San Carlos City Council
April 25, 2022

I
n addition to the 2018 Standard Specifications and Standard Plans (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs- standard-plans-and-standard-specifications), the attached "Encroachment Permit General Provisions" (TR-0045) (available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/traffic-operations/documents/encroachment-permits/ep- general-provisions-a11y.pdf), “Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste Management Special Provisions” (TR-0408), and “Storm Water Special Provisions for Minimal or No Impact (TR-0400)” (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/ep/ep-manual/), all work permitted herein must comply with the following provisions:

A p
re-job meeting with the State Representative is required at least 7 days prior to the start of any work under this permit.

Failure to do so may result in permit revocation with no prejudice.

T
he permittee must provide the stage construction plans, traffic handling plans, work schedule, and a list of all sub- contractors to the State Representative at the time of the pre-job meeting.

N
otwithstanding General Provision 4, construction must not begin until the contractor performing the work applies for and obtains a separate encroachment permit (referred to as a Double Permit) for the work authorized herein. An initial fee/deposit of $1,640.00 is required at the time of application for permit processing and inspection. Additional inspection hours will be charged at the current State hourly rate.

C
ertain details of work authorized herein are shown on the plans and specifications submitted by the permittee, for the proposed project and attached to this encroachment permit.

A
dditional inspection hours will be charged at the current State hourly rate.

T
he permittee is responsible for maintenance of the installed facilities at the permittee's expense within the State right-of- way under this permit.

S
igns, lights, flags or other protective devices must not obscure the visibility of, nor conflict in intent, meaning, and function of either existing signs, lights and traffic control devices, or any construction area signs.

O
n conventional highways, permittee's vehicles and equipment not involved in the permitted activities must be legally located off the traveled way and not interfere with free traffic and pedestrian flow.

N
o vehicle or equipment must be stored overnight within the State highway right-of-way. All vehicles and equipment must be removed immediately at the completion of the day’s work. Refueling of vehicle or equipment within the State highway right-of-way is strictly prohibited.

The p
ermittee must furnish to the State Representative a completed “Notice of Materials to be Used” (CEM-3101) (available at
https://forms.dot.ca.gov/v2Forms/servlet/FormRenderer?frmid=CEM3101&distpath=prodev&brapath=construction) for all manufactured or fabricated materials delivered to a work site if the State will own it upon completion of work. Such material includes, but is not limited to, all electrical components of signals, State-owned lighting, metal poles, mast arms, foundation bolts, and signs. These materials require source inspection and approval by the State. Materials not inspected and approved by the State will be rejected from use on the State highway.

Tr
affic control must comply with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Plans T9 through T14 (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications), and the California MUTCD, Part 6, "Temporary Traffic Control" (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/camutcd/).

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 309
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) City of San Carlos
0421-NSN-2469
August 17, 2021

All traffic control devices must be installed, maintained, and removed by a qualified traffic control contractor.

The State Representative and CHP reserve the right to require reopening the highway at any time as necessary. All cost must be borne by the permittee.

Traffic control is authorized to close one (1) lane on El Camino Real (SR 82) only from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays as defined in the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications). No more than one lane may be closed at a time. Traffic control must be in compliance with the approved traffic control plans.

Do not reduce an open traffic lane width to less than 11 feet. If traffic cones or delineators are used for temporary edge delineation, the side of the base of the cones or delineators nearest traffic is considered the edge of traveled way.

Traffic control using flagging, must comply with the California MUTCD, Part 6E, "Flagger Control" (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/camutcd/), and Cal/OSHA Construction Safety Orders, Section 1599, “Flaggers”, (available at https://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/1599.html).

Temporary pedestrian facilities must comply with the Caltrans Temporary Pedestrian Facilities Handbook (available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/construction/documents/temporary-pedestrian-facilities-handbook- a11y.pdf)), and the California MUTCD Part 6, Chapter 6D – “Pedestrian and Worker Safety” (available at https://www.dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/camutcd).

Notwithstanding General Provision 13, temporary pedestrian access routes must comply with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Plans T30 through T34 (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications).

Streets and highways in the San Francisco Bay Area contain a significant number of existing underground utilities. This includes traffic signal conduits that are installed 9 inches or less in depth. The permittee is responsible for necessary site investigations for identification of the location and depth of existing underground facilities prior to excavation (e.g., pothole or hand-dig) to avoid damage or disruption in services.

Curbs and sidewalks must be saw cut to the nearest score mark and replaced equal in dimension to that removed with score marks matching existing adjacent curb and sidewalk. Pavement must be replaced in kind and must conform to lip of new gutter.

Curbs and gutters must conform to the 2018 Caltrans Standard Plan A87A, Type A2-6, (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications) unless necessary to conform to existing adjacent curb and gutter installations.

Curbs and gutters must be placed over 6 inches of Class II Aggregate Base. Sidewalks must be a minimum 4 inches PCC placed over 3 inches of Class II Aggregate Base.

A monolithic pour of curb and sidewalk is not permitted.

Trench excavation must comply with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 19-3, “Structure Excavation and Backfill” (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications).

Trench backfill must comply with the attached trench detail and the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section

19.3.02E, “Slurry Cement Backfill”, and 19-3.02G, “Controlled Low-Strength Material”.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 310
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) City of San Carlos
0421-NSN-2469
August 17, 2021

Asphalt Concrete (AC) to be removed must be saw cut to the full depth along both sides of the trench. Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) to be removed must be saw cut to a minimum depth of 4 inches along both sides of the trench.

Where the edge of trench is within 2 feet of curb, gutter, or pavement edge, Asphalt Concrete (AC) pavement between the trench and curb, gutter, or pavement edge must be removed and replaced.

Open trenching is authorized one lane at a time with approved traffic control.

No excavation must be left open overnight. Temporary backfilling of excavations in finished surfaces must be capped with a minimum 3 inches Asphalt Concrete (AC).

Pavement construction within the State right-of-way must comply with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 39, “Asphalt Concrete” and Sectio39-2, “Hot Mix Asphalt.”

Where Asphalt Concrete (AC) has been placed, temporary painted traffic striping and pavement markings must be installed within 24 hours. Where shown on the plans, after 30 days curing time, thermoplastic materials must be applied in accordance with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 84, “Markings” (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications).

Traffic stripes and pavement markings must comply with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Plans A20A through A24F (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications).

Sign installation must comply with the 2018 Caltrans Standard Plans RS1 through RS4 (available at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/ccs-standard-plans-and-standard-specifications).

The State Representative must be notified at least 5 business days before system turn-on.

Changes to the provisions herein require an Encroachment Permit Rider, except for minor changes authorized by the State Representative.

Time extension requests must be made a minimum 2 weeks prior to permit expiration.

Neither materials nor waste must be stockpiled within the State highway right-of-way.

All mud, dirt, and gravel tracked onto the roadway must be immediately removed.

The State Representative and CHP reserve the right to require reopening the highway at any time as necessary. All cost must be borne by the permittee.

Any damage to State facilities must be repaired to the same state as before the damage and the cost of repairs must be the responsibility of the permittee.

Upon completion of work authorized by this encroachment permit, the permittee must provide the State Representative with “Notice of Completion” (TR-0128) (available at https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/traffic- operations/documents/encroachment-permits/tr0128.pdf).

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 311
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) City of San Carlos
0421-NSN-2469
August 17, 2021

Conditional Permit Requirements

The application for a double permit must include six copies of the Traffic Control Plans, stamped and signed by a California Licensed Professional Engineer.

Enclosures

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 312
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) For

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 313
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs)

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 314
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) D4-Office of Permits/Office of Traffic Management Page 1 of 2 Rev. 07/2020 D4 Encroachment Permit Work Scheduling Request Form
Submit your request to schedule traffic control weekly, 7 days in advance, using this form. Submit your request to State Representative (Inspector) listed on page 1 or 2 of your permit. If your inspector is not available, contact Permit Duty Station at (510) 286-4401. Check
special provisions for authorized work hours. A ny deviation from the permit must be in writing and requires additional review and approval.

I
NSTRUCTIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS: See the procedures on page 2 of thi s form.

1. Permit No. : _________________________________ 2. Expiration Date: _____________ 3. Request Date: ______________

4. Caltrans Ins pector: _________________________________________ 5. Requested Work Week: ___________to__________

6. Route: _________ __ 7. County: ________________________8. City or T ownship:_________________________________

9. PostMiles: From: To: 10. Existing Lanes (in each Dir): Dir Lns / Dir Lns a

11. Describe Location (use landmark if necessary): From: ________________________To: ____________________________

12. Name of Conventional Highway or Surface St:_______________________________________________________________

13. Fill in or ‘x’ if applicable (a through k): (a) Divided Hwy or Undivided Hwy (b) Full-Closure 1 dir or both dir (c) One-Way Traffic Control: Only on "Undivided" Hwy (Alternate use of same lane for both directions--hold traffic 5 –10 min w/flaggers) (d) Connector Ramp: (State Highway #) ___________to (State Highway #) __________Closed or Lane #__________ (e) Off-ramp: (Freeway to City St.) Ramp Name: _____________________________ Off-ramp Closed or Lane#: _______ (f) On-ramp: (City St. to Freeway) Ramp Name: _____________________________ On-ramp Closed or Lane#: _______ (g) Divert Traffic or Contra Flow: Reconfigure Lns/divert traffic to Lane# ___in the ___ Direction; ___Lns open each dir (h) Intermittent Traffic Control (i) Various Locations (j) Long-Term (24+ hours continuous) ETO_________________ (k) Year: Time Dir * * * * * * Restricted Lanes * * * * * * Brks Closure ID# From
DATE
To
DAT
E
DAY(S) 24-HR CLOCK NB SB Full
Closure
See
Detour
SHLDR
1 2 3 4 5 6
V
L
Aux
or
Coll
CD
or
Med
TURN

PCKT(S)
Park
Strip
5 to
15 min
Roll-
ing
Caltrans
will complete &
return
SU–M-T-W-

TH-F-SA
Start
(10-97)
Finish
(10-98) EB WB L R L R

14. Description of work/comments: _________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

15. Detour (Required for full closure): _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________
______________________________________________________________________________________

16. Contingency Plan: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

17. On-site during work (circle if applicable): CHP / PD / Other: __________________________________________________

18. Name: Permittee or Permittees Representative/Contractor:

Address including zip code:

On-site Personnel
Contact Name of person in
responsible charge & phone
number(s).

Name:

Email:

Office: FAX:

Cell: Emergency phone number 24/7:

19. "REAL-TIME" STATUS INSTRUCTIONS – PLEASE MAKE YOUR FIELD PERSONNEL AWARE & RESPONSIBLE! Permittee must STATUS lane closures DAILY via Caltrans District 4's 24- Hour Communication Center at ( 510) 286-6359.

Status using Closure ID Number when work begins, to 1097 (1st cone down), and again to 1098 (last cone picked up) ; OR, 1022 to cancel. Any delay in picking up your closure must be reported immediately.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 315
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) D4-Office of Permits/Office of Traffic Management Page 2 of 2 Rev. 07/2020 D4 Encroachment Permit Work Scheduling Procedures

1. INSTRUCTIONS: Fill in blanks or check appropriate boxes. Attach maps or diagrams, if available. Enter beginning day through ending
day of work week (M-T-W-T H-F-SA-SU). Date: Month/Day–Enter month (01-12) and day (01-31) of requested week. Start & Finish Time: Use 24-hour clock format. Read the Permit Special Provisions for hours & days allowed. Separate lane closure #’s are required for each direction and facility. Use separate line for each. Lanes are numbered in
direction of travel from left to right, excluding turn pockets; left being #1 or "f as t lane." Check boxes under Restricted Lanes to indicate lanes or parts of highway to be closed. VL may be checked with note in Comments Section stating number of lanes to
remain open at all times.

2. ABBREVIATIONS:

Aux=auxiliary, CD=Center Divide; Coll=Collector; Contra Flow=Close 1 direction of traffic and divert to lane(s) in opposite direction or a turn lane.

DAY(S)=(M-T-W-T H-F-SA-SU); Dir=Direction (NB=Northbound, SB=Southbound, WB=Westbound, EB=Eastbound); ETO=E mergency Traffic Operations; F/L=fog line; Hwy=Highway; Lns
=Lanes; L=Left; Med=M edian; Park Strip=Parking area parallel to lane; PCKT=Pocket; Rolling=traffic breaks for closure such
as sweeping; R=Right; SHLDR=Shoulder; VL=Various Lanes

3. Requests for scheduling must be submitted on this form to the Inspector listed on page 1 or 2 of your permit. If your inspector is n
ot available, contact Permit Duty Station at (510) 286-4401.

4. All perm
itted work (with or without traffic control) is subject to advance scheduling on this form, seven (7) days in advance of the work
week requested. Submittals and approvals must continue on a weekly basis.

5. If
work begins weekly on Sunday, the work week must be Sunday through Saturday. If work week begins on Monday, the work week must be Monday through Sunday.

6. Incomplete,
illegible, or inaccurate requests may be returned for correction. Assistan ce for completing the request may be obtained
from the designated State Representative.

7. Every
attempt will be made to return timely requests with closure ID or work authorization numbers, to the Permittee by close of business on Thursday, prior to the scheduled work week. When deemed necessary to ensure public convenience, Caltrans may deny
and/or reschedule the request.

8. All requests must include a contingency plan for restoring public traffic (i.e. reopening of a closed lane, ramp and/or shoulder) in the event of (1) CHP or the local authority requires opening due to an unforeseeable incident in the nearby vicinity, or (2) permitted experiences an equipment breakdown, shortage of or lack of production materials or any other failure which would otherwise delay restoring public convenience within the time limits specified in the permit. The contingency plan must include
availability of any proposed standby equipment and stockpiled materials that can be utilized for the immediate opening of closures when ordered by the State representative. Acceptance of the contingency plan by the Engineer must not relieve the Contractor from the requirement of opening the restricted travel way to accommodate public traffic as specified i
n the lane closure hour’s section of the permit provisions.

9. Caltrans will review and process the request by entering all information into the Statewide Lane Closure System (LCS).

This
process generates a work authorization number*. This number will be entered on the request form and returned to P
ermittee as approval to proceed AND will be used to "Real-Time Status" on a daily basis. Permittee must communicate with Caltrans 24-hour District 4 Communication Center (DCC) via telephone at (510) 286-6359 twice daily when working, or once daily if cancelled.
a. When work begins (1st cone down), Permittee must contact Caltrans DCC and relay: "(Closure ID #*) is 1097." b. When work ends (last cone picked up), Permittee must contact Caltrans DCC and relay: "(Closure ID #*) is 1098." c. If the work is cancelled on any scheduled day, Permittee must contact Caltrans DCC and relay; "(Closure ID #*) is 1022." A "10-22" (cancellation) can be phoned any time before the scheduled "10 -97" time, but no later than 1 hour prior to scheduled "10-98" time.
d. During the work, any unexpected occurrences including delayed openings, accidents, etc., must be communicated to Caltrans DCC immediately.

Av
oid possible miscommunication when calling status. Use the PHONETIC ALPHABET to state your Closure ID:

A=Adam, B=Boy, C=Charles, D=David, E=Edward, F=Frank, G=George, H=Henry, I=Ida, J=John, K=King, L=Lincoln, M =Mary, N=Nora, O=Ocean, P= Paul, Q=Queen, R=Robert, S= Sam, T=Tom, U=Union, V=Victor, W=William, X=X-ray, Y=Yellow, Z=Zebra. Example: P82CA="Paul 82 Charles Adam"

10. The intent of these procedures is to help ensure public convenience by identifying planned closures on the State Highway system, resolving potential conflicts, and disseminating all available "REAL-TIME" information via the traffic media to all motorists, including but not limited to the public, CHP, local police and sheriffs’ office, and emergency fire and rescue personnel.
* "closure ID number" is the same as "work authorization number"

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 316
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) PERMIT NO.

DATE

SIGNATURE OF PERMITTEE
Dear Sir or Madam:

All work authorized by the above-numbered permit was
completed on
FM 92 1546 M
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
TR-0128 (REV. 6/01) CT #7541-5529-1
PERMIT NO.

DATE

SIGNATURE OF PERMITTEE
Dear Sir or Madam:

All work authorized by the above-numbered permit was
completed on
FM 92 1546 M
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
TR-0128 (REV. 6/01) CT #7541-5529-1
DATE

SIGNATURE OF PERMITTEE
Dear Sir or Madam:

All work authorized by the above-numbered permit was
completed on
FM 92 1546 M
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
TR-0128 (REV. 6/01) CT #7541-5529-1
DATE

SIGNATURE OF PERMITTEE
Dear Sir or Madam:

All work authorized by the above-numbered permit was
completed on
FM 92 1546 M
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
TR-0128 (REV. 6/01) CT #7541-5529-1
PERMIT NO. PERMIT NO.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 317
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS

© 2018 California Department of Transportation. All rights reserved.

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS
TR – 0045 (REV. 04/2021)

1. AUTHORITY: The California Department of
Transportation (“Department”) has authority to issue
encroachment permits under Division 1, Chapter 3,
Article 1, Sections 660 through 734 of the Streets and
Highways Code.

2. REVOCATION: Encroachment permits are revocable on
five (5) business days’ notice unless otherwise stated on the permit and except as provided by law for public
corporations, franchise holders, and utilities.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, in an emergency situation as determined by the Department, an encroachment
permit may be revoked immediately. These General
Provisions and any applicable Special Provisions are
subject to modification or abrogation by the Department at any time. Permittees’ joint use agreements, franchise rights, reserved rights or any other agreements for
operating purposes in State of California (“State”)
highway right -of-way may be exceptions to this
revocation.

3. DENIAL FOR NONPAYMENT OF FEES: Failure to pay
encroachment permit fees when due may result in
rejection of future applications and denial of
encroachment permits.

4. ASSIGNMENT: This encroachment permit allows only
the Permittee or Permittee’s authorized agent to work
within or encroach upon the State highway right-of-way, and the Permittee may not assign or transfer this
encroachment permit. Any attempt to assign or transfer
this encroachment permit shall be null and void.

5. ACCEPTANCE OF PROVISIONS: Permittee
understands and agrees to accept and comply with these
General Provisions, the Special Provisions, any and all terms and/or conditions contained in or incorporated into the encroachment permit, and all attachments to the
encroachment permit (col lectively “the Permit
Conditions”), for any encroachment, work, and/or activity to be performed under this encroachment permit and/or
under color of authority of this encroachment permit.

Permittee understands and agrees the Permit Conditions
are applicable to and enforceable against Permittee as
long as the encroachment remains in, under, or over any part of the State highway right-of-way.

6. BEGINNING OF WORK: When traffic is not impacted
(see General Provision Number 35), the Permittee must
notify the Department’s representative two (2) business days before starting permitted work. Permittee must notify the Department’s representative if the work is to be
interrupted for a period of five (5) business days or more, unless otherwise agreed upon. All work must be
performed on weekdays during regular work hours,
excluding holidays, unless otherwise specified in this
encroachment permit.

7. STANDARDS OF CONSTRUCTION: All work performed
within State highway right -of-way must conform to all
applicable Departmental construction standards including but not limited to: Standard Specifications, Standard
Plans, Project Development Procedures Manual,
Highway Design Manual and Special Provisions.

Other than as expressly provided by these General
Provisions, the Special Provisions, the Standard
Specifications, Standard Plans, and other applicable
Departmental standards, nothing in these General
Provisions is intended to give any third party any legal or equitable right, remedy, or claim with respect to the
encroachment permit and/or to these General Provisions
or any provision herein. These General Provisions are for the sole and exclusive benefit of the Permittee and the Department.

Where reference is made in such standards to
“Contractor” and “Engineer,” these are amended to be
read as “Permittee” and “Department’s representative,”
respectively, for purposes of this encroachment permit.

8. PLAN CHANGES: Deviations from plans, specifications, and/or the Permit Conditions as defined in General
Provision Number 5 are not allowed without prior approval from the Department’s representative and the Federal
Highway Administration ( “FHWA”) representative if
applicable.

9. RIGHT OF ENTRY, INSPECTION AND APPROVAL: All
work is subject to monitoring and inspection. T he United States, the State, the Department, and the Directors,
officers, employees, agents , and/or contractors of the State and/or of the Department, and other state, and
federal agencies, and the FHWA, through their agents or representatives, must have full access to highway
facilities/encroachment area, at any and all times for the purpose of inspection, maintenance, activities needed for construction/reconstruction, and operation of the State highway right-of-way.

Upon completion of work, Permittee must request a
final inspection for acceptance and approval by the
Department. The local public agency Permittee must not
give final construction approval to its contractor until final acceptance and approval by the Department is obtained.

10. PERMIT AT WORKSITE: Permittee must keep the permit
package or a copy thereof at the work site at all times and must show it upon request to any Department
representative or law enforcement officer. If the permit package, or a copy thereof, is not kept and made
available at the work site at all times, the work must be suspended.

11. CONFLICTING ENCROACHMENTS: Permittee must
yield start of work to ongoing, prior authorized work
adjacent to or within the limits of the Permittee’s project site. When existing encroachments conflict with
Permittee’s work, the Permittee must bear all cost for
rearrangements (e.g., relocation, alteration, removal,
etc.).

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 318
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS

© 2018 California Department of Transportation. All rights reserved.

12. PERMITS AND APPROVALS FROM OTHER PUBLIC
AGENCIES AND/OR ENTITIES : This encroachment
permit is invalidated if the Permittee has not obtained all permits and approvals necessary and required by law,
including but not limited to permits from the California Public Utilities Commission ( “CPUC”), California
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(“Cal-OSHA”), and any other public agency and/or entity having jurisdiction. Permittee warrants all such permits and approvals have been obtained before beginning work
under this encroachment permit. The Department may, at
the Department’s discretion, require the Permittee to
demonstrate that Permittee has obtained all such
permits/approvals, and Permittee shall demonstrate this at the time and in the manner specified by the
Department.

13. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST SAFETY: A safe
continuous passageway must be maintained through the
work area at existing pedestrian or bicycle facilities. At no time must pedestrians be diverted onto a portion of the street used for vehicular traffic. At locations where safe alternate passageways cannot be provided, appropriate
signs and barricades must be installed at the limits of construction and in advance of the limits of construction at the nearest crosswalk or intersection to detour
pedestrians to facilities across the s treet. Attention is directed to Section 7-1.04 “Public Safety,” and to Section 12-4.04 “Temporary Pedestrian Access Routes ,” and to
Section 16- 2.02 “Temporary Pedestrian Facility ,” of the Department’s Standard Specifications , and to California Vehicle Code section 21760, subdivision (c).

14. PUBLIC TRAFFIC CONTROL: The Permittee must
provide traffic control protection, warning signs, lights, safety devices, etc., and take all other measures
necessary for the traveling public’s safety as required by law and/or the Department. While providing traffic control, the needs of all road users, including but not limited to motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians, including persons with disabilities in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, must be an essential part of the work activity.

Lane, Bike Lane, Sidewalk, Crosswalk, and/or
shoulder closures must comply with the Department’s
Standard Specifi cations and Standard Plans for
Temporary Traffic Control Systems & Temporary
Pedestrian Access Routes , and with the applicable
Special Provisions. Where issues are not addressed in
the Standard Specifications, Standard Plans, and/or
Special Provisions, the California Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (Part 6, Temporary Traffic Control) must be followed.

15. MINIMUM INTERFERENCE WITH TRAFFIC: Permittee
must plan and conduct work so as to create the least
possible inconvenience to the traveling public (motorized vehicles, unmotorized vehicles such as bicycles,
pedestrians, person(s) with disabilities , etc.) , such that traffic is not unreasonably delayed.

16. STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS: The
storage of equipment or materials is not allowed within State highway right -of-way, unless specified within the Special Provisions of this encroachment permit. If
encroachment permit Special Provisions allow for the
storage of equipment or materials wi thin the State
highway right-of-way, the equipment and material storage must also comply with Section 7- 1.04, Public Safety, of the Department’s Standard Specifications.

17. CARE OF DRAINAGE: Permittee must provide alternate
drainage for any work interfering with an existing drainage facility in compliance with the Department’s Standard
Specifications, Standard Plans, and/or as directed by the Department’s representative.

18. RESTORATION AND REPAIRS IN STATE HIGHWAY
RIGHT-OF-WAY: Permittee is responsible for restoration
and repair of State highway right -of-way resulting from permitted work (Streets and Highways Code, section 670
et seq.).

19. STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF-WAY CLEAN UP: Upon
completion of work, Permittee must remove and dispose
of all scraps, refuse, brush, timber, materials, etc. off the State highway right-of-way. The aesthetics of the highway must be as it was before work started or better.

20. COST OF WORK: Unless stated otherwise in the
encroachment permit or a separate written agreement
with the Department, t he Permittee must bear all costs incurred for work within the State highway right -of-way and waives all claims for indemnification or contribution from the United States, the State, the Department, and
from the Directors, officers, and employees of the State and/or the Department. Removal of Permittee’s personal
property and improvements shall be at no cost to the
United States, the State, and the Department.

21. ACTUAL COST BILLING: When specified in the permit,
the Department will bill the Permittee actual costs at the currently set Standard Hourly Rate for encroachment
permits.

22. AS-BUILT PLANS: When required, Permittee must
submit one (1) set of folded as-built plans within thirty (30) calendar days after completion and acceptance of work in compliance with requirements listed as follows:
a) Upon completion of the work provided herein, the
Permittee must submit a paper set of As -Built plans
to the Department’s representative.
b) All changes in the work will be shown on the plans, as issued with the permit, including changes approved
by Encroachment Permit Rider.
c) The plans are to be prominently stamped or otherwise noted “AS-BUILT” by the Permittee’s representative
who was responsible for o verseeing the work. Any
original plan that was approved with a Department
stamp, or by signature of the Department’s
representative, must be used for producing the As -
Built plans.
d) If construction plans include signing or striping, the dates of signing or s triping removal, relocation, or
installation must be shown on the As-Built plans when
required as a condition of the encroachment permit.

When the construction plans show signing and
striping for staged construction on separate sheets,

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 319
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS

© 2018 California Department of Transportation. All rights reserved. the sheet for each s tage must show the removal,
relocation, and installation dates of the appropriate
staged striping and signing.
e) As-Built plans must contain the Encroachment Permit
Number, County, Route, and Post Mile on each
sheet.
f) The As -Built Plans must not include a disclaimer
statement of any kind that differs from the obligations and protections provided by sections 6735 through
6735.6 of the California Business and Professions
Code. Such statements constitute non- compliance
with Encroachment Permit requirements and may
result in the Department retaining Performance
Bonds or deposits until proper plans are submitted.

Failure to comply may also result in denial of future
encroachment permits or a provision requiring a
public agency to supply additional bonding.

23. PERMITS FOR RECORD PURPOSES ONLY: When
work in the State highway right -of-way is within an area under a Joint Use Agreement (JUA) or a Consent to
Common Use Agreement (CCUA), a fee exempt
encroachment permit is issued to the Permittee for the
purpose of providing a notice and record of work. The
Permittee’s prior rights must be preserved without the
intention of creating new or different rights or obligations. “Notice and Record Purposes Only” must be stamped
across the face of the encroachment permit.

24. BONDING: The Permittee must file bond(s), in advance, in the amount(s) set by the Department and using forms
acceptable to the Department. The bonds must name the
Department as obligee. Failure to maintain bond(s) in full force and effect will result in the Department stopping all work under this encroachment permit and possibly
revoking other encroachment permit(s). Bonds are not
required of public corporations or privately-owned utilities unless Permittee failed to comply with the provisions
and/or conditions of a prior encroachment permit. The
surety company is responsible for any latent defects as provided in California Code of Civil Procedure section
337.15. A local public agency Permittee also must comply with the following requirements:
a) In recognition that project construction work done on State property will not be directly funded and paid by
State, for the purpose of protecting stop notice
claimants and the interests of State relative to
successful project completion, the local public agency
Permittee agrees to require the construction
contractor to furnish both a payment and performance
bond in the local public agency’s name with both
bonds complying with the requirements set forth in
Section 3-1.05 Contract Bonds of the Department’s
Standard Specifications before performing any
project construction work.
b) The local public agency Permittee must defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the United States, the
State and the Department, and the Directors, officers,
and employees of the State and/or Department, from
all project construction related cl aims by contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers, and from all stop
notice and/or mechanic’s lien claimants. The local
public agency also agrees to remedy, in a timely
manner and to the Department’s satisfaction, any
latent defects occurring as a result of the project
construction work.

25. FUTURE MOVING OF INSTALLATIONS: Permittee
understands and agrees to relocate a permitted
installation upon notice by the Department. Unless under prior property right or agreement, the Permittee must
comply with said notice at the Permittee’s sole expense.

26. ENVIRONMENTAL:
a) ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL: If any
archaeological or historical resources are identified or encountered in the work vicinity, the Permittee must
immediately stop work, notify the Department’s
representative, retain a qualified archaeologist who
must evaluate the site at Permittee’s sole expense,
and make recommendations to the Department’s
representative regarding the continuance of work.
b) HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: If any hazardous waste
or materials (such as underground storage tanks,
asbestos pipes, contaminated soil, etc.) are identified or encountered in the work vicinity, the Permittee
must immediately stop work, notify the Department’s
representative, retain a qualified hazardous
waste/material specialist who must evaluate the site
at the Permittee’s sole expense, and make
recommendations to the Department’s representative
regarding the continuance of work.

Attention is directed to potential aerially deposited
lead (ADL) presence in unpaved areas along
highways. It is the Permittee’s responsibility to take all appropriate measures to protect workers in
conformance with California Code of Regulations
Title 8, Section 1532.1, “Lead,” and with Cal -OSHA
Construction Safety Orders, and to ensure roadway
soil management is in compliance with Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) requirements.
c) Biological: If any regional, state , or federally listed biological resource is identified or encountered in the work vicinity, the Permittee must immediately stop
work, notify the Department’s representative, retain a
qualified biologist who must evaluate the site at
Permittee’s sole expense, and make
recommendations to the Department’s representative
regarding the continuance of work.

27. PREVAILING WAGES: Work performed by or under an
encroachment permit may require Permittee’s contractors and subcontractors to pay appropriate prevailing wages
as set by the California Department of Industrial
Relations. Inquiries or requests for interpretations relative to enforcement of prevailing wage requirements must be
directed to the California Department of Industrial
Relations.

28. LIABILITY, DEFENSE, AND INDEMNITY: The Permittee
agrees to indemnify and save harmless the United States, the State, the Department, and the Directors, officers, employees, agents and/or contractors of the State and/or of the Department, including but not limited to the Director

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 320
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS

© 2018 California Department of Transportation. All rights reserved. of Transportation and the Deputy Directors, from any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, liability, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description, including but not limited to those brought for or on account of property damage, invasion of privacy, violation or deprivation of a right under a state or federal law, environmental damage or penalty, or injury to or death of any person including but not limited to members of the public, the Permittee, persons employed by the Permittee, and/or persons
acting on behalf of the Permittee, arising out of or in connection with: (a) the issuance and/or use of this
encroachment permit; and/or (b) the encroachment, work, and/or activity conducted pursuant to this encroachment permit, or under color of authority of this encroachment permit but not in full compliance with the Permit
Conditions as defined in General Provision Number 5
(“Unauthorized Work or Activity”); and/or (c) the
installation, placement, design, existence, operation,
and/or maintenance of the encroachment, work, and/or
activity; and/or (d) the failure by the Permittee or anyone acting on behalf of the Permittee to perform the
Permittee’s obligations under any part of the Permit
Conditions as defined in General Provision Number 5, in respect to maintenance or any other obligation; and/or (e) any change to the Department’s property or adjacent
property, including but not limited to the features or
conditions of either of them, made by the Permittee or
anyone acting on behalf of the Permittee; and/or (f) a
defect or obstruction related to or caused by the
encroachment, work, and/or activity whether conducted in compliance with the Permit Conditions as defined in
General Provision Number 5 or constituting Unauthorized Work or Activity, or from any cause whatsoever. The duty of the Permittee to indemnify and save harmless includes the duties to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the Civil Code.

It is the intent of the parties that except as prohibited by law, the Permittee will defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless as set forth in this General Provision Number 28 regardless of the existence or degree of fault or
negligence, whether active or passi ve, primary or
secondary, on the part of: the United States, the State; the Department; the Directors, officers, employees, agents
and/or contractors of the State and/or of the Department, including but not limited to the Director of Transportation and the Deputy Directors; the Permittee; persons
employed by the Permittee; and/or persons acting on
behalf of the Permittee.

The Permittee waives any and all rights to any type of
expressed or implied indemnity from or against the United States, the State, the Department, and the Directors,
officers, employees, agents, and/or contractors of the
State and/or of the Department, including but not limited to the Director of Transportation and the Deputy Directors.

The Permittee understands and agrees to comply
with the obligations of Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act in the conduct of the encroachment, work, and/or activity whether conducted pursuant to this encroachment permit or constituting Unauthorized Work
or Activity, and further agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless the United States, the State, the
Department, and the Directors, officers, employees,
agents, and/or contractors of the State and/or of the
Department, including but not limited to the Director of Transportation and the Deputy Directors, from any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, penalties, liability,
suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description
arising out of or by virtue of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Permittee understands and agrees the Directors,
officers, employees, agents, and/or contractors of the
State and/or of the Department, including but not limited to the Director of Transportation and the Deputy Directors, are not personally responsible for any liability arising from or by virtue of this encroachment permit.

For the purpose of this General Provision Number 28
and all paragraphs herein, “contractors of the State and/or of the Department” includes contractors , and their
subcontractors, under contract to the S tate and/or the Department.

This General Provision Number 28 and all
paragraphs herein take effect immediately upon issuance of this e ncroachment permit, and apply before, during, and after the encroachment, work, and/or activity
contemplated under this encroachment permit, whether
such work is in compliance with the Permit Conditions as defined in General Provision Number 5 or constitutes
Unauthorized Work or Activity, except as otherwise
provided by California law. The Permittee’s obligations to defend, indemnify, and save harmless under this General Provision Number 28 take effect immediately upon
issuance of this encroachment permit and have no
expiration date, including but not limited to situations in which this encroachment permit expires or is revoked, the work or activity performed under this encroachment
permit is accepted or not accepted by the Department, the encroachment, work, and/or activity is conducted in
compliance with the Permit Conditions as defined in
General Provision Number 5 or consti tutes Unauthorized Work or Activity, and/or no work or activity is undertaken by the Permittee or by others on the Permittee’s behalf.

If the United States or an agency, department, or
board of the United States is the Permittee, the first two paragraphs of this General Provision Number 28
(beginning “The Permittee agrees to indemnify…” and “It is the intent of the parties…”) are replaced by the following paragraph:

Claims for personal injury, death, or property damage
allegedly caused by the negligent or wrongful act or
omission of any employee of the United States acting
within the scope of their official duties are subject to the Federal Tort Claims Act, as amended, 28 U.S.C. § 1346
and § 2671 et seq. (Chapter 171).

29. NO PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED: This encroac hment
permit is issued with the understanding that it does not establish a precedent.

30. FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS REQUIREMENTS FOR
PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION:

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 321
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS

© 2018 California Department of Transportation. All rights reserved. a) As part of the consideration for being issued this
encroachment permit, the Permittee, on behalf of
Permittee and on behalf of Permittee’s personal
representatives, successors in interest, and assigns,
does hereby covenant and agree that:
i) No person on the grounds of race, color, or
national origin may be excluded from participation
in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise
subjected to discrimination in the use of said
facilities.
ii) That in connection with the construction of any
improvements on said lands and the furnishings
of services thereon, no discrimination must be
practiced in the selection and retention of first-tier
subcontractors in the selection of second- tier
subcontractors.
iii) That such discrimination must not be practiced
against the public in their access to and use of the
facilities and services provided for public
accommodations (such as eating, s leeping, rest,
recreation), and operation on, over, or under the
space of the State highway right-of-way.
iv) That the Permittee must use the premises in
compliance with all other requirements imposed
pursuant to Title 15, Code of Federal
Regulations, Commerce and Foreign Trade,
Subtitle A. Office of the Secretary of Commerce,
Part 8 (15 C.F.R. Part 8) and as said Regulations
may be amended.
b) That in the event of breach of any of the above
nondiscrimination covenants, the State and the
Department have the right to terminate this
encroachment permit and to re- enter and repossess
said land and the facilities thereon and hold the same
as if said permit had never been made or issued.

31. MAINTENANCE: The Permittee is responsible at
Permittee’s sole expense for the encroachment, and the
inspection, maintenance, repair, and condition thereof, so that it does not negatively impact State highway safety, maintenance, operations, construction, activities needed for construction/reconstruction, State facilities, or other encroachments. Additional permits or approval
documents may be required authorizing additional work
related to inspection, repair, and/or maintenance
activities.

