Marie Gift (Book C968 OR, Page 320). On November 1, 1983 the property was granted to Michael Kohl (Book 1030 OR, Page 103). On January 24, 2014 the property was passed to Michael T. Kohl and Mary D. Martin (Assessor's Property Record #22504294). On February 12, 2019 the property was granted to Lamb Partners LLC (Assessor's Property Record #24115588).
On August 20, 2021 the property was passed to LP Monroe Street LLC, who are the current listed owners.
Period of Significance
For purposes of historic listing, the period of significance for the structure at 930 Monroe Street spans from its original construction in 1905 to 1945. Alterations made to the structure and property after this time include the existing flat-roofed rear addition (circa 1960) as well as the detached garage (originally constructed 1959, the garage burned down in 1970 and was reconstructed in 1971. These alterations made after 1945 were less in keeping with the original architectural style and materials of the structure, and are non-significant.
The period of significance for the structures at 906 Monroe Street/1341 Homestead Road spans from the construction of 906 Monroe Street circa 1898 to 1945. Additions to the property after this period include the erection of the modern pre-fab shed structure to the rear of 906 Monroe Street. These alterations made after 1945 were less in keeping with the original architectural style and materials of the structure, and are non-significant.
Physical Description
Site
The subject area is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Homestead Road and Monroe Street, within the historic Old Quad area of the City of Santa Clara. The proposed project footprint includes parcels APN 269-20-086, 269-20-087, and 269-20-095. The surrounding neighborhood is mixed-use, with a number of both commercial and residential properties, many of which are broadly chronologically and stylistically compatible with the existing residential properties within the proposed project footprint.
Construction Chronology
The following section outlines the construction chronology of the property. The dates for modifications are based upon visual evaluation and other available documentation including building permits and County of Santa Clara Appraiser's Property Records. 1866: Original layout of the lots and sub-lots of the City of Santa Clara 1898: Construction of the residence at 906 Monroe Street 1905: Construction of the residence at 930 Monroe Street 3 C. 1920: Construction of the residence at 1341 Homestead Road 1941: Construction of the retail structure at 950 Monroe Street 1959: Construction of the rear addition at 930 Monroe Street 1959: Construction of the original detached garage at 930 Monroe Street 1970: Destruction of the original detached garage at 930 Monroe Street by fire 1971: Construction of the existing detached garage at 930 Monroe Street Additional modifications and remodels have been made to the interior of the structures, however they do not appear to have had a significant impact on the historic character of the structures as a whole.
Character-defining Features
930 Monroe Street
Constructed in 1905, the structure at 930 Monroe Street is an example of the Dutch Colonial Revival Style. The historic character-defining features of the structure include:
1. The cross-gambrel roof surfaced with wooden shingles
2. The broad and enclosed eaves with boxed rafters
3. The full-length raised front porch supported by cylindrical classical columns and a turned spindle balustrade.
4. The asymmetrically placed bay windows
5. The double-hung sash wooden framed fenestration
906 Monroe Street
Constructed in 1898, the structure at 906 Monroe Street is an example of the Stick/Eastlake Victorian style. The historic character-defining features of the structure include:
1. The steeply pitched hipped roof with asymmetrical cross-gables
2. The narrow and enclosed eaves with boxed rafters
3. The half-length raised front porch supported by turned spindle-work columns.
4. The elaborated bay window along Homestead Road
5. Turned spindle-work brackets and detailing at corners and below the eaves. 1341 Homestead Road
Constructed circa 1920, the structure at 1341 Homestead Road is a modest example of the Spanish Colonial Revival Style. The historic character-defining features of the structure include:
1. The low horizontal profile
2. The shallow-pitched side-gabled roof surfaced with Spanish roof tiles
3. The asymmetrical front facade with large arched window.
4. The small, centrally placed entry porch.
5. The decorative circular vents below the gables
6. The stucco wall cladding
4 Evaluation of Significance
National Register Significance
The National Register of Historic Places was first established in 1966, with major revisions in 1976. The register is set forth in 36 CFR 60 which establishes the responsibilities of the State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO), standards for their staffs and review boards, and describes the statewide survey and planning process for historic preservation. Within this regulation guidelines are set forth concerning the National Register of Historic Places (36 CFR
60.6). In addition, further regulations are found in 36 CFR 63-66, 800, and Bulletin 15 which define procedures for determination of eligibility, identification of historic properties, recovery, reporting, and protection procedures. The National Register of Historic Places was established to recognize resources associated with the accomplishments of all peoples who have contributed to the country's history and heritage. Guidelines were designed for Federal and State agencies in nominating cultural resources to the National Register. These guidelines are based upon integrity and significance of the resource. Integrity applies to specific items such as location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in resources that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and meet at least one of the following criteria:
a. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history;
b. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; c. that embody distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
1. that have yielded, or are likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Integrity is defined in Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service 1982) as:
the authenticity of a property's historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property’s historic or prehistoric period. If a property retains the physical characteristics it possessed in the past then it has the capacity to convey association with historical patterns or persons, architectural or engineering design and technology, or information about a culture or peoples.
5 There are also seven aspects of integrity which are used. These aspects are:
1. location 5. workmanship
2. design 6. feeling
3. setting 7. association
4. materials
None of the structures within the subject area are currently listed in the National Register of Historic Places, in addition, none appear potentially eligible for listing in this register. 930 Monroe Street
The structure at 930 Monroe Street is not associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history (NRHP Criterion A): the structure is not associated with persons of local, state, or national historic significance, thus the structure does not appear to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register under association with significant persons (NRHP Criterion B). The home is a good example of the Dutch Colonial Revival style of architecture, however it does not appear to be a significant enough example to be eligible for listing under NRHP Criterion C. The structure is not likely to yield significant historic information and thus is not potentially eligible for inclusion under NRHP Criterion D. 906 Monroe Street
The structure at 906 Monroe Street is not associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history (NRHP Criterion A): the structure is not associated with persons of local, state, or national historic significance, thus the structure does not appear to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register under association with significant persons (NRHP Criterion B). The home is a good example of the Stick/Eastlake Victorian style of architecture, however it does not appear to be a significant enough example to be eligible for listing under NRHP Criterion C. The structure is not likely to yield significant historic information and thus is not potentially eligible for inclusion under NRHP Criterion D. 1341 Homestead Road
The structure at 1341 Homestead Road is not associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history (NRHP Criterion A): the structure is not associated with persons of local, state, or national historic significance, thus the structure does not appear to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register under association with significant persons (NRHP Criterion B). The home is a modest example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style of architecture, however it does not appear to be a significant enough example to be eligible for listing under NRHP Criterion C. The structure is not likely to yield significant historic information and thus is not potentially eligible for inclusion under NRHP Criterion D. 6 California Register Significance
A cultural resource is considered "significant" if it qualifies as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). Properties that are eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet one or more of the following criteria:
Association 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. Association with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history;
3. Embodying the distinctive characteristics of a type, 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 National Register of Historic Places. Properties that are formally determined eligible for the NRHP are those that are designated as such through one of the federal preservation programs administered by the 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 resource based upon its physical authenticity. An historic cultural resource must retain its historic character or appearance and thus be recognizable as an historic resource. Integrity 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 integrity. It is possible that a cultural resource may not retain sufficient integrity to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places yet still be eligible for listing in the CRHR. If a cultural resource retains the potential to convey significant historical/scientific data, it may be said to retain sufficient integrity for potential listing in the CRHR. 930 Monroe Street
The structure at 930 Monroe Street is not currently listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. In addition, the structure does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under any of the criteria listed above. The home is not associated with any known significant historical events, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 1. No historically significant persons appear to have been associated with the property, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 2. Although the home is an example of the Dutch Colonial Revival style, is not an exceptional or unusual example of this style. Thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 3. In addition, the structure does not appear to have the potential to yield significant historical information, and thus does not appear eligible under criterion 4.
7 906 Monroe Street
The structure at 906 Monroe Street is not currently listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. However, it does appear to qualify as potentially eligible for inclusion in this Register. The home is not associated with any known significant historical events, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 1. No historically significant persons appear to have been associated with the property, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 2. The home is a good example of the Stick/Eastlake Victorian style of architecture. Thus it appears to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 3. In addition, the structure does not appear to have the potential to yield significant historical information, and thus does not appear eligible under criterion 4.
Thus the structure at 906 Monroe Street is potentially eligible for inclusion in the CRHR under criteria 3.
1341 Homestead Road
The structure at 1341 Homestead Road is not currently listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. In addition, the structure does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under any of the criteria listed above. The home is not associated with any known significant historical events, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 1. No historically significant persons appear to have been associated with the property, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 2. Although the home is a modest example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style, is not an exceptional or unusual example of this style. Thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion 3. In addition, the structure does not appear to have the potential to yield significant historical information, and thus does not appear eligible under criterion 4.