32. SPECIAL EVENTS: In accordance with subdivision (a) of Streets and Highways Code section 682.5 and 682.7, the
Department is not responsible for the conduct or
operation of the permitted activity, and the applicant
agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the
United States, the State, the Department, and the
Directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors of the State and/or of the Department, including but not
limited to the Director of Transportation and the Deputy Directors, from any and all claims, demands, damages,
costs, liability, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description arising out of any activity for which this
encroachment permit is issued.

The Permittee is required, as a condition of this
encroachment permit, for any event that awards prize
compensation to competitors in gendered categories, for any participant level that receives prize compensation, to ensure the prize compensation for each gendered
category is identical at each participant level. (Streets and Highways Code, section 682.7.)
The Permittee understands and agrees to comply
with the obligations of Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act in the conduct of the event, and
further agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless
the United State, the State and the Department, and the Directors, officers, and employees of the State and/or
Department, including but not limited to the Director of the Department and the Deputy Directors, from any and all
claims, demands, damages, costs, liability, suits, or
actions of every name, kind and description arising out of or by virtue of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

33. PRIVATE USE OF STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF-WAY:

State highway right -of-way must not be used for private purposes without compensation to the State. The gifting of public property uses and therefore public funds is
prohibited under the California Constitution, Article XVI, Section 6.

34. FIELD WORK REIMBURSEMENT: Permittee must
reimburse the Department for field work performed on
Permittee’s behalf to correct or remedy hazards or
damaged facilities, or to clear refuse, debris, etc. not attended to by the Permittee.

35. LANE CLOSURE REQUEST SUBMITTALS AND

NOTIFICATION OF CLOSURES TO THE
DEPARTMENT: Lane closure request submittals and
notifications must be in accordance with Section 12-4.02, and Section 12.4- 04, of the Department’s Standard
Specifications or as directed by the Department’s
representative. The Permittee must notify the
Department’s representative and the Traffic Management
Center ( “TMC”) before initiating a lane closure or
conducting an activity that may cause a traffic impact. In emergency situations when the corrective work or the
emergency itself may affect traffic, the Department’s
representative and the TMC must be notified as soon as
possible.

36. SUSPENSION OF TRAFFIC CO NTROL OPERATION:

The Permittee, upon notification by the Department’s
representative, must immediately suspend all traffic lane, bike lane, sidewalk, crosswalk, and/or shoulder closure operations and any operation that impedes the flow of
traffic. All costs associated with this suspension must be borne by the Permittee.

37. UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT (USA)
NOTIFICATION: Any excavation requires compliance
with the provisions of Government Code section 4216 et
seq., including but not limited to notice to a regional notification center, such as Underground Service Alert
(USA). The Permittee must provide notification to the
Department representative at least five (5) business days before, and the regional notific ation center at least forty -

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 322
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT GENERAL PROVISIONS

© 2018 California Department of Transportation. All rights reserved. eight (48) hours before, performing any excavation work within the State highway right-of-way.

38. COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES ACT (ADA): All work within the State
highway right -of-way to construct and/or maintai n any public facility must be designed, maintained, and
constructed strictly in accordance with all applicable
Federal Access laws and regulations (including but not
limited to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 794), California Access laws and regulations relating to ADA, along with its implementing regulations, Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations Parts 35 and 36 (28 C.F.R., Ch. I, Part 35, § 35.101 et seq., and Part 36, § 36.101 et seq.), Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 1191 (36 C.F.R., Ch. XI, Part 1191, § 1119.1 et seq.), Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 37 (49 C.F.R., Ch. A, Part 37, § 37.1 et seq.), the United States Department of Justice Title II and Title III for the ADA, an d California Government Code
section 4450 et seq., which require public facilities be made accessible to persons with disabilities.

Notwithstanding the requirements of the previous
paragraph, all construction, design, and maintenance of public facilities must also comply with the Department’s Design Information Bulletin 82, “Pedestrian Accessibility Guidelines for Highway Projects ” and Standard Plans &
Specifications on “Temporary Pedestrian Access
Routes.”

39. STORMWATER: The Permittee is r esponsible for full compliance with the following:
a) For all projects, the Department’s Storm Water
Program and the Department’s N ational Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (N PDES) Permit
requirements under Order N o. 2012-0011-DWQ,
NPDES No CAS000003; and
b) In addition, for projects disturbing one acre or more of soil, with t he C alifornia C onstruction General
Permit Order N o. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No
CAS000002; and
c) In addition, for projects disturbing one acre or more of soil in the Lahontan Region with Order No. R6T-2016-
0010, NPDES No CAG616002.
d) For all projects, it is the Permittee’s responsibility to install, inspect, repair, and maintain all facilities and devices used for water pollution control practices
(Best Management Practices/BMPs) before
performing daily work activities.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 323
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STORMWATER SPECIAL PROVISIONS for MINIMAL or NO IMPACT (SWSP) TR-0400 (Rev 05/2018)

1. GENERAL: The purpose of these Special Provisions is to provide the Permittee with specifications for water pollution control to minimize, prevent, or control the discharge of material into the air, surface waters, groundwater, and storm sewers owned by the State or local agencies. These provisions are not intended to take the place of the Caltrans Water Pollution Control Program ( WPCP) for projects where soil disturbance from work activities less than one acre, or work activities of one acre or more subject to the preparation of the Caltrans Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). The Permittee must comply with the following Special Provisions and the direction of the State R epresentative. All Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) m ust conform to Section 13 Water Pollution Control of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications.

2. NPDES REQUIREMENTS: The Permittee must be responsible for full compliance with the Caltrans Storm Water Program and the Caltrans National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit requirements (Order N o. 2012-0011-DWQ, NPDES No CAS000003) and for and projects disturbing one acre or more of soil, full compliance with t he C alifornia C onstruction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No CAS000002) or for projects for projects that have one acre or more of soil disturbance in the Lahontan Region ( Order N o. R6T-2016-0010, NPDES No
CAG616002). It is the Permittee’s responsibility to install, inspect, and repair or maintain facilities and devices used for water pollution control practices (BMPs) before performing daily work activities. Installation, inspection and maintenance responsibilities on the job site include:
1) soil stabilization materials in work areas that are inactive or prior to storm events, 2) water pollution control devices to control sediment and erosion, 3) implementation of spill and leak prevention procedures for chemical and hazardous sub stances st ored on the job site, 4) material storage, 5) stockpile management, 6) waste management, 7) non-stormwater management, 8) water conservation, 9) tracking controls and 10 ) illicit connection, illegal discharge detection and reporting. The Permittee must report to the State representative when discharges enter into receiving waters, adjacent property, drainage systems or when discharges could be a cause or a threat for water pollution. The Permittee must also control illicit discharges or illegal dumping prior to start of daily work schedule. Copies of written notices or orders from the Regional Water Quality Control Board or other regulatory agency must be provided to the State representative within 48 hours of reported activity. F or additional information on stormwater compliance, visit the State Water Resources Control Boards storm water Website at:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater

3. RESPONSIBILITY FOR DEBRIS REMOVAL: The Permittee must be responsible for preventing sediment, trash, debris, and other construction waste from entering the street, the storm drains, local creeks, or any other bodies of water.

4. SPOILS AND RESIDUE: The Permittee must vacuum any
saw-cut concrete waste material, debris, residue, etc. No spoils, debris, residue, etc. must be washed into a drainage system.

5. SWEEPING: Sweep paved roads at construction entrance and exit locations and surrounding paved areas daily within the job site during:
1) clearing and grubbing, 2) earthwork, 3) trenching, 4) soil disturbance, 5) pavement grinding and/or cutting, and 6) after observing tracking of material onto or off the State property. K eep dust to a minimum during sweeping activities. Use vacuum whenever dust generation is excessive or sediment pickup is ineffective.

Roadways or work areas must not be washed down with water. Street sweeping operations must conform to Section 13 Water Pollution Control of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications.

6. VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT: Permittee must prevent all vehicles, equipment, etc. from leakage or mud tracking onto roadways.

If l eaks cannot be repaired immediately, remove the vehicle or equipment from the job site.

7. MAINTENANCE AND FUELING O F VEHICLES AND
EQUIPMENT: Maintenance and fueling of equipment must not result in any pollution at the job site. The Permittee must immediately clean up spills/leaks, and properly dispose of contaminated soil and materials.

8. CLEANING VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT: Limit vehicle
and equipment cleaning or washing at the job site except what is necessary to control vehicle tracking or hazardous waste. The Permittee must clean all equipment within a bermed area or over a drip pan large enough to prevent run-off. No soaps, solvents, degreasers, etc. must be used in State right-of-way. Any water from this operation must be collected and disposed of at an appropriate site. Containment berms or dikes must be used for fueling, washing, maintaining and washing vehicles or equipment in outside areas. Containment must be performed at least 100 feet from concentrated flows of storm water, drainage courses, and storm drain inlets if within a flood plain, otherwise at least 50 feet if outside the floodplain. Keep adequate quantities of absorbent spill- cleanup material and spill kits in the fueling or maintenance area and on fueling trucks.

9. DIESEL FUELS: The use of diesel fuel from petroleum or other fossil fuel as a form-oil or solvent is not allowed.

10. WEATHER CONDITIONS AT WORKSITE: Any activity
that would generate fine particles or dust that could be transported off site by stormwater must be performed during dry weather.

11. WIND EROSION PROTECTION: The use of Wind Erosion
BMPs must be deployed year -round in instances where dust or fine particles could be transported off site.

11. HOT MIX ASPHALT: Runoff from washing hot mix asphalt must not enter into any drainage conveyances.

12. PROTECTION OF DRAINAGE FACILITIES: The Permittee
must protect/cover gutters, ditches, drainage courses, and inlets with gravel bags, fiber rolls, State approved fabric filters, etc., to the satisfaction of the State r epresentative during grading, paving, saw- cutting, etc. and materials must conform to Section 13-6.02 Materials for Water Pollution Control of Caltrans’ St andard Specifications. No su ch protection measures must cause an obstruction to the traveling public. The Permittee must implement spill and leak prevention procedures for chemicals and hazardous substances stored on the job site (including secondary containment requirements) in accordance to section 13-4.03B Spill Prevention and Control, and 14- 11 Hazardous Waste and Contamination, W ater Pollution Control of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications.

13. PAINT: Rinsing of painting equipment and materials is not permitted in State right-of-way. When thoroughly dry, dispose of the following as solid waste: dry latex paint, paint cans, used brushes, rags, gloves, absorbent materials, and drop cloths. O il based paint sludge and unusable thinner must be disposed of at an approved hazardous waste site.

14. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS: Stockpile of all construction materials, including, but not limited to; pressure treated wood, asphalt concrete, cold mix asphalt concrete, concrete, grout, cement containing premixes, and mortar, must conform to section 13-4.03C (2) Material Storage & 13- 4.03C (3) Stockpile Management of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 324
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STORMWATER SPECIAL PROVISIONS for MINIMAL or NO IMPACT (SWSP) TR-0400 (Rev 05/2018)

15. CONCRETE EQ UIPMENT: Concrete equipment must b e
washed in a designated washing area in a wa y t hat does n ot contaminate soil, receiving waters, or storm drain systems.

16. E
XISTING VEGETATION: Established existing vegetation is
the best form of erosion control . Minimize d isturbance to existing vegetation. D amaged or remo ved v egetation must b e r eplaced a s directed by the State Representative.

17. SOIL DISTURBANCE: Soil disturbing activities must b e avoided during the wet w eather s eason. I f c onstruction activities during w et weather a re allowed in your perm it, all necessary erosion control and soil stabilization measures must be implemented in advance of soil disturbing activity.

18. SLOPE STAB ILIZATION AND S EDIMENT CO NTROL:

Consider a certified expert in Erosion and Sediment c ontrol in cases where slopes a re d isturbed during construction. The Perm ittee is directed to comply with Section 13.5 Temporary Soil Stabilization and Section 21 Ero sion Control of Caltrans’ St andard S pecifications during application of temporary soil stabilization measures to the soil surface. Fib er rolls or silt fen ces ma y be re quired down slope until permanent so il stabilization is established. Remove the accumulated sediment whenever the sediment accumulates to 1 /3 o f t he li near sediment barrier height. The Perm ittee must limit the use of plastic materials when more sustainable, environmentally friendly alternatives exist or when environmental regulations prohibit their use within the project.

19. STOCKPILES: Stockpiles containing aggregate and/or soil must be stored at l east 100 f eet from c oncentrated flows of storm water, drainage c ourses, and storm dra in inle ts if w ithin a floo d plain, otherwise at lea st 50 f eet if outside the floo dplain, and must b e covered and protected with a temporary perimeter sediment barrier.

Cold mix stockpiles must be stored on an imperm eable surface and covered with 9 mil pla stic to pr event c ontact with water. Minimize stockpiling of materials on the job site. Manage stockpiles by implementing the water pollution control practices in Section 13 -

4.03C (3) Stockpile Management of the State of Ca lifornia stand ard
specifications for construction.

20. DISCOVERY OF CO NTAMINATION: The State
Representative must be notified in case any unusual d iscoloration, odor, or t exture of ground water, is found in excavated material or if abandoned, underground t anks, pipe s, or burie d debris ar e encountered.

21. SANITARY AND SEPT IC WAS TE: Do not bu ry or discharge wa stewater from a san itary or sep tic sy stem w ithin th e highway. Properly connected sewer facilities are free from leaks. With State Representative approval place portable sanitary facility at least 50 f eet away fro m st orm drains, receiving wate rs, and flo w li nes.

Permittee mu st comply wi th lo cal h ealth agency provisions when using an on-site disposal system.

22. LIQUID WASTE: Prevent job site liquid waste from entering storm dra in systems and receiving wate rs. Drilling slurries, grea se or oil-free waste water o r rinse water, dredging, wa sh water o r rinse water running of f a surface or other n on-storm water liquids n ot covered under separa te waste water perm its must b e held i n structurally s ound, l eak-proof c ontainers, such as portable bins or portable t anks. Sto re containers at l east 50 f eet away fro m moving vehicles and equipment. Liquid waste may require testing to determine hazardous material c on tent prior to d isposal. All measures must conform to s ection 13-4.03D (5) Liquid Waste , Water Pollution Control of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications.

23. WAT
ER CO NTROL A ND CONSERV ATION: Manage
water u se in a w ay that w ill pre vent ero sion and the d ischarge o f pollutants in to storm drain systems and receiving wate rs. Direct runoff, incl uding water from water line repa ir from the j ob site to areas where it can inf iltrate in to the grou nd. Direct water from off- site sources around the job site or from contact with jobsite runoff.

24. PILE DRIVING: Keep sp ill kits and cl eanup materials at p ile driving lo cations. Pa rk p ile drivin g e quipment o ver d rip pan s, absorbent pad s, or pla stic sheeting with absorbent material, and away from stormwater run-on when not in use.

25. DEWATERING: Dewaterin g c onsists o f discharging
accumulated storm w ater, groundwater, or surface water fro m excavations or tem porary containment f acilities. A ll dewaterin g operations must comply with the latest Caltrans guidelines including the Field Guide for Construction Site Dewatering. C ontact State representative for approval of dewatering discharge by infiltration or evaporation, otherwise, any effluent discharged into a permitted storm water syste m r equires a pproval fro m t he Regi onal Water Qua lity Control Board. Prior to the start of dewatering, t he Per m ittee must provide the Sta te Representa tive w ith a dewaterin g and d ischarge work plan tha t complies w ith s ection 13-4.03G Dewatering, Water Pollution Control of Caltrans’ Standard Specifications. A c opy of the Waste Discharge Permit and a c opy of a va lid WDID number issued by the Regional Board must be provided to the State representative.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 325
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SPECIAL PROVISIONS TR-0408 (New 09/2017)

By acceptance of this encroachment permit, Permittee hereby agrees that:

1. All construction debris/materials/water/excess soil must become the property of the Permittee, and must be transported and disposed of, outside of Caltrans’ right-of-way, in accordance with all applicable environmental laws and regulations. The Permittee must be identified as the generator for all construction debris/materials/water/excess soil and must be responsible for proper identification (including sampling and analysis) and management of all construction and contaminated debris/materials/water/excess soil that are removed, and/or excavated, from the work site. If hazardous waste is generated, the Permittee must obtain an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Identification Number issued in their name. State Permit Inspector does not sign any manifests or shipping papers. The Permittee must be named as the generator on all Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifests and shipping papers. Caltrans must not be identified or written anywhere on the manifests or shipping papers. Prior to waste disposal, the Permittee should submit the waste generator form(s) to State Permit Inspector for verification. The Permittee must submit to the State Permit Inspector, a copy of all manifests and/or shipping papers generated for materials removed, transported and/or excavated from the state right-of-way.

2. If contaminated material is encountered, Permittee is to stop work and contact the State Permit Inspector immediately. The Permittee must submit a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), and a Health and Safety Plan (HaSP) prepared by a Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) and in conformance with California Code of Regulations title 8, section 5192, “Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response” for sampling activity through a separate permit application. Upon the permit review, additional environmental documents may be required prior to resumption of construction activity.

3. Permittee is responsible for any violation, penalty, enforcement action, corrective action, remedial action, and any other type of consequences resulting from cross contamination of groundwater (including perched groundwater), improper handling/managing of hazardous materials and/or placement of contaminated materials inside Caltrans right-of-way.

4. It is the Permittee’s responsibility to comply with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) ADL requirements for roadway soil management. Reuse of soils containing greater than 80 mg/kg total lead is not allowed without written approval of the DTSC and Caltrans. The Soil Management Agreement for Aerially Deposited Lead-Contaminated Soils between Caltrans and the DTSC does not constitute written approval for the Permittee to reuse soils containing greater than 80 mg/kg total lead.

5. The Permittee must implement the emergency notification requirements established in the California Office of Emergency Management Hazardous Materials, Spill / Release Notification Guidance (http://www.caloes.ca.gov/).

6. Any imported material used for backfill must be free of contamination, and a certificate of the material as “clean” with the source area of the material must be provided to Permit Inspector upon request. Importing soils containing greater than 80 mg/kg total lead for use in state right-of-way is not allowed.

7. Stockpiles of material containing aerially deposited lead shall not be placed where affected by surface run-on or run-off. Stockpiles shall be covered with plastic sheeting 13 mils minimum thickness or with one foot of nonhazardous material. Stockpiles shall not be placed in environmentally sensitive areas. Stockpiled material shall not enter storm drains, inlets, or waters of the State.

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 326
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs)

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 327
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 328
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 329
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 330
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 331
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 332
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 333
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and 12" MINOR CONCRETE (SEE NOTE 1)
12"
SEE NOTE 2
LEGEND:LEGEND:LEGEND:

HOT MIX ASPHALTSLURRY CEMENT OR CLSM BACKFILL
3" HMA(A)
TACK COAT (SEE NOTE 3)

SECTIONSTRUCTURAL EXISTING FLEXIBLE
(SEE SECTION 19 OF STD. SPECIFICATIONS)SLURRY CEMENT OR CLSM BACKFILL (SEE NOTE 1) ~
~
~
9" MIN.
12" FOR PIPES OVER 42 INCHES IN DIAMETER OR SPAN)(6' FOR PIPES 42 INCHES OR LESS IN DIAMETER OR SPAN,CD = 6" TO 12" NOTES: HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS DO NOT EXIST WITHIN THE TRENCH

MINOR CONCRETE
(IF REQUIRED)

TRACER WIRE
SEE STD PLANS A62D, A62DA OR A62FFOR APPLICABLE BEDDING REQUIREMENTS.

ABBREVIATIONS:

REVISED 11/12/2019
CASE 1: FOR TRAFFIC INDEX (TI) LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 12 OD = OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF UTILITY OR CULVERTCLSM = CONTROLLED LOW-STRENGH MATERIALCD = CLEAR DISTANCEHMA(A) = HOT MIX ASPHALT TYPE A 12"12"
CDODCD
WITHIN THE TRENCH. 6. USE OF THIS DETAIL IS APPLICABLE IF HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS DO NOT EXIST WITH CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND PROJECT-SPECIFIC SPECIAL PROVISIONS. 5. ALL MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP, TESTING, AND INSPECTIONS SHALL COMPLY 4. ALL TRENCH WORK SUBJECT TO STATE REGULATIONS AND INSPECTION.3. TACK COAT (ASPHALTIC EMULSION) SHALL BE APPLIED PRIOR TO PLACING HMA(A). DETAIL LIBRARY). A SPECIAL DESIGN IS NECESSARY (FOR IN-HOUSE PROJECTS, REFER TO HQ DRAINAGE WHEN COVER OVER A REPLACEMENT PIPE/ENCASEMENT PIPE IS LESS THAN 24", GUIDELINES IN THE ENCROACHMENT PERMITS MANUL OR HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL.2. FOR NEW INSTALLATIONS, MINIMUM DEPTH OF COVER REQUIREMENTS ARE TO FOLLOW RSC DEPENDING UPON THE PROJECT'S TIME CONSTRAINTS. REPLACE THE SLURRY CEMENT OF CLSM BACKFILL WITH LEAN CONCRETE BACKFILL OR1. CONCRETE CAP MAY BE RAPID STRENGH CONCRETE (RSC); IF RSC IS USED,

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 334
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans 12" MINOR CONCRETE (SEE NOTE 1)
12"
SEE NOTE 2
LEGEND:LEGEND:LEGEND:

HOT MIX ASPHALT

SLURRY CEMENT OR CLSM BACKFILL
3" HMA(A)
TACK COAT (SEE NOTE 3)

SECTIONSTRUCTURAL EXISTING FLEXIBLE
(SEE SECTION 19 OF STD. SPECIFICATIONS)SLURRY CEMENT OR CLSM BACKFILL (SEE NOTE 1) ~
~
~
9" MIN.
12" FOR PIPES OVER 42 INCHES IN DIAMETER OR SPAN)
(6' FOR PIPES 42 INCHES OR LESS IN DIAMETER OR SPAN,
CD = 6" TO 12"
NOTES:OD = OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF UTILITY OR CULVERTCLSM = CONTROLLED LOW-STRENGH MATERIAL HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS DO NOT EXIST WITHIN THE TRENCHCD = CLEAR DISTANCE

MINOR CONCRETE
(IF REQUIRED)

TRACER WIRE
SEE STD PLANS A62D, A62DA OR A62FFOR APPLICABLE BEDDING REQUIREMENTS.

ABBREVIATIONS:HMA(A) = HOT MIX ASPHALT TYPE A
REVISED 11/12/2019
CASE 2: FOR TRAFFIC INDEX (TI) GREATER THAN 12
18" O.C. EACH WAY
#4 REBAR
2" CLR.

CLR = CLEARANCEO.C.= ON CENTER
CDODCD
12" 12"
WITHIN THE TRENCH.

6. USE OF THIS DETAIL IS APPLICABLE IF HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS DO NOT EXIST WITH CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND PROJECT-SPECIFIC SPECIAL PROVISIONS.

5. ALL MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP, TESTING, AND INSPECTIONS SHALL COMPLY

4. ALL TRENCH WORK SUBJECT TO STATE REGULATIONS AND INSPECTION.

3. TACK COAT (ASPHALTIC EMULSION) SHALL BE APPLIED PRIOR TO PLACING HMA(A).

DETAIL LIBRARY).

A SPECIAL DESIGN IS NECESSARY (FOR IN-HOUSE PROJECTS, REFER TO HQ DRAINAGE WHEN COVER OVER A REPLACEMENT PIPE/ENCASEMENT PIPE IS LESS THAN 24", GUIDELINES IN THE ENCROACHMENT PERMITS MANUL OR HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL.

2. FOR NEW INSTALLATIONS, MINIMUM DEPTH OF COVER REQUIREMENTS ARE TO FOLLOW RSC DEPENDING UPON THE PROJECT'S TIME CONSTRAINTS.

REPLACE THE SLURRY CEMENT OF CLSM BACKFILL WITH LEAN CONCRETE BACKFILL OR

1. CONCRETE CAP MAY BE RAPID STRENGH CONCRETE (RSC); IF RSC IS USED,

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 335
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans

APPENDIX A

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 336
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) Application Portal https://yourprojects-pge.com/ic-app-detail/869390/Detail 1 of 2 3/14/2022, 9:17 AM

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 337
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) Application Portal https://yourprojects-pge.com/ic-app-detail/869390/Detail 2 of 2 3/14/2022, 9:17 AM

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 338
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs)

APPENDIX C

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 339
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs)

DAILY WORK REPORT
Project Name: File No.: Date:

Contractor: Foreman: Weather:

Item # Description Unit New and Unforeseen Work [ ] None [ ] Yes, describe:

Equip. # Description Hours Hourly Rate Ext. Amount Emp. # Employee Name Hours Hourly Rate Ext. Amount

SUBTOTAL COST OF EQUIPMENT
Inv. # Description Unit Unit Cost Ext. Amount

SUBTOTAL COST OF MATERIALS SUBTOTAL COST OF LABOR
Inv. # Description Amount Subsistence
Travel Expense
Other

TOTAL COST OF LABOR

SUBTOTAL COST OF WORK DONE BY SPECIALISTS
+ 35% on labor

TOTAL COST OF EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND WORK
+ 15% on equipment and material
+ 5% on work done by specialists
Contractor Foreman Date CSC Reviewed By Date TOTAL COST

MATERIAL
WORK done by specialists
LABOR

CONTRACT WORK PERFORMED
Survey Station

DIARY AND REMARKS

EQUIPMENT

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 340
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) 0:: w
=>
CD <(
z >­
(!) z fi3 z
0 <(

INDEX OF PLANS

SHEET NUMBER
1 C1 .1
2 C2 .1

DESCRIPTION

TITLE SHEET

CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
3 E-1
4 E-2
5 E-3

PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON PLAN -EL CAMINO REAL & BELMONT AVE

PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON PLAN -EL CAMINO REAL & BELMONT AVE

PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON PLAN -EL CAMINO REAL & BELMONT AVE ABBREVIATIONS:

AB AGGREGATE BASE MW MONITORING WELL

AC ASPHALT CONCRETE N NORTHING

ACP ASBESTOS CEMENT PIPE OC ON-CENTER

AT&T AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH OH OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE

BC BEGIN CURVE, BOTTOM OF CURB PB PACIFIC BELL

BW BACK OF WALK PCC PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE

C CURVE PG&E PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC

CDF CONTROLLED DENSITY FILL PL PLASTIC
Cl CAST IRON POC POINT OF CONNECTION

CL CENTERLINE PT POINT

CMP CORRUGATED METAL PIPE PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE

COM COMMUNICATION R RADIUS, RIGHT

CONG CONCRETE RC RELATIVE COMPACTION

CY CUBIC YARD RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE

DI DRAIN INLET REHAB REHABILITATION

DIFF DIFFERENCE IN ELEVATION BETWEEN NEW & EX RRFB RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH BEACON

DWY DRIVEWAY RT RIGHT

E ELECTRICAL, EASTING R/W RIGHT OF WAY
EC END CURVE s SOUTH

EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT SD STORM DRAIN

EX EXISTING SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE

FDAC FULL DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE SDR STANDARD DIMENSION RATIO

FH FIRE HYDRANT SFW SAN FRANCISCO WATER

FL FLOW LINE SL STATION LINE, STREET LIGHT

FO FIBER OPTICS SM SURVEY MARKER
FS FIRE SERVICE ss SANITARY SEWER
FW FACE OF WALK ssco SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT

G GAS SSMH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE

GB GRADE BREAK STA STATION

HAWK HIGH-INTENSITY ACTIVATED CROSSWALK BEACON STD STANDARD

HOPE HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE PIPE SW SIDEWALK

HP HIGH POINT TC TOP OF CURB

HV HIGH VOLTAGE TEL TELEPHONE, TELECOM

HYD FIRE HYDRANT TFL THEORETICAL FLOW LINE

INV INVERT TTC THEORETICAL TOP OF CURB

IRR IRRIGATION TYP TYPICAL

L LEFT, LINE, LENGTH UT UTILITY

LF LINEAR FEET VCP VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE

LP LOW POINT W,WTR WATER

LT LEFT WM WATER METER

MH MANHOLE WV WATER VALVE

MISC MISCELLANEOUS WW WELDED WRAP

MON MONUMENT
GENERAL NOTES:

1. ALL MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP SHALL FULLY CONFORM WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, AND ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER.

2. THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF ANY WORK.

3. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE AND LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES. THE UNDERGROUND CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY UTILITY COMPANIES AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF CONSTRUCTION TO FIELD LOCATE UTILITIES. CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT AT 800-2 27-2600.

4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY FIELD CHANGES MADE WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CITY ENGINEER.

5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE TRAFFIC CONTROLS & SHALL SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN

6. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS THAT BECOME DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE COMPLETELY RESTORED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY ENGINEER, AT CONTRACTOR'S SOLE EXPENSE.

7. THE CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE

CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITE CONDITIONS DURING THE

COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY AND THAT THIS REQUIREMENT SHALL BE MADE TO APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT JUST DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.

8. EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY SHORED, BRACED AND SHEETED SO THAT THE EARTH WILL NOT SLIDE OR SETTLE AND SO THAT ALL EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS OF ANY KIND WILL BE FULLY PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE. ANY DAMAGE RESULTING

FROM A LACK OF ADEQUATE SHORING, BRACING OR SHEETING, SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS OR RECONSTRUCTION AT CONTRACTOR OWN EXPENSE.WHERE THE EXCAVATION FOR A

CONDUIT TRENCH, AND/OR STRUCTURE IS FOUR FEET OR MORE IN DEPTH, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE

SHEETING, SHORING AND BRACING OR EQUIVALENT METHOD, FOR THE PROTECTION OF LIFE, OR LIMB, WHICH SHALL

CONFORM TO THE APPLICABLE CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ORDERS OF THE DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL SAFETY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALWAYS COMPLY WITH OSHA REQUIREMENTS.

9. SHOULD IT APPEAR THAT THE WORK TO BE DONE, OR ANY MATTER RELATIVE THERETO, IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY DETAILED OR

EXPLAINED ON THESE PLANS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR SUCH FURTHER EXPLANATIONS AS MAY BE NECESSARY.

10.EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN SERVICE AND IN PLACE BY THE CONTRACTOR DURING CONSTRUCTION UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.
11 .CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL MONUMENTS.
12 .ALL USA MARKINGS TO BE REMOVED AT END OF CONSTRUCTION.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL POSSESS THE CLASS (OR CLASSES)
OF LICENSE AS SPECIFIED IN THE "NOTICE TO BIDDERS."
BORDER LAST REVISED 8/1/2016 CAL TRANS WEB SITE IS: HTTP//WWW.DOT.CA.GOV/

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PROJECT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION ON
HAWK
----

STATE HIGHWAY
IN
IN
SIGNAL
SAN
CITY
MATEO
OF SAN
COUNTY
CARLOS

AT BELMONT AVE-EL CAMINO REAL
(PROJECT NO. C1807)
TO BE SUPPLEMENTED BY STANDARD PLANS DATED MAY 2018

LOCATION OF

CONSTRUCTION
" "
_J_ -- -- -
L
--

RELATIVE BORDER SCALE

IS IN INCHES
.. ' '
I
"'- " ..--JL -------

I I) --
-----
--
-
� ....
�
I
I
I
I
0 . . --
UJ
�
1-
z
0 �
...J
UJ
Ill
.. . .
"
;:_ -
I .r-� r-
2 .. -_ .....

I
--
3 . . " V . . . . .. " -- ,,_, __ " --· ..!!... -- .. --

EL CAMINO REAL
I □ □ □ - - -- - -- -- -
USERNAME => BELLECCI
DGN FILE=> El Camino Real & Belmont.dwg
Dist
04 COUNTY ROUTE POST MILES

TOTAL PROJECT

SHEET TOTAL
No. SHEETS
SM 04 - SM - 82
' •.
/\
I \
'--i /\ ,, L,1··--·-1111·�-I L..., \ I, L..l '·- •.j ,I \ _ ··-• ' ' I I ' -\ .·,� ,_ 111:-: ._,
.1:·i;==n L_
'7
ILJU,11_
K ::r:l•I

5.3 ' '
I
I
I /J .. ,:.;:__l:_S\
1 ���\
:,.c..--, �,1-c;n I

REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER

PLANS APPROVAL DATE
07-07- 21
DATE

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OR ITS

OFFICERS OR AGENTS SHALL NOT BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACY OR
c.,, � LL.I;:::,;
OfESS/
OS[P
No. 87131
P. 09-30-
CJ V \\.

OF C�I.:

COMPLETENESS OF ELECTRONIC COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

BELLECCI & ASSOCIATES, INC
2290 DIAMOND BOULEVARD, SUITE 100
CONCORD, CA 94520

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
600 ELM STREET
SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA 94070
C1. 1
5 -r
I
0421-NSN-2469
08/17/21

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 341
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) 1::i
0 UJ
en
0:::
' >-
@ a:J
�o
....I LU
::J z
() (9....I en <( LU
() 0
0:::
0 en
LU
CL ::J en
z
0 I­() z ::J 11.
z 0
0:::
0 en z
I-
IL
0 I-
z
UJ
UJ
0 <(
z
0:::
0 IL
<(
u
IL
0 I-
en
0 UJ
en
> UJ
0:::

UJ
0 �
0 UJ �
() UJ ::c
()
I
�
,;
(�
•
,... Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)

SAN MATEO COUNTYWIOE
Water Pollution
Prevention Program
Construction projects are required to implement the stormwater best management practices (BMP) on this page, as they apply to your project, all year long.

Clean Water. Healthy Community.

Materials & Waste Management
Non-Hazardous Mat�rlals
□ Berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other construction material with tarps when ram is forecast or if not actively berng used within 14 days.
□ Use (but don't overuse) reclaimed water for dust control.

H aurdous Mawrlals
□ Label all hazardous materials and hazardous wastes (such as pesticides, paints, thinners, solvents, fuel, oil, Md antifreeze) in accordance with city, county, state and federal regulations. □ Store hazardous materials and wa�tes in water tight containers, store in appropnate secondmy containment, and cover them at the end of every work day or during wet weather or when rain is for<XOast.

D Follow manufacturer's application instrnctions for hazardous materials and be careful not to use more than ne=sary. Do not apply chemicals outdoors when rain is forecast within 24 homs.

D Arrange for appropriate disposal of all ha=dous wastes.

Waste Management
□ Cover waste disposal containers secmely ,v:ith Imps at the end of every work day and during wet weather.
□ Check waste disposal containers frequently for leaks and to make sure they are not overfilled. Never hose down a dumpster on lhe construction site.

D Clean or replace portable toilets, and inspect them frequently for leaks and spills
□ Dispose of all wastes and debris properly. Recycle materials and wastes that can be recycled (such as asphalt, concrete, aggregate base materials, wood, gyp board, pipe, etc.)
D Dispose ofliquid residues from paints, thinners, solvents, glues, and clemring fluids as ha=dous waste.

Constt·uction Entrances and Perimeter
□ Establish mid maintain effective perimeter controls and stabilize all constmction entrm1ces and exits to sufficiently control erosion mid sediment discharges from site and tracking off site.

D Sweep or vacuum any street tracking immediately and secme sediment source to prevent further tracking Never hose down streets to clean up tracking.

Equipment Management &
Spill Control
Maintenance and Parking
□ Designate an area, fitted with appropriate BMPs, for
vehicle and equipment parking and storage.
0 Perform major maintenance, repair jobs, and vehicle
and equipment washing off site.
0 lfrefueling or vehicle ITlillntenance must be done
onsite, work in a bermed area away from storm drains
and over a d1ip pan or drop cloths big enough to collect fluids. Recycle or dispose of fluids as hazardous waste. □ If vehicle or eqrnpment cleaning must be done oru;i.te, clean with water only in a bermed area that ,v:ill not
allow rinse water to run into gutters, streets, storm
drairn, or surface waters.

D Do not clean vehicle or equipment onsite using soaps, sol vents, degreasers, or steam cleaning equipment.

Spill Prevention and Control
0 Keep spill cleanup materials (e.g., rags, absorbents mid cat litter) available at the construction site at all times.

D Inspect vehicles and eq1tipment frequently for and
repair leaks promptly. Use drip pans to catch leaks
until repairs are made.

D Clean up spills or leaks immediate! y and dispose of
cleanup materials properly
D De not hose down surfaces where fluids have spilled.

Use dry cleanup methods (absorbent materials, cat
litter, and/or rags).
□ Sweep up spilled dry materials immediately Do not
try to wash them away with water, or bury them.

D Clean up spills on dirt areas by digging up and
properly disposing of contaminated soil
□ Report significant spills immediately. You are required by law to report all significant releases of ha=dous
materials, including oil. To report a spill: 1) Di al 911 or your local emergency resporne number, 2) Call the
Governor's Office of Emergency Se!Vices Warning
Cente1; (800) 852-7550 (24 hours).

Earthmoving
D Sched1ile grading and excavation work
during dry weather
0 Stabilize al.I denuded areas, install and
maintain tempormy erosion controls (such
as erosion control fabric or bonded fiber
matrix) until vegetation is established.

D Remove existing vegetation only when
absolutely necessary, and seed or plant
vegetation for erosion control on slopes
or where construction is not immediately
planned.

D Prevent sediment from migrating offaite
and protect stonn drain inlets, gutters,
ditches, and drainage cournes by installing
and maintaining appropriate BMPs, such
as fiber rolls, silt fences, sediment basins,
gravel bags, benns, etc.
0 Keep excavated soil on site and transfer it
to dump ti·ucks on site, not in the streets.

Contaminawd So ils
0 If any of the following conditions are
observed, test for contamination and
contact the Regional ·water Quality
Contrnl Board:
- Unusual soil conditions, discoloration,
or odor.
- Abandoned underground tanks
- Abandoned wells
- Buried ban·els, debris, or trash.

Paving/ Asphalt Work
D Avoid paving and seal coating in wet
weather or when rain is forocast, to
prevent materials that have not cmed
from contacting s.tonnvrater runoff.

D Cover storm drain inlets and manholes
when applying seal coat, tack coat, slLJIIy
seal, fog seal, etc.

D Collect and recycle or appropriately
dis pose of excess abrasive gravel or sand.

Do NOT sweep or wash it into gutters.

D Do not use water to wash down fresh
asphalt concrete pavement.

Sawcutting .11< AsphalUConCl'ew Removal
□ Protect nearby storm drain inlets when
saw cutting. Use filter fab1ic, catch basin
inlet filters, or gravel bags to keep slurry
out of the storm drain system
□ Shovel, abosorb, or vacuum saw-cut
slurry and dispose of all waste as soon
as you m·e finished in one location or at
the end of each w01k day (whichever is
sooner')-
□ If sawcut slurry enters a catch basin, clean
it up immediately.

Concrete, Grout & Mortar
Application
D Store concrete, grout, and mortar away
from storm drains or waterways, and on
pallets under cover to protect them from
rain, nm off, and wind.

D Wash out concrete equipmentftrucks
offsite or in a designated washout
area, where the water "�11 flow into a
temporary waste pit, and in a manner
that ,v:ill prevent leaching into the
underlying soil or onto surrounding areas.

Let concrete harden and dispose of as
garbage
D When washing exposed aggregate,
prevent washwater from entering storm
drains. Block m1y inlets and vacuum
gutters, hose washwater onto dirt areas, or
drain onto a bermed surface to be pwnped
and disposed of properly.

Landscaping .. v
□ Protect stockpiled landscaping materials
from wind and rain by stoiing them under
tarps all year-round.
□ Stack bagged material on pallets and
under cover.
□ Discontinue application of any erodible
landscape material "� thin 2 days before a
forecast rain event or during wet weather.

Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines of up to $10,000 per day!

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
H

AWK SIGNAL AT BELMONT

AVE-EL CAMINO REAL
(PROJECT NO. C1807)
Painting & Paint Removal
Painting Cleanup and Removal
D Never clean brushes or rinse pa.int
containers into a street, gutter, storm
drain, or stremn.

D For water-based paints, paint out brushes
to tlie extent possible, md rinse into a
drain that goes to the sanitary sewer.

Never pour paint down a storm drain.
0 For oil-based paints, paint out blllShes to
the extent possible and clean with tllinner
or solvent in a proper container. Filter and
reuse thinners and solvents. Dispose of
excess liquids as hazardous waste.

D Paint chips and dust from non-hazardous
dry stripping md sand blasting may be
swept up or collected in.plastic drop
cloths and disposed of as trash.
0 Chemical paint stripping residue artd chips
and dust from IIIBiine paints or paints
containing lead, mercury, or tributyltin
must be disposed of as hazardous waste.

Lead based paint removal requires a state­
certified contractor.

Dewatering
D Discharges of groundwater or captured
runoff from dewatering operations must
be properly managed and disposed. When
possible send dewatering discharge to
l817dscaped area or smlitary sewer If
discharging to the sanitary sewer call your
local wastewater tTeatrnent plant.
□ Divert run-on water from otfsite away
from all disturbed areas.

D When dewatering, notify and obtain
approval from the local municipality
before discharging water to a street gutter
or storm drain. Filtration or diversion
through a basin, tank, or sediment trap
may he required.
□ In areas of known or suspected
contamination, call your local agency to
determine whether the ground water must
be tested. Pumped groundwater may need
to be collected ar1d hauled off-site for
treatment and proper disposal.

Dist
04 COUNTY ROUTE
SM 04 - SM - 82

POST MILES

TOTAL PROJECT

5.3 SHEET TOTAL
No. SHEETS
2 5
-------"'=-------- 07 - 07 - 21
oHss,
\0S[P

REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER

PLANS APPROVAL DATE

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OR ITS

OFFICERS OR AGENTS SHALL NOT BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACY OR
DATE
<:,!)� c>f"r'1
L,,J ::e 7' rT"1
o,; -< XI
No. 87131
EXP. 09-30-21
Ct VI\.
or c�\.''
COMPLETENESS OF ELECTRONIC COPIES OF THIS PLAN SHEET.

BELLECCI & ASSOCIATES, INC
2290 DIAMOND BOULEVARD, SUITE 100
CONCORD, CA 94520

CONSTRUCTION BEST

MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
C2.1 � �
� ----------------------,.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..--------------------------------------------------------------� � � �
USERNAME => MBecker
DGN FILE=> El Camino Real & Belmont.dwg

RELATIVE BORDER SCALE

IS IN INCHES
0 2 3

UNIT PROJECT NUMBER & PHASE

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 342
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) 35 0

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

HAWK SIGNAL AT BELMONT

AVE-EL CAMINO REAL
(PROJECT NO. C1807)

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 343
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) 045

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

HAWK SIGNAL AT BELMONT

AVE-EL CAMINO REAL
(PROJECT NO. C1807)

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 344
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs) 055

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

HAWK SIGNAL AT BELMONT

AVE-EL CAMINO REAL
(PROJECT NO. C1807)

7.c.2
Packet Pg. 345
Attachment: Plans and Specs - HAWK Signal at Belmont Ave-El Camino Real (HAWK Signal Plans and Specs)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: April 25, 2022

ITEM TITLE: Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Historical Property Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) for the Property Located at 300 Chestnut Street in the City of San Carlos.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council a dopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Historical Property Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) with the property owner at 300 Chestnut Street.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

For the 2021 tax assessment year, the General Tax Total amount for the property at 300 Chestnut Street was $21,727, of which 13.27 percent, or approximately $2,883.17, would be allocated to the City of San Carlos General Fund. Based on an estimate from the O ffice of the San Mateo County Assessor, the property owner would receive an annual tax savings of approximately $10,000 in the 2023 tax assessment year should the Mills Act contract be officially executed and rec orded before January 1, 2023 . Therefore, upo n adoption of the contract, staff estimates that the City would be allocated $1,528.08 from the General Tax Total for the property, or a loss of approximately $1,355.09 annually for the City for the duration of the contract.

BACKGROUND:

On September 24, 2021, Aseem Grover and Meilinda Huang (“Applicants”) filed an application for approval of a Mills Act contract for the property at 300 Chestnut Street. This item is now coming to the City Council to consider approval.

The Mills Act is a State tax incentiv e law enacted in 1972 , which provides cities with the authority to enter into agreements with the owners of qualified historic properties. Mills Act contracts provide an ongoing reduction in property taxes in exchange for the owner’s agreement to preserve and maintain a historic property in accordance with an approved work schedule.

The term of a Mills Act contract is for a minimum period of 10 years. On an annual basis, one year is automatically added to the initial term of the contract unless notice of n onrenewal is given by either the City of San Carlos or the property owner for any reason. Therefore, upon

7.d
Packet Pg. 346
2 taking effect, the contract is always 10 years from termination unless the contract is not renewed. Mills Act c ontracts run with the land and are not affected by a change in property ownership.

Upon entering a Mills Act contract, property owners can save between 40% and 60% annually on their property tax bill. Exact savings depend on the adjusted assessment made by the County Assessor after the contract is executed and recorded.

The Planning Commission, at its April 4, 2022 meeting, recommended the City Council approve the Mills Act Contract with the owners of the property at 300 Chestnut Street.

ANALYSIS:

To be eligible as a historical property unde r the Mills Act, the property must be privately owned and be:
 Listed in the National Register of Historic Places or located in a registered historic district; or
 Listed in any state, city, county, or city and county official register of historical or architecturally significant sites, places, or landmarks

The subject property is listed in the City of San Carlos’ 1991 Historic Resource Inventory (Attachment 3) which is a citywide survey of cultural resources that are intended to be considered in the community planning process. Because the property is listed in the City’s 1991 Historic Resource Inventory and the house is eligible for inclusion in the State registry (see below), the Planning Commission determined that the property at 300 Chestnut Street qualifies as a historic resource under the Mills Act.

Furthermore, the Applicants’ historic consultant, Robert Cartier, submitted a historic resource evaluation (Attachment 4) that concluded that the property appears eligible for inclusion in the California Reg ister of Historic Resources (“CRHR”). The Planning Division requested a peer review of evaluation by Dr. Laura Jones, Director of Heritage Services and University Archaeology for Stanford University (Attachment 5). Dr. Jones agreed with Cartier’s conclusio n that the property is eligible for listing on the CRHR and advised staff that the property is a historic resource worthy of preservation.

Site Description
The site is located on the corner of Chestnut Street and Manzanita Avenue. The site consists of one parcel of land with an approximate area of 13,022 square feet and features a one-and-one- half story single-family residence that was constructed circa 1889.

Historic Resource Description
A project may be deemed eligible for listing in the California R egister of Historic Resources (“CRHR”) if one of the following 4 criteria are met. The property is:

1. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.

2. Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history.

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values.

7.d
Packet Pg. 347
3 4. Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation.

The historic resource survey indicates the home dates to 1889 , making it among the oldest extant structures in the local area, and associating the structure with the earliest phases of the development of what is now the City of San Carlos. Thus, the structure appears to be eligible for inclusion in this reg ister (CRHR Eligibility Criterion 1). In addition, the structure was the retreat cottage of Captain Nicholas T. Smith, a significant figure in the context of local and regional history. Thus , the property also appears potentially eligible for inclusion (CRHR Eligibility Criterion 2).

Figure 1 - Photograph of Front Building Façade

Work Schedule
The proposed work plan, included as an attachment to the Agreement ( Attachment 6), consists of preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration treatments to the residence . Work includes landscaping improvements (add landscaping, tree trimming, rebuild irrigation system, regrade the ground, install fence and gate, etc.); repair front steps, pathway and driveway; repair and restore balcony; replace and restore roof of house; replace and restore roof of garage; restore and repair exterior windows and doors; restore and repair wood siding of house; repaint exterior of house; general maintenance (repairing cracks, paint touch ups, replace wood rot, etc.). The work plan follows the Secretary of the Interior’s Stand ards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (“Interior’s Standards”). The work plan has been reviewed by Dr. Jones and found to be appropriate to execute a Mills Act Contract. On April 4, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and expressed support for the proposed work plan.

Environmental Determination.

This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15331, which applies to projects limited to the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Interior’s Standards.

7.d
Packet Pg. 348
4 ALTERNATIVES:

Options available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Mills Act Contract with the with the property owners at 300 Chestnut Street; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, AICP
Community Development Director

Approved for submission by:

_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

2. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-04 - Final Unsigned

3. Historical Resource Inventory

4. CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street

5. Peer Review by Dr. Laura Jones, Heritage Resources Consulting, 2022

6. Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract)

7.d
Packet Pg. 349
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A HISTORIC PROPERTY

PRESERVATION AGREEMENT (MILLS ACT CONTRACT) FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 300 CHESTNUT STREET IN THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS.

WHEREAS, the purpose of the Mills Act is to encourage the preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of historic properties; and
WHEREAS, the property at 300 Chestnut Street is deemed a qualified historic property under Government Code Section 50280.1; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos’ General Plan Goal LU -12 is to “Protect San Carlos’ historic and cultural resources to maintain and enhance a unique sense of place” and the restoration and rehabilitation of the building at 300 Chestnut Street is consistent with this Goal; and WHEREAS, all exterior work to be performed pursuant to the subject Mills Act Contract shall be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties: and
WHEREAS, the City o f San Carlos has determined that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15331, which states that modifications to historic structures consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties are categorically exempt from CEQA review; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at a regular meeting on April 25, 2022 considered the (Mills Act Contract) application of Aseem Grover and Meilinda Huang and recommended the City Council approve the Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a Historic Property Agreement with the propert y owner for the preservation of the property located at 300 Chestnut Street. *****
I City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on t he 25th day of April, 2022, by the following vote:

________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

7.d.1
Packet Pg. 350
Attachment: Resolution (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)
RESOLUTION NO. PC2022-04

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO

ENTER INTO A HISTORICAL PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT (MILLS ACT CONTRACT) FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 300 CHESTNUT STREET IN THE CITY

OF SAN CARLOS

WHEREAS, the purpose of the Mills Act is to encourage the preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of historic properties; and
WHEREAS, the property at 300 Chestnut Street is deemed a qualified histo ric property under Government Code Section 50280.1; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos’ General Plan Goal LU -12 is to “Protect San Carlos’ historic and cultural resources to maintain and enhance a unique sense of place” and the restoration and rehabilitation of the building at 300 Chestnut Street is consistent with this Goal; and
WHEREAS, all exterior work to be performed pursuant to the subject Mills Act Contract shall be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Histo ric Properties: and
WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos has determined that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15331, which states that modifications to historic structures consistent with the Secret ary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties are categorically exempt from CEQA review; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at a regular meeting on April 4, 2022 considered the Mills Act Contract application of Aseem Grover and Meilinda Huang; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission of the City of San Carlos hereby finds that:

The application is consistent with General Plan Goal LU -12 because the proposed contract would allow the property owner to contin ue to preserve, maintain, and enhance the historic building at 300 Chestnut Street.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager enter into a Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act contract) with the property owners, Aseem Grover and Meilinda Huang. *****

Passed and adopted as a Resolution of the City of San Carlos Planning Commission at a regular meeting thereof held on the 4th day of April 2022, by the following vote:

7.d.2
Packet Pg. 351
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-04 - Final Unsigned (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) 1 AYES, PLANING COMMISSION MEMBERS: Garvey, Iacoponi, Bradley, Clements, Roof NOES, PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS:

ABSENT, PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS:

___________________________________
Chair, Planning Commission of the City of San Carlos

ATTEST:

_____________________________________________
Lisa Porras, Planning Manager of the City of San Carlos

7.d.2
Packet Pg. 352
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-04 - Final Unsigned (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

7.d.3
Packet Pg. 353
Attachment: Historical Resource Inventory (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

7.d.3
Packet Pg. 354
Attachment: Historical Resource Inventory (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

7.d.3
Packet Pg. 355
Attachment: Historical Resource Inventory (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

7.d.3
Packet Pg. 356
Attachment: Historical Resource Inventory (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) Archaeological Resource Management
Robert R. Cartier, Ph.D.
496 North 5th Street
San Jose, CA 95112
Telephone (408) 295-1373
Fax (408) 286-2040
email: [email protected]
Ms. Meilinda Huang February 3, 2022
300 Chestnut Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
RE: HISTORIC EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AT 300 CHE STNUT STREET IN

THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Dear Ms. Huang;
Asperyourrequest,ourfirmcarriedoutanhistoricreviewo fthestructureat300ChestnutStreet intheCityofSanCarlos,alsoknownasthePagodaHouse. This assessmentevaluatesthehome for eligibility for the Mills Act. The property includes a two story residence, originally constructed in 1889 as a retreat cottage, as well as a detached garage.

Basedupontheresultsofthisinvestigation,itwasdetermi nedthatthepropertyiscurrentlylisted on the City of San Carlos Historic Resource Inventory. The structure at 300 Chestnut Street is not currently listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. However, the structure does appear to be potentially eligible for inclusion in thisregister. The home dates to 1889, making it among the oldest extant structures in the local area, and associating the structure with theearliestphasesofthedevelopmentofwhatisnowtheCity ofSanCarlos. Thusthestructure appears to bepotentiallyeligibleforinclusion in this registerunderCriterion 1. In addition, the structurewastheretreat cottageofCaptain NicholasT. Smi th,asignificant figureinthecontext of local and regional history. Thus the property also appears potentially eligible for inclusion underCriterion2. Furthermore,thehomeisanexcellentexa mpleofVictorianarchitecturewith a rare sweeping curved gable roof form, and thus the propertyappears to qualify as potentially eligibleunderCriterion3. Surfacesoilswereexamineddur ingfieldanalysisandphotographyof the structure, and no significant cultural materials were noted at that time. However, given the age of the the structure it is likely that subsurface historic deposits may be present on the property, thus the property has the potential to yield information important to the history of the local area and it appears potentially eligible for listing under Criterion 4.

Enacted in 1972, the Mills Act legislation grants participating local governments (cities and counties) the authority to enter into contracts with ownersof qualified historic properties who activelyparticipateintherestorationandmaintenanceof theirhistoricpropertieswhilereceiving property tax relief (ohp.parks.ca.gov). Each local government establishes their own criteria and determines how many contracts they will allow in their jurisdiction.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 357
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) California Government Code Section 50280, et seq. authorizes the City of San Carlos to enter into contracts with owners of qualified historical properties to provide for the use, maintenance, and restoration of historical properties so as to retain characteristics of historical significance.

The Cityof San Carlos requires that properties be recognized as eligible for the CRHR in order to be eligible for consideration for a Mills Act contract.

The property at 300 Chestnut Street is currently listed on the San Carlos Historic Resources Inventory. Inaddition,itappearseligibleforinclusioni ntheCRHRunderCriteria1,2,3,and4.

Thus, based upon the results of this evaluation, the structure appears to be eligible for consideration for a Mills Act contract.

Sincerely,
Robert Cartier, Ph.D.

RC/dj Principal Investigator

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 358
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial ______________________________ NRHP Status Code ______________________
Other Listings ____________________ ____________________ Review Code ________ Reviewer __________ Date ________ Page _ 1 _ of _24 Resource Name or # ____ 300 Chestnut Street _____ P1. Other Identifier: _________________________ ______________________________ P2. Location: ____ Not for Publication __ x_ Unrestricted *a. County ___ San Mateo ___ and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: San Mateo, CA Date: 2018 T ; R ; 1/4 of 1/4 of S ec ; BM c. Address: 300 Chestnut Street City: San Carlos, CA Zip: 94070 d. UTM: 10S 5 64 773mE/41 51 440mN
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) APN: 05004303-300
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries.) The primary structure at 300 Chestnut Street is a one-and-one-half story wooden framed residence originally constructed as a “Honeymoon Cottage.” The roof of the main portion of the home is constructed in a rare sweeping curved gable style, surfaced with composition shingles. This roof form gives the home its local name the “pagoda house.” Although reminiscent of Chinese architecture, the sweeping curved roof design “according to the family, came from the folding of two cards on top of a block of wood” (Seavey 1991). The eaves are broad and open, with exposed rafters. Exterior walls are surfaced with wooden siding, in a combination of vertical and horizontal configurations.

See Continuation Page 4
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes.) HP02: SFR, HP04: Ancill ary structures *P4. Resources Present: x_Building __Structure __Object __District __Element of Distric t __Site __Other P5a. Photo or drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, objects.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) Oblique view of the front facade of 300 Chestnut
Street
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources
Historic X Prehistoric Both
Constructed 1889F (The San Carlos Villagers 1982,
Seavey 1991).
*P7. Owner and Address:

Mr. Aseem Grover and Ms. Meilinda Huang
300 Chestnut Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
*P8. Recorded by:

Robert Cartier
Archaeological Resource Management
496 North 5 th Street
San Jose, CA 95112
*P9. Date Recorded: 2/3/2022
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite Survey Report and other sources, or enter "none.") None
* Attachments: __None X_Location Map __Sketch Map X_Continuation Sheet X_Building, Structure, and Object Record __Archaeological Record __District Record __Linear Feature Record __Milling Station Record __Rock Art Record __Artifact Record __Photographic Record __Other (List):

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 359
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page _ 2 _ of _ 24 *NRHP Status Code _________________________ *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) ____ 300 Chestnut Street_____ B1. Historic Name: _________Captain Nicholas T. Smith Cottage _____________________________________________ B2. Common Name: ________ 300 Chestnut Street _____________________________________________ B3. Original Use: ____retreat cottage____ B4. Present Use: _____residence_____ *B5. Architectural Style: ____Victorian cottage__ _________ *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Based upon visual evaluation and available documentation, the residence at 300 Chestnut Street was originally constructed in 1889. This date is listed in the local history “A Short Walk Through San Carlos History” (The San Carlos Villagers 1982), and corroborated by K. Seavey in his original documentation of the residence for the City of San Carlos Historic Resource Inventory (Seavey 1991). The County Appraiser's record lists a later date of 1905, however this appears to have been an estimate made when the record was created in the 1970's. Since its original construction multiple modifications have been made to the structure. Stairs and an upper door on the northern elevation were added circa 1909, both features were removed after 1991. A series of modifications were made throughout the 1950's (BP 6203 in 1953, 7879 in 1954, BP 7152 in 1958, and BP 10091 in 1958). It appears to be during this period in which the formerly separate cottage structure was incorporated into the residence as the southwest bedroom. More recent permitted modifications include the addition of aluminum siding to the rear and chimney wall in 1990 (BP 22043), remodeling of the master bathroom in 1992 (BP 4003), reroofing in 1999 (BLD1999-00654), construction of a landscaping wall in 2001 (ENC2001-00060), replacing the tankless water heater in 2008 (BLD2008-01414), replacing the furnace and adding an AC unit in 2020 (MEP2020-00609), and interior remodeling in 2021 (BLD2021-00056). *B7. Moved? _x_ No ___ Yes ___ Unknown Date: _______ Original Locatio n: __________________ *B8. Related Features: none
B9a. Architect: _____Nicholas T. Smith _______ b. Builder: _______ Nicholas T. Smith _________ *B10. Significance: Theme _____ architecture and shelter ____ Area _____San Carlos, CA ______ Period of Significance 1889-1907 Property Type __private residential__ Applicable Criteria CRHR 1,2,3,4 __ Rancho de las Pulgas (the fleas), originally known as Cachanigtac, was granted to Don José Dario Argüello sometime prior to 1795. This rancho contained approximately twelve square leagues, and was located along the San Francisco Bay between San Mateo Creek, to the north, and San Francisquito Creek, to the south. Don José served as acting governor of Alta California in 1814, prior to being made Governor of Baja California in 1815. He had nine children, the most historically prominent of which was Don Luís Antonio Argüello, born 1784, who served as acting governor of Alta California from 1822 to 1825. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4 B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) ________N/A ______________________ *B12. References:

See continuation sheet, Page 7.

B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator:
______ Robert R. Cartier _________
*Date of Evaluation: ______2/3/2022 ____________

(This space reserved for official comments.)
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 360
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________ LOCATION MAP Trinomial ________________________________ Page _3_ of _24 Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) ____300 Chestnut Street ______ __ *Map Name: ___San Mateo, CA__________ *Scale: ___7.5 minute __ *Date of Map : __2018 _____

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 361
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _ 4_ of _ 24 * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) _____ 300 Chestnut Street _______ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 X Continuation Update Continued from P3a:

Fenestration originally consisted of a combination of fixed windows with a diamond pattern glazing above and large and small multi-paned wooden casement windows below. The existing windows are non-original, primarily wooden framed and multi-paned, in a mixture of fixed and sliding configurations. The structure was expanded in 1909 from a single room cottage into a full residence including an open porch entry under a flared roof on the south side, and an open staircase to access the upper floor on the north side. Further modifications were made throughout the 1950s incorporating once separate cottages at the southwest corner as a bedroom and a one story gabled wing at the northwest corner.

Continued from B10:

A new title for Rancho de las Pulgas was made circa 1820 to Don Luís Antonio Argüello. After his death in 1830, his widow Dona Soledad and their children continued to occupy the rancho (Hoover et al, 1966).The next owner of what would become the subject property was Timothy Guy Phelps, who in multiple purchases in the 1850's came to own about 3,500 acres of land in what is now San Carlos and the surrounding area. Phelps was a prominent merchant in San Francisco, He served in the California State Assembly from 1855 to 1857, and was instrumental in the establishment of the County of San Mateo in 1856. He was then elected to the State Senate, serving from 1858 to 1861, and the 37 th U.S. Congress from 1861 to 1863.

Phelps then became the first President of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company from 1865 to 1868, later running as the Republican Candidate for Governor of California in 1876, but losing to the Democrat William Irwin (Veronico & Veronico 2007).

In 1888 the San Carlos Land Company was founded by Captain Nicholas T. Smith and four other partners to promote the development of the town of San Carlos. The company purchased 173.2 acres of Lot 2 of the T. G. Phelps property, subdivided it, graded and laid out an extensive network of streets, lots and sewers. Although growth of the community was slow at first, this development formed the nucleus of what was to become the City of San Carlos. Captain Nicholas T. Smith was born in Schodeck New York on November 19, 1829, the son of John N. and Maria (Hendricks) Smith. At the age of seventeen he was employed at the offices of Schulyer & Co. in Albany, N.Y, the principal freight company on the Hudson River at that time. Smith spent four years at Schulyer & Co in charge of their freight boats. In 1852 he moved to California, settling first in Cold Springs, El Dorado County, California. He formed a partnership with Leland Stanford selling mining supplies to prospectors headed to the California gold fields. Smith would maintain a friendship with Stanford throughout the remainder of his life. In 1855 he was elected to the State Legislature on the Democratic ticket, and closed his business to move to Sacramento. After a period of prospecting he began new business ventures starting in 1859, first in Placer County, and then in Virginia City, Nevada. In 1866 he was appointed Recorder of the then newly created Nye County, Nevada. In 1871 he was made cashier and paymaster of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company (SPRC), whose offices were in San Francisco. Five years later he was elected treasurer of the SPRC, as well as of the Market Street Cable Railway Company.

On February 15, 1882 he was married to Mary Hooker (James T. White & Co 1922). As well as being a significant figure in the early development and promotion of the community of San Carlos, Captain Smith was instrumental in the construction of the San Carlos Southern Pacific Railroad Depot (1888), a National Register structure. Although the Railroad Depot is associated with Smith in his capacity as treasurer of the Southern Pacific Railroad, the residence at 300 Chestnut Street can be seen as better representative of his significance as an early promoter and developer of the City of San Carlos.

Smith built his primary residence (no longer extant) on the northwest corner of Laurel and Cypress Avenue (now San Carlos Avenue) in 1893. This residence was moved to 530 Walnut Avenue in 1927 (The San Carlos Villagers 1982), and was demolished Circa the 1980s. The structure at 300 Chestnut Street was constructed by Captain Smith in 1889 as a retreat:
“Capt. Smith and his-associates were constantly beset by people seeking funding for various projects and causes. To secure privacy for himself and his friends who enjoyed the game of poker he constructed his "Pagoda House" away from town atop the Chestnut Street hill” (Seavey 1991). As Smith's pied-a-terre on the peninsula prior to construction of his primary residence in 1893, and given the Victorian proclivity for the admixture of business and leisure activities, it is likely that much of the business and deal making associated with his early promotion of the community of San Carlos were carried out within the subject structure. At the time of the home's construction, the subject property consisted of Lot 3 of Block 31, as shown on the 1888 Map of the Town of San Carlos (See Photo #26). After Nicholas T. Smith's death in 1907, his widow Mary Hooker Smith retained ownership of the property until her death. As noted in its original recordation in 1991, “this building is the last physical reminder of the contribution of Captain Nicholas T. Smith as one of the founders of the town of San Carlos” (ibid).

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 362
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _ 5_ of _ 24 * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) _____ 300 Chestnut Street _______ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 X Continuation Update The property then passed to Ida H. Stewart, who transferred her interest in the property by quitclaim deed to Robert T.

Brown on January 11, 1926 (Book 229, Page 402). At that time the subject property was identified as consisting of Lot 3 of Block 31 as shown on the map entitled “Resubdivision of a Portion of the Town Of San Carlos” dated May 20, 1921 (Volume 10 of Maps, Pages 39 and 40). The Decree of Distribution for Mary Hooker Smith's estate (signed June 23, 1926, Book 229, Pages 320-324) also cites the transference of the property to Robert T. Brown. On March 22, 1932 Robert Brown and his wife Margaret Brown granted the property to Merritt R. Hosmer (Book 558, Page 154). On February 24, 1943 Hosmer granted the property to Albert L. and Etta E. Schacherer (Book 1053, Page 100).

Two years later on March 9, 1945 the property was granted to Mary E. Hart (Book 1159 Page 435). The following year, on November 20, 1946 Mary E. Hart granted the property to Jack H. and Barbara R. Jones. Jack Jones was a sheet metal worker employed at the San Carlos Sheet Metal Works and later at Belco in Belmont. The Jones' would own the property for over forty years. On August 10, 1992 Barbara R. Jones granted the property to Lyle A. and Barbara Cole Woodson. On July 3, 1996 the property was granted to Gavin James and Lisa M. Telfer. The Telfers owned the property until August 29, 2019, when the property was granted to the current owners, Meilinda Huang and Aseem Grover.

City of San Carlos Historic Resources Inventory
The City of San Carlos Historic Resource Inventory was created in 1991 and consists of fifty two listings recorded by a team of volunteers. This included a range of residential and commercial structures and one public park significant to the City's history. The structure at 300 Chestnut Street was included in this register, with the original forms being completed by K.

Seavey in 1991.

The City of San Carlos has no local historic preservation ordinance or formal historic designation criteria. However, the City of San Carlos 2030 General Plan (2009) describes goals and policies for historic resources within the city. These include the following policies and actions relevant to the subject structure:

POLICY LU-12.2 Foster the preservation, restoration and compatible reuse of architecturally and/or historically significant structures and sites.

POLICY LU-12.3 Ensure that modifications to identified historic resources are consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

POLICY LU-12.4 Encourage continued use and adaptive reuse of designated historic resources through application of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for rehabilitation, reconstruction and restoration.

POLICY LU-12.6 Promote the maintenance, restoration and rehabilitation of historical resources through but not limited to the use of Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits, State incentives including the Mills Act and the California Cultural and Historical Endowment and the California State Historical Building Code.

ACTION LU-12.1 Ensure thorough compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) relating to potential impacts to cultural and historical resources.

ACTION LU-12.2 Apply for Certified Local Government status to become eligible for participation in federal and State historic preservation programs.

ACTION LU-12.3 Update the city’s inventory and map of historic and architecturally significant properties and landmarks every five years.

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 363
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _ 6_ of _ 24 * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) _____300 Chestnut Street_______ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 X Continuation Update ACTION LU-12.4 Develop a cultural landmarks and historic preservation plan and supporting ordinances. (City of San Carlos 2009)
Mills Act status for the structure at 300 Chestnut Avenue would be consistent with Policy LU-12.2, as well as Policy LU-12.6 as it would foster the preservation of this important structure associated with the early development of the City.

California Register of Historic Resources Criteria
A cultural resource is considered "significant" if it qualifies as eligible for listing in the Califor nia Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). Properties that are eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet one or more of the following criteria:

1. Association with events that have made a signifi cant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States;

2. Association with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history;

3. Embodying the distinctive characteristics of a ty pe, period, region, or method of construction, or representing the work of a master, or possessing high artistic values; or

4. Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

A property may be automatically listed in the CRHR if it is formally determined eligible for the Natio nal Register of Historic Places. Properties that are formally determined el igible for the NRHP are those that are designated a s such through one of the federal preservation programs administered by t he California Office of Historic Preservation (i.e. , the National Register, Tax Certification, and Section 106 review of federal undertakings).

The CRHR interprets the integrity of a cultural res ource based upon its physical authenticity. An his toric cultural resource must retain its historic character or appearance an d thus be recognizable as an historic resource. In tegrity is evaluated by examining the subject's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. If the subject has retained these qualities, it may be said to have in tegrity. It is possible that a cultural resource m ay not retain sufficient integrity to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places yet still be eligible for listing i n the CRHR. If a cultural resource retains the potential to convey significan t historical/scientific data, it may be said to ret ain sufficient integrity for potential listing in the CRHR.

The structure at 300 Chestnut Street is not current ly listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. However, the structure does appear to be potentially eligible fo r inclusion in this register. The home dates to 1889, making it among the oldest extant structures in the local area, and associating the structure with the earliest phases of the development of what is now the City of San Carlos. Thus the structure app ears to be potentially eligible for inclusion in th is register under Criterion

1. In addition, the structure was the retreat cott age of Captain Nicholas T. Smith, a significant fig ure in the context of local and regional history. Thus the property also appea rs potentially eligible for inclusion under Criteri on 2. Furthermore, the home is an excellent example of Victorian architect ure with a rare sweeping curved gable roof form, an d thus the property appears to qualify as potentially eligible under Cr iterion 3. Surface soils were examined during fiel d analysis and photography of the structure, and no significant cultural materials were noted at that time. However, given the age of the the structure it is likely that subsurface historic dep osits may be present on the property, thus the prop erty has the potential to yield information important to the history of the local area and it appears potentially eligible for listing under Criterion 4.

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 364
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _ 7_ of _ 24 * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) ____300 Chestnut Street_____________ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 X Continuation Update Integrity
The Period of Significance for the property at 300 Chestnut Street has been identified as stretching f rom construction of the structure in 1889 until Captain Nicholas T. Smith's death in 1907. Multiple modifications have been m ade to the structure since that time. Stairs and an upper door on the northern elevation were added circa 1909, both features were removed after 1991. A series of modifications and additions were made throughout the 1950's incorporating a former ly separate cottage structure into the residence as the southwest bedroom. More recent modifications include reroofing in 1999 construction of a landscaping wall in 2001 and interior remodeling in 2021. These modifications have reduced the histor ic integrity of the structure, however the primary architectural charac teristic, the sweeping curved gable roof, remains a prominent and identifiable feature of the building.

The Mills Act
Enacted in 1972, the Mills Act legislation grants p articipating local governments (cities and counties ) the authority to enter into contracts with owners of qualified historic pr operties who actively participate in the restoratio n and maintenance of their historic properties while receiving property tax relief (ohp.parks.ca.gov). Each local government establishes their own criteria and determines how many contracts they will allow i n their jurisdiction. California Government Code S ection 50280, et seq. authorizes the City of San Carlos to enter into con tracts with owners of qualified historical properti es to provide for the use, maintenance, and restoration of historical properties so as to retain characteristics of historical significance. The City of San Carlos requires that properties be recognized as eligible for the CRHR in order to be eligible for con sideration for a Mills Act contract.

The property at 300 Chestnut Street is currently li sted on the San Carlos Historic Resources Inventory . In addition, it appears eligible for inclusion in the CRHR under Cr iteria 1, 2, 3 and 4. Thus, based upon the results of this evaluation, the structure appears to be eligible for consideration for a Mills Act contract.

Continued from B12:

Alexander, P. W. & C. P. Hamm
1916 History of San Mateo County Illustrated. Burlingame Publishing Company, Burlingame California.

Appraiser's Office, County of Santa Clara
1966 Appraiser's property records for the property at 300 Chestnut Street.

Barrows, H. D.

A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California.

Douglas, J.
1993 Historical Footnotes of Santa Clara Valley. San Jose Historical Museum Association, San Jose.

Drake, F.
1953 History of San Carlos. Pamphlet by Fred Drake, City Historian of San Carlos.

Eureka Federal Savings & Loan Association
n.d. A Brief History and Catalogue of San Carlos.

Foote, H.
1888 Pen Pictures from the Garden of the World. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co.

Hoover, M. et al
1966 Historic Spots in California. Stanford University Press, Stanford California.

Hynding, A.
1982 From Frontier to Suburb; The Story of the San Mateo Peninsula. Star Publishing Company, Belmont, CA.

DPR 523A (1/95)
*Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 365
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _ 8_ of 24 * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) __300 Chestnut Street_____________ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 X Continuation Update James T. White & Co.
1922 The National Cyclopaedia of American Biography, Vol. XVIII. James T. White & Co., New York.

Mahany. E. C.
1968 Through the Years in San Carlos . San Carlos Villagers.

McAlester, V. and L. McAlester
1997 A Field Guide to American Houses . Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

Milliken, Randall
1995 A time of Little Choice: The Disintegration of Tribal Culture in the San Francisco Bay Area 1769-1910. Menlo Park, CA: Ballena Press Publications.

Moore & DePue
1878 Illustrated History of San Mateo County. Moore & DePue, Publishers.

New York Times
1907 Obituary for Captain Nicholas T. Smith, April 25, 1907.

Richards, G.
1973 Crossroads; People and Events of the Redwoods of San Mateo County, a History. Gilbert Richards Publications, Woodside, CA.

City of San Carlos
2009 City of San Carlos General Plan 2030.

The San Carlos Villagers
1982 A Short Walk Through San Carlos History. San Carlos, California.

San Jose Mercury Herald
1907 Mortuary Notice for Captain Nicholas T. Smith. April 25, 1907.