City of Santa Clara Historic Preservation and Resource Inventory The Criteria for Local Significance were adopted on April 20, 2004, by the City of Santa Clara City Council.
Qualified Historic Resource
Any building, site, or property in the City that is 50 years old or older and meets certain criteria of architectural, cultural, historical, geographical or archeological significance is potentially eligible.
Criterion for Historical or Cultural Significance
To be historically or culturally significant, a property must meet at least one of the following criterion:
• The site, building or property has character, interest, integrity and reflects the heritage and cultural development of the city, region, state, or nation. • The property is associated with a historical event.
• The property is associated with an important individual or group who contributed in a significant way to the political, social and/or cultural life of the community. 8 • The property is associated with a significant industrial, institutional, commercial, agricultural, or transportation activity.
• A building’s direct association with broad patterns of local area history, including development and settlement patterns, early or important transportation routes or social, political, or economic trends and activities. Included is the recognition of urban street pattern and infrastructure.
• A notable historical relationship between a site, building, or property’s site and its immediate environment, including original native trees, topographical features, outbuildings or agricultural setting.
Criterion for Architectural Significance
To be architecturally significant, a property must meet at least one of the following criterion:
1. The property characterizes an architectural style associated with a particular era and/or ethnic group.
2. The property is identified with a particular architect, master builder or craftsman.
3. The property is architecturally unique or innovative.
4. The property has a strong or unique relationship to other areas potentially eligible for preservation because of architectural significance.
5. The property has a visual symbolic meaning or appeal for the community.
6. A building’s unique or uncommon building materials, or its historically early or innovative method of construction or assembly.
7. A building’s notable or special attributes of an aesthetic or functional nature. These may include massing, proportion, materials, details, fenestration, ornamentation, artwork or functional layout.
930 Monroe Street
The property at 930 Monroe Street is currently listed in the City of Santa Clara Historic Preservation and Resource Inventory. Based upon the results of this evaluation, the residence appears to meet the criteria for Historical and Cultural Significance due to its association with broad patterns of residential development within the City of Santa Clara. It also appears to meet criteria for Architectural Significance including Criterion 1 as an example of early 20th Century Colonial Revival architecture as well as Criterion 7; its cross-gambrel roof is an uncommon feature of this style of architecture. Gambrel roofs are present in only approximately 10% of colonial revival homes, forming a sub-type known as Dutch Colonial Revival. The cross-gambrel roof configuration was a popular pattern book design from approximately 1905 to 1915 (McAlester 1997), but is rare within the local context. 906 Monroe Street
The property at 906 Monroe Street is currently listed in the City of Santa Clara Historic Preservation and Resource Inventory. Based upon the results of this evaluation, the residence appears to meet the criteria for Historical and Cultural Significance due to its association with broad patterns of residential development within the City of Santa Clara. It also appears to meet criteria for Architectural Significance including Criterion 1 as an example of late 19th Century Stick/Eastlake Victorian architecture.
9 1341 Homestead Road
The property at 1341 Homestead Road is not currently individually listed in the City of Santa Clara Historic Preservation and Resource Inventory. However, as a secondary residence on the same parcel as 906 Monroe Street described above, it contributes to the historic character of the property as a whole, adding an early 20th Century element to the late 19th Century primary residence.
Evaluation of Historic Integrity
930 Monroe Street
The residence at 930 Monroe Street has been somewhat modified since its original construction in 1905. However, these modifications do not constitute a significant impact to the integrity of the resource (i.e. the structure retains sufficient integrity to be eligible for inclusion in the local historic resource inventory under multiple criteria).
The seven aspects of integrity for the property are:
• Setting: The structure at 930 Monroe Street retains its setting within the historic Old Quad area of the City of Santa Clara, which retains much of its historic character, including many structures constructed both prior to and roughly contemporaneous with the construction of the residence at 930 Monroe Street, giving it integrity of setting. • Location: The structure remains in its original location as it has not been moved, giving it integrity of location.
• Design: Although some modifications have been made to the structure, the residence at 930 Monroe Street retains many of its original character defining Features (as described above), and retains its integrity of workmanship.
• Materials: The majority of the modifications and additions to the residence at 930 Monroe Street were constructed with materials similar to those utilized in the original construction. Thus the structure retains its integrity of materials.
• Feeling: The modifications made to the structure do not mask its identity as an early 20th Century Dutch Colonial Revival residence, thus the structure retains integrity of feeling.
• Association: Despite some modifications, the structure is recognizably the same residence as occupied by its earliest owners and thus retains its integrity of association.
The structure at 930 Monroe Street has undergone minor modifications to its exterior throughout its history. However, as described above, the structure retains its historic integrity under all seven of the aspects of integrity as outlined in National Register Bulletin 15: setting, location, design, materials, feeling, and association.
10 906 Monroe Street
The residence at 906 Monroe Street has been somewhat modified since its original construction in 1898. However, these modifications do not constitute a significant impact to the integrity of the resource (i.e. the structure retains sufficient integrity to be eligible for inclusion in the local historic resource inventory under multiple criteria) as well as the CRHR.
The seven aspects of integrity for the property are:
• Setting: The structure at 906 Monroe Street retains its setting within the historic Old Quad area of the City of Santa Clara, which retains much of its historic character, including many structures constructed both prior to and roughly contemporaneous with the construction of the residence at 906 Monroe Street, giving it integrity of setting. • Location: The structure remains in its original location as it has not been moved, giving it integrity of location.
• Design: Although some modifications have been made to the structure, the residence at 906 Monroe Street retains many of its original character defining Features (as described above), and retains its integrity of workmanship.
• Materials: The majority of the modifications and additions to the residence at 906 Monroe Street were constructed with materials similar to those utilized in the original construction. Thus the structure retains its integrity of materials.
• Feeling: The modifications made to the structure do not mask its identity as a late 19th Century Stick/Eastlake Victorian residence, thus the structure retains integrity of feeling.
• Association: Despite some modifications, the structure is recognizably the same residence as occupied by its earliest owners and thus retains its integrity of association.
The structure at 906 Monroe Street has undergone minor modifications to its exterior throughout its history. However, as described above, the structure retains its historic integrity under all seven of the aspects of integrity as outlined in National Register Bulletin 15: setting, location, design, materials, feeling, and association.
1341 Homestead Road
The residence at 1341 Homestead Road has been somewhat modified since its original construction circa 1920. However, these modifications do not constitute a significant impact to the integrity of the resource (i.e. the structure retains sufficient integrity to contribute to the historic character of the subject property.
11 The seven aspects of integrity for the property are:
• Setting: The structure at 1341 Homestead Road retains its setting within the historic Old Quad area of the City of Santa Clara, which retains much of its historic character, including many structures constructed both prior to and roughly contemporaneous with the construction of the residence at 1341 Homestead Road, giving it integrity of setting. • Location: The structure remains in its original location as it has not been moved, giving it integrity of location.
• Design: Although some modifications have been made to the structure, the residence at 1341 Homestead Road retains many of its original character defining Features (as described above), and retains its integrity of workmanship.
• Materials: The majority of the modifications and additions to the residence at 1341 Homestead Road were constructed with materials similar to those utilized in the original construction. Thus the structure retains its integrity of materials.
• Feeling: The modifications made to the structure do not mask its identity as an early 20th Century Spanish Colonial Revival residence, thus the structure retains integrity of feeling.
• Association: Despite some modifications, the structure is recognizably the same residence as occupied by its earliest owners and thus retains its integrity of association.
The structure at 1341 Homestead Road has undergone very minor modifications to its exterior throughout its history. However, as described above, the structure retains its historic integrity under all seven of the aspects of integrity as outlined in National Register Bulletin 15: setting, location, design, materials, feeling, and association.
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards) provides the framework for evaluating the impacts of additions and alterations to historic buildings. The Standards describe four treatment approaches: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction. The Standards require that the treatment approach be determined first. This is because a different set of standards apply to each approach. For the residential structures at 930 Monroe Street, 906 Monroe Street, and 1341 Homestead Road, the treatment approach is rehabilitation. The Standards describe rehabilitation as:
In Rehabilitation, historic building materials and character-defining features are protected and maintained as they are in the treatment Preservation; however, an assumption is made prior to work that existing historic fabric has become damaged or deteriorated over time and, as a result, more repair and replacement will be required.
Thus, latitude is given in the Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitation to replace extensively deteriorated, damaged, or missing features using either traditional or substitute materials. Of the four treatments, only Rehabilitation includes an opportunity to make possible an efficient contemporary use through 12 alterations and additions.
The ten standards for rehabilitation are:
2. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Project Impacts
The proposed project impacts include:
930 Monroe Street
Demolition of the existing detached garage (constructed 1971) Demolition of the flat-roofed rear addition to the residence (constructed circa 1960)
Construction of a new two-car garage
13 906 Monroe Street/1341 Homestead Road
- Demolition of an existing detached modern pre-fab shed structure - Construction of a new one-car garage
– landscaping in the front area of 1341 Homestead Road
These modifications are presented in Design drawings by Salvatore Caruso Design Corporation dated October 5, 2022.
Mitigation of Project Impacts
930 Monroe Street
The proposed treatment plan for 930 Monroe Street, as state above, is rehabilitation. The proposed project will require no further mitigation as it follows the Standards, as outlined below:
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
1. The historic usage of the subject structure was as a residence.
2. The proposed project as currently designed retains this usage of the structure
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that exterior modifications are minor, and are classifiable as minimal changes as the distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships of the structure will be retained.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
1. The character defining features of 930 Monroe Street consist of: the crossgambrel roof surfaced with wooden shingles, the broad and enclosed eaves with boxed rafters, the full-length raised front porch supported by cylindrical classical columns and a turned spindle balustrade, the asymmetrically placed bay windows, and the double-hung sash wooden framed fenestration
2. The proposed modifications will not remove any of the distinctive materials and features installed during the period of significance (1905– 1945).
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that. no distinctive materials or features from the period of significance for the residence at 930 Monroe Street (1905-1945) will be removed.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 14 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
1. The residence at 930 Monroe Street exists as a physical record of its time (period of significance between 1905 and 1945), place (the structure’s location within the historic Old Quad area), and use (as a residence) despite minor modifications since its construction in 1905.
2. Based upon the property’s appearance and materials and significance during its period of significance, the proposed project modifications do not add conjectural features (features which may or may not have been present on the structure as originally constructed) nor do they create a false sense of historic development.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no conjectural features will be added, and architectural elements from other structures will not be integrated into the design.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
1. No architectural modifications to the structure appear to have acquired historic significance in their own right.
2. No changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be impacted by the current proposed project.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be impacted.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
1. The character defining features of the residence at 930 Monroe Street consist of: the cross-gambrel roof surfaced with wooden shingles, the broad and enclosed eaves with boxed rafters, the full-length raised front porch supported by cylindrical classical columns and a turned spindle balustrade, the asymmetrically placed bay windows, and the double-hung sash wooden framed fenestration
2. The project plans, as currently proposed will not impact these character- defining features.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that the proposed modifications do not remove any distinctive materials, features, finishes or construction techniques of the residence.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 15 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
1. The proposed project will not replace any historic features.
2. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no significant historic features will be replaced. If necessary, replacement of deteriorated features will be with in-kind materials.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
1. No physical or chemical treatments which may cause damage to historic features are proposed as part of the current project.
2. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no physical or chemical treatments which may cause damage to historic features are proposed as part of the current project. All proposed work will be carried out using materials and chemicals which will not harm the structure or its existing architectural elements.
3. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
1. The subject site is not located within an identified Archaeological zone.
2. Thus the project will not impact any known archaeological resources
3. However, if archaeological resources or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated, with the concurrence of the City of Santa Clara staff, and implemented.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
1. The proposed modifications will have minimal impact on the historic fabric constructed during the period of significance (1905-1945).
2. Additions and modifications to the structure proposed by the current project 16 include: demolition of a non-significant rear addition which does not contribute to the historic character of the structure, demolition of a detached garage constructed in 1971.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that these proposed modifications do not represent a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historical resource, as they do not significantly impact any of the architectural defining features of the residence.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
1. The proposed modifications could be removed in the future without impact to the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
2. The project proposes the following additions: construction of a new two-car detached garage.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that the proposed modifications could be removed in the future with little or no impact to the character defining features that date within the period of significance (1905-1945).
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 906 Monroe Street
The proposed treatment plan for 906 Monroe Street, as state above, is rehabilitation. The proposed project will require no further mitigation as it follows the Standards, as outlined below:
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
1. The historic usage of the subject structure was as a residence.
2. The proposed project as currently designed retains this usage of the structure
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that exterior modifications are minor, and are classifiable as minimal changes as the distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships of the structure will be retained.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 17 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
1. The character defining features of 906 Monroe Street consist of: The steeply pitched hipped roof with asymmetrical cross-gables, the narrow and enclosed eaves with boxed rafters, the half-length raised front porch supported by turned spindle-work columns, the elaborated bay window along Homestead Road, turned spindle-work brackets and detailing at corners and below the eaves.
2. The proposed modifications will not remove any of the distinctive materials and features installed during the period of significance (1898– 1945).
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that. no distinctive materials or features from the period of significance for the residence at 906 Monroe Street (1898-1945) will be removed.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
1. The residence at 906 Monroe Street exists as a physical record of its time (period of significance between 1898 and 1945), place (the structure’s location within the historic Old Quad area), and use (as a residence) despite minor modifications since its construction in 1898.
2. Based upon the property’s appearance and materials and significance during its period of significance, the proposed project modifications do not add conjectural features (features which may or may not have been present on the structure as originally constructed) nor do they create a false sense of historic development.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no conjectural features will be added, and architectural elements from other structures will not be integrated into the design.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
1. No architectural modifications to the structure appear to have acquired historic significance in their own right.
2. No changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be impacted by the current proposed project.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be impacted.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 18 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
1. The character defining features of the residence at 906 Monroe Street consist of: the steeply pitched hipped roof with asymmetrical cross-gables, the narrow and enclosed eaves with boxed rafters, the half-length raised front porch supported by turned spindle-work columns, the elaborated bay window along Homestead Road, turned spindle-work brackets and detailing at corners and below the eaves.
2. The project plans, as currently proposed will not impact these character- defining features.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that the proposed modifications do not remove any distinctive materials, features, finishes or construction techniques of the residence.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
1. The proposed project will not replace any historic features.
2. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no significant historic features will be replaced. If necessary, replacement of deteriorated features will be with in-kind materials.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
1. No physical or chemical treatments which may cause damage to historic features are proposed as part of the current project.
2. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no physical or chemical treatments which may cause damage to historic features are proposed as part of the current project. All proposed work will be carried out using materials and chemicals which will not harm the structure or its existing architectural elements.
3. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
1. The subject site is not located within an identified Archaeological zone.
2. Thus the project will not impact any known archaeological resources
3. However, if archaeological resources or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters of the find until 19 it can be evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated, with the concurrence of the City of Santa Clara staff, and implemented.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
1. The proposed modifications will have minimal impact on the historic fabric constructed during the period of significance (1898-1945).
2. Additions and modifications to the structure proposed by the current project include: demolition of a non-significant pre-fab shed of recent construction.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that these proposed modifications do not represent a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historical resource, as they do not significantly impact any of the architectural defining features of the residence.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
1. The proposed modifications could be removed in the future without impact to the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment.
2. The project proposes the following additions: construction of a new one-car detached garage.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that the proposed modifications could be removed in the future with little or no impact to the character defining features that date within the period of significance (1898-1945).
5. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 20 1341 Homestead Road
The proposed treatment plan for 1341 Homestead Road as state above, is rehabilitation. The proposed project will require no further mitigation as it follows the Standards, as outlined below:
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
1. The historic usage of the subject structure was as a residence.
2. The proposed project as currently designed retains this usage of the structure.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that exterior modifications are minor, and are classifiable as minimal changes as the distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships of the structure will be retained.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
1. The character defining features of 1341 Homestead Road consist of: the low horizontal profile, the shallow-pitched side-gabled roof surfaced with Spanish roof tiles, the asymmetrical front facade with large arched window, the small, centrally placed entry porch, the decorative circular vents below the gables, the stucco wall cladding.
2. The proposed modifications will not remove any of the distinctive materials and features installed during the period of significance (1920– 1945).
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that. no distinctive materials or features from the period of significance for the residence at 1341 Homestead Road (1920-1945) will be removed.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
1. The residence at 1341 Homestead Road exists as a physical record of its time (period of significance between 1920 and 1945), place (the structure’s location within the historic Old Quad area), and use (as a residence) despite minor modifications since its construction circa 1920.
2. Based upon the property’s appearance and materials and significance during its period of significance, the proposed project modifications do not add conjectural features (features which may or may not have been present on the structure as originally constructed) nor do they create a false sense of historic development.
21 3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no conjectural features will be added, and architectural elements from other structures will not be integrated into the design.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
1. No architectural modifications to the structure appear to have acquired historic significance in their own right.
2. No changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be impacted by the current proposed project.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be impacted.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
1. The character defining features of the residence at 1341 Homestead Road consist of: the low horizontal profile, the shallow-pitched side-gabled roof surfaced with Spanish roof tiles, the asymmetrical front facade with large arched window, the small, centrally placed entry porch, the decorative circular vents below the gables, the stucco wall cladding
2. The project plans, as currently proposed will not impact these character- defining features.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that the proposed modifications do not remove any distinctive materials, features, finishes or construction techniques of the residence.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
1. The proposed project will not replace any historic features.
2. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no significant historic features will be replaced. If necessary, replacement of deteriorated features will be with in-kind materials.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 22 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
1. No physical or chemical treatments which may cause damage to historic features are proposed as part of the current project.
2. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that no physical or chemical treatments which may cause damage to historic features are proposed as part of the current project. All proposed work will be carried out using materials and chemicals which will not harm the structure or its existing architectural elements.
3. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
1. The subject site is not located within an identified Archaeological zone.
2. Thus the project will not impact any known archaeological resources
3. However, if archaeological resources or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated, with the concurrence of the City of Santa Clara staff, and implemented.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
1. The proposed modifications will have minimal impact on the historic fabric constructed during the period of significance (1920-1945).
2. Additions and modifications to the structure proposed by the current project include: demolition of a non-significant pre-fab shed of recent construction and addition of minor landscaping along the front facade of the residence.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that these proposed modifications do not represent a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historical resource, as they do not significantly impact any of the architectural defining features of the residence.
4. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard. 23 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
1. The proposed modifications could be removed in the future without impact to the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
2. The project proposes the following additions: construction of a new one-car detached garage and addition of minor landscaping along the front facade.
3. These proposed changes are consistent with the standard in question, in that the proposed modifications could be removed in the future with little or no impact to the character defining features that date within the period of significance (1920-1945).
6. Therefore, based on these facts, the project is consistent with this standard.
Thus, as described above, the proposed project as currently designed is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and no further recommendations are being made.
Sincerely,
Robert Cartier, Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
RC/dj
24 Appendix A: Bibliography
25 Bibliography
Appraiser's Office, County of Santa Clara
1971 Appraiser's property records for the property at 930 Monroe Street.
Chicago Title Company
2019 Preliminary Report on the Property at 930 Monroe Street in Santa Clara.
Douglas, J.
1993 Historical Footnotes of Santa Clara Valley. San Jose Historical Museum Association, San Jose.
EAA Newsletter
2013 July 2013 Newsletter of the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), July 2013.
Hoover, M. et al
1966 Historic Spots in California. Stanford University Press, Stanford California.
Loomis, P.
1977 Article on Marvin Gibson, in Signposts, San Jose Mercury News, September 2, 1977.
McAlester, V. and L. McAlester
1997 A Field Guide to American Houses. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Mission College
2019 Von Raesfeld Family Fire Tower Dedication. Article dated September 12, 2019 at https://missioncollege.edu/news/press/releases_2020/2019-09-12- vonraesfeld.html
Sawyer, E.
1922 History of Santa Clara County, California. Historical Record Company, Los Angeles
Thompson & West
1876 Historical Atlas of Santa-Clara County, California. Thompson & West, San Francisco.
US Department of the Interior
1990 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
US Department of the Interior
1982 Bulletin 15 - "How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.
Whiffen, Marcus
1992 American Architecture since 1780, Revised Edition. The MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.
26 APPENDIX B:
PROJECT MAPS
27 28
I ~
- . . E STIRIEIET PIROJ ECT I
29 !44-4" 1422 4 08
._-+-__........,,._,____,•g>
42 29.50
69. 0
g 40
-
0 I()
..-i
"-I l'i E: ,t" ...:
o 49,75
t.l
,;r, 11
.., 44 43 ~
-.J
-
-
.-
----
"'
c..
7tl ?.:5-
RTY
S
TREET
.;.
0.259 A,'C
PLAN.
- 40. 2
- IJ56- - J.J3{1-
- LJ.JB- - 1$ 46- - ·i.348-
83 84
- - §2
1 ..........
---2 - ....J..._ _ ___ _
El
91}
'In
"'
IROAD
PROJECT
AREA
. 52.50
0.180
A!C
PLA,N. .95 ,., -..., ~ A - - ~
ST. IIACA110N
RES. 81JJ
40'
LaJ
0 0::
z
10 :I
(ij)
APPENDIX C:
PROPOSED PROJECT PLANS
SALVATORE CARUSO DESIGN CORPORATION
OCTOBER 5, 2022
30 VIEW FROM MONROE ST
3 STORY 4 STORY
3 STORY 6 STORY
URBAN FORM FRAMEWORK AS SHOWN ON PAGE 45 OF THE SANTA CLARA DOWNTOWN
PRECISE PLAN
6 STORY
6 STORY
SCDC
AlrnITlECTUlffi
!001FBIDED
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION 911ELCAMOOl£Al,flOO,W.TAa..w,C'.l.!SQlO Ill. Ma. (Ol9!l-07 • FAX.Ma.(,Q)99Ml!I
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~Mro.'ROOST
W.TAll.AkA.CAmsll
'"'""''-~'"'""'"·""- . . .......... O,TNl""'1 ..._ .. _,,.,~ ..
INSPIRATION
IMAGES
A0.2
----------------------------------------------------------------~--- i I
f---------------------~
. i
I 1· I 269-20-083
. i I .
L--------------------7
I .
. I
I .
. I
I . . I
~ = ~-~~~~---------------------~
MONROE
CD EXISTING SITE PLAN
269-20-086
052/22588
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi llN'IBlmDED
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
911ELCAMOOl£Al,flOO,W.TAa..w,C'.l.!lO!O
Ill. Mo. (,Ql911-Q7 • FAX.Mo.(,Q)99Mlll
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~Mro.lOOST
W.TACUlA.CA9mo
EXISTING
SITE PLAN
A1.0
~---------
1 i
i
i I
f-------------------~
' i
I i I i I ,
L------------------7
I ,
, I
I ,
, I
I ,
..... , I
rm+--====;-r-:r----""'-'-------7-------------------7
i
'------r-,-~--c_.r
CD PROPOSED SITE PLAN
i
_j
L_ _______________________ _
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi llN'IBlmDED
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
911ELCAMOOl£Al,flOO,W.TAa..w,C'.l.!lO!O
Ill.Mo.(,Ql911-Q7 • FAX.Mo.(,Q)99Mlll
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~Mro.lOOST
W.TACUlA.CA9mo
PROPOSED
SITE PLAN
A1.1 --~ --
:State o.t ca111orn1a - 1 no Hoiources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HABS __ Ht_ER~ NR __ SHL __ Loe __ UTM: A /Opf!~J,7'70 8
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY C _______ D
IDENTIFICATION
1. Common name : ----------~---------------------
Historic name :-----.---,.---,---,----,,..,......---------------------- 13ij I Ho0-1<1 s+<>ccl y.,J.
Street or rural address: _9_0_6_M_o_n_r_o_e_S_t_r_e_e_t ____________ ~-------- Citv,_ __ S_a_n_t_a_C_l_a_r_a _______ Zip _9_S_O_S_O ___ County Santa Clara Parcel number: __ ·_·~_6_9_-_~_l_-_:9_8_...s::;l:::..6=---:.'J_·-_;::~~\ ~-C~~_.'j ______________ _ Present Owrier: Elaine Gift Address: ___ 3_8_8_1_K_e_n_s_1_· _n_t_o_n __ City __ s_a_n_t_a_C_l_a_r_a _____ Zip 9 505 lownership is: Public ____ Private _x ____ _
6. Present Use: Residential Original use: Single Family Residential ------------- DESCRIPTION 7a. Architecwral style: Stick/Eastlake Victorian'
7b. Briefly describe the present physical description of the site or structure and describe any major alterations from its original condition: 906 Monroe Street is a 1~ story wooden residence designed on a rectangular plan in an eastlake design. The steeply hipped ro6f is punctuated by 2 off set gables and a fropt facing, hipped dormer. The roof is sheathed in asphalt shingles and furth_E?r · accented by a tall, brick chimney.
The roof extends in a shed form over an entry porch. The residence is sheathed in wide ship lap and patterned shingles. Plain wooden facing has been :::1 added to the rear. The large plain frieze and corner boards accent the stick 'detailing of the residence, while the profusion of spindles, pendents, carved brackets and decorated tunn posts emphasize the eastlake qualities in the . structure's design. _, The side gable covers an angled bay, while the front facing gable covers a squared bay • . The southeast. corner of the building .has been cut out and ornamented with a spindle screen, large brackets and pendent to repeat . the forms of the angled bay. Fenes,tration is simple, rectangular in shape_ and aouble hung. The paire~ sq~re windows under the side gable . are of cas~ment design. The front stair is composed of 7 wooden steps, 5 carv~d turnposts, simple railing and twin ornamented newel posts.