Seavey, K. L.
1991 Historic Resource Inventory Forms for 300 Chestnut Street in San Carlos.

Stanger, F.
1963 South From San Francisco: The Life Story of San Mateo County. San Mateo County Historical Association.

Tutorow, E. L. and N.E. Tutorow
1998 Captain Nicholas T. Smith From Schodack to San Carlos. San Mateo County Historical Association.

US Department of the Interior
1990 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for R ehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
US Department of the Interior
1982 Bulletin 15 - "How to Apply the National Regist er Criteria for Evaluation.

Veronico, N. A. and B. S. Veronico
2007 Images of America: San Carlos. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco, California.

Whiffen, Marcus
1992 American Architecture since 1780, Revised Edition. The MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 366
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 1: View of the northern facade showing “Pagoda” style roof line.

Photo 2: Detail of eaves and gable peak on the northern facade.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 367
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 3: View of small northern addition.

Photo 4: Oblique view of the front facade.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 368
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 5: View of the front facade from the east.

Photo 6: Detail of long dormer on the eastern facade.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 369
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 7: View of the southern (rear) facade showing roof line.

Photo 8: Detail of rear entry and connection to rear additions.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 370
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 9: Detail of gable peak and eaves on the southern facade.

Photo 10: Oblique view along the eaves on the southern facade.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 371
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 11: View of rear addition.

Photo 12: View of the rear facade of the rear addition.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 372
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 13: View along the western facade.

Photo 14: View of the western facade showing rear addition and integrated cabin.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 373
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 15: View of the front entry.

Photo 16: Interior view of the modernized kitchen.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 374
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 17: Interior view of roof in the integrated cabin (SW bedroom).

Photo 18: Interior view of the upper floor under the pagoda roof.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 375
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 20: View of the eastern facade of the detached garage.

Photo 19: View of the front facade of the detached garage.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 376
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 21: Undated early view of 300 Chestnut Street showing then separate smaller cottage (from Veronico & Veronico 2007).

Photo 22: Undated view of the Smiths' primary residence on Laurel Avenue, no longer extant. (from Veronico & Veronico 2007).

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 377
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 23: Portrait and Signature of Captain Nicholas T. Smith from the National Cyclopaedia of American Biography.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 378
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 24: Detail from an 1856 map of Rancho de las Pulgas, with the approximate area of the subject property circled.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 379
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 25: Detail from an 1880 map of the Property of T. G. Phelps with the approximate location of the subject property circled.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 380
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 13: Detail from an 1880 map of the Property of T. G. Phelps with the approximate location of the subject property circled.

Photo 26: Detail from the 1888 Map of San Carlos, Volume B. of Maps, Page 19. The subject property is outlined.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 381
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________

*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 2/3/2022 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 27: 1921 Re-Subdivision of a Portion of the Town of San Carlos. The subject property is outlined.

7.d.4
Packet Pg. 382
Attachment: CA Depart of Parks and Recreation, DPR Evaluation Form - 300 Chestnut Street (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St) March 25, 2022
City of San Carlos
Planning Department
600 Elm Street San Carlos CA 94070

Peer Review: Historic Resource Evaluation of 300 Chestnut Street I reviewed the revised Historic Resources Evaluation Report prepared by Archaeological Resources Management, dated February 3, 2022.

The suggestion that the property dates to 1889 is supported by secondary sources. While primary sources would be stronger evidence, the revised evaluation report adequately addresses the comment. The house at 300 Chestnut Street appears eligible for listing on the California Register as associated with the earliest phases of development in the City of San Carlos.

The revised report expands on the analysis of Smith’s association with the property but provides no references to support the conjecture that “given the Victorian proclivity for the admixture of business and leisure activities, it is likely that much of the business and deal making associated with his early promotion of the community of San Carlos were carried out within the subject structure.” Smith’s association with the San Carlos Railroad Depot is not documented or considered in the revised report. Captain Smith may have been associated with both properties, but no documentary evidence or analysis is provided to support that this association was significant. The revised report would not be adequate for a nomination to the California or National Registers. However, there is no reason to doubt the association with Captain Smith, and this association was acceptable for listing as a local landmark.

The revised report removes the suggestion that the house was designed with an “Asian influence,” presumably because no evidence could be found to support it. This was one of the reasons the house was listed as a local landmark but was not the only factor. Lacking evidence for the Asian influence should not disqualify the property as a local landmark. The suggestion that the property is nonetheless eligible under Criterion 3 as an “excellent example of Victorian architecture with a rare sweeping curved gable roof form” would be stronger if any documentation that this house is an excellent example of a style, or that sweeping roof forms are rare, were provided. It may be that the roof qualifies the property as an example of “high artistic values” but that finding is not explicitly provided. There really isn’t enough analysis provided to be adequate for a nomination to the California or National Registers for architectural significance.

A one sentence suggestion that surface soils were examined is not an adequate archaeological survey, but the revised report does correctly identify that subsurface historic deposits are likely present on the property. The finding of eligibility under Criterion 4 however, cannot be supported without additional investigation.

Criteria 1 and 2 appear to be met, if not strongly documented, in the revised report. The period of significance should be considered to be 1889-1907. The expanded discussion of integrity documents that many changes have been made since 1907, however, the historic photograph provided on page 19 (Photo 21) supports the finding that the house remains recognizable to its period of significance.

The property at 300 Chestnut Street is a historic resource, potentially eligible for listing on the California Register and therefore meriting consideration for the protections and benefits offered by the Mills Act Program.

Reviewed by

Laura Jones
Heritage Resources Consulting

7.d.5
Packet Pg. 383
Attachment: Peer Review by Dr. Laura Jones, Heritage Resources Consulting, 2022 (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

Recording at the request of and
when recorded please mail to:

Crystal Mui, City Clerk
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070

HISTORICAL PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered this ______day of __________ 2022, by and between the CITY OF SAN CARLOS, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and Aseem Grover and Meilinda Huang, husband and wife as community property with right of survivorship (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Owner”) for the property located at 300 Chestnut Street, San Carlos, CA (APN 050-043-030).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 50280, et seq., referred to as the Mills Act, allows cities the discretion to enter into contracts with the owners of qualified historical properties, as the term is defined by Government Code Section 50280.1, for the purpose of restricting development of its cultural and historic significance and co ntinuing maintenance of the historical property;

WHEREAS, Owner possesses fee title in and to that certain real property, together with associated structures and improvements thereon, located at the street address 300 Chestnut Street, San Carlos, California, 94070 (Assessor Parcel Number 050-043-030, hereinafter referred to as the “Historical Property”) . A legal description of the Historical Property is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit A;

WHEREAS, the San Carlos City Council has designated the Historical Property as a Historic Site and listed in the “City of San Carlos Historic Resources Inventory”;

WHEREAS, on _________, 202 2 the City Council of the City of San C arlos adopted Resolution No. 2022-________ thereby declaring its intention to enter into this Historic Property Preservation Agreement.

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 384
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

WHEREAS, the City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this Agreement both to protect and preserve the characteristics of cultural and historic significance of the Historic al Property and to qualify the Historical Property for an assessment of valuation pursuant to the provisions of Article 1.9 (commencing with Section 439) of Chapter 3 of Part 2 of Division 1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, and of Article 12 (commencing with Section 50280) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 1 of the California Government Code (and as amended from time to time).

NOW THEREFORE, the City and Owner, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and conditions set forth herein, do hereby agree as follows:

1. Effective Date an d Term of Agreement . This Agreement shall be effective and commence on January 1, 2023 and shall remain in effect for a term of ten (10) years thereafter. Each year, upon the anniversary of the effective date of this Agreement (hereinafter “renewal date”), one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement, unless timely notice of nonrenewal, as provided in paragraph 2, is given. If either City or Owner serves notice to the other of nonrenewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from its original execution or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.

2. Notice of Nonrenewal . If City or Owner desires in any year not to renew the Agreement, that party shall serve written notice of nonrenewal in advance of the annual renewal date of the contract as follows: (1) Owner must serve written notice of nonrenewal at least ninety (90) days prior to the renewal date or (2) City must serve written notice within sixt y (60) days prior to the renewal date. Owner may make written protest of the notice. City may, at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice of nonrenewal to Owner.

3. Valuation of Historical Property . During the term of this Agreement, Owner is entitled to seek assessment of valuation of the Historical Property pursuant to the provisions of Article 1.9, Chapter 3 of Part 2 of Division 1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code.

4. Standards for Historical Property. During the term of this Agreement, the Historical Property shall be subject to the following conditions, requirements, and restrictions:

(a) Owner shall preserve and maintain the characteristics of cultural and historical significance for Historical Property i n accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the minimum maintenance standards, identified in Exhibit B, attached hereto, which shall apply to the Historical Property throughout the term of this Agreement. New additions, exterior alterations, or related construction shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
(b) Owner shall make improvements to bring Historical Property into good condition. Attached hereto, marked as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by this reference, is a list of work that both the City and Owner agree is necessary to bring the property into good condition.
(c) Owner shall undertake all improvements in accordance with Exhibit C. If the schedule set out in Exhibit C is not complied with, then City will use the

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 385
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

following process to determine whether the Owner is making good faith progress on the schedule of work. Upon City’s request, the Owner shall submit documentation of expenditures, made to accomplish the next highest priority improvement project for the property, within the last 24 months. The Owner shall be determined to be in substantial compliance when the expenditures are equal to or greater than the property tax savings provided by the Historical Property under the Mills Act. This schedule set out in Exhibit C shall be revised to reflect the schedule change. The Community Development Director of the City of San Carlos shall have the ability to administratively adjust the schedule timeline, in concurrence with the Owner, only by written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto.

5. Inspections and Annual Reporting . Owner agrees to permit the periodic examination, by prior appointment of the interior and exterior of the Historic Property by the County Assessor, the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Board of Equalization and the City of San Carlos as may be necessary to determine the Owner’s compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. Owners agree to provide the City with a report as to the status of the Historic Property annually and when any improvements or changes have been made.

6. Provision of Information . Owner hereby agrees to furnish City with any and all information requested by the City of San Carlos which City deems necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

7. Cancellation by City. The City, following a duly noticed public hearing as set forth in California Gover nment Code Section 50285 may cancel this Agreement if it determines that the Owner has breached any of the conditions of this Agreement or has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historical property. City may also cancel this Agreement if it determines that Owner has failed to restore or rehabilitate the Historical Property in the manner specified in paragraph 4 of this Agreement.

In the event of cancellation, Owner shall be subject to pay ment of those cancellation fees set forth in Government Code Sections 50280 et seq., described herein. Upon cancellation, Owner shall pay cancellation fee of twelve and one - half percent (12 ½%) of the current fair market value of the Historical Property a t the time of cancellation, as determined by the county assessor as though the Historical Property were free of any restrictions pursuant to this Agreement.

8. Enforcement of Agreement. In lieu of any provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms of this Agreement. In the event of a default, under the provisions of this Agreement by Owner, City shall give written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the ad dress stated in the Agreement, and if such a violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default is said breach or default cannot be cured within thirty (30) days provide that acts to cure the breach or default may be commenced within thirty (30) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by Owner, then

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 386
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

City may, without further notice, de clare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of the Owner growing out of the terms of this Agreement, may apply to any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate.

9. Waiver. City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City’s regulations governing historic properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder.

10. Binding Ef fect of Agreement . Owner hereby subjects the Historical Property described in Exhibit A hereto to the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. City and Owner hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reserva tions ad restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon the Owner’s successors and assigns in title or interest to the Historical Property.

Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, governing or conveying the Historical Property, or any portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this Agreemen t regardless of whether such covenants, reservations and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument.

City and Owner hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that it restricts development of the Historical Property. City and Owner hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants, reservations and restrictions touch and concern the land by enhancing and maintaining the cultural and historic characteristics and significance of the Historical Property for the benefit of the public and Owner.

11. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided at the address of the respective parties as specified below, or at any other address as may later be specified by the parties hereto:

City: City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070

Owner: Aseem Grover and Meilinda Huang
300 Chestnut Street
San Carlos, CA 94070

12. General Provisions

a. None of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 387
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or member of any joint enterprise.
b. Owner agrees to and shall hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees harmless from liability or damage or claims which may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or those of their contractor, subcontractor, agenda, employee or other person acting on his/her behalf which relates to the use, operation and maintenance of the Historical Property and from any injury to property caused by the restrictions on development of the Historical Property from application or enforcement of this Agreement. Owner hereby agrees to and shall defend the City and its elected officials, officers, agents and emplo yees with respect to any and all actions for damages caused by, or alleged to have been caused by, reason of Owner’s activities in connections with the Historical Property. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffere d, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the operations referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved this plans, specifications or other documents for the Historical Property. c. All of the agreem ents, rights, covenants, reservations and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heir, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part of port ion of the Historical Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. d. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or ret rain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations and restrictions contained herein, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorney’s fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to court costs and other relief ordered by the court.
e. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court or competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be affected thereby. f. This Agreement shall be constructed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

13. Recordation. No later than 20 days after the parties execute and enter into this Agreement, the City shall cause the Agreement to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Mateo.

14. Notice to State Office of Historic Preservation. The Owner or Agent of the Owner shall provide written notice of this Agreement to the State Office of Historic Preservation within six (6) months of the date of this Agreement.

15. Eminent Domain. In the event that property subject to Agreement under this article is acquired in whole or in part by eminent domain or other acquisition by any entity authorized to exercise the power of eminent domain, and the acquisition is determined by the City Council to frustrate the purpose of the Agreement, such Agreement shall be canceled and no cancellation fee shal l be imposed . Such

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 388
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

Agreement shall be deemed null and void for all purposes of determining the value of the property so acquired.

16. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended, in whole or in part, only be written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have executed this Agreement on the date first written above.

OWNERS

Dated: ______________ _____________________________
Aseem Grover

Dated: ______________ _____________________________
Meilinda Huang

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

Dated: _______________ _____________________________

Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

APPOVED AS TO FORM

_______________________________

Greg Rubens, City Attorney

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 389
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

APN/PARCEL ID: 050-043-030

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF SAN

CARLOS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

119.06 FT X 110 FT COR OF MANZANITA AVE & CHESTNUT ST PTN OF LOT 3 BLOCK 31 RESUB PTN TOWN OF SAN CARLOS

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 390
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

EXHIBIT B

MINIMUM PROPERTY MAINTENANCE

As part of this agreement, the Owner shall maintain all buildings, structures, yards and other improvements in a manner that does not detract from the appearance of the immediate neighborhood. The following conditions (including, but not limited to) are prohibited:

1. Dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired structures, such as: fences, roofs, doors, walls, windows; broken windows, peeling exterior paint, broken structures;

2. Scrap lumber, junk, trash or debris;

3. Abandoned, discarded, or unused objects, equipment such as automobiles, automobile parts, furniture, appliances, containers, cans or similar items;

4. Stagnant water, including pools and spas, or open excavations;

5. Any device, decoration, design, structure, vegetation or landscape that is unsightly by reason of its height, condition or its inappropriate location;

6. Graffiti;

7. Incomplete exterior construction where no building inspections have been requested for 6 or more months, or for work which does not require a building permit, where there has been no significant progress for 90 days.

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 391
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

EXHIBIT C

WORK PROGRAM

The City of San Carlos and the Owner agree to the following work program to be undertaken by the Owner in conformance with Paragraph 4b of this Agreement. In addition, throughout the life of this contract the owner shall maintain Minimum Property Maintenance as described in Exhibit B. The work will be conducted as indicated below.

Work Plan Projects Schedule for
Completion
Ongoing landscaping Improvements (install fence & gate, add landscaping, tree trimming, rebuild irrigation system, regrade the ground, etc.)

2023-2026
Repair front steps, pathway and driveway, which are cracking and separating 2024
Repair and restore balcony 2025
Replace and restore roof of house 2026
Replace garage roof and door 2027
Restore and repair exterior windows and doors 2028
General Maintenance (repairing cracks, touch up paint, repair doors, replace wood rot, etc.) 2029
Restore and repair wood siding of house 2030
Repaint exterior of the house 2031
General Maintenance (repairing cracks, touch up paint, repair doors, replace wood rot, etc.) 2032-2033

Work Item: The methods and materials for completing the above work items shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to commencement of work. All work shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Non-compliance with this requirement may constitute grounds for termination of this Agreement by the City of San Carlos.

Completion Date: Work shall be completed by the specified date unless the Owner requests a change to a later completion date in writing and the City agrees to a later completion date. Non-compliance with this requirement may constitute grounds for termination of this Agreement by the City of San Carlos.

7.d.6
Packet Pg. 392
Attachment: Draft Historic Preservation Agreement (Mills Act Contract) (Mills Act - 300 Chestnut St)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: April 25, 2022

ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a One -Year Extension to the Agreement with Granicus, Inc. for the IQM2 Agenda Management System in an Amount Not to Exceed $13,680.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a one -year extension to the agreement with Granicus, Inc. (formerly Accela, Inc.) for the support and hosting of the IQM2 Agenda Man agement System in an amount not to exceed $13,680 to cover the transition time associated with implementation of new agenda management software which is anticipated to go live later this summer.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact or additional budget appropriation necessary at this time.

The costs associated with this software have been budgeted since 2017 , and there is sufficient budget to cover this request.

BACKGROUND:

This agreement comes before the City Council for approval per the City of San Carlos’ Municipal Code requirements. Under Chapter 3.12 “Purchasing of City Supplies and Services ”, any contracts (including amendments) committing less than $75,000 may be approved by the City Manager under his signing authority, but those committing greater than $75,000 must be approved by the City Council. The total cost of this amendment (including prior year s’ costs) have raised the total contract value above the City Manager’s signature authority, thereby necessitating approval by the City Council.

In 2017, the City entered into a five -year agreement with Accela, Inc. for the purchase and implementation of an agenda management system IQM2 (also referred to as MinuteTraq) in the amount of $19,699.20 each year. The five -year agreement will end on April 30, 2022 . Four months after the City’s implementation of IQM2, Accela sold this product line to Granicus, who has been providing the City with software updates and technical support to this day.

The total contract value over the past five y ears total s $68,400. The cost of a one -year extension will be $13,680.

7.e
Packet Pg. 393
2 ANALYSIS:

In February 2022, the City Council approved a three -year agreement with PrimeGov in the amount of $75,998.97 for a new agenda and meeting management system. Although the implementation of this new system has begun, it will not be live before the IQM2 contract expires.

The City’s agenda and meeting management software plays a significant role in administrative functions Citywide. It provides the City with an electronic agen da process for all City Council and City Commissions, as well as video streaming for the Council and Planning Commission meetings. In order to avoid any disruption in service to both the City Council and the public, staff recommends that the Council authorize a one-year extension to cover the transition period.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a one-year extension to the agreement with Granicus, Inc. for the IQM2 Agenda Management System in an amount not to exceed $13,680 to cover the transition to the new agenda system; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk

Approved for submission by:

_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

7.e
Packet Pg. 394
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 - ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION TO THE AGREEMENT WITH GRANICUS, INC. (FORMERLY ACCELA, INC.) FOR THE SUPPORT AND HOSTING OF THE IQM2 AGENDA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $13,680.

WHEREAS, in 2017, the City entered into a five-year agreement with Accela, Inc. for the purchase and implementation of an agenda management system IQM2 (also referred to as MinuteTraq) in the amount of $19,699.20 each year; and

WHEREAS, four months after the City’s implementation of IQM2, Accela sold this product line to Granicus, who has been providing the City with software updates and technical support to this day; and

WHEREAS, the five-year agreement for the IQM2 system will end on April 30, 2022; and

WHEREAS, in February 2022, the City Council approved a three -year agreement with PrimeGov in the amount of $75,998.97 for a new agenda and meeting management system; and

WHEREAS, although the implementation of this new system has begun, it will not be live before the IQM2 contract expires; and

WHEREAS, no additional budget appropriation is necessary at this time as t he costs associated with this software have been budgeted since 2017 , and there is sufficient budget to cover this request.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a one -year extension to the agreement with Granicus, Inc. (formerly Accela, Inc.) for the support and hosting of the IQM2 Agenda Management System in an amount n ot to exceed $13,680 to cover the transition time associated with the implementation to the new agenda management software.

* * * * *
I, Crystal Mui, City Clerk, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 25th day of April, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________

___________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

7.e.1
Packet Pg. 395
Attachment: Resolution (MT Extension)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: April 25, 2022

ITEM TITLE: Receive an Annual Update on Police Services.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive the annual report on police services.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no financial impact associated with receiving this report.

BACKGROUND:

The City’s contract with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office (“Sheriff’s Office”) directs that the City be provided periodic updates on police services. The purpose of this report is t o fulfill that requirement. This Staff Report will update the City Council on crime, traffic, organizational performance, and community outreach initiatives in San Carlos.

ANALYSIS:

Prior to January 1, 2021, law enforcement agencies would submit informat ion on the number of Part 1 Crimes to the F ederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) monthly. Part 1 Crimes were the universal standard upon which crime was measured in the United States. Part 1 Crimes include the following offenses: homicide, rape, arson, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and auto theft.

The monthly reporting program was known as the Uniform Crime Reporting ( “UCR”) Program.

The UCR Program collected data to measure the level and scope of crime occurring throughout the nation.

The UCR Program was retired on January 1, 2021 when the FBI transitioned to the National Incident-Based Reporting System (“NIBRS”). NIBRS was implemented to improve the quality of crime data collected by law enforcement. The Sheriff’s Office transitioned to NIBRS on September 1, 2021. Local, state, and federal agencies are all moving toward incident -based reporting in lieu of the hierarchy reporting system under the UCR program.

The UCR Program was based on hierarchy, meaning that only the most significant crime/offense was reported for an incident even though other crimes/offenses could have been present. Now, under the NIBRS, all crimes are reported to the Department of Justice /FBI. The main purpose behind the change is to give agencies more robust and detailed data on crime trends. This allows for more informed decisions about operational and investigative resources.

8.a
Packet Pg. 396
2 Below is a graph of Part 1 Crimes in the City of San Carlos during the past 13 years:

Part 1 Crimes in San Carlos fluctuat e between 500 and 700 annually. In 2021, the number was 636 which is a 7% decrease compared to 2020.

In 2021, the COVID -19 pandemic impact continued in San Carlos and San Mateo County. The pandemic affected the normal day-to-day operations for all government and private entities. Law enforcement experienced operational impacts in the following ways: 1) jail booking restrictions ; 2) accelerated releases from jails and prisons ; 3) postponed court hearings as far as one year into the future ; and, 4) emergency bail schedul ing. With the booking restrictions and reduced bails, many crimes resulted in the offender receiving a citation and being released from the scene.

Throughout the state and nation , the operational changes in law enforcement stemming from the pandemic created an environment which allowed criminals to repeat offenses with little consequence. Many of the crimes committed throughout the region were the result of repeat offenders who took advantage of pandemic booking restrictions. In response, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office has and will continue to enforce crimes and violations making operational adjustments as needed. It continues to work within the pandemic guidelines to maintain its mission of ongoing public safety and prevention of crimes.

8.a
Packet Pg. 397
3 VIOLENT CRIME

In 2021, there were 38 violent crimes reported in the City of San Carlos. This is a 7% decrease compared to 2020.

RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY

In 2021, there were 48 residential burglaries committed in the City of San Carlos. This is a 55% increase compared to 2020. In the past 13 years, 2015 was the highest year for residential burglaries in San Carlos with an overall downward trend since.

8.a
Packet Pg. 398
4 OVERALL CRIME TRENDS AND RESPONSES

As stated earlier, the city has been experiencing an overall decrease in crime since 2010. While there is variation from year to year, such as the increased residential burglary trends in 2015 and crimes in 2020, crime is trending downward overall in San Car los. It is difficult to say precisely why crime is trending downward overall , but a number of initiatives implemented in recent years have likely contributed to this trend, including:

 Proactive Response by the Sheriff’s Office : As the Sheriff’s Office identifies increases in crime or new trends emerge, its goal is to respond very quickly and tactically. It initiates focused enforcement strategies and high -profile patrols, implement s new information outreach strategies, communicate with residents and busin esses, inform s the City Council, meets with property owners, and much more. Investigative efforts have evolved through use of the Vehicle Theft Task Force, Narcotics Task Force , and Crime Suppression Unit.

 Strategic Communications: The Sheriff’s Office an d City staff have embarked on numerous communications efforts designed to educate all residents on current crime safety and quality of life concerns. Videos, social media platforms, SMC Alerts, public safety fairs, and flyers sent to every home are used to keep everyone in the community informed. In addition, the Sheriff’s Office has created a mobile application which allows the community to register surveillance videos, request vacation checks, and much more.

 Team Approach at City Hall : The San Carlos Police Bureau continues to enjoy significant support from other City staff, especially as it relates to communication outreach. The City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Management Analyst, and Communications Staff have played a big role in helping the team develop outreach strategies to engage and encourage all residents to assist with crime prevention. The added support and resources of all City departments assists the Sheriff’s Office’s mission to continuously improve public safety.

 Supportive City Council: Councilmembers have taken the time to understand the various community concerns at hand, ask questions of the Sheriff’s Office ’s staff, provide additional funding to allow on -going training and increase staffing on the streets, communicate law enforcem ent efforts effectively with their constituents, and remain supportive of the Sheriff’s Office’s mission to improve overall public safety.

 Successful Complex Criminal Investigations : Detectives remain busy trying to bring offenders to justice for the crimes committed in our community. With perseverance, skill, and long hours, detectives can bring several people to justice for these crimes. Our line level staff provide in depth and detailed reports which contribute to the success of the higher crime clearance rates in San Carlos.

 Strong District Attorney’s Office: Even during the pandemic, the District Attorney’s Office continued to adhere to its mission statement: “The mission of the District Attorney’s Office is the prosecution of adult and juvenile offen ders, to provide services to victims of crime, enforcement of consumer and environmental laws, provision of legal and investigative support to other law enforcement agencies, and dissemination of public information about law enforcement.”

8.a
Packet Pg. 399
5 TRAFFIC TRENDS AND RESPONSE

The two graphs below show reported traffic collisions and traffic enforcement history over the past six years (2016 -2021). There has been a decrease in injury collisions and auto v ersus pedestrian collisions in 2021, compared with 2020. There has been an increase in driving under the influence collisions (“DUI”), but “overall” collisions between 2020 and 2021 are the same.

Enforcement efforts were stepped up pandemic restrictions decreased and more individuals were back on the road.

Traffic e nforcement citations were slightly higher in 2021 compared with 2020 and parking enforcement was slightly lower than 2020. This is largely due to the response and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic, coupled with an increase in teleworking resid ents, contributed to significantly less vehicular traffic resulting in fewer violations observed.

TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS

TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT

8.a
Packet Pg. 400
6 CLEARANCE RATES

Clearance rates reflect a police agency’s ability to successfully investigate criminal activity and solve crimes. The following charts compare the Sheriff’s Office’s clearance rates with all of San Mateo County as well as the entire State of California.

8.a
Packet Pg. 401
7 EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
4:09 3:54 4:07 4:02 4:03 4:10 4:17 4:16

The table above lists response times to emergency calls for service within the city over the past eight years. Average emergency response times have consistently remained significantly under five minutes. These response times are excellent by any standard, and this metric is critical to community safety. It should be noted that elapsed time is measured from the moment a call is received in the Dispatch Center to the moment the first Sheriff’s Office unit arrives.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH INITIATIVES

An important component of effective policing is community outreach. By reaching out to the community, the Sheriff’s Office builds trust and establish es partnerships that help keep the community safe. The Sheriff’s Office continues to have a significant presence at major community events and organizes many of its own events including:

 Holiday Toy Drive
 Food Drive
 Eucalyptus Lighting
 Goblin Walk
 Night of Holiday Lights
 National Night Out
 Strategic Communication
 Downtown Services Unit
 Community Engagement Unit
 2+2 Committee Meetings

8.a
Packet Pg. 402
8 PSYCHIATRIC EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM (PERT)

The Sheriff’s Office’s Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT) is a team of two Sheriff’s Detectives and two Behavioral Health & Recovery Services Clinicians who partner to connect services with members of the public experiencing mental health demands. PERT supports patrol units by providing training and detective level support surrounding mental health crisis situations. To increase the effectiveness of patrol, PERT provides foundational and on-going training to Patrol Operations. Training includes de-escalation, assessing needs of the involved party, and identifying appropriate services to prevent reoccurrence.

From January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2021, there were 71 instances in San Carlos where one or more persons was determined to fit the criteria outlined in 5150 of the Welfare and Institutions Code by being a danger to themselves, danger to others, or gravely disabled.

Additionally, 49 PERT referrals were recommended by Patrol Deputies for follow up. Each case was reviewed by PERT, as are most cases where mental health is believed to play a significant factor.

Overall, PERT received 142 total referrals from the City of San Carlos.

The following examples represent some PERT-related initiatives the Sheriff’s Office has undertaken:

 Worked with the County’s Counsel on the legal process to remove firearms from San Carlos residents who were hospitalized on mental health holds (8102(a) W&I).

 Referred a well-known unsheltered woman to PERT after numerous complaints to the City. PERT met with the woman on several occasions and eventually facilitated her transportation to a hospital for mental health treatment via the San Mateo County San Mateo Assessment and Referral Team (SMART).

• Received a $350,000 grant for Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training (ECIT) from the U.S. Senate Appropriations Spending Bill.

 Used ECIT training to achieve positive outcomes when responding to numerous high risk mental health crisis calls in 2021.

 Introduced Gun Violence Restraining Orders to patrol as a less intrusive, yet legal means (Per AB-339) to reduce future gun violence and secure firearms after a domestic violence incident or mental health crisis.

 Developed long term relationships through PERT efforts to eventually aid an individual who was living on the streets. The individual is now thriving and the effort is recognized and discussed by Behavioral Health and Recovery Services as a great success story for top managers of what’s possible.

 Developed family support and case management by allowing families to provide/present mental health treatment options along with or without law enforcement. PERT also helped families set boundaries and know what lines couldn’t be crossed which would prompt a 911 call.

8.a
Packet Pg. 403
9 CONCLUSION:

On behalf of Sheriff Carlos Bolanos and the men and women of the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office’s San Carlos Bureau, it is an honor to provide law enforcement services to the people of San Carlos. We are proud of our performance and remain committed to doing our very best at all times while always looking for ways to improve.

Respectfully submitted by:

Kristina Bell,
Police Captain

Approved for submission by:

_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

8.a
Packet Pg. 404

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: April 25, 2022

ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Introducing an Ordinance Amending San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.18 - Landscaping, Replacing Sections 18.18.070 - Trees, and 18.41 - Terms and Definitions. -- Continued from City Council April 11, 2022 Meeting.

This item is continued from the April 11, 2022 City Council meeting. Changes to the staff report are shown in red text.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council introduce an Ordinance to amend San Carlos Municipal Code Section s 18.18.070 – “Trees” (to be replaced in its entirety) and

18.41 – “Terms and Definitions”.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact or additional appropriation needed for this action.

This p roject was completed in -house by staff from the Community Development Department with consulting services from a City-retained arborist. The costs incurred by the consulting arborist were paid using the existing professional services budget.

On October 13 , 2021, an agreement was executed with NBS to provide an overhead cost allocation review and comprehensive fee and rate study. This study is expected to be completed in the next few weeks and any fees related to th e Ordinance will be proposed as part of th e fee study recommendations.

BACKGROUND:

The proposed Ordinance was developed at the direction of the City Council in response to community concerns about the number of protected tree removals in the community. As a result of these concerns, the City C ouncil held a study session on May 10, 2021 and adopted an Urgency Ordinance at public hearings held on June 14, 2021 and July 12, 2021. Additionally, staff also received feedback from a widely noticed study session with the Planning Commission held on Sep tember 7, 2021, a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and Residential Design Review Committee (RDRC) held on February 7, 2022, staff consultation with City- retained arborist, inter-departmental discussions, and public comments. See the links provided in Attachment 3.

9.a
Packet Pg. 405
2 The purpose of this comprehensive update is to recommend amendments to the City’s existing Protected Tree Ordinance (SCMC 18.18.070) and replace it with a more comprehensive ordinance that will ensure a significant and thriving populati on of large healthy trees in San Carlos for public enjoyment and environmental sustainability w hile balancing property rights.

There are also additional minor amendments proposed for section 18.41 titled “Terms and Conditions.”

On March 21, 2022, the Planning Commission approved Resolution PC2022-03 (Attachment 2) and recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance. Based upon feedback from the City’s contract arborist, the Planning Commission also recommended eliminating redwood trees from the list of options for replacing heritage trees, because redwoods require high water usage and are not suitable for smaller lots. This change does not affect the designation of certain redwood trees as Protected Trees. Redwood trees that have a minimum diameter of 15 inches or greater (measured at 54” in height) are still protected under the new Ordinance. Staff has incorporated this change within the proposed Ordinance. See Attachment 1, for full copy of the proposed Ordinance.

April 11, 2022 City Council meeting summary:

On April 11, 2022 , staff introduced the proposed Protected Tree Ordinance to the City Council.

The City Council proposed a few text amendments to the Ordinance as well as several additions to the Administrative Guidelines and Preferred Tree List. The item was continued to the April 25, 2022 Council meeting. The proposed amendments to the Ordinance are addressed as follows:

1) Include language to allow protected trees to be moved . This is a ddressed in section

18.18.070 F.4 of the proposed Ordinance.
2) Include language to require noticing for pruning . This is a ddressed in section 18.18.040 (5) of the proposed Ordinance.
3) Change the noticing timeline from 10 days to 14 days for protected tree removal and pruning. This is addressed in section 18.18.040 (5) of the proposed Ordinance. 4) Size of replacement trees. The Ordinance already provides appropriate discretion to the City arborist to decide the size of replacement tree s, therefore no further changes are proposed.

The remainder of the proposed changes focused on items in the Administrative Guidelines and Preferred Tree List, which are separate documents from the Ordinance itself. The Administrative Guidelines and the Preferred Tree List are not proposed to be adopted with this Ordinance in order to allow flexibility for changes on an as needed basis. The City Council directed staff to work on changes to these documents and present the revised documents for the Council’s consideration. The following changes/additions were made:

Administrative Guidelines

- Included diagrams and figures
- Included information regarding relocation of trees
- Included procedural information regarding 1-1 tree replanting exceptions

Preferred Tree List

- Included an additional category for foliage type, form, and nature of trees

9.a
Packet Pg. 406
3 - Updated the list with additional information on flammability, littering, and nativity - Clarified the olive tree species to specify a non-fruit tree - Added undesirable species into “not recommended” category

Future changes to these documents include ad ding additional photographs and graphics , procedural information, and updating the preferred tree species list.

It should be noted that some of the discussion at the April 11, 2022 meeting focused on updating fees for pro tected tree removal and pruning. However, updating user fees is a separate agenda item and will be brought back for City Council consideration at a later date. At that time the City Council will have a chance to provide input and feedback for fees related to protected trees.

ANALYSIS

Ordinance Amendments
As proposed, San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.18.070, “Trees”, would be replaced entirely as shown in Attachment 1, Exhibit A hereto. The proposed Ordinance includes various updates including standards for measuring a protected tree, replacement tree size and species, protected tree removal criteria, noticing requirements , and penalty fees. Portions of Municipal Code Section 18.41 are also proposed for amendment to ensure consistency in terminology as shown in Attachment 1, Exhibit B hereto.

Many aspects of the proposed Ordinance update closely follow the adopted Urgency Ordinance 1572. The proposed differences from the adopted Urgency Ordinance 1572 are outlined within major categories in the table below as underlined text.

Table 1: Comparison of proposed changes with the current Urgency Ordinance 1572

Category NEW - Proposed Changes Adopted Urgency Ordinance 1572 Significant
Trees
Any tree that is eleven inches in
diameter (or more) outside of bark,
measured at fifty-four inches above
natural grade.

Any tree that is thirty-six inches in
circumference (or more) (which is
approximately eleven and one-half
inches in diameter), outside of bark,
measured at forty-eight inches above
natural grade.

9.a
Packet Pg. 407
4 Heritage
Trees
Indigenous tree whose size, as
measured at fifty-four inches above
natural grade exceeds a specific
threshold for that species of tree:
 Buckeye (9” in diameter or
greater)
 Redwood (15” in diameter or
greater)
 Madrone (9” in diameter or
greater)
 Coast Live Oak (9” in diameter
or greater)
 Valley Oak (9” in diameter or
greater)
 Blue Oak (9” in diameter or
greater)
 Interior Live Oak (9” in diameter
or greater)
 California Bay Laurel (11” in
diameter or greater)
Indigenous tree whose size, as
measured at forty -eight inches above
natural grade exceeds a specific
threshold for that species of tree:
 Buckeye (30” in circumference.)
 Redwood (48” in circumference.)
 Madrone (30” in circumference.)
 Coast Live Oak (30” in
circumference.)
 Valley Oak (30” in circumference
 Blue Oak (24” in circumference)
 Interior Live Oak (24” in
circumference)
 California Bay Laurel (30” in
circumference)
Non
protected
tree –
regardless of
size
 Bailey, Green or Black Acacia
 Tree of Heaven
 Fruit Trees
 Monterey Pine
 Eucalyptus genera
 Monocot trees including palms
and palm relatives.
 Bailey, Green or Black Acacia
 Tree of Heaven
 Fruit Trees
 Monterey Pine
 Eucalyptus
Replanting
Tree Size
Minimum 24” box size tree, unless
otherwise specified by the City
arborist or the San Carlos Protected
Tree Administrative Guidelines.

Size determined by Community
Development Director and based on
valuation.

Replanting
Tree
Species
Must be:
1) A heritage tree shall be replaced
from the heritage tree list with
the exception of redwood trees,
unless as allowed by the City
arborist; or
2) Any other significant tree shall
be replaced from the City’s
preferred tree list
Must be either:
1) the same species as that removed
(unless invasive) or;
2) a heritage species
Tree
replanting
fees
At discretion of City arborist,
applicants allowed to pay a tree fee if
the required replacement is not
possible.

No provision of tree fee.

Off-site tree replanting is allowed.

9.a
Packet Pg. 408
5 Tree
Relocation
Allows applicants to opt for
professional tree relocation within
the same site (instead of tree
removal) to accommodate proposed
development, repair, and alteration.

No such provision
Noticing
requirement

Tree removals and pruning are
required to be noticed. The noticing
period is proposed to be 14 days.

Only tree removals are required to be
noticed. The noticing period is 10 days.

In addition to the proposed changes as summarized in the table above, the proposed Ordinance also includes updated requirements and clarifying text as outlined below.

Staff has worked with the City-retained arborist to strengthen the language within the proposed Ordinance to provide clarity and ensure effective implementation. The amendments include updates to the following areas:
 Language for tree removal criteria
 Definitions for the following terms including, “community of trees”, “pruning”, “trimming”, “construction activity”, “dripline”, and a “tree protection zone”  Application submission requirements
 Replacement tree requirements

Additional Documents
To support easy implementation of the proposed Ordinance, staff has prepared two supplemental documents for administrative and internal processing procedures , which are included as Attachment 4. These documents are summarized below.

1. San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (“Administrative Guidelines”) – This will be a supplement al guidance document for the Protected Tree Ordinance. The document thoroughly describes administrative procedures to help users comply with and implement the provisions of the Protected Tree Ordinance. Some portions of the San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines were adapted from heritage tree administrative guidelines and technical manuals of the City of San Mateo, City of Menlo Park , and City of Palo Alto. This document includes details and guidance on subjects such as:
 Size requirements of replacement trees
 Measuring height and width of the tree trunk
 Tree appraisal method
 Permit application requirements
 Public noticing requirements
 Tree protection plan requirements
 Resources to help maintain trees.

2. Preferred Tree List – A preferred tree list was developed in consultation with the City-retained arborist suitable for public and private properties . This list is proposed to b e used citywide.

The new “Preferred Tree L ist” is intended to replace the “List of Approved Street Trees ” (Attachment 5) commonly used by the Public Works and Community Development Department. The methodology adopted by the City arborist to develop this new Preferred Tree List is included in Attachment 6.

9.a
Packet Pg. 409
6 It should be noted that the Administrative Guidelines and Preferred Tree List are not included in the proposed O rdinance for adoption by the City Council , but rather, would remain separate documents that could be updated easily at the discretion of the Director in cons ultation with the City arborist.

Responsibilities for City-Retained Arborist
The proposed O rdinance assigns significant responsibilities to the City-retained Arborist to make major decisions that will help implement the proposed Ordinance . These include preparing and reviewing arborist reports, reviewing th e tree protection plans, formulating conditions of approvals for tree removal permits, conducting site visits, reviewing the feasibility of design alternatives , monitoring replacement trees , and n oticing. If adopted, the proposed Ordinance would allow for the arborist to make the decision on tree removal permits, tree protection plans, and development applications regarding impacts to trees.

On March 28, 2022, the City Council approved an increased budget for professional services which will allow the arborist to assist in processing applications and implementing the provisions of the proposed Ordinance. A significant portion of the arborist’s fees will be offset by permit fees, development fees, and plan review fees.

Staff has listed a few additional long-term projects that were identified as possible future activities based upon public comments, City Council recommendations, Planning Commission recommendations, and staff’s experience while handling protected tree removal permits. If so directed by Council, projects identified for the City-arborist could also include:

 Inventory protected trees citywide
 Research feasibility of city-wide invasive species removal program  Research feasibility to assist citizens for dead-tree removals  Research feasibility of providing financial assistance for tree removals  Update the preferred tree list as necessary
 Prepare guidelines for planting trees in the public right-of-way  Prepare a tree-related comprehensive technical guidance document

Additional Comments Regarding Fees
In response to several public comments received a t the March 21, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to ask the City Council to consider lowering the Protected Tree Removal /Pruning Application fees to “as low as possible” and implementing a program to provide financial assistance , including hardship waiver, to qualified individuals for protected tree removals or pruning.

Staff also received a few public comments suggesting the reduction of application fees for dead- tree removals. Staff believes using a City arborist for the identified tasks will help in reducing staff time spent on tree removal application reviews. As a result, it is anticipated it could lower arborist deposit costs to applicants. For example, current fees for all tree removal applications include an arborist deposit, processing fee , and technology fee which cost approximately $720.

In addition to preparing a thorough report for staff’s review, there is often much discussion between the arborist a nd staff since the decision for removal is ultimately up to the Community Development Department. The proposed Ordinance allows the City arborist to make independent decisions which will save time and costs to the applicant. In addition, although the arborist will need to document reasons for approving or denying a tree removal, there will not

9.a
Packet Pg. 410
7 always be the need for a comprehensive arborist report which results in additional time and money.

As noted above, staff is including this feedback and information into the comprehensive fee study.

Public Comments
This City Council meeting was advertised through various mediums ( City Council newsletter, social media, website, newspaper, email lists). As of the writing of the staff report, t here were several comments received. These are included as Attachment 7.

Environmental Determination
This project implements the programs and policies of the San Carlos 2030 General Plan, is within the scope of the activities and impacts identified in San Carlos 2030 General Pla n Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and no new environmental effects have been found and no new mitigation is necessary. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and California Envir onmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162 and 15168. This project is also exempt per CEQA Section 15308, actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment.

Next Steps
Should the City Council introduce the Ordinance as proposed or with amendments, a second reading of the Ordinance would be held on May 9 , 2022 , and if passed, the proposed amendments would become effective June 9, 2022.

ALTERNATIVES:

Options available to the City Council include:

1. Introduce an Ordinance amending the San Carlos Municipal Code Section s

18.18.070 – “Trees” (to be repl aced in its entirety) and 18.41 – “Terms and Definitions”; or

2. Do not introduce the proposed Ordinance; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, AICP
Community Development Director

9.a
Packet Pg. 411
8 Approved for submission by:

_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Ordinance with Exhibits A and B

2. Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03

3. Project History and Links to Staff Report and Attachments

4. San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

5. List of approved Street Trees (Proposed to be replaced)

6. Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology

7. Public Notice

8. Public Comments

9.a
Packet Pg. 412
Proposed text amendments from the April 11, 2022 City Council meeting are shown in red text.

ORDINANCE NO. _________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS AMENDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 18.18 LANDSCAPING, REPLACING SECTION 18.18.070 TREES AND CHAPTER 18.41 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of San Carlos does hereby ordain as follows:

WHEREAS, on May 10 2021, the City Council conducted a study session on protected tree removals and/or pruning and expressed interest in moving forward with an Interim Urgency Ordinance to restrict protected tree removals and/or pruning and allow staff time to analyze the existing ordinance and propose changes, while only allowing for protected tree removal and/or pruning for trees that meet limited, specific findings; and

WHEREAS, on June 14, 2021 the City Council adopted the Urgency Ordinance 1571 to enact the Urgency Ordinance for a period of 45 - days.

WHEREAS, on July 12, 2021 extended the Urgency Ordinance for a period of ten months and fifteen days Ordinance 1572 to allow staff time to research and propose a more comprehensive Protected Tree Ordinance

WHEREAS, on September 7, 2021 the Planning Commission conducted a study session to discuss reasons for tree removals, penalty fees for violation of the ordinance, notification requirements, and replanting and tree protection requirements, and received public comments, to be considered within the permanent protected tree ordinance.

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2022 the Planning Commission and the Residential Design Review Committee conducted a joint meeting to comment and provide input on the ongoing work and next steps on developing a permanent protected tree ordinance; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65853 and 65850 and San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136, when a change in the Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code) is found necessary, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider such change and render its decision to the City Council; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136.030 and California Government Code Section 65090 and 650901 a Public Hearing Notice was published on March 10, 2022 for the Draft Zoning Ordinance and the San Carlos Municipal Code Draft Amendments in the newspaper, distributed to interested agencies, added to the City’s website and announced through e-notify, city-wide postcard, and other social media platforms; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on amendments to the San Carlos Municipal Code to hear and consider all comments of all persons interested in or concerned with a proposed amendments of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code on March 21,

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 413
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

2022 in consideration of a recommend ation to the City Council regarding adoption of an Ordinance; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136.030 and the California Government Code Sections 65090 and 65091 a Public Hearing Notice for the City Council consideration of t he Planning Commission recommendation on the Draft Zoning Ordinance and the San Carlos Municipal Code Draft Amendments was published April 1, 2022 in the newspaper, distributed to interested agencies, added to the City’s website and announced through e-notify, and other social media platforms; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance text were released for public review on April 7, 2022 and additional amendments on April 21, 2022 to incorporate the recommendations of the Planning Commission as recommended in Resolution of the Planning Commission No. PC2022-0003 and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on amendments to the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance to hear and consider all comments of all persons intere sted in or concerned with a proposed amendments of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code on April 11, 2022 and April 25th, 2022 in consideration of adoption of this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to make findings for the propo sed amendments to the San Carlos Municipal Code Title 18 Zoning Ordinance relative to implementation of the 2030 General Plan.

WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the desired outcome of the Ordinance update is to ensure a significant and thriving population of large healthy trees in San Carlos for public enjoyment and environmental sustainability while balancing property rights and implementation efficiency is achieved; and

WHEREAS, the City Council finds the Ordinance update process evaluated current issues and successes with the existing ordinance and explored options for changes based on evidence and best practices in other communities and industry experts; and

SECTION 2: The City Council makes the following findings:

A. The proposed Ordinance amendments are consistent with the General Plan.

Basis for finding: The 2030 General Plan includes Goal EM-3, which states “Enhance the Urban Forest,” Action EM-3.1 which states, “Maintain and expand the urban canopy with special emphasis on protection of heritage trees” and EM-3.2 which states, “Review and amend the Zoning Ordinance as needed to identify barriers to the effective enhancement of the urban forest and the protection of heritage trees.” One of the primary goals of th e update is to ensure that San Carlos’s municipal code pertaining to protected trees ensure a significant and thriving population of large healthy trees in San Carlos for public enjoyment and environmental sustainability while balancing property rights and implementation efficiency.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 414
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

B. The ordinance amendment is consistent with the purpose of the zoning title to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

Basis for finding: The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the 2030 General Plan and as such promote the effective enhancement of the urban forest and protection of heritage trees through updated regulations while continuing to protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

SECTION 3 : Replacement of Code. Chapter 18.18 – Landscaping, and Section

18.18.070 – Trees, Chapter 18.41 Terms and Definitions of Title 18 – Zoning is hereby replaced with the language in Exhibit A.

SECTION 4: Pending Applications. As to applications for protected tree removal and/or pruning permits, which have been accepted, processing and review of such applications may continue, but shall be subject to the regulations and requirements listed in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, on the date the ordinance becomes effective.

SECTION 5: California Environmental Quality Act Determination . The City Council hereby finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under Sections 15378 and 15061(b)(3) of the of the CEQA Guidelines. The Ordinance is intended to continue the level of tree canopy protection existing in the current Ordinance while providing more clarity and better enforcement, and has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment either directly or indirectly.

SECTION 6: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and such section, subsection, clause, phrase, or portion may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 7: That the City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and, if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or sec tion of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.

SECTION 8: This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.

* * * * *

I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on 25th day of April, 2022 and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Carlos held on the ____ day of _____, 2022 by the following vote:

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 415
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

______________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos

APPROVED:

___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

Exhibit A: Proposed Changes to Chapter 18.18
Exhibit B: Proposed Changes to Chapter 18.41

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 416
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

EXHIBIT A
CHAPTER 18.18 (PROPOSED DRAFT TEXT)
Chapter 18.18

LANDSCAPING
Section 18.18.070 Trees.

A. Intent and Purpose
This chapter is adopted with the intent and purpose of promoting the preservation and development of a healthy, diverse tree canopy in San Carlos, which is highly valued by the community and is vital to the character and health of the city.

Protected trees are valued for their many contributions to the environment, public health and quality of life of the San Carlos community. Examples of those benefits include:

1. Provide shade;

2. Resiliency to climate change;

3. Improve air quality;

4. Provide shelter from wind;

5. Prevent erosion and landslides;

6. Protect against flood hazards;

7. Add to the city’s scenic beauty and character;

8. Recognize historical significance to our city;

9. Create natural gathering places;

10. Reduce noise pollution;

11. Enhance privacy;

12. Enhance neighborhood property values;

13. Provide habitat for wildlife.

14. Improve storm water management and improve water quality

15. Offset carbon emissions

16. Minimize the urban heat island effect
B. Definitions

1. “Applicant” is the person seeking a permit to remove or perform pruning on a Protected tree under this chapter.

2. “Administrative Guidelines” means staff-prepared regulations for implementation and interpretation of this chapter.

3. “Construction activity” means any construction work associated with or requiring a permit for any new building, building addition, building demolition, grading, excavation or paving. This includes all necessary related activities which may or may not be shown on site plans, including but not limited to: storing/staging of materials, site access, parking,

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 417
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

placement of temporary structures, debris disposal, additional excavation and landscaping.

4. “Pruning” means the removal of one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of the tree or one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the root system.

5. “Trimming” means the cutting or removal of a portion of a tree which removes less than one-fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of a tree, removes less than one-fourth (25%) of the root system, and does not kill the tree.

6. “City arborist” means city-retained arborist.

7. “Community of trees” means a group or grove of trees that are dependent upon each other for their survival and/or structural stability.

8. “Tree Protection Zone (TPZ)” means the area surrounding a tree to be Protected based upon tree species, age, health, soil, and proposed construction. The TPZ shall have a radius measured from the trunk equal to ten times the diameter of the trunk measured at 54" above grade or as otherwise specified by a project arborist and approved by the City arborist.

9. “Removal” means cutting to the ground, complete extraction, or killing by spraying, girdling, or any other means; or pruning not done in conformance with a permit.

10. “Protected tree” means any significant or heritage tree, any tree as part of a replacement requirement, an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan. The following trees shall not be classified as Protected trees regardless of size:

i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;
ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

11. “Heritage tree” means any:

i. Indigenous tree whose size, as measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade (unless otherwise indicated), is defined below:
 Aesculus californica (buckeye) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 418
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

 Arbutus menziesii (madrone) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Quercus lobata (valley oak) measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Quercus douglassii (blue oak) measuring nine (9”) in diameter or greater.  Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) measuring fifteen inches (15”) in diameter or greater.
 Umbrellularia californica (California bay laurel) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring eleven inches (11”) in diameter or greater;

Heritage Tree Species Minimum Protected
Diameter
Aesculus californica (buckeye) 9” diameter or greater
Arbutus menziesii (madrone) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) 9” diameter or greater Quercus lobata (valley oak) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus douglassii (blue oak) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) 9” diameter or greater Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) 15” diameter or greater
Umbellularia californica (California bay
laurel)
11” diameter or greater

ii. Community of trees;

iii. Trees designated by the City Council, based upon findings that the particular tree is unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual age, appearance, location or other factors.

12. “Significant tree” means any tree that is eleven inches (11”) in diameter (or more), outside of bark, measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade. The following trees shall not be classified as significant or heritage trees regardless of size:

i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 419
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima;
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

C. Trees. Trees shall be provided as follows:

1. RS districts: one tree for every one thousand square feet of lot coverage for residential development; one tree for every two thousand square feet of lot coverage for non- residential development.

2. RM and mixed-use districts: one tree for every two thousand square feet of lot coverage.

3. Commercial districts: one tree for every two thousand square feet of lot coverage.

4. Industrial districts: one tree for every five thousand square feet of lot coverage.

5. If the lot size or other site conditions make planting of the required trees impractical to comply with, the applicant, at the discretion of the City arborist, may pay a fee as adopted in a resolution by the City Council.

6. If the required number and size of trees not including fruit trees, already exist on the site, the applicant may not be required to plant new trees on site unless as required per the City arborist, replacement requirement and/or an associated condition of approval. Instead, the existing trees shall be shown on the site and landscape plans submitted to the Planning Division, and those trees shall be maintained in compliance with the standards of this chapter.

7. Street oriented trees: At least one of the required on site trees must be street oriented unless otherwise approved by the City arborist.

8. Any tree planted to meet the requirements of this section shall be a minimum of 24” box size, unless otherwise specified by the City arborist.

9. Any tree planted to meet the requirements under this section shall not include, Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; Tree of Heaven:

Ailianthus altissima; Fruit trees of any kind; Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata; Eucalyptus genera; Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 420
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

D. Maintenance and Preservation of Protected Trees. The following requirements apply to Protected trees, as defined in this chapter and Section 18.41.020:

1. No Protected tree shall be removed, pruned, or otherwise materially altered without a permit except as provided in this section. Trimming of a protected tree is allowed without such a permit.

2. Chemicals or other construction materials shall not be stored within the Tree Protection Zone of Protected trees.

3. Drains shall be provided as required by the City arborist whenever soil fill is placed around Protected trees. Soil fill shall not be placed around Protected trees without approval by an ISA-certified arborist.

4. Signs, wires or similar devices shall not be attached to Protected trees.

5. Any Construction Activity performed within an area ten (10) times the diameter of a Protected tree on any property or in the public right of way shall require submittal and implementation of a tree protection plan for review and approval by the City arborist prior to issuance of any grading or construction permit. The tree protection plan shall be prepared by an ISA certified arborist and shall address issues related to protective fencing and protective techniques as specified in the administrative guidelines to minimize impacts associated with grading, excavation, demolition and construction.

The City arborist may impose conditions on any City permit to assure compliance with this section. These trees and protection zones shall be identified on plans.

6. If the proposed development, including any site work for the development, will encroach upon the Tree Protection Zone of a Protected tree, special measures shall be utilized, as approved by the City arborist, to allow the roots to obtain oxygen, water, and nutrients as needed. Any excavation, cutting, filling, or compaction of the existing ground surface within the protected perimeter, if authorized at all by the review authority, shall be minimized and subject to such conditions as may be imposed by the review authority. No significant change in existing ground level shall be made within the Tree Protection Zone of a Protected tree except as approved by the City arborist.

No burning or use of equipment with an open flame shall occur near or within the protected perimeter.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 421
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

7. Underground trenching for utilities shall avoid major support and absorbing tree roots of Protected trees. If avoidance is impractical, tunnels shall be made below the roots.

Trenches shall be consolidated to service as many units as possible. Trenching within the Tree Protection Zone of Protected trees shall be avoided to the greatest extent possible and shall only be done under the at-site directions of a certified arborist and with approval by the City arborist.

8. No concrete or asphalt paving shall be placed over the Tree Protection Zone of oaks except as approved by the City arborist.

9. No compaction of the soil within the Tree Protection Zone of Protected trees shall occur.

E. Removal and/or pruning of Protected trees prohibited.

It is unlawful for any person to remove, or cause to be removed, any Protected tree from any parcel of property in the city, or perform pruning on a Protected tree, without obtaining a permit; provided, that in case of emergency, when a Protected tree is imminently hazardous or dangerous to life or property, it may be removed by order of the City arborist. Any person who vandalizes, grievously mutilates, destroys or unbalances a Protec ted tree without a permit or beyond the scope of an approved permit shall be in violation of this chapter.

F. Protected Tree Removal Permit and Decision-making Criteria.

1. Application. Application and fees for Protected tree removal permits and/or pruning of a Protected tree shall be submitted in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures and the Administrative Guidelines. The application shall state, among other things per the Administrative Guidelines, the number and location of the tree(s) to be removed or pruned by type and the reason for removal or pruning of each. The application shall also include a recent colored photograph with correct botanical identification of the subject tree(s).

2. Decision-making Criteria. The City arborist may only issue a permit for the removal and/or pruning of a Protected tree if he/she/they determines there is good cause for such action. In determining whether there is good cause, the City arborist shall give consideration to the following:
a. Death. The Protected tree is dead as designated by the City arborist. b. Tree Risk Rating. The condition of the Protected tree poses a high or extreme risk rating under the International Society of Arboriculture Best Management Practices:

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 422
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

Tree Risk Assessment and/or administrative guidelines; and the risk cannot be reasonably abated to a low risk rating with sound arboricultural treatments. The City arborist may consider ‘danger to people and property’ in assessing the risk to make a decision.
c. Tree Health Rating. The Protected tree is (A) dying or has a severe disease, pest infestation, intolerance to adverse site conditions, or other condition and/or pruning or other reasonable treatments based on current arboricultural standards will not restore the Protected tree to a fair, good or excellent health rating as defined in the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition, or its successor manual or the administrative guidelines (B) likely to die within a year as designated by an ISA Certified Arborist and/or the City arborist.
d. Species. The Protected tree is a member of a species that has been designated as invasive or low species desirability by the City arborist or his/her/their designee in the administrative guidelines.
e. Development. The Protected tree interferes with existing or proposed development, repair, alteration or improvement of a site or the Protected tree is causing/contributing to structural damage to a habitable building (excluding amenities, such as walkways, patios, pools and fire pits); and there is no reasonable design alternative that would permit preservation of the Protected tree while achieving the applicant’s reasonable development objectives or of the property. Necessary documentation and/or tree appraisals as established in the administrative guidelines shall be submitted to the City arborist demonstrating infeasibility of alternatives to the removal and/or pruning. f. Utility Interference. The removal and/or pruning is requested by a utility, public transportation agency, or other governmental agency due to a health or safety risk resulting from the Protected tree’s interference with existing or planned public infrastructure and there is no reasonable design alternative that would permit preservation of the Protected tree. Necessary documentation as established in the administrative guidelines shall be submitted to the City arborist demonstrating infeasibility of alternatives to the removal and/or pruning.

3. Review. In reviewing applications for removal and/or pruning of Protected trees, the City arborist shall give priority to those based on hazard or danger of disease. The City arborist may refer any application to another department, committee, board or

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 423
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

commission of the City for a report and recommendation, and may require the applicant to provide an arborist’s report which shall be reviewed by the City arborist.

4. Applicants may choose to professionally move a protected tree on-site to accommodate proposed development, repair, alteration or improvement of a site. Any tree proposed to be moved will be construed as tree removed and shall comply with application procedures as set forth within this chapter and the administrative guidelines. The City arborist may require documentation to certify that the moving work was accomplished according to acceptable tree moving standards and specifications. Additional documentation may be required to prove feasibility of moving, establishing and maintaining the moved protected tree.

5. Noticing Requirements.

Notice before Issuance. Before a Protected tree is removed or pruned, notice of removal shall be posted by the applicant on the property containing the Protected tree at a conspicuous location when a permit is sought under subsection (e) (Development) or (f) (Utility Interference) of this section. Property owners within three- hundred (300’) feet of the exterior boundary of the property containing the Protected tree shall be noticed by mail of the pending application. Failure to receive copies of such notice shall not invalidate any action taken by the City.

Notice of Issuance. Upon receipt of a tree removal or pruning permit, the property owner shall post a notice of issuance of any permit for a tree removal at the subject property for a period of fourteen (14) calendar days. A proof of posting shall be sent to the City arborist. The City will furnish the owner with a copy of the notice of issuance.

6. Conditions and Replacement Trees. In granting a tree removal permit, the City arborist may attach reasonable conditions to ensure compliance with the content and purpose of this chapter, such as, but not limited to, the following:
a. Replacement tree(s) for heritage tree removals shall be from the heritage tree list, with the exception of redwood trees, at a 1:1 ratio of a size, as determined by the City arborist and/or specified in the administrative guidelines. The City arborist may allow a species not on the heritage tree list if:

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 424
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

i. The species from the heritage tree list is proven to be unsuitable at a given location per an ISA Certified Arborist and/or the City arborist, b. Replacement tree(s) for all other significant tree removals shall be at a 1:1 ratio of a size, as determined by the City arborist and/or specified in the administrative guidelines.
c. Replacement trees shall be planted within four (4) months of the permit issuance unless the replacement tree is part of an approved landscape plan associated with a development project, or upon approval by the City Arborist. d. Any tree planted to meet the requirements under this section shall not include, Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima; Fruit trees of any kind; Monterey Pine:

Pinus radiata; Eucalyptus genera; Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.
e. Special construction to allow irrigation and aeration of roots and preservation of the Protected tree.
f. Tree wells or other tree protection techniques.
g. Protected tree maintenance requirements to help the tree grow and thrive h. Other reasonable requirements per the City arborist

7. Emergencies. If an emergency develops regarding a Protected tree removal and/or pruning which requires immediate response for the safety of life or property, action may be taken by obtaining oral permission of the City arborist, notwithstanding other provisions contained in this chapter. Such emergencies shall be exempt from Protected tree permit application procedures; however, replacement shall occur as provided in this chapter.

8. Expiration. If no action on an approved tree removal permit is taken within a period of one year from the date of approval, the permit shall be considered void.

9. Appeals. Tree removal permit decisions are subject to the appeal provisions of Section 18.27.150, Appeals.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 425
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

10. Administrative Guidelines. The Director shall have the authority to adopt and modify administrative guidelines to implement this chapter.

G. Violation. In addition to the provisions of Chapter 18.39, Enforcement and Abatement Procedures, and Chapter 1.20, Penalties, any person who removes or causes to be removed any Protected tree, the following shall apply:

1. If a violation occurs during development, the City may issue a stop work order suspending and prohibiting further activity on the property pursuant to the grading, demolition, and/or building permit(s) (including construction, inspection, and issuance of certificates of occupancy) until a mitigation plan has been filed with and approved by the City arborist, agreed to in writing by the property owner(s), and either implemented or guaranteed by the posting of adequate security as determined by the City.

2. Any person violating this chapter shall be subject to a civil fine or penalty in the amount established by this ordinance. If a person commits, or maintains a violation of any part of Municipal Code Section 18.18, he/she/they will be fined in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per violation; and if the violation resulted in the removal or demise of a Protected tree, the fine will not exceed $5,000 per tree or the appraised value of each such tree, as determined by an ISA Certified Arborist in consultation with the City arborist, whichever amount is higher. The arborist shall use the then-current issue of “A Guide to Plant Appraisal” published by the International Society of Arboriculture or as specified in the administrative guidelines. Replacement shall occur as established in this chapter.

3. The code enforcement officer, director, building official, City arborist or designee are authorized to issue stop work orders, notices of violation, administrative penalties and citations under this chapter.

4. Any citation or penalty received under this chapter may be appealed to the Zoning Administrator or designee whose determination shall be final. Such appeal must be filed within ten (10) days of receipt of the citation or penalty.

5. Whenever the amount of any administrative fine or penalty or administrative cost incurred by the City in connection with a violation of this chapter has not been satisfied

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 426
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

in full within ninety (90) days and/or has not been successfully challenged by a timely writ of mandate, this obligation may constitute a lien or, in the alternative, a special assessment against the real property on which the violation occurred.

6. The City Attorney may bring a civil action against the violator to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of violation of any provision in this chapter. In a civil action brought pursuant to this chapter in which the City prevails, the court may award to the City all costs of investigation and preparation for trial, the costs of trial, reasonable expenses, including overhead and administrative costs incurred in prosecuting the action, and reasonable attorney fees.

7. The remedies provided in this section may be enforced against both the contractor and other person performing work in violation of this chapter as well as the owner of the real property on which the Protected tree is located.

8. All remedies provided in this section shall be cumulative and are not exclusive.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 427
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

EXHIBIT B
CHAPTER 18.41 (PROPOSED DRAFT TEXT)
Chapter 18.41

TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
“Applicant” is the person seeking a permit to remove or perform pruning on a Protected tree under this chapter.
“Administrative Guidelines” means staff-prepared regulations for implementation and interpretation of this chapter.
“Construction activity” means any construction work associated with or requiring a permit for any new building, building addition, building demolition, grading, excavation or paving. This includes all necessary related activities which may or may not be shown on site plans, including but not limited to: storing/staging of materials, site access, parking, placement of temporary structures, debris disposal, additional excavation and landscaping. “Pruning” means the removal of one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of the tree or one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the root system. “Trimming” means the cutting or removal of a portion of a tree which removes less than one- fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of a tree, removes less than one-fourth (25%) of the root system, and does not kill the tree.
“City arborist” means city-retained arborist.
“Community of trees” means a group or grove of trees that are dependent upon each other for their survival and/or structural stability.
“Tree Protection Zone (TPZ)” means the area surrounding a tree to be Protected based upon tree species, age, health, soil, and proposed construction. The TPZ shall have a radius measured from the trunk equal to ten times the diameter of the trunk measured at 54" above grade or as otherwise specified by a project arborist and approved by the City arborist. “Removal” means cutting to the ground, complete extraction, or killing by spraying, girdling, or any other means; or pruning not done in conformance with a permit. “Protected tree” means any significant or heritage tree, any tree as part of a replacement requirement, an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan. The following trees shall not be classified as Protected trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 428
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

“Heritage tree” means any:
i. Indigenous tree whose size, as measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade (unless otherwise indicated), is defined below:
 Aesculus californica (buckeye) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Arbutus menziesii (madrone) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Quercus lobata (valley oak) measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Quercus douglassii (blue oak) measuring nine (9”) in diameter or greater.  Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter or greater.
 Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) measuring fifteen inches (15”) in diameter or greater.
 Umbrellularia californica (California bay laurel) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring eleven inches (11”) in diameter or greater;

Heritage Tree Species Minimum Protected
Diameter
Aesculus californica (buckeye) 9” diameter or greater
Arbutus menziesii (madrone) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) 9” diameter or greater Quercus lobata (valley oak) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus douglassii (blue oak) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) 9” diameter or greater Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) 15” diameter or greater

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 429
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

Umbellularia californica (California bay
laurel)
11” diameter or greater

ii. Community of trees;

iii. Trees designated by the City Council, based upon findings that the particular tree is unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual age, appearance, location or other factors.

“Significant tree” means any tree that is eleven inches (11”) in diameter (or more), outside of bark, measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade. The following trees shall not be classified as significant or heritage trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;
ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima;
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 430
Attachment: Ordinance with Exhibits A and B (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 431
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 432
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 433
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO. ___ _

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS AMENDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 18.18 LANDSCAPING, REPLACING SECTION 18.18.070 TREES AND CHAPTER 18.41 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of San Carlos does hereby ordain as follows:

WHEREAS, on May 10 2021, the City Council conducted a study session on protected tree removals and/or pruning and expressed interest in moving forward with an Interim Urgency Ordinance to restrict protected tree removals and/or pruning and allow staff time to analyze the existing ordinance and propose changes, while only allowing for protected tree removal and/or pruning for trees that meet limited, specific findings; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2021 the City Council adopted the Urgency Ordinance 1571 to enact the Urgency Ordinance for a period of 45 - days.

WHEREAS, on July 12, 2021 extended the Urgency Ordinance for a period of ten months and fifteen days to allow staff time to research and propose a more comprehensive Protected Tree Ordinance
WHEREAS, on September 7, 2021 the Planning Commission conducted a study session to discuss reasons for tree removals, penalty fees for violation of the ordinance, notification requirements, and replanting and tree protection requirements to be considered within the permanent protected tree ordinance.

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2022 the Planning Commission and the Residential Design Review Committee conducted a joint meeting to comment and provide input on the ongoing work and next steps on developing a permanent protected tree ordinance.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65853 and 65850 and San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136, when a change in the Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code) is found necessary, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider such change and render its decision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136.030 and California Government Code Section 65090 and 650901 a Public Hearing Notice was published on March 10, 2022 for the Draft Zoning Ordinance and the San Carlos Municipal Code Draft Amendments in the newspaper, distributed to interested agencies, added to the City's website and announced through e-notify, city-wide postcard, and other social media platforms; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on amendments to the San Carlos Municipal Code to hear and consider all comments of all persons interested in or concerned with a proposed amendments of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code on March 21, 2022 in consideration of a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of an Ordinance; and
Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 434
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) WHEREAS, pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.136.030 and the California Government Code Sections 65090 and 65091 a Public Hearing Notice for the City Council consideration of the Planning Commission recommendation on the Draft Zoning Ordinance and the San Carlos Municipal Code Draft Amendments was published April 1, 2022 in the newspaper, distributed to interested ag�ncjes, added to the City's website and announced through e-notify, and other social media platforms; and WHEREAS, City Council has received a recommendation from the Planning Commission as a result of a Public Hearing held at the Planning Commission Meeting March 21, 2022 and has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission for regulations in the San Carlos Municipal Code including Planning Commission findings for amendments to the Title 8 and the reasons for the recommendations, the relationship of the proposed ordinance or amendments to the Zoning Ordinance (Title 18), and 2030 General Plan.

WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the desired outcome of the Ordinance update is to ensure a significant and thriving population of large healthy trees in San Carlos for public enjoyment and environmental sustainability while balancing property rights and implementation efficiency is achieved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the Ordinance update process evaluated current issues and successes with the existing ordinance and explored options for changes based on evidence and best practices in other communities and industry experts; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the preferred options where identified based on increasing clarity, increasing and maintaining canopy, and increasing effectiveness of ordinance implementation, and adopts the following amendments to the Protected Tree Ordinance (18.18.070).

SECTION 3: The City Council makes the following findings:

A. The proposed Ordinance amendments are consistent with the General Plan.

Basis for finding: The 2030 General Plan includes Goal EM-3, which states "Enhance the Urban Forest," Action EM-3.1 which states, "Maintain and expand the urban canopy with special emphasis on protection of heritage trees" and EM-3.2 which states, "Review and amend the Zoning Ordinance as needed to identify barriers to the effective enhancement of the urban forest and the protection of heritage trees." One of the primary goals of the update is to ensure that San Caries's municipal code pertaining to protected trees ensure a significant and thriving population of large healthy trees in San Carlos for public enjoyment and environmental sustainability while balancing property rights and implementation efficiency.

B. The ordinance amendment is consistent with the purpose of the zoning title to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

Basis for finding: The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the 2030 General Plan and as such promote the effective enhancement of the Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 435
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) urban forest and protection of heritage trees through updated regulations while continuing to protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

SECTION 4: Replacement of Code. Chapter 18.18 - Landscaping, and Section

18.18.070 - Trees, Chapter 18.41 Terms and Definitions of Title 18 - Zoning is hereby replaced with the language in Exhibit A.

SECTION 5: Pending Applications. As to applications for protected tree removal and/or pruning permits, which have been accepted, processing and review of such applications may continue, but shall be subject to the regulations and requirements listed in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, on the date the ordinance becomes effective.

SECTION 6: California Environmental Quality Act Determination. The City Council hereby finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") under Sections 15378 and 15061(b)(3) of the of the CEQA Guidelines. The Ordinance is intended to continue the level of tree canopy protection existing in the current Ordinance while providing more clarity and better enforcement, and has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment either directly or indirectly.

SECTION 7: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and such section, subsection, clause, phrase, or portion may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 8: That the City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and, if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.

SECTION 9: This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption. *****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on 11th day of April, 2022 and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Carlos held on the 25th day of April, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 436
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 437
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) CHAPTER 18.18 (PROPOSED DRAFT TEXT)
Chapter 18.18

LANDSCAPING
Section 18.18.070 Trees.

A. Intent and Purpose
This chapter is adopted with the intent and purpose of promoting the preservation and development of a healthy, diverse tree canopy in San Carlos, which is highly valued by the community and is vital to the character and health of the city.

Protected trees are valued for their many contributions to the environment, public health and quality of life of the San Carlos community. Examples of those benefits include:

1. Provide shade;

2. Resiliency to climate change;

3. Improve air quality;

4. Provide shelter from wind;

5. Prevent erosion and landslides;

6. Protect against flood hazards;

7. Add to the city's scenic beauty and character;

8. Recognize historical significance to our city;

9. Create natural gathering places;

10. Reduce noise pollution;

11. Enhance privacy;

12. Enhance neighborhood property values;

13. Provide habitat for wildlife.

14. Improve storm water management and improve water quality

15. Offset carbon emissions

16. Minimize the urban heat island effect
B. Definitions

1. "Applicant" is the person seeking a permit to remove or perform pruning on a Protected tree under this chapter.