A smaller wooden stair is also found on the south facing side. The ' enclosed orch and side s'tair do not a ear on the ea.'i:liest Sanborn maps with the eing an Attach Photo(s) Hereobvious. al_teration a 1. t~nstruction date: latter being executed earlier. modification~ .·, ., : , -. ". ·_. ·. . { 1 Estimated -1890 Fact~al __ _ ,:<: ; . ' '.!•;•;. _.:;_····=·~·<:.:· .... :
.I:·
.--..·. · . .
i
r ... ; :-0-...
r . - < • .• -.. I •
'
, 'I:
9. Architect ___ . ~UJ..!.n.i::,.k,._. ___ _
10. Builder __ _:U!,!Jn_uk~ • .__ ___ _
- 11. · Approx. property size (in feet) -- Fro~tage 5 2 Depth 15 2 or apprnx. acreage _____ _
12. Date (s) of enclosed photograph (s)
April 24, 1979
13. Condition: Excellent -~Good __ Fair __ Deteriorated __ No longer in existence
14. Alterations: Enclosed rear porch, side entry and stairs of ehru·gtt unt!Q:: s~c il \?-n 610U c,t !Yt!I 1f~,._"'~tr1, v..~-~.-,,·.t f.A},.--l,(},.
15. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary) Open land _ Scattered buildings __ Densely built-up _ _ _ Residential ~Industrial __ Commercial~ Other:
16. Threats to site: None known _Pr1ate ff°.lopment __ Zoning ~ Vandalism Public Works project __ Other: _r_a __ 1._c ____ ________________ _
17. Is the structure: On its original site? __ _ Moved? __ _ Unknown? _x __ _
18. Related features: ___________ ..;.... ____________________ _
SIGNIFICANCE
19. Briefly stat~ historical and/or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons associated with the site.) The site is significant due primarily to its architectural style. The rich ornamentation of both stick and eastlake details, which are very well maintained in the residence, provides the old quad area of Santa Clara with one of its major late Victorian gems. The residence appears virtually identical in plan to the stracture as shown in the 1901 Sanborn map. Two alterations exist from the turn-of~the century house plan. The rear porch is not enclosed as it is today and there is no side entry and stair in the 1901 plan as exists in todays structure. The earliest directory consulted lists the house owned and occupied by Mrs. Dora Brock from 1912 to 1922.
From 1923 through 1945 W~E. DeSoto and later his widow, Louise, owned and occupied the residence. M:i::-i.BeSoto was a glazier. The house changed hands often during the late '40 's and '50 's. The last directory consult.ed lists the occupant as Gallagher Kieran in 1961.
' .. ... :.
20. ' Main them~ of the historic resource: (l'fmor~ th~•n one is checked, number in order of importance.) :
Architectuf.l: ' ' X ' ,, A~ & leisure-' _- _ -____ _
_ Economic/Industrial ·_' _' ··expl~ration'/Settlement __ _ Governm~nt . ', ,:, - Military _ · _ -" _· _ ____,,----- .. - R~ligco'n -- , ,:,). ,, :Sociai/Educat10n ,,_ .. _, _ ,: --- ., : .'·' .. j ' . .,. , _, ;. · .:. ;. ,, -' :. -~· ':, : . . . ~ ,. . .. ~ . • . ' '"; ' ;· ... . ...... ~ ' . I ;· . '. i ... ~' ' l ; • ..,. : : ' • · : .' ; • . 21. Sources (List books, documents, surve·ys, personal interviews j@ their d~tf~- Sanborn In~urance Map - ·- l~0l, 1~ 5 and 1939. 1 . Polks··:City Directories 1912, 1922, 923, .1923, 1944, 1945, 1947, 1949, 1959, and 1961. ,, ... - ,
22. Date form prepared • NOV~ l~f . ; 9 8 ~ - By (name) Dubach/Z_vl __ 1_ o_ URC Organization for the . City of Santa Cla
Address: . 1500 Warburton
City Santa Clara Zip 9 5050
Phone: (408) 984-3111
OFFICE OF THE
CITY CLERK/CITY AUDITOR
EXTRACT OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE CITY
OF SANTA CLARA FOR MEETING HELD ON JUNE 23, 1998
CITY HALL
1500 WARBURTON AVE.
SANTA CLARA, CA 96050 (408) 964-3140
FAX (408) 241-8771
..................... "MOTION was made by Arno, seconded and unanimously carried (Diridon and Gillmor absent), that, per the Director of Planning and Inspection (6/9/98), the Council approve and authorize execution of Historic Property Preservation Agreements (Mills Act) with Michael Kohl and Mary Denise Martin for the property located at 864 Madison Street and with Michael Kohl for the property located at 906 Monroe Street which will qualify the properties for tax incentives . . " ..................................................................................................... . i, Iii£': u11defs1gned Cny Clerk of the Cily of
Sant& Clara, do ~1e1eby certify that the above
and to1 egoing is a true and correct copy of
an Excerpt of the Minutes of a meeting of the
City Council of the City of Santa Clara, held
on
kohl
HOTOGMPHY & VIDEO ______ ____;__ ___ _
~~~l
'fi_l4 fr rv 1-Jp f-#_ ~~
/J-.-:f,ri,-~ >~~~J-?~
~ /i'--fJ-Z- ~ I 3 '-/ t t-/.n.--, ~ · - yr,_Je... C / ~ c;,,_ ,..
01 .... ~ ~ ~ (}.LW &j'~~7ot~S1- f ~~ _) 0 -- , & /~ '-II f-/,,,;t...e)~• I 11 "> - L;;-•..• u ~ ., J-« 1 s c ~ · .
(A)e),p,2~/ ~ • - ./ ... ,._ JI.~
'Z-V<>'Z., :J..:,O--t - 5~ ( /1..P,-<,v-~• ,. <j<){;
Zoo~,. i.ou ~ , , · IS \/ /
,2o o S- l,;O(; C - P //.-(~ 1 · ~ 0 { e;,_ Yt G f.J. , . f7'V 2 oo G - le) or · 1 • r > c.../ t t= y: / 1
7-vo 7 ;_ 'LGJI.J 't f Af /2T , ;i Iv r ~le r'o ~ . o-( ~ t 7 t-1- 20 'i> 7 - 1if'O 2t> I b ~ ../2,V 1• .ew-, 7' (/ W,,.. ~ /V¥ f /o y..ea.-> 'f1..w/14-£1Ac:f~0~i1:J~
~ &.._ ¥ (1/.Cv~ ~ri--+~
p.e4 it>}µ_,._,),~, ~~tr, ~(.de-
~ f /~ ~ _ c.J.u--o.-t_ .
. -,~~ . ; (~~
906 Monroe Street, Santa Clara, CA 9505 (408) 985-7676 Fax (408) 247-2948 __ ___J kohl
HOTOGMPHY & VIDEO _______ ____,
~ G--{~ 7-r7-o:r ,
f~~ ~ ~~t~ '(.'7 ' ~ ~ ~ {l.l(_ ~ ~ --f-c)Vl. U)tJ 6 f ~~--tr~ ~ ~ {,v 2.oo'l)_ 4-, f1'cJ (h,//{ A,:,-k
7~1-J~-~ .. . 2.l)0/, - ~ ~ p~ fv ~~~2oor
'2c.J)~ -- • • . - .. . • ,.
o,-~~ ~4 ~ ~ b~nj
~~+~h-Qh/J
q iH, , f1 - st-. - z.. °' _ '4,,,-?-,..- -1. f-:; f--- p~ +(e-,,r o.,,,.,;) Zvo? > ~ Ws L-., /~~ r A;e...., 2-,uo ~ U .....
~
1.tt., 'i1 ,. /1/~
Kl 4 ~ 1 Plc:-vv
~
~
('3<..I( {~~~ - 7-.D)O G - ~~ 'hi p ~ f- tp4--vv,fr:~efZY7:
c,uJ,- - i,,c)c), tf,v ..()/,-,..., ~ ~
').. U'O <i, - ? ? ? f e.JS ~' b,e,,_ p-u..; T- 6",l'v ()~r-i-- ~ •f!E)J l-~ Wtf ~,
906 Monroe Street, Santa Clara , CA 95050 (408) 985-7676 Fax (408). 247-2948 ___ __.
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]
Attn: Mr. Randy Lamb June 24, 2020
Lamb Partners, LLC
535 Middlefield Road, Suite 190
Menlo Park, CA 94025
C/O: Salvatore Caruso Design Corporation
RE: HISTORIC EVALUATION OF THE RESIDENCE AT 930 MONROE STREET IN
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Dear Mr. Lamb;
As per your request our firm is submitting the enclosed historical evaluation of the property at 930 Monroe Street in the City of Santa Clara. Based upon the requirements of the City of Santa Clara, a methodology was designed which included the following services:
- a visual description of the structure including general appearance, condition, and architectural style
- photography of the structure
- documentation of property ownership history
- an evaluation of the structure using the criteria of the City of Santa Clara, the National Register of Historic Places, and the California Register - State Historic Resources Evaluation forms (DPR) 523 for the structure
Based upon the results of this investigation, it was determined that the property at 930 Monroe Street is not currently listed on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) or the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and does not appear eligible for listing in these registers. However, the structure is listed in the City of Santa Clara Historic Preservation and Resource Inventory. The structure appears to retain its eligibility for listing in this register, as an example of the uncommon Dutch Colonial Revival style of architecture. This eligibility is based upon the structural characteristics of the home, and is not closely tied to the specific location of the residence. This evaluation was completed during the COVID-19 related Shelter in Place Order for the County of Santa Clara. Certain archival sources were unavailable at this time.