2. "Administrative Guidelines" means staff-prepared regulations for implementation and interpretation of this chapter.

3. "Construction activity" means any construction work associated with or requiring a permit for any new building, building addition, building demolition, grading, excavation or paving. This includes all necessary related activities which may or may not be shown on site plans, including but not limited to: storing/staging of materials, site access, parking, placement of temporary structures, debris disposal, additional excavation and landscaping.

Not to be referred as preferred Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 438
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

4. "Pruning" means the removal of one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of the tree or one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the root system.

5. 'Trimming" means the cutting or removal of a portion of a tree which removes less than one-fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of a tree, removes less than one-fourth (25%) of the root system, and does not kill the tree.

6. "City arborist" means city-retained arborist.

7. "Community of trees" means a group or grove of trees that are dependent upon each other for their survival and/or structural stability.

8. "Tree Protection Zone (TPZ)" means the area surrounding a tree to be Protected based upon tree species, age, health, soil, and proposed construction. The TPZ shall have a radius measured from the trunk equal to ten times the diameter of the trunk measured at 54" above grade or as otherwise specified by a project arborist and approved by the City arborist.

9. "Removal" means cutting to the ground, complete extraction, or killing by spraying, girdling, or any other means; or pruning not done in conformance with a permit.

10. "Protected tree" means any significant or heritage tree, any tree as part of a replacement requirement, an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan. The following trees shall not be classified as Protected trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;
ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

11. "Heritage tree" means any:
i. Indigenous tree whose size, as measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade (unless otherwise indicated), is defined below:
• Aesculus californica (buckeye) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 439
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) • Arbutus menziesii (madrone) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Quercus lobata (valley oak) measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Quercus douglassii (blue oak) measuring nine (9") in diameter or greater. • Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) measuring fifteen inches (15") in diameter or greater.
• Umbrellularia californica (California bay laurel) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring eleven inches (11 ") in diameter or greater; Heritage Tree Species
Aesculus californica (buckeye)
Arbutus menziesii (madrone)
Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak)
Quercus lobata (valley oak)
Quercus douglassii (blue oak)
Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak)
Sequoia sempervirens (redwood)
Umbellularia californica (California bay
laurel)
ii. Community of trees;
Minimum Protected
Diameter
9" diameter or greater
9" diameter or greater
9" diameter or greater
9" diameter or greater
9" diameter or greater
9" diameter or greater
15" diameter or greater
11" diameter or greater
iii. Trees designated by the City Council, based upon findings that the particular tree is unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual age, appearance, location or other factors.

12. "Significant tree" means any tree that is eleven inches (11 ") in diameter ( or more), outside of bark, measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade. The following trees shall not be classified as significant or heritage trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;
Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 440
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima;
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

C. Trees. Trees shall be provided as follows:

1. RS districts: one tree for every one thousand square feet of lot coverage for residential development; one tree for every two thousand square feet of lot coverage for non­ residential development.

2. RM and mixed-use districts: one tree for every two thousand square feet of lot coverage.

3. Commercial districts: one tree for every two thousand square feet of lot coverage.

4. Industrial districts: one tree for every five thousand square feet of lot coverage.

5. If the lot size or other site conditions make planting of the required trees impractical to comply with, the applicant, at the discretion of the City arborist, may pay a fee as adopted in a resolution by the City Council.

6. If the required number and size of trees not including fruit trees, already exist on the site, the applicant may not be required to plant new trees on site unless as required per the City arborist, replacement requirement and/or an associated condition of approval. Instead, the existing trees shall be shown on the site and landscape plans submitted to the Planning Division, and those trees shall be maintained in compliance with the standards of this chapter.

7. Street oriented trees: At least one of the required on site trees must be street oriented unless otherwise approved by the City arborist.

8. Any tree planted to meet the requirements of this section shall be a minimum of 24" box size, unless otherwise specified by the City arborist.

9. Any tree planted to meet the requirements under this section shall not include, Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; Tree of Heaven:

Ailianthus altissima; Fruit trees of any kind; Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata; Eucalyptus genera; Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 441
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) D. Maintenance and Preservation of Protected Trees. The following requirements apply to Protected trees, as defined in this chapter and Section 18.41.020:

1. No Protected tree shall be removed, pruned, or otherwise materially altered without a permit except as provided in this section. Trimming of a protected tree is allowed without such a permit.

2. Chemicals or other construction materials shall not be stored within the Tree Protection Zone of Protected trees.

3. Drains shall be provided as required by the City arborist whenever soil fill is placed around Protected trees. Soil fill shall not be placed around Protected trees without approval by an !SA-certified arborist.

4. Signs, wires or similar devices shall not be attached to Protected trees.

5. Any Construction Activity performed within an area ten (10) times the diameter of a Protected tree on any property or in the public right of way shall require submittal and implementation of a tree protection plan for review and approval by the City arborist prior to issuance of any grading or construction permit. The tree protection plan shall be prepared by an ISA certified arborist and shall address issues related to protective fencing and protective techniques as specified in the administrative guidelines to minimize impacts associated with grading, excavation, demolition and construction.

The City arborist may impose conditions on any City permit to assure compliance with this section. These trees and protection zones shall be identified on plans.

6. If the proposed development, including any site work for the development, will encroach upon the Tree Protection Zone of a Protected tree, special measures shall be utilized, as approved by the City arborist, to allow the roots to obtain oxygen, water, and nutrients as needed. Any excavation, cutting, filling, or compaction of the existing ground surface within the protected perimeter, if authorized at all by the review authority, shall be minimized and subject to such conditions as may be imposed by the review authority. No significant change in existing ground level shall be made within the Tree Protection Zone of a Protected tree except as approved by the City arborist.

No burning or use of equipment with an open flame shall occur near or within the protected perimeter.

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 442
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

7. Underground trenching for utilities shall avoid major support and absorbing tree roots of Protected trees. If avoidance is impractical, tunnels shall be made below the roots.

Trenches shall be consolidated to service as many units as possible. Trenching within the Tree Protection Zone of Protected trees shall be avoided to the greatest extent possible and shall only be done under the at-site directions of a certified arborist and with approval by the City arborist.

8. No concrete or asphalt paving shall be placed over the Tree Protection Zone of oaks except as approved by the City arborist.

9. No compaction of the soil within the Tree Protection Zone of Protected trees shall occur.

E. Removal and/or pruning of Protected trees prohibited.

It is unlawful for any person to remove, or cause to be removed, any Protected tree from any parcel of property in the city, or perform pruning on a Protected tree, without obtaining a permit; provided, that in case of emergency, when a Protected tree is imminently hazardous or dangerous to life or property, it may be removed by order of the City arborist. Any person who vandalizes, grievously mutilates, destroys or unbalances a Protected tree without a permit or beyond the scope of an approved permit shall be in violation of this chapter.

F. Protected Tree Removal Permit and Decision-making Criteria.

1. Application. Application and fees for Protected tree removal permits and/or pruning of a Protected tree shall be submitted in accordance with the provisions set forth in Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures and the Administrative Guidelines. The application shall state, among other things per the Administrative Guidelines, the number and location of the tree(s) to be removed or pruned by type and the reason for removal or pruning of each. The application shall also include a recent colored photograph with correct botanical identification of the subject tree(s).

2. Decision-making Criteria. The City arborist may only issue a permit for the removal and/or pruning of a Protected tree if he/she/they determines there is good cause for such action. In determining whether there is good cause, the City arborist shall give consideration to the following:
a. Death. The Protected tree is dead as designated by the City arborist. 12,. Tree Risk Rating. The condition of the Protected tree poses a high or extreme risk rating under the International Society of Arboriculture Best Management Practices:

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 443
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Tree Risk Assessment and/or administrative guidelines; and the risk cannot be reasonably abated to a low risk rating with sound arboricultural treatments. The City arborist may consider 'danger to people and property' in assessing the risk to make a decision.
_g_,_ Tree Health Rating. The Protected tree is (A) dying or has a severe disease, pest infestation, intolerance to adverse site conditions, or other condition and/or pruning or other reasonable treatments based on current arboricultural standards will not restore the Protected tree to a fair, good or excellent health rating as defined in the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition, or its successor manual or the administrative guidelines (B) likely to die within a year as designated by an ISA Certified Arborist and/or the City arborist.
d. Species. The Protected tree is a member of a species that has been designated as invasive or low species desirability by the City arborist or his/her/their designee in the administrative guidelines.
� Development. The Protected tree interferes with existing or proposed development, repair, alteration or improvement of a site or the Protected tree is causing/contributing to structural damage to a habitable building (excluding amenities, such as walkways, patios, pools and fire pits); and there is no reasonable design alternative that would permit preservation of the Protected tree while achieving the applicant's reasonable development objectives or of the property. Necessary documentation and/or tree appraisals as established in the administrative guidelines shall be submitted to the City arborist demonstrating infeasibility of alternatives to the removal and/or pruning. i. Utility Interference. The removal and/or pruning is requested by a utility, public transportation agency, or other governmental agency due to a health or safety risk resulting from the Protected tree's interference with existing or planned public infrastructure and there is no reasonable design alternative that would permit preservation of the Protected tree. Necessary documentation as established in the administrative guidelines shall be submitted to the City arborist demonstrating infeasibility of alternatives to the removal and/or pruning.

3. Review. In reviewing applications for removal and/or pruning of Protected trees, the City arborist shall give priority to those based on hazard or danger of disease. The City arborist may refer any application to another department, committee, board or Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 444
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) commission of the City for a report and recommendation, and may require the applicant to provide an arborist's report which shall be reviewed by the City arborist.

4. Noticing Requirements.

Notice before Issuance. Before a Protected tree is removed, notice of removal shall be posted by the applicant on the property containing the Protected tree at a conspicuous location when a permit is sought under subsection (e) (Development) or (f) (Utility Interference) of this section. Property owners within three-hundred (300') feet of the exterior boundary of the property containing the Protected tree shall be noticed by mail of the pending application. Failure to receive copies of such notice shall not invalidate any action taken by the City.

Notice of Issuance. Upon receipt of a tree removal permit, the property owner shall post a notice of issuance of any permit for a tree removal at the subject property for a period of ten calendar days. A proof of posting shall be sent to the City arborist. The City will furnish the owner with a copy of the notice of issuance.

5. Conditions and Replacement Trees. In granting a tree removal permit, the City arborist may attach reasonable conditions to ensure compliance with the content and purpose of this chapter, such as, but not limited to, the following:
a. Replacement tree(s) for heritage tree removals shall be from the heritage tree list, with an exception of redwood trees, at a 1: 1 ratio of a size, as determined by the City arborist and/or specified in the administrative guidelines. The City arborist may allow a species not on the heritage tree list if:
i. The species from the heritage tree list is proven to be unsuitable at a given location per an ISA Certified Arborist and/or the City arborist, b. Replacement tree(s) for all other significant tree removals shall be at a 1 :1 ratio of a size, as determined by the City arborist and/or specified in the administrative guidelines.
c. Replacement trees shall be planted within four (4) months of the permit issuance unless the replacement tree is part of an approved landscape plan associated with a development project, or upon approval by the City Arborist.

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 445
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) d. Any tree planted to meet the requirements under this section shall not include, Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima; Fruit trees of any kind; Monterey Pine:

Pinus radiata; Eucalyptus genera; Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.
e. Special construction to allow irrigation and aeration of roots and preservation of the Protected tree.
f. Tree wells or other tree protection techniques.
g. Protected tree maintenance requirements to help the tree grow and thrive h. Other reasonable requirements per the City arborist

6. Emergencies. If an emergency develops regarding a Protected tree removal and/or pruning which requires immediate response for the safety of life or property, action may be taken by obtaining oral permission of the City arborist, notwithstanding other provisions contained in this chapter. Such emergencies shall be exempt from Protected tree permit application procedures; however, replacement shall occur as provided in this chapter.

7. Expiration. If no action on an approved tree removal permit is taken within a period of one year from the date of approval, the permit shall be considered void.

8. Appeals. Tree removal permit decisions are subject to the appeal provisions of Section 18.27.150, Appeals.

9. Administrative Guidelines. The Director shall have the authority to adopt and modify administrative guidelines to implement this chapter.

G. Violation. In addition to the provisions of Chapter 18.39, Enforcement and Abatement Procedures, and Chapter 1.20, Penalties, any person who removes or causes to be removed any Protected tree, the following shall apply:

1. If a violation occurs during development, the City may issue a stop work order suspending and prohibiting further activity on the property pursuant to the grading, demolition, and/or building permit(s) (including construction, inspection, and issuance Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 446
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) of certificates of occupancy) until a mitigation plan has been filed with and approved by the City arborist, agreed to in writing by the property owner(s), and either implemented or guaranteed by the posting of adequate security as determined by the City.

2. Any person violating this chapter shall be subject to a civil fine or penalty in the amount established by this ordinance. If a person commits, or maintains a violation of any part of Municipal Code Section 18.18, he/she/they will be fined in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per violation; and if the violation resulted in the removal or demise of a Protected tree, the fine will not exceed $5,000 per tree or the appraised value of each such tree, as determined by an ISA Certified Arborist in consultation with the City arborist, whichever amount is higher. The arborist shall use the then-current issue of "A Guide to Plant Appraisal" published by the International Society of Arboriculture or as specified in the administrative guidelines. Replacement shall occur as established in this chapter.

3. The code enforcement officer, director, building official, City arborist or designee are authorized to issue stop work orders, notices of violation, administrative penalties and citations under this chapter.

4. Any citation or penalty received under this chapter may be appealed to the Zoning Administrator or designee whose determination shall be final. Such appeal must be filed within ten (10) days of receipt of the citation or penalty.

5. Whenever the amount of any administrative fine or penalty or administrative cost incurred by the City in connection with a violation of this chapter has not been satisfied in full within ninety (90) days and/or has not been successfully challenged by a timely writ of mandate, this obligation may constitute a lien or, in the alternative, a special assessment against the real property on which the violation occurred.

6. The City Attorney may bring a civil action against the violator to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of violation of any provision in this chapter. In a civil action brought pursuant to this chapter in which the City prevails, the court may award to the City all costs of investigation and preparation for trial, the costs of trial, reasonable expenses, including overhead and administrative costs incurred in prosecuting the action, and reasonable attorney fees.

Not to be referred as proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 447
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

7. The remedies provided in this section may be enforced against both the contractor and other person performing work in violation of this chapter as well as the owner of the real property on which the Protected tree is located.

8. All remedies provided in this section shall be cumulative and are not exclusive.

Not to be referred as Proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 448
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

EXHIBIT B
CHAPTER 18.41 {PROPOSED DRAFT TEXT)
Chapter 18.41

TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
"Applicant" is the person seeking a permit to remove or perform pruning on a Protected tree under this chapter.
"Administrative Guidelines" means staff-prepared regulations for implementation and interpretation of this chapter.
"Construction activity" means any construction work associated with or requiring a permit for any new building, building addition, building demolition, grading, excavation or paving. This includes all necessary related activities which may or may not be shown on site plans, including but not limited to: storing/staging of materials, site access, parking, placement of temporary structures, debris disposal, additional excavation and landscaping. "Pruning" means the removal of one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of the tree or one-fourth or more than one-fourth (25%) of the root system. "Trimming" means the cutting or removal of a portion of a tree which removes less than one- fourth (25%) of the crown or existing foliage of a tree, removes less than one-fourth (25%) of the root system, and does not kill the tree.
"City arborist" means city-retained arborist.
"Community of trees" means a group or grove of trees that are dependent upon each other for their survival and/or structural stability.
"Tree Protection Zone (TPZ)" means the area surrounding a tree to be Protected based upon tree species, age, health, soil, and proposed construction. The TPZ shall have a radius measured from the trunk equal to ten times the diameter of the trunk measured at 54" above grade or as otherwise specified by a project arborist and approved by the City arborist. "Removal" means cutting to the ground, complete extraction, or killing by spraying, girdling, or any other means; or pruning not done in conformance with a permit. "Protected tree" means any significant or heritage tree, any tree as part of a replacement requirement, an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan. The following trees shall not be classified as Protected trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;
Not to be referred as Proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 449
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.
"Heritage tree" means any:
i. Indigenous tree whose size, as measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade (unless otherwise indicated), is defined below:
• Aesculus californica (buckeye) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Arbutus menziesii (madrone) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Quercus lobata (valley oak) measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Quercus douglassii (blue oak) measuring nine (9") in diameter or greater. • Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) measuring nine inches (9") in diameter or greater.
• Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) measuring fifteen inches (15") in diameter or greater.
• Umbrellularia californica (California bay laurel) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring eleven inches (11") in diameter or greater; Heritage Tree Species Minimum Protected
Diameter
Aesculus californica (buckeye) 9" diameter or greater
Arbutus menziesii (madrone) 9" diameter or greater
Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) 9" diameter or greater Quercus lobata (valley oak) 9" diameter or greater
Quercus douglassii (blue oak) 9" diameter or greater
Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) 9" diameter or greater Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) 15" diameter or greater
Not to be referred as Proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 450
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Umbellularia californica (California bay 11" diameter or greater laurel)
ii. Community of trees;
iii. Trees designated by the City Council, based upon findings that the particular tree is unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual age, appearance, location or other factors.
"Significant tree" means any tree that is eleven inches (11") in diameter (or more), outside of bark, measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade. The following trees shall not be classified as significant or heritage trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon;
ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima;
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

Not to be referred as Proposed Ordinance

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 451
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 452
Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution PC2022-03 (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Attachment 3
Links to Staff Report and Minutes for Protected Tree Ordinance meetings In the spring of 2021, the City Council requested staff to research surrounding jurisdictions’ tree regulations, including penalty fees for illegal tree removals and replanting policies. In addition to collecting this information, staff also surveyed jurisdictions regarding their protected/heritage tree removal policies.

On May 10, 2021, the City Council held a Study Session to review the researched information.

At that time there was consensus from the Council to move forward with a comprehensive update to the existing Protected Tree Ordinance. Council also expressed interest in moving forward with an Urgency Ordinance to restrict protected tree removals/ pruning while staff worked on a comprehensive update to the Protected Tree Ordinance. Staff Report - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3188&Inline=True, Minutes - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2533&Inline=True

On June 14, 2021 the City Council adopted an Urgency Ordinance 1571 for a period of 45 - days.

The City Council, at its July 12, 2021 meeting, extended the Urgency Ordinance 1572 for a period of ten months and fifteen days to allow staff enough time to research and propose a comprehensive update to section 18.18.070. Staff Report - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3206&Inline=True Minutes - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2542&Inline=True

On September 7, 2021 staff conducted a study session with the Planning Commission to discuss various aspects of the Ordinance. The topics included reasons for tree removals, penalty fees for violation of the ordinance, notification requirements, replanting requirements, specific definitions, as well as other requirements for tree protection measures. During this meeting, both the Planning Commission and the public provided comments for consideration. Staff Report - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3246&Inline=True Minutes - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2567&Inline=True

On February 7, 2022, staff conducted a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and the Residential Design Review Committee (RDRC) to provide them and members of the public an opportunity to comment and provide input on the ongoing work and steps taken to develop the proposed Ordinance.

Minutes - http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2618&Inline=True At both of these meetings, the Planning Commission and RDRC provided additional direction and input for staff consideration, which has since been incorporated into the proposed ordinance. Staff also relied on other resources to develop the Ordinance which included public comments, conducting research on nearby cities, inter-departmental discussions, and regular consultation with the city-retained arborist.

9.a.3
Packet Pg. 453
Attachment: Project History and Links to Staff Report and Attachments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) On March 21, 2022 staff presented the proposed Protected Tree Ordinance to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission favorably recommended adoption of the proposed Ordinance with one change to Redwood tree replacements. The Planning Commission recommended not requiring replanting a Redwood tree when a heritage tree is removed owing to the species high water usage and local unsuitability. Staff Report -
http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3320&Inline=True On April 11, 2022 staff brought forward the proposed Protected Tree Ordinance for City Council consideration. The City Council proposed a few text amendments to the ordinance as well as several additions to the Administrative Guidelines and Preferred Tree List and continued the item to April 25, 2022 meeting. Agenda packet -
http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3322&Inline=True, Page 259- 344
April 25, 2022 staff will bring forward the proposed protected tree ordinance with proposed amendments for City Council consideration.

9.a.3
Packet Pg. 454
Attachment: Project History and Links to Staff Report and Attachments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

PROTECTED TREES

ADMINISTRATIVE

GUIDELINES

APRIL 2022

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 455
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 1 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

Background
This is a supplemental document to the Protected Tree Ordinance. This document provides procedural information and guidance to help users comply with and implement the Protected Tree Ordinance. It is also intended to educate and provide resources regarding best practices to maintain Protected trees.

1. Rules of measurement
1) For single-trunk trees, trunks shall be measured at 54” (4.5’) above the natural grade. 2) For multi-trunk trees arising at or below 54”, the trunk shall be measured at the smallest diameter point below the main union of the trunk unless the union occurs below grade. 3) For multi-trunk trees where union occurs below grade, each trunk shall be considered an individual tree. To determine the trunk diameter, measurements shall be taken for each individual stem – independent of the other stem’s diameters.

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 456
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 2 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

2. Important definitions

1.“Protected tree” means any significant or heritage tree, any tree as part of an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan.

The following trees shall not be classified as Protected trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

2. “Heritage tree” means any:
i. Indigenous tree whose size, as measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade (unless otherwise indicated), is defined below:
● Aesculus californica (buckeye) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter ● Arbutus menziesii (madrone) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty-four inches above natural grade and measuring nine inches (9”) in diameter. ● Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) of more than nine inches (9”) in diameter ● Quercus lobata (valley oak) of more than nine inches (9”) in diameter ● Quercus douglassii (blue oak) of more than nine (9”) in diameter ● Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) of more than nine inches (9”) in diameter ● Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) of more than fifteen inches (15”) in diameter ● Umbellularia californica (California bay laurel) with a single stem or multiple stems touching each other at fifty -four inches above natural grade and measuring eleven inches (11”) in diameter;

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 457
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 3 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

Aesculus californica (buckeye) 9” diameter or greater
Arbutus menziesii (madrone) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak) 9” diameter or greater Quercus lobata (valley oak) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus douglassii (blue oak) 9” diameter or greater
Quercus wislizneii (interior live oak) 9” diameter or greater Sequoia sempervirens (redwood) 15” diameter or greater
Umbellularia californica (California bay
laurel)
11” diameter or greater

iii. Tree so designated by the City Council, based upon findings that the particular tree is unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual age, appearance, location or other factors.

3. “Significant tree” means any tree that is eleven inches (11”) in diameter (or more), outside of bark, measured at fifty-four inches above natural grade. The following trees shall not be classified as significant or heritage trees regardless of size:
i. Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; ii. Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima;
iii. Fruit trees of any kind;
iv. Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata;
v. Eucalyptus genera;
vi. Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

4. “Community of trees” means a group or grove of trees that are dependent upon each other for their survival and/or structural stability.

3. Protected Tree Removal Permit Procedures
All permit requests shall be accompanied by a completed application form, recent colored photograph with correct botanical identification of the subject tree(s) and applicable fees. The number of pruning application s shall be limited to only one application per tree within the

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 458
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 4 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

preceding 12-month period. The City arborist may review exceptions. The submission packet shall include the corresponding material for each removal criteria per this guidance document. The application packet will be reviewed by the City arborist at cost to the applicant. Please note, an arborist report prepared by the applicant is not required . However, if an arborist report has already been completed for the subject tree(s), please include it in the application submission to be peer reviewed by the City arborist.

Criteria-based Submission Requirements for Protected Tree Removal Applications Removal criteria Stages and requirements of review

1. Death 1. Applicant submits a conceptual site plan showing the protected tree proposed to be removed.

2. The City arborist conducts a site visit and prepares a report/memo and renders a final decision.

2. Tree Risk Rating 1. Applicant submits a conceptual site plan showing the protected tree proposed to be removed.

2. The City arborist conducts a site visit and prepares a report indicating the risk rating of the tree proposed to be removed and renders a final decision. The tree risk rating shall be based on the International Society of Arboriculture Best
Management Practices: Tree Risk Assessment and/or as
indicated in these administrative guidelines.

3. Tree Heath Rating 1. Applicant submits a conceptual site plan showing the protected tree proposed to be removed.

2. The City arborist conducts a site visit and prepares an arborist report detailing the sub-criteria A and/or B under which the tree is proposed to be removed. The City arborist renders a final decision.

4. Species 1. Applicant submits a conceptual site plan showing the protected tree proposed to be removed.

2. The City arborist conducts a site visit and prepares an arborist report analyzing if the tree in question is invasive or an undesirable species at the given location or not. The City arborist renders a final decision.

5. Development
(Existing or
Applicant submits necessary documentation to demonstrate

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 459
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 5 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

proposed)

Tree Appraisals may
be required for
removal and/or
pruning.
infeasibility of alternative design that includes:

1. A written narrative of infeasibility and describing areas where structural damage is possible due to the tree(s).

2. Detail Site Plans:
a. Existing site plan showing existing development
b. Proposed site plan showing proposed development
c. On the proposed site plan, location of all protected trees, within 30’-0 of all construction activities
irrespective of proposed to be removed or not shall be
shown.
d. Detail information of each protected tree including but not limited to tree species, tree trunk diameter
measured at 54”, heritage or significant tree, proposed action to be taken

3. At least two alternative site plan designs showing infeasibility with respect to the tree proposed for removal.

4. The City arborist prepares an arborist report based on the submitted documents and site visit(s). The City arborist renders a final decision.

6. Utility Interference
The utility, public or transportation agency shall submit:

4. Proposed site plan showing proposed development

5. On the proposed site plan, location of all protected trees, within 30’-0 of all construction activities irrespective of proposed to be removed or not shall be shown.

6. The City arborist conducts a site visit and prepares an arborist report analyzing the utility interference. The City arborist renders a final decision.

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 460
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 6 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

3.1 Tree Relocation
Applicants may choose to professionally relocate an on -site protected tree to accommodate proposed development, repair, alteration or improvement of a site. Any tree proposed to be relocated will be construed as tree removed and shall comply with application procedures as set forth above. The City arborist may require documentation to certify that the relocation work was accomplished according to acceptable tree relocation standards and specifications. Additional documentation may be required to prove feasi bility of relocating, establishing and maintaining the relocated protected tree.

4. Replacement Trees Requirements

4.1 Species of replacement trees

 Replacement tree(s) for heritage tree removals shall be from the heritage tree list, with the exception of Redwood trees, at a 1:1 ratio of a size, as determined by the City arborist and/or specified in the administrative guidelines. The City arborist may choose a different species for replacement if:

The species from the heritage tree list is proven to be unsuitable to a given location per an ISA Certified Arborist and/or the City arborist,
 Replacement tree(s) for all other significant tree removals shall be at a 1:1 ratio of a size, as determined by t he City arborist and/or as specified within a recommended tree list (see bottom of the document) or per the administrative guidelines.

 Replacement Tree(s) shall not include, Bailey, Green or Black Acacia: A. baileyana, A. decurrens or A. melanoxylon; Tree of Heaven: Ailianthus altissima; Fruit trees of any kind; Monterey Pine: Pinus radiata; Eucalyptus genera; Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

4.2 Exception to 1-1 tree replacement
Per Ordinance, granting an exception for a 1-1 tree replanting requirement or allowing payment of a tree fee will be solely at the discretion of the City arborist. The City arborist may require documentation such as, but not limited to, soil report, existing conditions report, and an existing or proposed site plan to arrive at a decision.

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 461
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 7 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

4.2 Size of replacement trees
For every Protected tree proposed for removal, it must be replaced by a minimum 24” box size tree per the replacement tree species requirement unless as required by the City arborist or any condition of approval of a development application or the following:
● Any Protected tree with a trunk diameter between 9 inches to 30 inches has a minimum replacement tree requirement of one (1) 24-inch tree box. ● Any Protected tree with a trunk dia meter of greater than 30 inches to 40 inches has a minimum replacement tree requirement of one (1) 36-inch tree box. ● Any Protected tree with a trunk diameter of greater than 40 inches to 50 inches has a minimum replacement tree requirement of one (1) 48-inch tree box. ● Any Protected tree with a trunk diameter of greater than 50 inches has a minimum replacement tree requirement of one (1) 60-inch tree box. ● Or any combination as determined by the City arborist.

5. Selecting a good location for street-oriented trees
The Protected Tree Ordinance specifies that at least one of the trees required to be planted as part of the lot coverage requirement (SCMC 18.18.070 C) shall be street -oriented. A street - oriented tree shall be located between the front of the property and the street. This may include the area in front of the property loc ated in the public right of way. For example, a planter strip between the sidewalk and the street. Note that not all species of trees are suitable for the narrow width of a planter strip. For appropriate placement of street -oriented trees, it is recommended to consult a qualified consulting arborist prior to selecting a species.

Please contact San Carlos Public Works regarding any work to be performed in the public right of way. Please note, it is the owner’s responsibility to maintain trees adjacent to their property , regardless of whether they are located on private property or within the right-of-way.

6. Tree Protection Zone (TPZ)
The Protected Tree Ordinance requires each Protected tree to be retained have a designated TPZ identifying the area with a radius 10x the trunk diameter to protect the tree, soil and roots from proposed disturbance. Any variation in the size of the TPZ radiu s must be approved by the City arborist. The TPZ shall be shown on all site plans and landscaping plans for the project. If any construction activity is proposed within the TPZ, a Tree P rotection Plan (TPP) prepared by a certified arborist shall be submitted to the City arborist for review.

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 462
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 8 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

6.1 Activities prohibited within the TPZ include:
- Storage or parking vehicles, staging building materials or refuse on exposed soil without a root buffer and trunk protection (Type III protection). - Placement of excavated spoils or dumping of poisonous materials on or around trees and roots. Poisonous mat erials include, but are not limited to, paint, petroleum products, concrete or stucco mix, dirty water or any other material which may be deleterious to tree health.
- The use of tree trunks as a winch support, anchorage, as a temporary power pole, sign posts or other similar function.
- Cutting of tree roots by utility trenching, foundation digging, placement of curbs and trenches and other miscellaneous excavation without prior approval of the City Arborist. - Soil disturbance or grade change (see Grade C hanges and Trenching, Section 2.20).

Drainage changes.
- Improvements or activities such as paving, utility and irrigation trenching and other ancillary activities shall occur outside the TPZ, unless authorized by the City Arborist, or by project approval.

6.2 Activities permitted or required within the TPZ include:
- Mulching. During construction, wood chips may be spread within the TPZ to a 4-to 6-inch depth, leaving the trunk clear of mulch to help inadvertent compaction and moisture loss from occurring. The mulch may be removed if improvements or other landscaping is

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 463
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 9 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

required. Mulch material shall be 2 -inch unpainted, untreated wood chip mulch or approved equal.
- Root Buffer. When areas under the tree canopy cannot be fenced, a temporary buffer is required and shall cover the root zone and remain in place at the specified thickness until final grading stage. The root buffer shall be constructed using one of the methods in the current ISA Best Management Practices: Managing Trees During Construction Publication.

Type III trunk protection is also required with a root buffer. - Irrigation, aeration, fertilizing or other beneficial practices that have been specifically approved for use within the TPZ.

7. Tree Protection Plan (TPP) and Procedures
A Tree Protection Plan is required when construction activity is proposed within the 10x trunk diameter (TPZ) of a Protected Tree.

Although tree protection measures are not required for Protected trees located beyond 10 x the trunk diameter from construction activities, they are still protected by Ordinance. Therefore, no items may be stored, staged, parked or driven within the TPZ of these trees. The health, structural stability and aesthetics of Protected Trees on any property must be maintained at all times during a development project, except where Protected Trees have been per mitted for removal by the City. The Tree Protection Plan preparation shall follow the following guidelines:

7.1 General Guidelines

1. A property owner /project-arborist shall have prepared a Tree Protection Plan prior to commencement of a development project.

2. Prior to writing the TPP, the project arborist shall review the most current version of the entire available plan set including but not limited to grading, demolition, utilities, building and landscaping. The TPP shall identify the plan sheets reviewed by name, sheet number and date. The project arborist shall also visit the site and identify on a site plan from the current plan set, the location of all Protected trees within 30’ -0 of the project.

The TPP shall indicate the date of the site visit.

3. The Tree Protection Plan (TPP) shall be prepared to assess impacts to trees; recommend mitigation for reducing impa cts to a less than significant level and identify construction guidelines to be followed through all phases of a construction project.

4. The TPP shall be project-specific and contain recommendations for how the tree protection measures are to be practically executed on the project site. Routine maintenance

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 464
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 10 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

recommendations such as pruning or fertilizing are not required in a TPP except as specified mitigation for specific construction impacts.

5. The TPP will be peer-reviewed by the City arborist for approval.

6. The approved TPP is to be reproduced on one or more full-size sheets and included in the plan set properly indexed. The TPP must be readable so that important details will not be missed.

7. If any parts of the plan set were not made available, or a site visit was not performed, the TPP shall indicate these limitations.

7.2 Impacts of Construction
The TPP shall accurately detail the impacts of construction on Protected Trees including but not limited to soil compaction, root loss or damage, bark injury and excessive pruning. All construction-related activities shall be considered including but not limite d to demolition, grading, excavation, paving, storing, staging, site access, parking, placement of temporary structures, debris disposal and landscaping.

Impacts to trees shall be documented by the type of work taking place, th e distance of the work from the trunk in feet as precisely as possible and expressed as a multiple of the trunk diameter (measured at 54 inches from the ground). Example : “Foundation excavation will take place about 50 feet from Tr ee 1 , which is 12 times the trunk diameter.” Vague statements such as “the work is taking place far from the tree” will not be acceptable .

Measurements may be made in the field using flags, stakes or story poles , or using Adobe Measuring Tool on a site plan showing accurate tree locations and drip lines in relation to the proposed work. The method of measuring distance of impacts to Protected Trees shall be documented in the tree protection plan.

If below-grade work takes place within a radius of 6 times the trunk diameter (measured at 54 inches from the ground) of any Protected Trees, the City Arborist may require a test excavation in the presence of the Project Arborist using air, water or hand -digging to document all roots likely to be affected. The test excavation and report may be required as part of the submittal review process, prior to permit approval and issuance.

7.3 Site Plan Requirements
On all improvement plans for the project, indicate accurate trunk locations, canopy driplines and the ‘TPZ’ of all trees or groups of trees to be preserved within the development area. In addition, for protected trees the plans shall accurately show the trunk diameter, dripline, TPZ and cl early indicate the tree protection zone to be enclosed with the specified tree fencing as a bold dashed

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 465
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 11 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

line. Root buffers, trunk protection and locations of hand-digging shall also be located on the site plan. Site plan is to include a north arrow and scale bar.

7.4 Verification of TPP
The project arborist or contractor shall verify, in writing, that all pre-construction conditions have been met (tree fencing, erosion control, trimming, etc.) and are in place. Include photos of each tree or group of trees to be Protected as specified in the approved Tree Protection Plan. Photos are to be labeled with tree numbers and show the relationship of the fencing to the dripline.

Written verification must be submitted to and approved by the City Arborist prior to demolition, grading or building permit issuance.

8. Tree Rating for Condition and Suitability
Protected trees shall be rated according to health, structure and suitability for preservation. The rating system shall define the terms used and criteria for such ratings. The rating system must be based on current professional standards for evaluating tree condition and suitability for preservation.

Below is a sample system that may be used:

8.1 Tree Health: Rated Good, Fair or poor, using the following criteria:

Good: Vigorous growth with foliage of normal size, shape and color. Canopy density 90-100%, little to no dead wood, minor or no pest infestation, little to no decay. Tree is expected to live its natural lifespan.

Fair: All or some of the new growth shoots are shorter than expected for the species.

Canopy density 60-90%. Some small branch dieback. Noticeable pest infestation and/or decay.

Tree is not in decline right now, but further stress such as construction impacts, increased pest pressure, drought etc. May cause a decline in health.

Poor: Little to no new growth and significant dieback. Foliage may be undersized, distorted, yellowed or another color abnormal for the species. Canopy density 20-60% or less. Significant dead wood, pest infestation or decay. Tree is not expected to live its natural lifespan.

8.2 Tree Structure: Rated Good, Fair or Poor, using the following criteria:

Good: Minor structural flaws may be corrected through pruning. Tree has an upright trunk and a single trunk tapering to a single leader at the top, or a single leader may be easily trained.

Most scaffold branches are smaller than the leader, attached to the trunk at angles

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 466
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 12 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

approaching 45 degrees and are spaced apart on the trunk both vertically and radially.

Structure does not contain included bark (bark inside the juncture of multiple trunks). No sign of previous branch failures. Foliage is evenly distributed on the limbs. Symmetrical or mostly symmetrical canopy.

Fair: Some structural flaws not correctable through pruning. Tree may have more than on e trunk or leader, trunk may have a slight lean. Scaffold branches may be attached at angles less than 30-9 degrees and/or may be crowded on the trunk. Structure may have included bark, previous branch failures or end-heavy limbs. Some asymmetry in the canopy.