However, available sources were sufficient to determine that the subject property appears to meet multiple local criteria.
The proposed project calls for relocation of the existing residences at 930 and 906 Monroe Street and demolition of the adjacent retail plaza (906 Monroe and the retail plaza were not evaluated as part of this report). Proposed new construction on the properties consists of a 61 unit housing project. Thus it is recommended that the residence be relocated to a new lot within the City of Santa Clara in a neighborhood context consistent with the general chronology of the home.
Sincerely,
Robert Cartier, Ph.D.
RC/dj Principal Investigator
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 _27 Resource Name or # ____930 Monroe Street_____ P1. Other Identifier: ___Clarence Bjorlie House____________________________________________________ P2. Location: ____ Not for Publication __x_ Unrestricted *a. County ___Santa Clara___ and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: San Jose West, CA Date: 2018 T ; R ; 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec ; BM c. Address: 930 Monroe Street City: Santa Clara, CA Zip:95050 d. UTM: 10S 5 93 177mE/41 33 972mN
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) APN: 269-20-087
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries.) The structure at 930 Monroe Street is a two story Dutch Colonial Revival style residence in good condition. The original structure is roughly rectangular, with a somewhat offset square addition to the rear. A cross-gambrel roof is the most notable aspect of the architecture. A shed roof covers the rear addition. The roof is surfaced with wooden shingles.
The eaves are broad and enclosed, with boxed rafters. Exterior walls are surfaced with narrow horizontal siding, painted red with white trim. A raised porch extends the full length of the front façade, supported by cylindrical classical columns and a turned spindle balustrade.
See Continuation Sheet, Page 4
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes.) HP03: SFR, HP04: Ancillary structures *P4. Resources Present: x_Building __Structure __Object __District __Element of District __Site __Other P5a. Photo or drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, objects.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) View of the front facade of 930 Monroe Street
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources
Historic X Prehistoric Both
Constructed 1905 based on County of Santa Clara
Appraiser's data.
*P7. Owner and Address:
Lamb Partners, LLC
535 Middlefield Road, Suite 190
Menlo Park, CA 94025
*P8. Recorded by:
Robert Cartier
Archaeological Resource Management
496 North 5th Street
San Jose, CA 95112
*P9. Date Recorded: June 24, 2020
*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
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page _ 2 _ of _27 *NRHP Status Code _________________________ *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) ____930 Monroe Street_____ B1. Historic Name: ________Dora T. Gibson Residence______________________________________________ B2. Common Name: ________930 Monroe Street_____________________________________________ B3. Original Use: _____residence____ B4. Present Use: ______ residence_____ *B5. Architectural Style: ______Dutch Colonial Revival_________ *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Based upon visual evaluation and available documentation, the residence at 930 Monroe Street was constructed in 1905.
Building permits for the property include BP# 1943-1261 from May 20, 1943. This permit is listed as “erect family room” and appears to refer to internal modifications. BP# 1959-17493 (January 30, 1959) is listed as remodeling and construction of the garage (this original detached garage burned down in 1970), the rear addition may also have been erected around this time. BP# 1960-19422 (February 23, 1960) appears to relate to the same project as above. BP# 1970-1125 (November 1970) was for reconstruction of the garage. BP#1974-42539 (May 17, 1974) was for alterations and remodeling to the home. BP# 1998-119730 (October 5, 1998) is described as a kitchen and half-bath remodel.
BP#2003-05826 (July 7, 2003) was for installation of a doughboy pool and spa. *B7. Moved? _x_ No ___ Yes ___ Unknown Date: _______ Original Location: __________________ *B8. Related Features:
Also present on the property is a detached garage constructed in 1971 based upon County of Santa Clara Appraiser’s property records. This structure features a front-gabled roof surfaced with composition shingles. The exterior walls are surfaced with stucco, painted light blue with a beach theme mural.
B9a. Architect: _____unknown_______ b. Builder: _______MacMillian (1943 addition)_________ *B10. Significance: Theme _____architecture and shelter____ Area _____Santa Clara, CA______ Period of Significance ____Early 20 th
C.___ Property Type __private residential__ Applicable Criteria __N/A_____ The subject property makes up a portion of Lot 3, Block 1 South, Range 4 West as shown on the “Map of Lots and Sublots of Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California” from July of 1866 (Volume B of Maps, Page 103, see Page 26 of this report). Based upon County of Santa Clara Appraiser’s property records, the subject structure was constructed in 1905.
The earliest known resident of the home was Dora T. Gibson (widow of Marvin Gibson), who is listed at this address in 1907 (Polk Directory). Dora was listed at 930 Monroe Street in 1920. By 1940, the property was the home of Clarence and Marjorie Bjorlie, who is listed at this address in the U.S. Census of that year.
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: ______6/24/2020____________
(This space reserved for official comments.)
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________ LOCATION MAP Trinomial ________________________________ Page _3_ of _27 Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) ____930 Monroe Street______ __ *Map Name: ___San Jose East, CA__________ *Scale: ___7.5 minute__ *Date of Map: __2018_____ DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _4_ of _27 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) _____930 Monroe Street_______ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 06/24/20 X Continuation Update Continued from P3a:
The front and southern facades also feature asymmetrically placed window bays. Fenestration throughout the structure is primarily wooden framed in a double-hung sash configuration. The interior of the home is in good condition, although heavily modified from its original form. The living room includes a set of built-in cabinets which appear original. The majority of other fixtures and appliances are modern.
Continued from B10:
Based on City of Santa Clara Building Permit #1959-17493, by 1959 the home was owned by Donald R. Von Raesfeld Jr., and Jocyline M. Von Raesfeld. Donald Von Raesfeld, Jr. is the son of Donald Von Rasfeld (Senior), who served as City Manager of Santa Clara from 1960 to 1985, and a City Council member from 1988 to 1992. Donald Jr. was a long time driver for the Valley Transit Authority (VTA). He also served on the Board of Directors and as Membership Chairman of the San Jose Chapter of the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA). The Von Raesfelds’ owned the property until its recent purchase by Lamb Partners, LLC.
City of Santa Clara Criteria for Local Significance
The Criteria for Local Significance were adopted on April 20, 2004, by the City of Santa Clara City Council.
Qualified Historic Resource
Any building, site, or property in the City that is 50 years old or older and meets certain criteria of architectural, cultural, historical, geographical or archeological significance is potentially eligible.
Criterion for Historical or Cultural Significance
To be historically or culturally significant, a property must meet at least one of the following criterion:
• The site, building or property has character, interest, integrity and reflects the heritage and cultural development of the city, region, state, or nation.
• The property is associated with a historical event.
• The property is associated with an important individual or group who contributed in a significant way to the political, social and/or cultural life of the community. • The property is associated with a significant industrial, institutional, commercial, agricultural, or transportation activity.
• A building’s direct association with broad patterns of local area history, including development and settlement patterns, early or important transportation routes or social, political, or economic trends and activities. Included is the recognition of urban street pattern and infrastructure. • A notable historical relationship between a site, building, or property’s site and its immediate environment, including original native trees, topographical features, outbuildings or agricultural setting.
Criterion for Architectural Significance
To be architecturally significant, a property must meet at least one of the following criterion:
1. The property characterizes an architectural style associated with a particular era and/or ethnic group.
2. The property is identified with a particular architect, master builder or craftsman.
3. The property is architecturally unique or innovative.
4. The property has a strong or unique relationship to other areas potentially eligible for preservation because of architectural significance.
5. The property has a visual symbolic meaning or appeal for the community.
6. A building’s unique or uncommon building materials, or its historically early or innovative method of construction or assembly.
7. A building’s notable or special attributes of an aesthetic or functional nature. These may include massing, proportion, materials, details, fenestration, ornamentation, artwork or functional layout.
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _5_ of _27 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) _____930 Monroe Street_______ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 06/24/20 X Continuation Update The property at 930 Monroe Street is currently listed in the City of Santa Clara Historic Preservation and Resource Inventory. Based upon the results of this evaluation, the residence appears to meet the criteria for Historical and Cultural Significance due to its association with broad patterns of residential development within the City of Santa Clara. It also appears to meet criteria for Architectural Significance including Criterion 1 as an example of early 20th Century Colonial Revival architecture as well as Criterion 7; its cross-gambrel roof is an uncommon feature of this style of architecture.
Gambrel roofs are present in only approximately 10% of colonial revival homes, forming a sub-type known as Dutch Colonial Revival. The cross-gambrel roof configuration was a popular pattern book design from approximately 1905 to 1915 (McAlester 1997), but is rare within the local context.
California Register of Historic Resources Criteria
A cultural resource is considered "significant" if it qualifies as eligible for listing in the California 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 significant 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 type, 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 National Register of Historic Places. Properties that are formally determined eligible for the NRHP are those that are designated as such through one of the federal preservation programs administered by the 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 resource based upon its physical authenticity. An historic cultural resource must retain its historic character or appearance and thus be recognizable as an historic resource. Integrity 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 integrity. It is possible that a cultural resource may not retain sufficient integrity to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places yet still be eligible for listing in the CRHR. If a cultural resource retains the potential to convey significant historical/scientific data, it may be said to retain sufficient integrity for potential listing in the CRHR.
The property at 930 Monroe Street is not currently listed on the CRHR. In addition, it does not appear to be potentially eligible for listing in this register. The property is not associated with significant historic events, thus it does not appear to be eligible for listing under criterion 1. It is not closely associated with persons of historic significance, thus it does not appear to be eligible for listing under criterion 2. The structure at 930 Monroe Street is an example of the Dutch Colonial Revival architectural style, however it is not a notable example of this style. Thus the structure does not appear to be eligible for listing under criterion 3. In addition, the structure does not appear likely to yield important historical information. Thus they do not appear eligible for listing under criterion 4.
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _6_ of _27 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) _____930 Monroe Street_____________ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 06/24/20 X Continuation Update National Register Criteria
The National Register of Historic Places was first established in 1966, with major revisions in 1976. The register is set forth in 36 CFR 60 which establishes the responsibilities of the State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO), standards for their staffs and review boards, and describes the statewide survey and planning process for historic preservation.
Within this regulation guidelines are set forth concerning the National Register of Historic Places (36 CFR 60.6). In addition, further regulations are found in 36 CFR 63-66, 800, and Bulletin 15 which define procedures for determination of eligibility, identification of historic properties, recovery, reporting, and protection procedures. The National Register of Historic Places was established to recognize resources associated with the accomplishments of all peoples who have contributed to the country's history and heritage. Guidelines were designed for Federal and State agencies in nominating cultural resources to the National Register. These guidelines are based upon integrity and significance of the resource. Integrity applies to specific items such as location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in resources that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and meet at least one of the following criteria:
a. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history; b. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; c. that embody distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
d. that have yielded, or are likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Integrity is defined in Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service 1982) as:
the authenticity of a property's historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property’s historic or prehistoric period. If a property retains the physical characteristics it possessed in the past then it has the capacity to convey association with historical patterns or persons, architectural or engineering design and technology, or information about a culture or peoples.
There are also seven aspects of integrity which are used. These aspects are:
1. location 5. workmanship
2. design 6. feeling
3. setting 7. association
4. materials
The property at 930 Monroe Street is not currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the structure does not appear to be potentially eligible for listing in this register. The structure is not associated with significant historical events. Thus it does not appear to be potentially eligible for listing under criterion a. The structure is not associated with persons of historic significance, thus it does not appear to be potentially eligible for listing under criterion b. Although the structure at 930 Monroe Street is an example of the Dutch Colonial Revival style of architecture, it is not a notable example of this style. Thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion c. The structure does not appear to be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history, thus it does not appear to qualify as potentially eligible under criterion d. In addition, the structure has been somewhat modified from its original form.
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________ Page _7_ of 27 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) __930 Monroe Street_____________ *Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 06/24/20 X Continuation Update Continued from B12:
Appraiser's Office, County of Santa Clara
1971 Appraiser's property records for the property at 930 Monroe Street.
Chicago Title Company
2019 Preliminary Report on the Property at 930 Monroe Street in Santa Clara.
Douglas, J.
1993 Historical Footnotes of Santa Clara Valley. San Jose Historical Museum Association, San Jose. \ EAA Newsletter
2013 July 2013 Newsletter of the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), July 2013.
Hoover, M. et al
1966 Historic Spots in California. Stanford University Press, Stanford California.
Loomis, P.
1977 Article on Marvin Gibson, in Signposts, San Jose Mercury News, September 2, 1977.
McAlester, V. and L. McAlester
1997 A Field Guide to American Houses. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Mission College
2019 Von Raesfeld Family Fire Tower Dedication. Article dated September 12, 2019 at https://missioncollege.edu/news/press/releases_2020/2019-09-12-vonraesfeld.html Sawyer, E.
1922 History of Santa Clara County, California. Historical Record Company, Los Angeles Thompson & West
1876 Historical Atlas of Santa-Clara County, California. Thompson & West, San Francisco.
US Department of the Interior
1990 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
US Department of the Interior
1982 Bulletin 15 - "How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.
Whiffen, Marcus
1992 American Architecture since 1780, Revised Edition. The MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 1: View of the front facade of the residence at 930 Monroe Street.
Photo 2: A closer view of the front façade.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 3: View of the front facing gambrel and dormer window.
Photo 4: View of the front porch and entry.
Hfl'I __ ':iii' ..
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 5: View of the southern side of the 1st story front façade..
Photo 6: View of the northern side of the 1st story front façade.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 7: Detail of window bay on the front porch.
Photo 8: Detail of column capital on the front porch.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 9: Oblique view of the front gambrel from the southeast.
Photo 10: Oblique view of the front porch from the southeast.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 11: Oblique view of northeast corner of the residence.
Photo 12: View of the northern façade from the adjacent lot.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 13: View of northern cross-gable
Photo 14: View of base of the chimney on the northern façade.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 15: View of wooden framed basement window on north façade.
Photo 16: Detail of broadly overhanging eaves, northeast corner.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 17: View of rear portion of the northern façade.
Photo 18: View of the rear addition from the north.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: Oblique view of the residence from the northwest.
Photo 20: View of the rear addition from the northwest. .......
·•
~.•
•• ♦
~
•
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: View of the cross-gambrel on the southern façade.
Photo 20: View of bay windows on the southern façade.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: View of the southern portion of the rear addition.
Photo 20: View of wooden framed windows on the rear addition.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: Interior view of the dining room.
Photo 20: View of the living room showing bay window.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: Another view of the living room. Note built-in cabinets.
Photo 20: View of the kitchen showing all new fixtures and appliances.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: View of the stairway leading to the 2nd story.
Photo 20: View of the upstairs hallway.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: View of a bedroom.
Photo 20: View of the bathroom, note modern fixtures.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: View of the detached garage, constructed 1971.
Photo 20: View of the southern façade of the garage showing mural.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Photo 19: View of the rear facade of the garage.
Photo 20: View of the faux rock fountain feature.
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Map #1: Portion of the 1866 Map of Santa Clara showing the subject property.
Map #2: 1891 Sanborn Map showing no structure on the property at that time.
I
I I
l
3::
► I 0
i en I
I 0
J :z
- ~ -
l
~ I ;" ..
I
~
ST REE T _ - .. - - - - - - - --.,,.. ..
~~-----,:---- i\ •
\
I
•
l
I
Cv
0::,
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # ______________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _______________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial ______________________________
*Recorded by Archaeological Resource Management Date 6/24/2020 Continuation x Update DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information
Map #3: 1915 Sanborn Map showing the subject structure.
Map #4: 1950 Sanborn Map showing the subject structure. : e o.H.
" --i------w _ e: ~ev-✓----· • I
z
0 (/)
0 c(
'.:?
.
~II • ~" i\:d
lt;:1
. ' "'•, ,v
' ' '
/.19(/ 1.17{1
~
"' ~
~
Ed = "':i,) . .
l-!.--:!1
/3!1!1
- u.~
" -----. -r-' ------~ _.e:~~,:L .. __ _ e
' ,,
;, ,,, • .,.asv
' -t~ ;t:;
"'•· 7()
. . .
"
oS
~ -----~ ..... 4 _., : ~ ~ =,"""fr;~,:';'£ ___ •
•
n'
, ,o
FRANKLIN
~----------7,
! 2 YJ . ... '
' ' ' ' I ' ' : I _J
G e
I
• •- a·w.~: IO'°W.P.
~
~ "'
"'
~
I
I
• •
• '
l1J
0 a:
z
0 ~
.
~:
i,:' ~· , I ....
?',17'
I
:
:
~
. FRANKLIN •• s·wp _: /tr H
'
LIBERTY
. •
.
. '
w
0 a:
z
0 ~
"'
.
~: .