Poor: Significant structural flaws not correctable through pruning. Significant dead wood or decay. More than one trunk or leader and/or branches crowded together on the trunk.

Significantly end-heavy limbs may be present. Structure may contain significant included bark, previous branch failures and/or asymmetry. Precipitous lean may be present. Tree is likely to be hazardous.

8.3 Suitability for Preservation: based only on the tree itself and not related to potential construction impacts. Rated Good, Fair or poor, using the following criteria:

Good: Tree is currently an asset to the landscape and may be expected to survive minor to moderate construction impacts if adequately Protected.

Fair: Tree contri bute something to the landscape and may be improved by pruning or other maintenance activities. May be expected to survive minor construction impacts if adequately Protected. Protection measures are probably worth taking except where construction impacts are extensive.

Poor: Tree does not contribute to the landscape. It is in poor health and may be hazardous. It is not expected to survive any construction impacts. Some trees with poor viability may be retained if they will not be impacted by construction.

9. Protective Tree Fencing Requirements
Unless otherwise specified, the protective fencing shall serve as the TPZ. Fenced enclosures shall be erected around trees to be Protected to achieve three primary goals, (1) to keep the foli age crowns and branching structure clear from contact by equipment, materials and activities; (2) to preserve roots and soil conditions in an intact and non -compacted state and; (3) to identify the tree protection zone (TPZ) in which no soil disturbance is permitted and activities are restricted, unless otherwise approved.

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 467
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 13 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

All trees to be preserved shall be Protected with five or six (5’ - 6’) foot high chain link fences.

Fences are to be mounted on two inch diameter galvanized iron posts, driven into the ground to a depth of at least 2 -feet at no more than 10 -foot spacing. This detail shall appear on grading, demolition and improvement plans.

9.1 Type I Tree Protection
The fences shall enclose the entire area under the TPZ of the tree(s) to be saved throughout the life of the project, or until final improvement work within the area is required, typically near the end of the project. Parking Areas: If the fencing must be located on paving or sidewalk that wi ll not be demolished, the posts may be supported by an appropriate grade level concrete base.

9.2 Type II Tree Protection
For trees situated within a narrow planting strip, only the planting strip shall be enclosed with the required chain link protective fencing in order to keep the sidewalk and street open for public use.

9.3 Type III Tree Protection
Trees situated in a small tree well or sidewalk planter pit, shall be wrapped with 2 -inches of orange plastic fencing as padding from the ground to the firs t branch with 2-inch thick wooden slats bound securely on the outside. During installation of the wood slats, caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. Major scaffold limbs may also require Type III protection as directed by the City Arborist.

9.4 Duration of protective fencing
Tree fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction begins and remain in place until final inspection of the project permit, except for work specifically required in the approved plans in whic h case the project arborist or City Arborist (in the case of street trees) must be consulted.

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 468
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 14 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

10. Noticing requirements
Notice before Issuance. Before a Protected tree
is removed, notice of removal shall be posted by
the applicant on the property containing the
Protected tree at a conspicuous location. When
a permit is sought under subsection (e)
(Development) or (f) (Utility Interference) of this
section, property owners within three -hundred
(300’) feet of the exterior boundary of the
property containing the Protected tree shall be
notified by the City by mail of the pending
application. Failure to receive copies of such
notice shall not invalida te any action taken by
the City.

Notice of Issuance . Upon receipt of a tree
removal permit, the property owner shall post
a notice of issuance of any permit for a tree
removal at the subject property for a period of
ten calendar days at a conspicuous loca tion.

The City will furnish the owner with a copy of
the notice of issuance. A proof of posting shall
be sent via email to the City arborist.

11. Fines for Violation
Any person violating the Protected tree ordinance shall be subject to a civil fine or penalty in the amount established by this ordinance. If a person commits, or maintains a violation of any part of Municipal Code Section 18.18, he/she/they will be fined in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per violation; and if the violation resulted in the removal or demise of a Protected tree, the fine will not exceed $5,000 per tree or the appraised value of each such tree, as determined by an ISA Certified Arborist in consultation with the City arborist , whichever amount is higher.

Replacement shall occur as provided in this chapter. The arborist shall use the then-current issue of “A Guide to Plant Appraisal” published by the International Society of Arboriculture or as specified in the administrative guidelines.

12. Tree Appraisal Method

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 469
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 15 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

When a violation of this chapter occurs, the certified arborist must prepare the appraisal by using the most current edition of (1) the ‘Guide for Plant Appraisal’, published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers, and (2) the most recent ‘Form for Northern California’ established by the International Society of Arboriculture.

The Trunk Formula Technique: Applies to trees that are too large for practical replacement (transplanting) and shall be appraised by: determining the basic tree value and ad justing this value by a condition and location ratings. The appraised value shall be determined by using the most recent edition of the ‘Guide for Plant Appraisal’, published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. The Trunk Formula established by the International Society of Arboriculture must be used to compute the appraised value. When the value of a tree needs to be determined for establishing the amount of security required, or for any other purpose, the value shall be determined by using the most recent edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers.

13. Resources
1) For consumer tree care info: https://www.treesaregood.org/treeowner/treeownerinformation 2) For Tree species selection: https://selectree.calpoly.edu 3) For Tree species selection: https://canopy.org/tree-info/canopy-tree-library/ 4) California Native Plants and Trees: https://calscape.org/ 5) Caring for trees: https://canopy.org/tree-info/caring-for-trees/ 6) Tree Planting and Care - Arbor Day Foundation: https://www.arborday.org/trees/index- planting.cfm?utm_source=Arborday.org&utm_medium=Top_Menu&utm_campaign=Dropdown_Me nu&utm_term=Trees&utm_content=Planting_and_Care
7) What Tree is That? Tree Identification Field Guide: https://www.arborday.org/trees/whattree/ 8) Trees are good: https://www.treesaregood.org/treeowner/treeownerinformation

Some portions of this document were adapted from heritage tree administrative guidelines and technical documents of the City of Menlo Park, City of San Mateo and City of Palo Alto

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 470
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 1 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

City of San Carlos

Preferred Tree List
(city-wide)

This list is not proposed to be adopted with the Protected Tree Ordinance and may be updated at the discretion of the Director.

Common
Name
Scientific Name Native to: Water use rating
(WUCOLS or
SelecTree)
Classification Foliage
Type
Height - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Width - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Exposure
(from
SelecTree)
Strip Width
(from City
list, or
estimated)
Litter
(from
Selectree)
"Fire
resistant"*
(source)
Why not
recommended
Red Maple Acer rubrum 'Red
Sunset'
(Cultivated
variety)
Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
California
Buckeye
Aesculus
californica
Central
California
Very Low Preferred Heritage Tree,
Preferred Significant
Replacement, Preferred
Residential
Deciduous
(loses
leaves in
summer
unless
irrigated)
25 20-30 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
Dry fruit,
leaves,
flowers
yes-San
Mateo
County

Peppermint
Tree
Agonis flexuosa Western
Australia
Low Preferred residential, not
recommended street tree
Evergreen 35 15-30 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
none
noted
not noted
in sources
reviewed

Strawberry
Tree
Arbutus 'Marina' (Cultivated
variety)
Low Preferred Residential (non-
street-oriented)
Evergreen 50 40 Full Sun Wet Fruit Probably
(close
relative of
A. unedo)

Pacific
Madrone
Arbutus menziesii Western N
America
Low Heritage tree, Preferred
Significant replacement,
preferred Residential
(recommend non-street
oriented)
Evergreen 65 50 Full Shade -
Full Sun
Bark, wet
fruit
yes-San
Mateo
County

Strawberry
Madrone
Arbutus unedo S. Europe &
Ireland
Low Preferred Residential (non-
street-oriented)
Evergreen 35 20-35 Full Shade -
Full Sun
Wet Fruit Yes - (Marin
County)

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 471
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 2 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

City of San Carlos

Preferred Tree List
(city-wide)

This list is not proposed to be adopted with the Protected Tree Ordinance and may be updated at the discretion of the Director.

Common
Name
Scientific Name Native to: Water use rating
(WUCOLS or
SelecTree)
Classification Foliage
Type
Height - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Width - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Exposure
(from
SelecTree)
Strip Width
(from City
list, or
estimated)
Litter
(from
Selectree)
"Fire
resistant"*
(source)
Why not
recommended
Orchid Tree
(Red
Bauhinia)
Bauhinia galpinii Eastern,
Southern Africa
Low Experimental Street,
Preferred residential
Semi-
Deciduous
15 15-May Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
3 ft Dry Fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Flame Tree Brachychiton
acerifolius
Australia Low Experimental Street,
Preferred residential
Semi-
Deciduous
60 30-40 Full Sun 4 ft + Dry Fruit,
leaves,
flowers
Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Bottle Tree Brachychiton
populneus
Australia Low Experimental Street,
Preferred residential
Evergreen 50 30 Full Sun 4 ft + Dry fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Gold
Medallion
Tree
Cassia leptophylla Brazil Low Experimental Street,
Preferred residential
Semi-
Deciduous
25 30 Full Sun 3 ft Dry Fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

River She-
Oak
Casuarina
cunninghamiana
Australia Low Experimental Street,
Preferred residential
Evergreen 70 30 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
4 ft + Dry Fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Chinese
Hackberry
Celtis sinensis China Low Not recommended
Approved Street tree
aphids, sticky
honeydew
Carob Ceratonia siliqua Mediterranean Low Experimental Residential, Significant replacement
Evergreen 40 30-40 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
n/a Dry fruit yes - (Marin
County)

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 472
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 3 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

City of San Carlos

Preferred Tree List
(city-wide)

This list is not proposed to be adopted with the Protected Tree Ordinance and may be updated at the discretion of the Director.

Common
Name
Scientific Name Native to: Water use rating
(WUCOLS or
SelecTree)
Classification Foliage
Type
Height - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Width - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Exposure
(from
SelecTree)
Strip Width
(from City
list, or
estimated)
Litter
(from
Selectree)
"Fire
resistant"*
(source)
Why not
recommended
Willow
Peppermint
Eucalyptus
nicholii
Low Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Fire prone
(multiple
sources)
Maidenhair
(Male tree
only)
Ginkgo biloba (Cultivated
variety)
Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Kentucky
Coffee Tree
Gymnocladus
dioicia
Eastern US Low Experimental Residential,
Significant replacement
Deciduous 100 40-50 Full Sun n/a Dry fruit yes (Oregon
State)

Crape
Myrtle
Lagerstroemia
indica cvs
(Cultivated
variety)
Low Approved Street Tree
(current), Preferred
Residential
Deciduous 25 25 Full Sun 3 ft Dry Fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Primrose
Tree
Lagunaria
patersonii
S Pacific &
Australia
Low Experimental Street,
Preferred residential
Evergreen 50 20 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
4 ft Dry Fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Sweet Gum Liquidambar
styraciflua
Moderate/Medium Not Recommended water use, litter - seedpods
Flowering
Crabapple
Malus floribunda Asia Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Mayten tree Maytenus boaria Chile Moderate/Medium Do not plant Aggressive root suckers
White
Mulberry
Morus alba Asia Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 473
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 4 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

City of San Carlos

Preferred Tree List
(city-wide)

This list is not proposed to be adopted with the Protected Tree Ordinance and may be updated at the discretion of the Director.

Common
Name
Scientific Name Native to: Water use rating
(WUCOLS or
SelecTree)
Classification Foliage
Type
Height - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Width - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Exposure
(from
SelecTree)
Strip Width
(from City
list, or
estimated)
Litter
(from
Selectree)
"Fire
resistant"*
(source)
Why not
recommended
Olive
(fruitless)
Olea europaea
'Swan Hill'
(Cultivated
variety)
Very Low Recommended Street Tree Evergreen 30 25-30 Partial Shade - Full
Sun
3 ft none
noted
Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Chinese
Pistache
Pistacia chinensis China Low Approved Street Tree
(current), Preferred
Significant replacement,
residential
Deciduous 35 25-35 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
4 ft none
noted
yes - (Marin
County)

London
Plane
Platanus x
hispanica
(Platanus x
acerifolia)
(Cultivated
variety-hybrid)
Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Catalina
cherry
Prunus ilicifolia
lyonii
California
Channel Islands
Low Experimental Residential
(non street oriented)
Evergreen 35 20-30 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
3 ft wet fruit yes - (San
Mateo
County)

Flowering
Cherry
Prunus serrulata
'Kwanzan'
(Cultivated
variety)
Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Aristocrat
Pear
Pyrus calleryana
'Aristocrat'
(Cultivated) Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Coast Live
Oak
Quercus agrifolia
var. agrifolia
Central and
Southern
California
Very Low Preferred Heritage Tree,
Preferred Significant
Replacement, Preferred
Residential
evergreen 70 20-70 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
Dry fruit
(acorns)
yes-San
Mateo
County

Oregon
White Oak
Quercus garryana Western North
America
Low Experimental Residential,
Significant replacement
Deciduous 90 30-60 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
n/a Dry fruit
(acorns)
yes (Oregon
State)

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 474
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 5 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

City of San Carlos

Preferred Tree List
(city-wide)

This list is not proposed to be adopted with the Protected Tree Ordinance and may be updated at the discretion of the Director.

Common
Name
Scientific Name Native to: Water use rating
(WUCOLS or
SelecTree)
Classification Foliage
Type
Height - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Width - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Exposure
(from
SelecTree)
Strip Width
(from City
list, or
estimated)
Litter
(from
Selectree)
"Fire
resistant"*
(source)
Why not
recommended
Valley Oak
aka
California
White Oak
Quercus lobata California
riparian (rivers)
Low Preferred Heritage Tree,
Preferred Significant
Replacement, Preferred
Residential
Deciduous 70 50 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
Dry fruit
(acorns)
yes (San
Mateo
County)

Cork Oak Quercus suber W.

Mediterranean,
N Africa
Low Experimental Street,
residential, Significant
replacement
Evergreen 70 70 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
4 ft Dry fruit
(acorns)
Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Island Oak Quercus
tomentella
California and
Mexico
Low Experimental Residential,
Significant replacement
Evergreen 50 25-40 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
n/a none
noted
Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Interior Live
Oak
Quercus wislizeni California Very Low Preferred Heritage Tree, Preferred Significant
Replacement, Preferred
Residential
Evergreen 70 40-80 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
Dry fruit
(acorns)
not noted
in sources
reviewed

Brazilian
pepper
Schinus
terebinthifolius
Peru Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Sumac Searsia lancea
(Rhus lancea)
South Africa Low Not recommended
Approved Street tree
litter-dry fruit
(Selectree)
Coast
Redwood
Sequoia
sempervirens
California High Heritage tree not
recommended for new
plantings
Water use, size

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 475
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 6 | Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines

City of San Carlos

Preferred Tree List
(city-wide)

This list is not proposed to be adopted with the Protected Tree Ordinance and may be updated at the discretion of the Director.

Common
Name
Scientific Name Native to: Water use rating
(WUCOLS or
SelecTree)
Classification Foliage
Type
Height - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Width - ft
(from
SelecTree)
Exposure
(from
SelecTree)
Strip Width
(from City
list, or
estimated)
Litter
(from
Selectree)
"Fire
resistant"*
(source)
Why not
recommended
Green
Mountain
Linden,
Silver Linden
Tilia tomentosa SE Europe, SW
Asia
Low Experimental Street,
residential, Significant
replacement
Deciduous 50 20-30 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
n/a Dry fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Water Gum,
Kanooka
Tristianopsis
laurina
Australia Moderate/Medium Not recommended
Approved Street tree
Water use
Emerald
Sunshine
elm
Ulmus davidiana
var. japonica
'Emerald
Sunshine'
(Cultivated
variety)
Low Experimental Street,
residential, Significant
replacement
Deciduous 35 15-25 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
4 ft + Dry Fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Chinese
evergreen
elm
Ulmus parvifolia
'Drake'
(Cultivated
variety)
Low Experimental Street,
residential, Significant
replacement
Semi-
Deciduous
45 35-50 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
4 ft + Dry fruit Not noted
in sources
reviewed

California
Laurel
Umbellularia
californica
California Moderate/Medium Heritage tree not
recommended for new
plantings
Water use, fire
prone (Marin
County)
Chitalpa X Chitalpa
tashkentensis
(Hybrid) Low Experimental Residential
(non street oriented)
Deciduous 35 30 Partial
Shade - Full
Sun
3 ft wet fruit,
flowers
Not noted
in sources
reviewed

Sawleaf
Zelkova
Zelkova serrata Eastern Asia Moderate/Medium Not recommended Approved Street tree
Water use

9.a.4
Packet Pg. 476
Attachment: San Carlos Protected Trees Administrative Guidelines (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

LIST OF APPROVED STREET TREES

STRIP WIDTH
3 Ft 4Ft

MORUS ALBA (FRUITLESS) (WHITE MULBERRY) X

PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA (LONDON PLANE) X
*GINKGO BILOBA (MAIDENHAIR) X
*PISTACIA CHINENSIS (CHINESE PISTACHE) X

CEL TIS SINENSIS (CHINESE HACKBERRY) X X

SCHINUS TEREBINTHIFOLIUS (BRAZILIAN PEPPER) X

EUCALYPTUS NICHOLII (WILLOW PEPPERMINT) X

PYRUS CALLERYANA ARISTOCRAT (ARISTOCRAT PEAR) X

TRISTANIOPSIS LAURINA (WATER GUM, KANOOKA) X

RHUS LANCEA (SUMAC) X X

PRUNUS (FLOWERING CHERRY) X X

MALUS FLORIBUNDA (FLOWERING CRABAPPLE) X X
*ACER RUBRUM, RED SUNSET (RED MAPLE) X
*LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE) X

AGONIS FLEXUOSA (PEPPERMINT TREE) X
*ZELKOVA SERRATA (SAWLEAF ZELKOVA) X
NOTES:

1. * FALL COLOR

2. UPDATED 3/2015
-
~at SAN~ CITY OF SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA STANDARD DETAIL )
APPROVED BY: STD. DETAIL No.
> fl LIST OF APPROVED .·. ...

CITY ENGINEER 41-2I
•
"4£iFOR\I.\~ STREET TREES DATE: JULY 2015
-
This list is proposed to be replaced with the
'Preferred Tree List'

9.a.5
Packet Pg. 477
Attachment: List of approved Street Trees (Proposed to be replaced) (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) LODGE POLE FOR EACH SIDE--~_,__,__ ___+---+-----__,
21 GRAM FERTILIZER TABLETS
20-10-5

COMPACTED SOIL MIX
DRAIN ROCK FILLED WATERING WELL.
24"Lx4" PERFORATED PIPE.

PERFORATIONS TURNED TOWARD ROOT BALL.
18" ROOT BARRIER ENCIRCLING

ROOT BALL, WATERING WELL AND
LODGE POLES.
24" BOX SIZE MINIMUM TREE. SEE PLANTING LIST FOR APPROVED SPECIES. TREE HEIGHT AND SPECIES APPROVED BY CITY STAFF PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

INSTALLATION IN SIDEWALKS MAY REQUIRE TREE GRATES AS DIRECTED BY CITY STAFF.

CITY OF SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA STANDARD DETAIL
APPROVED BY:
~·

CITY ENGINEER
DATE: JULY 2015

STANDARD

TREE PLANTING DETAIL
STD. DETAIL No.
41-1
NOTES:

1. 2.

9.a.5
Packet Pg. 478
Attachment: List of approved Street Trees (Proposed to be replaced) (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Garden Guidance LLC
Ellyn Shea, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
ISA Certified Arborist # WE -5476A - ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #516

2085 Hayes Street, No. 10  San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone: 415/846 -0190  E-Mail: [email protected] www.garden -guidance.com Venmo: @Ellyn -Shea

1 of 6
April 15, 2022

City of San Carlos Planning Department
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94060

Document to Accompany the updates to the Interim Preferred Tree Lists

The Interim Preferred Tree Lists have been updated after the City Council meeting of April 11, 2022. They were updated to address concerns raised at the meeting including:
• Use of non-native species
• Litter drop of the various species
• Flammability of the various species
• Problem species being not recommended including Hackberry, Eucalyptus and Liquidambar • More info re: size, foliage type (evergreen or deciduous) about each species • Purpose of including experimental species
• Improve the readability/clarity of the list in general so some questions about the list could be more easily answered.

What’s Different
• The original master list was an Excel spreadsheet intended to be sorted into different lists. I have sorted out these individual lists as separate documents and updated the master list.

• I removed Eucalyptus genera and Corymbia genera from the experimental list (Many Corymbia were previously classified as Eucalyptus). I also removed conifers as these types of trees are considered more flammable than non-conifers.

The Preferred Heritage tree list only includes Heritage trees recommended for new plantings. Existing Heritage trees named in the ordinance would still be protected. (Examples: Coast Redwood, Bay Laurel are protected but not recommended for new plantings)

• Height, spread and preferred exposure columns from my original Excel spreadsheet are now included. I also added the following columns:
o Native to?
o Litter
o Fire resistance

• Any trees that drop wet fruit as litter have been noted as not recommended for street or street-oriented trees, even if they are recommended for other uses.

9.a.6
Packet Pg. 479
Attachment: Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Garden Guidance LLC
Ellyn Shea, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
ISA Certified Arborist # WE -5476A - ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #516

2085 Hayes Street, No. 10  San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone: 415/846 -0190  E-Mail: [email protected] www.garden -guidance.com Venmo: @Ellyn -Shea

2 of 6
• The list of trees that are not recommended now indicates why. Previously discussed problem trees such as the aphid-prone Chinese Hackberries downtown and seedpod-dropping Liquidambars are identified so it is clear that these trees are the ones no longer recommended. Note that any existing Heritage trees on the not recommended list are still considered Protected by ordinance. These species are not recommended only for new plantings.

Sources
I used SelecTree (https://selectree.calpoly.edu/) as my source for native origin and litter, and the following sources for fire resistance:
• www.firesafesanmateo.org (County)
• www.firesafemarin.org
• “Fire Resistant Plants for Home Landscapes” a Pacific Northwest University Extension publication • chrome-
extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/viewer.html?pdfurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.firefree.org% 2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F02%2FFire-Resistant-Plants.pdf&clen=3428637&chunk=true • Additional information from www.readyforwildfire.org

It’s important to remember that any plant will burn under the right conditions. Fire-safe landscaping is more than just planting species off a “fire-safe” list. Plant spacing, ground cover treatment, irrigation and other factors must be considered.

Purpose of the Updated Lists

These should still be considered interim lists and not tied to the ordinance. The lists were updated for clarity and to provide more information about each species. The factors considered are complex and there are no perfect trees. Each species has its pros and cons. An arborist should advise on species choices for any individual new planting.

Experimental species

We have learned from the lesson of Dutch Elm disease that species diversity allows for a resilient urban forest.

Most pests and diseases are host-specific: they attack a particular species or family. Climate change is also a factor. Some species that did well in the past such as Coast Redwood struggle in the new hotter, drier climate.

Street trees

The street tree list in particular needs work. Very few trees ended up on there by the time I removed the Moderate water users and experimental species.

An inventory of trees in the public right of way would provide beneficial input to creating a new preferred street

9.a.6
Packet Pg. 480
Attachment: Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Garden Guidance LLC
Ellyn Shea, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
ISA Certified Arborist # WE -5476A - ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #516

2085 Hayes Street, No. 10  San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone: 415/846 -0190  E-Mail: [email protected] www.garden -guidance.com Venmo: @Ellyn -Shea

3 of 6
tree list. We are very aware which species cause problems but there is less data on the species out there doing well and causing fewer problems. Some of the “experimental” species may already have proven track records.

The City of San Francisco conducted a complete street tree inventory prior to updating the Street Tree Master Plan and recommended tree lists (which include experimental species) I imagine City of San Mateo has done something similar and I look forward to us learning from the results, which have recently been released.

Most of our Heritage and Significant size trees get to a size that is more likely to cause sidewalk damage.

However, given the narrow planting spaces and narrow sidewalks in many neighborhoods, many species eventually cause damage. Most roots of all species grow in the top 2-3 feet of the soil and in the compacted soils under pavement, perhaps shallower. Smaller trees have smaller root plates so that is one way to perhaps delay the damage. From my limited experience working on sidewalk repair with the Engineering Department in San Carlos, I encountered damage from many Liquidambars and Magnolias, as well as Camphor tree (Cinnamomum camphora) and street-oriented natives such as Coast Live Oak, Valley Oak and Coast Redwood.

9.a.6
Packet Pg. 481
Attachment: Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Garden Guidance LLC
Ellyn Shea, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
ISA Certified Arborist # WE -5476A - ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #516

2085 Hayes Street, No. 10  San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone: 415/846 -0190  E-Mail: [email protected] www.garden -guidance.com Venmo: @Ellyn -Shea

4 of 6
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Title and ownership of all property considered are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management.

2. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or other governmental regulations.

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

4. Various diagrams, sketches and photographs in this report are intended as visual aids and are not to scale, unless specifically stated as such on the drawing. These communication tools in no way substitute for nor should be construed as surveys, architectural or engineering drawings.

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

6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior written or verbal consent of the consultant.

7. This report is confidential and to be distributed only to the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any or all of the contents of this report may be conveyed to another party only with the express prior written or verbal consent of the consultant. Such limitations apply to the original report, a copy, facsimile, scanned image or digital version thereof.

8. This report represents the opinion of the consultant. In no way is the consultant’s fee contingent upon a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

9. The consultant 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, an agreement or a contract.

10. Information contained in this report reflects observations made only to those items described and only reflects the condition of those items at the time of the site visit. Furthermore, the inspection is limited to visual examination of items and elements at the site, unless expressly stated otherwise. There is no expressed or implied warranty or guarantee that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property inspected may not arise in the future.

9.a.6
Packet Pg. 482
Attachment: Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Garden Guidance LLC
Ellyn Shea, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
ISA Certified Arborist # WE -5476A - ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #516

2085 Hayes Street, No. 10  San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone: 415/846 -0190  E-Mail: [email protected] www.garden -guidance.com Venmo: @Ellyn -Shea

5 of 6
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. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborists 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. An arborist 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.

9.a.6
Packet Pg. 483
Attachment: Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Garden Guidance LLC
Ellyn Shea, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
ISA Certified Arborist # WE -5476A - ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #516

2085 Hayes Street, No. 10  San Francisco, CA 94117
Phone: 415/846 -0190  E-Mail: [email protected] www.garden -guidance.com Venmo: @Ellyn -Shea

6 of 6
Certification of Performance

I, Ellyn Shea, Certify:

• That I have personally inspected the trees and/ or property evaluated in this report. I have stated my findings accurately, insofar as the limitations of my Assignment and within the extent and context identified by this report;
• That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or any real estate that is the subject of this report, and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; • That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current scientific procedures and facts and according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices; • That no significant professional assistance was provided, except as indicated by the inclusion of another professional report within this report;
• That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party.
• I am a member in good standing, Certified Arborist (#WE-5476A), and a Qualified Tree Risk Assessor with the International Society of Arboriculture, and a Registered Consulting Arborist (#516) with the American Society of Consulting Arborists.

I have attained professional training in all areas of knowledge asserted through this report by completing relevant college courses, routinely attending pertinent professional conferences and by reading current research from professional journals, books and other media.

I have rendered professional services in a full-time capacity in the field of horticulture and arboriculture for more than 20 years.

Signature:

Date: 4-15-22

9.a.6
Packet Pg. 484
Attachment: Arborist Preferred Tree List Methodology (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) This space for filing stamp only

OR#:

O R A N G E C O U N T Y R E P O R T E R

~ SINCE 1921 ~

600 W. Santa Ana Blvd., Suite 205, Santa Ana, California 92701-4542 Telephone (714) 543-2027 / Fax (714) 542-6841

PROOF OF PUBLICATION

(2015.5 C.C.P.)

State of California )
County of Orange ) ss
Notice Type:

Ad Description:

I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of the ORANGE COUNTY REPORTER, a newspaper published in the English language in the City of Santa Ana, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California by the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, under date of June 2, 1922, Case No. 13,421. That the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:

Executed on: 10/10/2004
At Los Angeles, California
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Signature

EXAMINER - ENQUIRER-BULLETIN
303 TWIN DOLPHIN DR #600, REDWOOD CITY, CA 94065
(650) 556-1556
SPEN 3571170

CRYSTAL MUI

CITY OF SAN CARLOS/CITY CLERK
600 ELM ST
SAN CARLOS, CA - 94070

HRG - NOTICE OF HEARING
Update Protected Tree Ordinance
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of the EXAMINER - ENQUIRER-BULLETIN, a newspaper published in the English language in the city of SAN CARLOS, county of SAN MATEO, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California by the Superior Court of the County of SAN MATEO, State of California, under date 02/25/1946, Case No. 38966. That the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
04/01/2022
04/01/2022

SAN MATEO
!A000005983714!
Email

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC

HEARING NOTICE IS
HEREBY GIVEN THAT the
San Carlos City Council will
hold a Public Hearing on
Monday, April 11, 2022 at
7:00 p.m., for the purpose of
hearing and considering all
comments of all persons
interested in or c oncerned
with the Planning Commi s-
sion’s recommendation
(Resolution # PC2022 -03)
that the City Council hold a
public hearing and consider
introducing an ordinance to
amend Title 18 (Zoning
Ordinance) of the San Carlos
Municipal Code. The
following code sect ions are
proposed for amendment:

18.18.070 Trees (replaced in
entirety) and 18.41 Terms
and Definitions. This project
is consistent with the
programs and policies of the
San Carlos 2030 General
Plan, is within the scope of
the activities and impacts
identi fied in San Carlos 2030
General Plan Program
Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) and no new enviro n-
mental effects have been
found and no new mitigation
is necessary. Therefore, no
additional environmental
review is required pursuant
to Public Resources Code
Section 21166 and California
Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines Section
15162 and 15168. This
project is also exempt from
CEQA Section 15308,
actions by regulatory
agencies for protection of the
environment. The agenda
and relevant materials for
this item will be available for
viewing on the City’s website
www.cityofsancarlos.org/age
nda on April 7, 2022. A
hardcopy may be obtained
upon request to the City
Clerk. Please note that this
April 11, 2022 City Council
meeting will be held via
teleconferen ce and there will
not be a physical location for
which the public can attend.

However, the public will have
access to remotely observe
the meeting and address the
Council – details and
directions will be available on
the agenda. Questions
regarding the pro ject may be
directed to Project Manager
Rucha Dande at
[email protected].

Comments may be sent via
email to the City Clerk -
Cit y-
[email protected]
and the City Council –
CityCou n-
[email protected]; or
mailed to the City Clerk at
600 E lm Street, San Carlos,
CA 94070. All persons
interested in the above are
hereby invited to participate
remotely in this Public
Hearing and be heard. If you
challenge this proposal in
court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you
or someone els e raised at
the public hearing described
in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to
the City Clerk prior to the
public hearing. Crystal Mui,
City Clerk Publication Date:
4/1/22
SPEN -3571170#

EXAMINER - ENQUIRER -

BULLETIN

9.a.7
Packet Pg. 485
Attachment: Public Notice (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the San Carlos City Council will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, April 11, 2022 at 7:00 p.m., for the purpose of hearing and considering all comments of all persons interested in or concerned with the Planning Commission’s recommendation (Resolution # PC2022- 03) that the City Council hold a public hearing and consider introducing an ordinance to amend Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

The following code sections are proposed for amendment: 18.18.070 Trees (replaced in entirety) and 18.41 Terms and Definitions.

This project is consistent with the programs and policies of the San Carlos 2030 General Plan, is within the scope of the activities and impacts identified in San Carlos 2030 General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and no new environmental effects have been found and no new mitigation is necessary.

Therefore, no additional environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162 and 15168. This project is also exempt from CEQA Section 15308, actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment.

The agenda and relevant materials for this item will be available for viewing on the City’s website www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda
on April 7, 2022. A hardcopy may be obtained upon request to the City Clerk. Please note that this April 11, 2022 City Council meeting will be held via teleconference and there will not be a physical location for which the public can attend. However, the public will have access to remotely observe the meeting and address the Council – details and directions will be available on the agenda.

Questions regarding the project may be directed to Project Manager Rucha Dande at [email protected]. Comments may be sent via email to the City Clerk - [email protected] and the City Council – [email protected]; or mailed to the City Clerk at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070.

All persons interested in the above are hereby invited to participate remotely in this Public Hearing and be heard. If you challenge this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk prior to the public hearing.

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk

Publication Date: April 1, 2022

If you require translation for this notice, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 650-802-4222.

9.a.7
Packet Pg. 486
Attachment: Public Notice (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) From:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Date:

Attachments:
dannytwilliamson
David Roof
Rucha Dande
Redwood Tree, issue is Water
Tuesday, March 22, 2022 12:12:02 PM
image001.gif
image003.png
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of San Carlos -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
…hello Mr. Roof,
Thank you all for what you do.

I would like to provide some clarity regarding my ‘Do Not (re)Plant’ plea for last evening’s PC Protected Tree Ord. meeting.

Some years ago I sent to San Carlos Planning a one-page document regarding tree selections and redwood trees for the ‘San Carlos Transit Village’ that has subsequently become more true.

On just about any given San Carlos street you can see stressed redwood trees due to lack of ground water/irrigation. As global warming continues, the luxury of water for landscape is at issue. From January 1st I have collected about 0.50” of rain in my bucket.

Thank you for your time,
Dan Williamson
April 2013:

9.a.8
Packet Pg. 487
Attachment: Public Comments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

9.a.8
Packet Pg. 488
Attachment: Public Comments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) 1 Rucha Dande
To:

Subject: RE: Protected Tree Ordinance
…hello Ms. Dande,

I am very pleased that my redwood tree comments were considered during last evening’s PC meeting.

During the meeting a viable option came to mind for trees in conflict with building changes. In my 50+ years of construction I have successfully moved at least 100 healthy trees, mostly onto the same site and some sold to a ‘new’ home. If new residents can afford to buy and teardown an existing San Carlos house, moving a tree for a win-win may not be an issue.

Again, thank you so much for your time,
Dan Williamson

9.a.8
Packet Pg. 489
Attachment: Public Comments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) From:

To:

Subject:

Date:

Liz Tricase Rennaker
Rucha Dande
Feedback on Tree Permit Ordinance
Friday, March 25, 2022 3:06:42 PM
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of San Carlos -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hi Rucha,
Below is my feedback on the tree permit ordinance based on my experience helping my elderly neighbor from Jan-March 2022. Thank you for including it in the packet.

Please let me know if you see any issues with formatting. I could attach a Word document or link to a Google doc if needed.

Best,
Liz Rennaker
----------------------------------
My name is Liz, and I’m sending in feedback on the tree permit ordinance based on a situation with my wonderful neighbor, Anastasia. In January, Anastasia asked for my help in obtaining a tree removal permit, and I was happy to help her investigate and complete the application process. Unfortunately, we ran into a few problems along the way.

Context
Anastasia has a very large sweetgum tree (liquidambar) that was originally planted by the city of San Carlos many decades ago in the strip between the sidewalk and Brittan Ave. The trunk circumference is about 55" so now it’s considered a protected tree due to its size. Issues with the tree:

1. This tree is a safety issue. It's a high-risk, hazardous tree for public health and safety, and especially for the resident and property owner, Anastasia. For 6 months of the year, this tree drops round, hard seed pods that have caused several people to slip on the sidewalk or sprain ankles. Because of this, Anastasia is afraid to walk outside of her home for half of the year. A fall for Anastasia at this point would be incredibly dangerous, especially since she’s in her 80s. She needs this tree removed for health and safety reasons and would be happy to replace it with a safer tree.

2. Cost of maintenance is high.

Anastasia has been on a fixed income for some time now, and this tree is expensive to maintain. She pays a gardener to collect the seed pods every 2 weeks and clean up her sidewalk and driveway. We’ve investigated having an arborist inject or spray the tree on an annual basis to prevent the seed pods from forming, but both local arborists we consulted said this would not be effective on such a large tree (and it would be costly). Additionally, the roots have lifted up the sidewalk several times in the past, and she has paid thousands of dollars over the years to repair the sidewalk damage and tripping hazards.

9.a.8
Packet Pg. 490
Attachment: Public Comments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance) Instead of keeping this dangerous and expensive tree on her property, she would like to simply remove the tree and replace it with a safer tree that would also save her money in the long run.

Issues with the interim protected tree ordinance today

1. The cost of the permit application is extremely high, and the permit is not guaranteed.

The interim tree ordinance has an unreasonably high cost for the application, around $713, and this does not guarantee approval for a tree removal permit. In Anastasia’s case, based on her needs and based on the options available in the application, she’s worried she may simply lose that money if her permit application is reviewed and denied. These issues were enough for Anastasia to withdraw her application for now, and she feels stuck.

The entire process is especially difficult for senior citizens on a fixed income. Wealthy homeowners may decide to just pay the fine to remove a tree without a permit, but for Anastasia a rejected application is the difference between her resolving this safety issue and not resolving it.

2. Homeowners should have reasonable rights to determine what trees are on their properties.

The City of San Carlos did not consult Anastasia on what tree they decided to plant in this strip between the sidewalk and the street. Yet she is responsible for the cost and efforts of maintaining both the tree and the sidewalk that it keeps damaging. It has also grown into a hazardous tree, and it’s not clear if there’s an option on the permit application that relates to Anastasia’s needs (Tree Risk Rating?).

It feels like the city may not be giving her an option to remove this dangerous tree when she has both safety and financial reasons to remove it. Anastasia should be the one to determine what landscaping is best for her own safety and property.

We understand the benefits that large trees bring to carbon impact and to the look and feel of our city, but the safety of our residents should be our #1 priority above “look and feel”.

Anastasia just wants to replace her hazardous tree with something safer. She also has at least 6 other mature trees on her property, and she’s not looking to remove those because those don’t pose any danger to her.

Our friend who lives in Redwood City also has a tree between the sidewalk and the street. She called the city office to ask about her options for tree maintenance, and RWC said they will trim her tree for free. Maybe San Carlos can at least consider some sort of maintenance assistance like this for trees planted between the sidewalk and the street.

Thank you,
Liz Rennaker

This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to
report this email as spam.

9.a.8
Packet Pg. 491
Attachment: Public Comments (Permanent Protected Tree Ordinance)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: April 25, 2022

ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting an Interim Ordinance Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 (B) Establishing a Moratorium on the Submission, Consideration, or Approval of Applications for Lot Line Adjustments, Subdivisions, Discretionary Land Use Approvals or Building Permits Necessary for Development Within the Northeast Area of the City of San Carlos, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions.

RECOMMENDATION:

In order to protect the pu blic health, safety , and welfare, and prohibit the approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, Staff recommends that the City Council adopt an Interim Ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 (b) imposing a moratorium on the submission, consideration, or approval of applications for (i) lot line adjustments or the subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement, or any other disc retionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

Exceptions to the moratorium to include (i) development applications that have been approved or deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance, (ii) building permits for the construction of tenant improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and (iii) a change of use within space of an existing building and any ass ociated tenant improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million to prepare a s pecific plan for the Northeast Area, hereinafter the “Northeast Area Specific Plan,” and to prepare amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). This allocation of public resources aligns with the City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Plan goal to create a Northeast Area Specific Plan, which states as follows:

9.b
Packet Pg. 492
2 The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part o f this new development.

Other than the aforementioned appropriation, t here are no direct fiscal implications to the City’s General Fund associated with the City Council adopting an Interim Ordinance to establish a moratorium on the submission, considerati on, or approval of development applications for the Northeast Area.

BACKGROUND:

Since 2015, the City of San Carlos has experienced an unprecedented amount of private sector investment and development, including business and employment growth in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, in East San Carlos. In response, the City developed the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan in 2021 to plan for changes within the project area defined by Holly Street, Brittan Avenue, Old County Road, and Highway 101.

Since the adoption of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan, the City continues to receive developer interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors 1; so much so that allowable development under the 2030 General Plan would reach cap acity. With the current level of developer interest and growth, the City is on a trajectory to exceed the level of buildout for commercial, office, and industrial uses planned for and analyzed in San Carlos’ adopted 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR, as shown in Table 1. Attachment 2 includes the list of approved, proposed, and anticipated development projects citywide.

Table 1. Approved 2030 General Plan Buildout2
Status Square Footage Total Square Footage
Approved Build-out, per the 2030 General Plan
Approved Commercial Build-out 724,030 3,437,213
Approved Office Build-out 572,006
Approved Industrial Build-out 2,141,177
Development Projects
Approved Projects 915,943 3,578,562
Proposed Projects 2,115,515
Anticipated Projects 547,104
Difference
(Approved Build-out/Square Footage vs Development Projects) (141,349)

1 Research and development uses are allowed in the GCI: General Commercial/Industrial zoning district.

Research and development, and biotechnology, uses are also allowed under the IL: Light Industrial and the IP: Industrial Professional zoning districts, as defined in the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance. 2 City of San Carlos 2030 General Plan EIR – Table 4.10-1

9.b
Packet Pg. 493
3 The area north of the East Side Innovation District, referred to as the “Northeast Area,” is already experiencing interest from developers and is likely to see increased pr essure for new development in the coming years. To respond to this interest and provide clarity regarding desired development , the City has committed significant public resources to fund the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan (as noted above).

The “Northeast Area” that is the subject of this proposed Interim Ordinance and this public hearing is all land or sites within the area depicted in the map in Figure 1. However, the site owned by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (“PAMF”), which is an 18 -acre site on Industrial Road, is not included in the proposed Interim Ordinance. The PAMF site is not included because it has an approved development agreement and an approved Planned Development Plan (“PDP”) to build a hospital within the next 10 years. Under the terms of the development agreement, the City is contractually precluded from curtailing PAMF’s right to develop their site in a manner consistent with the terms of the approved PDP; thus, this site will not be subject to the provisions of the Int erim Ordinance. However, the boundaries of the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan will encompass the PAMF site.

9.b
Packet Pg. 494
4 Figure 1. Proposed Moratorium Area for the Northeast Area

As stated in the City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Plan , the goal to create a Northeast Area Specific Plan and any necessary general plan and zoning amendments will be prepared with in- depth community and stakeholder input. The intent of the Northeast Area Specific Plan is to consider the Northeast Area holistically through study of land uses, not only the continued development of facilities to accommodate the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, but also the introduction of housing and affordable housing which use is currently prohibited, as well as mobility and transportatio n, major infrastructure upgrades, environmental stewardship, urban design, recreation, and open spaces.

Therefore, the Northeast Area Specific Plan will also require the preparation and adoption of a General Plan amendment to adjust the General Plan buil dout for all land uses (residential and non-residential) in the City of San Carlos and comprehensive rezoning of the area within the Northeast Area Specific Plan boundaries. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will likely be

9.b
Packet Pg. 495
5 required to analyze the potent ial environmental impacts associated with the adjusted build -out for commercial, office, and industrial uses; as well as the introduction of residential uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan.

As has been well documented and as evidenced by the number of housing bills adopted by the State legislature, the State of California has a housing crisis that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Regardless of differences at the local level, throughout the State there is a recurring theme of a la ck of housing, especially affordable housing. As reflected in the City’s 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report 3, the City will likely not meet its current Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal by 2023, still needing 173 housing units affordab le to very low income households, 93 housing units affordable to low income households, and 97 housing units affordable to moderate income households. Factoring these current shortfalls with the City’s upcoming RHNA allocation for 2023 -2031 of 2,735 total housing units, of which 1,602 are to be affordable to very -low, low, and moderate income households, it is evident the City’s situation is reflective of the overall housing crisis that the California State Legislature has determined constitutes a threat to public health, safety, and welfare for at least the past decade - not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable.

While the City has no obligation to develop housing itself, it does shoulder a responsibility to respond to and address this overall housing shortfall at the local level through adoption of clear and objective development policies, standards , and conditions for the preservation, improvement and development of housing, specifically including the identification of adequate sites for housing4. For the City of San Carlos, the ability to identify adequate sites for housing rests primarily in identifying sites or areas of San Carlos that can be redeveloped with increased density and, in rare circumstances, those where housing can be introduced for the first time.

ANALYSIS:

The Northeast Area, comprising approximately 120 acres of land, is one such rare opportunity where there is a potential to introduce housing as an allowable use within this historically industrial area and thereb y address the City’s share of the regional housing shortfall. The Northeast Area has historically been referred to as the Harbor Industrial Area. The majority of this area (from Belmont Creek to north of Holly Street) was annexed in 1997 after a petition f or annexation was received from over 80 percent of the property owners within the Harbor Industrial Area. This area includes large manufacturing businesses, biotechnical , and biomedical firms, and light and heavy industrial uses. Per the 2030 General Plan, existing land use regulations prohibit housing and strongly discourage commercial, retail, and non -industrial uses in this area.

The City has not developed a plan for this area since it was annexed in 1997. The Northeast Area Specific Plan will provide a unique opportunity to plan for orderly future development and will likely propose new uses to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future, such as residential, commercial, retail, and other non-industrial uses.

The area also has aging infrastructure that, to best plan for new development, needs to be evaluated and addressed. The Northeast Area Specific Plan will prepare guidance for addressing the dated stormwater and sewer infrastructure in the area, as well as responding to

3 http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx
4 Government Code §65583

9.b
Packet Pg. 496
6 the flooding along Belmont Creek and identifying ways for new development to address this issue.

The City is seeing increased interest in this area through recent property sales and acquisitions.

From staff’s experience, property sales, acquisitions, and land consolidations can lead to future development applications. In fact, the City has recently deemed complete an application for two new buildings at 642 Quarry Road that propose 401,072 square feet of research and development space. The City has also receiv ed a preliminary application to develop 200 Industrial Road with two new buildings totaling 650,000 square feet of research and development space. The City anticipates several additional developments of similar size in the next few years.

Based on the fo regoing, and in consideration of the amount of development that has been approved and/or constructed under the 2030 General Plan buildout, development within San Carlos is on a trajectory to exceed the approved General Plan buildout for commercial, office, and industrial uses reflected in Table 1 above. In the absence of an amendment to the General Plan and appropriate environmental review pursuant to CEQA, no other commercial, office, or industrial projects would be able to move forward within the city.

Accordingly, preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, and corresponding amendments to the 2030 General Plan, are needed to address this impending development roadblock. In addition, the Northeast Area Specific Plan will, among other matters, conside r the Northeast Area holistically through study of land uses, specifically including the introduction of housing and affordable housing, as a means to address the City’s share of the Bay Area region’s housing needs.

An example of an issue that will need to be considered as part of the Northeast Area Specific Plan process relates to the potential presence of hazardous substances and the impact on allowable uses. As an example, the property located at the northwest corner of Industrial Road and Taylor Way, 1777 Industrial Way, San Carlos, is owned and operated by Delta Star, a Delaware corporation. This site is currently subject to a Covenant and Agreement 5 (“Covenant”) that was entered into with the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”), on September 23, 1992. The terms of the Covenant prohibit certain uses of the site, including residential uses, hospitals, schools, and day care for children and seniors, due to the presence of hazardous materials (i.e. p olychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”) on a small portion of the site (i.e. a 15’ x 15’ pit). The presence of PCBs in this instance does not mean that the site cannot be remediated to allow for uses that are currently prohibited, and it is likely that any futur e redevelopment and reuse of the site (e.g. residential, commercial, office, etc.) will undoubtedly involve the implementation of remedial measures under the oversight of DTSC for the protection of future site occupants. Nevertheless, it is possible that h azardous substances will be present on other sites within the Northeast Area, and depending on the nature of the contaminant involved and the extent of its impact, both laterally and vertically, it can make it more difficult and expensive to develop a site with more sensitive uses, such as housing, than commercial/office uses. Accordingly, it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to ensure that ad hoc development does not impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area that is “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

5 https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/deliverable_documents/6973508536/Delta.Star.DeedRestrict.pdf

9.b
Packet Pg. 497
7 While staff’s current review of the City’s housing related policies, development standards and conditions (as part of the 2023 -2031 Housing Element Update) indicates that there are adequate sites within the city sufficient to meet its 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, as well as a self- imposed goal of an additional 481 affordable units on top of its 1,602 RHNA allocation, it is doing so primarily through increasing allowable density and building height in areas already determined to be suitable for residential development, and not in reliance on the introduction of housing into new areas of th e city as contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan.

Nevertheless, while the City’s 2023-2031 RHNA allocation may appear to have been addressed (though still subject to review and approval by the State Department of Housing and Community Development), it would be naïve, and contrary to responsible planning, to suggest that now is not the time to lay the groundwork for future residential development that will be continue to be allocated the city during future RHNA cycles. In fact, ‘[ d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels is essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law6. Accordingly, adoption of the Interim Ordinance is necessary to not only prohibit development applications within the city, including the Northeast Area, that would exceed the 2030 General Plan build -out figures, but more importantly to prohibit development proposals within the Northeast Area that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “ supply of land and adequ ate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing.”

Therefore, in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and prohibit the approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or lim it the introduction of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, City staff recommends that the Council adopt an Interim Ordinance imposing a moratorium on the submission, consideration, or approval of applications for:

i. A lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, ii. Design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement, or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and
iii. A building permit required fo r construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

Exceptions to the moratorium to include:

i. Development applications that have been approved as complete or deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance, ii. Building permits for the construction of tenant improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and
iii. A change o f use within a space of an existing building and any associated tenant improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

6 Government Code §65580 (f)

9.b
Packet Pg. 498
8 In accordance with State law, if adopted b y a four -fifths vote of the City Council, the Interim Ordinance will be in effect for an initial forty -five (45) day period 7. Ten days prior to the expiration of the Interim Ordinance (i.e. May 30, 2022), the City Council must issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance8. After providing notice pursuant to Section 65090 of the Government Code and holding a public hearing, by a four-fifths vote of the City Council, the Interim Ordinance may be extended for an additional 22 months and 15 days. This amount of time should be sufficient to allow City staff to select and work with a consulting team to prepare the Northeast Area Specific Plan, 2030 General Plan amendment, and app ropriate environmental review in accordance with CEQA for the Council’s consideration.

If the Interim Ordinance is adopted, development applications that have been submitted and deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance may be proces sed notwithstanding the moratorium. However, since these applicants have no vested right to develop, the Council may decide to apply the Interim Ordinance to their applications and thereby preclude the processing of their application. Currently, the only c omplete application submitted to date for a site within the Northeast Area subject to the Interim Ordinance is for 642 Quarry Road. As currently drafted, the Interim Ordinance would not apply to their application since the application has been deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance.

If the City Council desires to include this development application under the Interim Ordinance, the City Council can direct staff during the meeting to present language to amend the Interim Ordinance accordingly.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:

The adoption of this Interim Ordinance is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the interim ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the en vironment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the interim ordinance is a project as defined in CEQA, the interim ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b)(3) of t he State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the Interim Ordinance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of the interim ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, the adoption of the Interim Ordinance is not subject to CEQA.

CONCLUSION:

The City is on the cusp of exceeding the a pproved build-out figures for commercial, retail, and industrial uses identified and analyzed in the 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR.

Additionally, the City has not developed planning guidance for the Northeast Area since it was annexed in 1997. Thi s proposed Interim Ordinance will provide sufficient time to prepare the Northeast Area Specific Plan, the General Plan amendment, and the appropriate environmental review in accordance with CEQA. The draft Northeast Area Specific Plan, draft General Plan amendment, and CEQA analysis will be brought before the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration in 2024.

7 Government Code §65858 (b)
8 Government Code §65858 (d)

9.b
Packet Pg. 499
9 Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Interim Ordinance. As noted, a four-fifths vote of the City Council is required to enact this Interim Ordinance, which will be in effect for an initial period of 45-days. Ten days prior to the expiration of the Interim Ordinance (i.e. May 30, 2022), the City Council must issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance. Thereafter, it is possible for the City Council to extend the Interim Ordinance for an additional 22 months and 15 days after a duly noticed public hearing.

ALTERNATIVES:

Options available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt an Interim Ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 (b) imposing a moratorium on (i) lot line adjustments and the subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivisio n Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement, or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code. Exceptions to the moratorium to include (i) development applications that have been approved as complete or deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance, (ii) building permits for the construction of tenant improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and (iii) a change of use within space of an existing building and any associated tenant improvements , provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance; or

2. Do not adopt the aforementioned Interim Ordinance; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, AICP
Community Development Director

Gregory Rubens, City Attorney

9.b
Packet Pg. 500
10 Approved for submission by:

_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium

2. List of Approved, Proposed and Anticipated Projects

3. Proof of Public Hearing Notice Publication

9.b
Packet Pg. 501
OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1
ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE SUBMISSION, CONSIDERATION OR

APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR (I) LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS AND THE

SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

CITY OF SAN CARLOS SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, (II) DESIGN REVIEW, USE PERMIT, TEMPORARY USE PERMIT, PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT, ZONING AMENDMENT, WAIVER, VARIANCE, GENERAL PLAN

AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER DISCRETIONARY

APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF A SITE WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS

ZONING ORDINANCE, OR (III) A BUILDING PERMIT REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION

AND/OR ALTERATIONS ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN ENUMERATED EXCEPTIONS.

WHEREAS, the Northeast Area of the City of San Carlos, commonly referred to as the Harbor Industrial Area, comprises approximat ely 120 acres of land and , for purposes of this Interim Ordinance, is more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Northeast Area”); and

WHEREAS, the majority of the Northeast Area was annexed in 1997 after a petition for annexation was received from over 80 percent of the property owners within the Harbor Industrial Area, which area includes large manufacturing businesses, biotechnical and biomedical firms, and light and heavy industrial uses; and

WHEREAS, under the 2030 General Plan and existing land use regulations and applicable zoning, residential, commercial, retail and non -industrial uses in the Northeast Area are prohibited; and

WHEREAS, since the annexation of the Northeast Area in 1997, th e City has not undertaken a comprehensive review and analysis of the long -term plan for physical development focused on the Northeast Area in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of California; and

WHEREAS, since 2015 the City has experienced an unprecedented amount of private sector investment and development in East San Carlos, including business and employment growth in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and thus, in response, in 2021 the City adopted the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan to guide these changes within the area defined by Holly Street, Brittan Avenue, Old County Road, and Highway 101 (the “East Side Innovation District”); and

WHEREAS, since the adoption of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan, the City continues to receive developer interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors; and

WHEREAS, in addition to the aforementioned interest in the East Side Innovation District, the Northeast Area is also experiencing increased develop ment interest as evidenced by recent property sales and acquisitions, and receipt of a complete development application for two new buildings at 642 Quarry Road , proposing 401,072 square feet of research and

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 502
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 2
development space, and a preliminary application to develop 200 Industrial Road with two new buildings totaling 650,000 square feet of research and development space; and

WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, and in consideration of the amount of development that has been approved and/or constructed under the 2030 General Plan buildout, allowable development within the City is nearing capacity and on a trajectory to exceed the level of buildout for commercial, office, and industrial uses planned for and analyzed in the adopted 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR; and

WHEREAS, in the absence of an amendment to the General Plan and appropriate environmental review pursuant to CEQA, future commercial, office, industrial and residential development within the City, including the Northeast Area, will face an impending roadblock; and

WHEREAS, in recognition of these factors, the City Council adopted the City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Plan which contains a goal to create and develop a Northeast Area Specific Plan, stated as follows:

The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life scienc es and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development; and

WHEREAS, on March 28, 2022, consistent with the aforementioned 2022 Strategic Plan goal, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public resources to prepare a specific plan for the Northeast Area, hereinafter the “ Northeast Area Specific Plan ”, and to prepare amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and

WHEREAS, as has been well documented, the State of California has a housing crisis of not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and

WHEREAS, as reflected in the City’s 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report 1, the City will likely not meet its current Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal by 2023, still needing 173 housing units affordable to very low income households, 93 housing units affordable to low income households, and 97 housing units affordable to mo derate income households, and factoring these current needs with the City’s upcoming RHNA allocation for 2023-2031 of 2,735 total housing units, of which 1,602 are to be affordable to very -low, low and moderate income households, it is evident the City’s s ituation is reflective of the overall housing crisis that the California State Legislature has determined constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare for at least the past decade - not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and

WHEREAS, while the City has no obligation to develop housing itself, it does shoulder a responsibility to respond to and address th e overall housing needs at the local level through adoption of clear and objective development policies, standards and conditions for the

1 http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 503
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 3
preservation, improvement and development of housing, specifically including the identification of adequate sites for housing2; and

WHEREAS, for the City of San Carlos, the ability to identify adequate sites for housing rests primarily in identifying sites or areas of the City that can be redeveloped with increased density and, in rare circumstances, those areas where housing can be introduced for the first time; and

WHEREAS, the Northeast Area is one such rare opportunity where there is a potential to introduce housing as an allowable use within this historically industrial area and thereby address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and

WHEREAS, the proposed Northeast Area Specific Plan will provide a plan for orderly future development and anticipates the introduction of new uses to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future, such as residential, commercial, retail, and other non- industrial uses, while also evaluating and addressing the aging storm water and sewer infrastructure, flooding along Belmont Creek and identifying ways for new development within the Northeast Area to address these issues; and

WHEREAS, preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, and corresponding amendments to the 203 0 General Plan, are needed to address these pending development pressures, and it is in the public interest to consider the Northeast Area holistically through study of land uses, specifically including the introduction of housing and affordable housing, a s a means to address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and

WHEREAS, as part of the Northeast Area Specific Plan process the presence of hazardous substances and the impact on allowable uses will need to be analyzed and accounted for because it is more likely than not that hazardous substances will be present on sites within the Northeast Area, and depending on the nature of the contaminant involved and the extent of its impact, it can be more difficult and expensive to develop a site with mo re sensitive uses, such as housing, than commercial/office uses, and accordingly, it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to ensure that ad hoc development does not impair the City’s ability to maximize the area wit hin the North east Area “ suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels;” and

WHEREAS, while the City’s housing related policies, standards and conditions indicates that there exists adequate sites within the City sufficient to meet its 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, as well as a self -imposed goal of an additional 481 affordable units on top of its 1,602 RHNA allocation, it would be contrary to responsible planning to sugge st that now is not the time to lay the ground work for future residential development by “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s h ousing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law3; and

WHEREAS, adoption of the Interim Ordinance is necessary to evaluate anticipated development within the Northeast Area tha t likely will exceed the 2030 General Plan build -out figures in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law , but more

2 Government Code §65583
3 Government Code §65580 (f)

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 504
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 4
importantly to prohibit ad hoc development proposals within the Northeast Area that may conflict with or otherwis e constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “ supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and

WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858 (b) provides that following notice pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and public hearing, the City Council, to protect public safety, health, and welfare, may adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal, such as the Northeast Area Specific Plan, that the City is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time; and

WHEREAS, as previously noted, on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million for the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan and attendant amendments to the 2030 General Plan, and thus the City’s intentions are clear; and

WHEREAS, consideration and approval of development p rojects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan, will only serve to frustrate the City’s ability to advance the City of San Carlos’ Strategic Plan, State housing goals, and the City’s housing goals, there by potentially resulting in ad hoc development that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “ supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and

WHEREAS, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “ supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”, the City Council desires to adopt this interim ordinance to provide the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the North east Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and adopt a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan to ensure the development of a plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development”; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION ONE. PURPOSE AND INTENT

The purpose and intent of this Interim Ordinance is to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and prohibit the ad hoc approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of a mix of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, specifically including housing and affordable housing, which uses are needed in order to address State and City housing goals. Accordingly, the Interim O rdinance provides the City the opportunity to evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and consider the Northeast Area for the purpose of “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 505
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 5

SECTION TWO. FINDINGS

1. The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby incorporates by reference all of the Recitals and footnotes thereto set forth in this Interim Ordinance.

2. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that since its annexation into the City of San Carlos in 1997, a comprehensive, long-term plan, with a focus on the physical development within the Northeast Area, has not been undertaken in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law. Therefore, only light and heavy industrial uses are permitted in the Northeast Area.

Accordingly, the City’s 2030 General Plan and zoning regulations applicable to the Northeast Area currently preclude a greater mix of residential, commer cial, retail and other non -industrial uses which are needed to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future.

3. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that private sector investment and development interest in the City gene rally, and the East Side Innovation District in particular, remains strong, and development pressures are being felt in the Northeast Area . Based on the amount of approved, proposed and anticipated development, the City is on a trajectory to exceed the lev el of build out planned for and analyzed in the 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR. In order to facilitate additional development beyond the 2030 General Plan buildout, either the City will need to undertake a comprehensive planning effort or increment ally analyze ad hoc development applications as they occur.

4. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public funds toward the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, with commensurate amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with CEQA, to undertake a comprehensive, long -term plan for the physical development of the Northeast Area.

5. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that th e City is but a microcosm of the State of California, as there is an overall shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City that is reflective of the statewide shortage, a situation which the State Legislature has declared constitutes a thr eat to public health, safety and welfare in California. The shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City of San Carlos constitutes a threat to the public health, safety and welfare in the City of San Carlos.

6. The City Council of the Ci ty of San Carlos finds that the Northeast Area and its anticipated transformation from exclusively light and heavy industrial uses to a mix of uses represents a unique and rare opportunity for the City to plan in a comprehensive manner the introduction of new uses to this historically industrial area, including residential, commercial, retail and office uses, to meet the needs of the citizens of San Carlos, consider potential constraints on the location of uses (e.g. proximity to freeways and railroads, pre sence of hazardous substances), while also addressing infrastructure needs of the area.

7. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to evaluate development in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop p olicies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development ,” and ensure that ad hoc development does not conflict with, constrain or impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the North east Area “suitable,

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 506
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 6
feasible, and avai lable for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

8. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that , given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the No rtheast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “ supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing, ” the submission, consideration, or approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or a lterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code , will result in a threat to public health, safety and welfare.

9. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that a temporary moratorium prohibiting the submission, consideration, or approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Ma p Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the dev elopment of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or a lterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code , is necessary in order to allow the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specif ic Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development ,” and maximizes the area within the North east Area “ suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

SECTION THREE. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Interim Ordinance, the following terms shall be defined as follows:

1. “Alteration” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

2. “Building” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

3. “Building permit” shall mean all permits governed by Chapter 15.04 of Title 15 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

4. “City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 17 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 507
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 7

5. “Construction” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

6. “Design review” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter

18.29 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

7. “Development” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 1 8.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

8. “Development agreement” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.37 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

9. “General plan amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.34 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

10. “Lot line adjustment” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

11. “Northeast Area” shall mean that geographic area o f the City of San Carlos, comprising approximately 120 acres of land and more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

12. “Planned development ” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.36 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

13. “Planning permit” shall mean a discretionary approval or permit for (i) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (ii) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

14. “San Carlos Zoning Ordinance ” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

15. “Site” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

16. “Subdivision” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

17. “Subdivision Map Act” shall mean those provisions set forth in California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.

18. “Temporary use permit” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.31 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

19. “Use permit,” inclusive of a conditiona l use permit and a minor use permit, shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.30 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 508
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 8

20. “Variance” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.32 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

21. “Waiver” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.33 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

22. “Zoning amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.35 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

SECTION FOUR. APPLICATION; EXCEPTIONS.

This Interim O rdinance shall apply to prohibit the submission, consideration, or approval of applications for (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or a lterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

This Interim Ordinance shall not apply to prohibit the submission, consideration, or approval of (i) an application for planning permit that has been approved as complete or deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance, (ii) building permits for the construction of tenant improvements to space within a n existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and (iii) a change of use within space of an existing building and any associated tenant improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

SECTION FIVE. CEQA DETERMINATION

The City Council finds that adoption of this Interim Ordinance is not a project subject to the requirements of th e California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA ”) because the Interim Ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the Interim Ordinance is a project as defined in CEQA, the Interim Ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b )(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the Interim Ordinance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this Interim Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, the adoption of the Interim Ordinance is not subject to CEQA.

SECTION SIX. SEVERABILITY

Every section, paragraph, clause, and phrase of this Interim Ordinance is hereby declared to be severable. If for any reason, any section, paragraph, clause, or phrase is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the va lidity or constitutionality of the remaining section, paragraphs, clauses or phrases.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 509
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 9

SECTION SEVEN. REPORT

In accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (d), ten days p rior to the expiration of this Interim Ordinance the City Council shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of this ordinance.

SECTION EIGHT. EFFECTIVE DATE

This Interim Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, in accordance with California Government Code section 65858, and it shall continue in force thereafter for a period of forty five (45) days from its date of adoption, unless it is further extended in accordance with applicable law.

SECTION NINE. CODIFICATION

This Interim Ordinance shall NOT be codified in the San Carlos Municipal Code.

*****

I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the forgoing Urgency Ordin ance was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting held on 25th day of April, 2022 by the following vote:

________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

Exhibit A: Northeast Area Depiction

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 510
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) OAK #4883-7277-2636 v1 10
EXHIBIT A.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 511
Attachment: Interim Ordinance - Northeast Area Development Moratorium (Moratorium HIA) Attachment 2: Approved, Proposed, and Anticipated Development Projects (Citywide) Address Applicant Project Type
Demo
Square
Footage
Gross New
Square
Footage
Net New
Square
Footage
Square
Footage
Remaining
from Approved
2030 General
Plan Buildout
(3,437,213 SF)1
Approved Projects2
26 El Camino Real Sitaram Hotel 10,627 59,733 49,106 3,388,107 825/835 Industrial Road Windy Hill Office/R&D 131,187 551,768 420,581 2,967,526 525 Industrial Road RD Olson Hotel 79,680 151,900 72,220 2,895,306 980 Brittan Avenue MBC Office/R&D 16,861 26,561 9,700 2,885,606 777 Industrial Road Honda Car dealership - 47,220 47,220 2,838,386 1091 Industrial Road Premia Office/R&D 40,067 139,000 98,933 2,739,453 1030 Brittan Avenue MBC Office/R&D - 108,143 108,143 2,631,310 655 Skyway Road Centrex Office/hangers 28,740 66,000 37,260 2,594,050 777 Industrial Road Presidio Office/R&D 47,220 120,000 72,780 2,521,270 Proposed Projects3
987 Commercial Street Alexandria Office/R&D 610,907 1,620,774 1,009,867 1,511,403 800 Old County Road Sobrato Office/R&D 29,723 325,473 295,750 1,215,653 405 Industrial Road Menlo Equities Office/R&D 16,445 205,273 188,828 1,026,825 501 Industrial Road Indigo Hotel Hotel 26,000 119,000 93,000 933,825 1021 Howard Avenue Premia Office/R&D 44,812 190,869 146,057 787,768 642 Quarry Road Presidio Office/R&D 80,038 409,810 329,772 457,996 275 Industrial Road PG&E PG&E Expansion 70,710 122,951 52,241 405,755 888 Bransten Road Alexandria Office/R&D 57,068 105,000 47,932 357,823 Anticipated Projects4
200 Industrial Road Minkoff Group Office/R&D 150,828 650,000 499,172 (141,349)

1 Source: City of San Carlos 2030 General Plan EIR – Table 4.10-1 2 An approved project is a development project that has received approval of all necessary permits, including zoning clearance, conditional use permit, minor use permit, temporary use permit, building permit, license, certificate of approval, or other entit lement for development and/or use of property as required by any public agency.
3 A proposed project is a development project for which an application has been submitted and is currently under review. 4 An anticipated project is a development project for which an application is anticipated to be forthcoming, but not yet submitted.

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 512
Attachment: List of Approved, Proposed and Anticipated Projects (Moratorium HIA)

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 513
Attachment: List of Approved, Proposed and Anticipated Projects (Moratorium HIA) This space for filing stamp only

OR#:

O R A N G E C O U N T Y R E P O R T E R

~ SINCE 1921 ~

600 W. Santa Ana Blvd., Suite 205, Santa Ana, California 92701-4542 Telephone (714) 543-2027 / Fax (714) 542-6841

PROOF OF PUBLICATION

(2015.5 C.C.P.)

State of California )
County of Orange ) ss
Notice Type:

Ad Description:

I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of the ORANGE COUNTY REPORTER, a newspaper published in the English language in the City of Santa Ana, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California by the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, under date of June 2, 1922, Case No. 13,421. That the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:

Executed on: 10/10/2004
At Los Angeles, California
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Signature

EXAMINER - ENQUIRER-BULLETIN
303 TWIN DOLPHIN DR #600, REDWOOD CITY, CA 94065
(650) 556-1556
SPEN 3575685

CRYSTAL MUI

CITY OF SAN CARLOS/CITY CLERK
600 ELM ST
SAN CARLOS, CA - 94070

HRG - NOTICE OF HEARING
Northeast Area Moratorium
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of the EXAMINER - ENQUIRER-BULLETIN, a newspaper published in the English language in the city of SAN CARLOS, county of SAN MATEO, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California by the Superior Court of the County of SAN MATEO, State of California, under date 02/25/1946, Case No. 38966. That the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
04/15/2022
04/15/2022

SAN MATEO
!A000005994872!
Email

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 514
Attachment: Proof of Public Hearing Notice Publication (Moratorium HIA)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the San Carlos City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. , or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard, pursuant to authority set forth in California Government Code s ection 65858 (b) and noticed in accordance with California Government Code section 65090, to consider the adoption of an interim ordinance establishing a moratorium on the submission, consideration, or approval of applications for (i) a lot line adjustment and the subdivisi on of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design re view, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, vari ance, general plan amendment, development agreement, or any other discretionary ap proval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the N ortheast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permi t required for the construction of improvements on property within the Northeast Area in accord ance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, excepting building permits for the construction of tenant improvements to existing space occupied by existing uses.

For purposes of the interim ordinance, the Northeast Area that is the subject of this public hearing is all land or sites within the area depicted in the map set forth below. $V LGHQWL¿HG LQ WKH &LW\ RI 6DQ &DUORV¶  6WUDWHJLF *RDOV WKH 1RUWKHDVW$UHD LV SDUW RI WKH (DVWVLGH 3ODQQLQJ ,QLWLDWLYH ZKHUH VLJQL¿FDQW FKDQJH LQ ODQG XVH LV H[SHFWHG WR WKLV predominantly industrial area. Accordingly, in order to guide t he orderly development of WKH 1RUWKHDVW $UHD WKH &LW\ LQWHQGV WR SUHSDUH D VSHFL¿F SODQFDOOHG WKH 1RUWKHDVW $UHD 6SHFL¿F3ODQ7KH1RUWKHDVW$UHD6SHFL¿F3ODQDQGDQ\QHFHVVDU\JHQHUDOSODQDQG]RQLQJ amendments, will be prepared with in-depth community and stakeh older input with the intent WRFRQVLGHUWKH1RUWKHDVW$UHDKROLVWLFDOO\WKURXJKVWXG\RIODQGXVHVVSHFL¿FDOO\LQFOXGLQJWKH LQWURGXFWLRQRIKRXVLQJDQGDႇRUGDEOHKRXVLQJZKLFKXVHLVFXUUHQWO\SURKLELWHGPRELOLW\DQG transit, environmental stewardship, urban design, recreation an d open spaces.7KHUHIRUHLQ order to preserve the future viability of residential developme nt within the Northeast Area in the midst of the Statewide housing crisis, the adoption of the interim ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare by prohibiting the approval and development RI XVHV WKDW PD\ EH LQ FRQÀLFW ZLWK RU RWKHUZLVH FRQVWUDLQ RU OLPLW WKH LQWURGXFWLRQ RI XVHV FRQWHPSODWHGLQWKH1RUWKHDVW$UHD6SHFL¿F3ODQ
7KH DGRSWLRQ RI WKLV LQWHULP RUGLQDQFH LV QRW D SURMHFW VXEMHFW WR WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV RI WKH California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the inter im ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the interim o rdinance is a project as GH¿QHG LQ &(4$ WKH LQWHULP RUGLQDQFH LV H[HPSW IURP HQYLURQPHQWDO UHYLHZ SXUVXDQW WR section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense H[HPSWLRQWKDW&(4$DSSOLHVRQO\WRSURMHFWVZKLFKKDYHWKHSRWHQWLDOIRUFDXVLQJDVLJQL¿FDQW HႇHFWRQWKHHQYLURQPHQWDQGZKHUHDVLQWKHFDVHRIWKHLQWHU LPRUGLQDQFHLWFDQEHVHHQ with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption o f the interim ordinance may have DVLJQL¿FDQWHႇHFWRQWKHHQYLURQPHQWWKHDGRSWLRQRIWKHLQWHULPRUGLQDQFHLVQRWVXEMHFWWR CEQA.
7KH DJHQGD DQG UHOHYDQW PDWHULDOV IRU WKLV LWHP ZLOO EH DYDLODEOH IRU YLHZLQJ RQ WKH &LW\¶V website at KWWS
VDQFDUORVFDLTPFRP RQ$SULO$KDUGFRS\PD\EHREWDLQHGXSRQ UHTXHVW WR WKH &LW\ &OHUN 3OHDVH QRWH WKDW WKLV$SULO   &LW\ &RXQFLO PHHWLQJ ZLOO EH held via teleconference and there will not be a physical location for which the public can attend.

However, the public will have access to remotely observe the meeting and address the Council – details and directions will be available on the agenda.

Questions regarding the proposed interim ordinance may be direc ted to Megan Wooley- Ousdahl, Senior Planner, at [email protected]. Comments may be sent via email to the City Clerk– [email protected] and the City Council– CityCouncil@ cityofsancarlos.org; or mailed to the City Clerk at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070.

All persons interested in the above matter are hereby invited t o participate remotely in this public hearing and be heard. If you challenge this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the pub lic hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk prior to the public hearing.

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
3XEOLFDWLRQ'DWH
$SULO
CNSB#3575685

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 515
Attachment: Proof of Public Hearing Notice Publication (Moratorium HIA)