·;:µ.-
"
. '
. ® 2L2l,
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
June 1, 2023 HLC MEETING
RTC 23-647
From: Robert Brock < >
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 3:57 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject:
Dear Council Members:
High-density housing and mixed-use city planning are absolutely essential to the health of our community and environment. The most direct solution to our housing crisis is to increase supply, and this project provides an excellent opportunity to do so. We cannot claim to care about solving homelessness without shifting away from low-density housing. As a Santa Clara resident, I am confident that this development is a necessary and exciting progression for the neighborhood.
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and I look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Robert Brock
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Blamey < >
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 8:32 AM
To: Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Steve Le <[email protected]> Subject: 906-950 Monroe Street and 1341 Homestead Road
I am interested in finding out how to oppose the size and scope of the six story residential mixed use building planned for the above cited location. How does a six story building fit in to a neighborhood with single family dwellings? As a life long Santa Clara resident and homeowner near the site, it is unbelievable that zoning and planning would allow this type of monstrosity to be build. Please let me
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
June 1, 2023 HLC MEETING
RTC 23-647
know the official formal process to oppose the scope of this project. In addition, please send the names and email addresses of all city council members. Email is preferred.
Jim Blamey
876 Monroe St.
Santa Clara
From: Myron Von Raesfeld < >
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 4:09 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>; Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: 950 Monroe St development
Please see the attached letter in support of the development proposal located at 950 Monroe St. Santa Clara. Please make sure every planning commissioner gets a copy of this letter. I truly believe this will be a great development for the downtown area.
Myron Von Raesfeld
Keller Williams Realty
Real Estate Broker
CA DRE: 00866594
North Carolina Lic: 302419
408-472-4025
YOUR CALIFORNIA TO RALEIGH CONNECTION
From: RebeccaG Flores < >
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 4:52 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: Ariana Gasper <[email protected]>
Subject: 950 Monroe St.
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals,
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
June 1, 2023 HLC MEETING
RTC 23-647
New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals.
Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Flores
-----Original Message-----
From: Anna Fisher < >
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 3:22 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Monroe street development project
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara.
Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you, and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Anna Fisher
From: Mayor and Council <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 9:44 AM
To: Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Andrew Crabtree <[email protected]>; Reena Brilliot <[email protected]>
Cc: Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: New Downtown Proposal/Monroe Street project
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
June 1, 2023 HLC MEETING
RTC 23-647
Forwarding to share with the recipients below. A copy has been sent to Council.
From: Brian Goldenberg < >
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2023 10:59 PM
To: Mayor and Council <[email protected]>; Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: New Downtown Proposal/Monroe Street project
Hello Mayor Gillmor and Council, Planning Commission, and Historical Commission, I am a proud life-long Santa Claran and I am excited for the possibility of a new downtown for our city.
I am excited that the two historical houses won't be torn down. This part is very important to me to preserve Santa Clara's history.
And equally important is the ability to have quality places to go for dining and entertainment - in my own city!
For years now, I join my friends for dinner, festivals, and music nights in the downtowns of Campbell, Sunnyvale, Los Gatos, and Mountain View. I frequently wish we could have something similar in our great city. I frequently wonder why we don't have this already.
The idea of creating a new Downtown Santa Clara has been talked about for a while now. But now it's time for us to have a sense of urgency to make this happen.
Those other cities are passing us by when it comes to where Santa Clara Valley residents go to eat and enjoy themselves.
When you look at populations, we are 3 times larger than Campbell; 4 times larger than Los Gatos; almost twice as big as Palo Alto; and considerably bigger than Mountain View.
We have a great convention center, a great stadium, and a top-level university. And a great business district with world-class companies. We even have Great America! We have a lot of great people, places, and things in the city.
Why not a great destination center that attracts locals year-round? Why not a great downtown?
Let's have a great part of town that draws people from those other cities TO Santa Clara!
Let's please not delay this further to 'review reports' and 'study the project.' Yes, it is important to do those things while we are making progress....not spinning our wheels while the downtowns of other cities continue to prosper and they collect tax dollars that could be going to Santa Clara.
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
June 1, 2023 HLC MEETING
RTC 23-647
So, please take the steps to help this move forward and continue making Santa Clara great!
Sincerely,
Brian Goldenberg
2047 Eucalyptus Ct.
Santa Clara 95050
From: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 10:26 AM
To: David Delozier ; Planning Public Comment
<[email protected]>; Mayor and Council <[email protected]>; Reena Brilliot <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Steve Le <[email protected]> Subject: RE: PLN2020-14457. 906-950 Monroe St. & 1341 Homestead Rd Good Morning,
This is to confirm your email has been received in the Planning Division. By way of my reply I am including the appropriate Planning Division staff for review of your comments.
Thank you for taking the time to notify us on this matter.
Regards,
Elizabeth Elliott
Community Development Department I Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
0 : 408.615.2450 I D: 408.615.2474
https://gcc02.safe1inks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.santaclaraca.gov%2F&data= 05%7C01%7CEElliott%40santaclaraca.gov%7CSa7d5efe7b154f64195c08db5c6b77f6%7C28ea354810694 e81aa0b6e4b3271a5cb%7C0%7C0%7C638205388857908340%7CUnknow n%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWljoi MC4wljAw MDAiLCJQljoiV2IuMzliLCJBTil6IklhaWw iLOXVCl6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sXo WDgY6xZSYji2TADulT7j5t0ZY55zEl8%2Feef30E7s%3D&reserved=0 -----Original Message-----
From: David Delozier >
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 2:31 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Mayor and Council <[email protected]>
Subject: PLN2020-14457. 906-950 Monroe St. & 1341 Homestead Rd Dear Mayor, Council, and Planning Commissioner's, Please have my comments read into the record. My name is David Delozier and I'm the property owner at 1260-1290 Benton St.(Monroe). My parents built
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
June 1, 2023 HLC MEETING
RTC 23-647
our building in 1967٫ it was the first building completed in the Franklin Mall. I'm not against growth and development when it's good and meets the needs of all citizen's of Santa Clara. I'm NOT in favor of overbuilt projects by developers that are interested in making the most return on their investment to the detriment of Santa Clara and it's neighborhoods!! This project is overbuilt and overbearing!! The number of stories and lack of parking for this project is unacceptable. I DON'T call Bus #22 and a mile away from the train/Bus depot٫ being on a mass transit route. You as our elected and appointed Representatives need to make developement decisions that are best for Santa Clara. Allowing the State or any other Government authority to override your representation of your constituents is a derelict of duty. Let me give you some history of our Downtown because " those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"!! The downtown was demolished by the Federal Redevelopment and then the Santa Clara Redelopment Agency٫ largely because of the lack of offstreet parking. The property owners of the Franklin Mall under a parking assessment district(still exists) purchased the land and built the 2 parking lots in the mall. They were built/required for public parking for the businesses in the mall٫ NOT to be overflow parking for underparked developments in the area. By allowing substantial parking variances on this project you will impact the offstreet parking٫ street parking٫ and traffic issue's in the Old Quad residential neighborhood (more conflict in the neighborhood). The folks living in this massive apt/condo complex will NOT be taking the #22 Bus to work or school. This project needs to be lowered in scale and more offstreet parking added(maybe 1 less floor of apt/condos and add parking to that floor). It's your duty to make decisions that are best for the citizen's of Santa Clara NOT maximising developer profits!!! I'm asking as a property owner and as a Santa Clara resident in this area٫ that you address the scale and parking on this development. Sincerely٫ David C. DeLozier٫ Former Santa Clara Councilmember٫ Santa Clara Businessowner٫ Santa Clara resident.
Sent from my iPad
May 12, 2023
Santa Clara Planning Commission and Staff
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Ave
Santa Clara Ca 95050
RE: 950 Monroe St Project
Dear Planning Commission and Staff
Our family have been part of Santa Clara ever since my dad began working as the City Manager back in 1962. Ever since then our family has called this great city home. My father loved this city and always wanted what was best for all the citizens and the companies that call this place home.
Several years ago, my father sold the 950 Monroe St building to Lamb partners who had indicated they would like to redevelop this site into a mixed-use residential development. While my father was excited and looking forward to the next chapter for this property he had owned since 1970 where he opened a small Hardware store.
The city has been talking about bring back a new downtown on the blocks between Monroe St, Lafayette St, Homestead Rd, and Benton St. While many proposals have floated around, and many people talk about the old downtown that no longer exists. The trut h is that no new downtown will be successful without citizens visiting it regularly. With Monroe being a busy thoroughfare with an active buss line there is no better place than this parcel to accomplish the needed increase in housing for others to enjoy all that Santa Clara has to offer.
We have seen this proposed project and we are in complete support of this development. We hope that the Planning commission will unanimously approve this project. This will be good for the city and the future downtown that will someday be rebuilt for many to enjoy.
Respectfully,~~
2~~ ~ .
1 Elizabeth Elliott
From: Karla Gutierrez
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 10:57 AM
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail • It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed‐use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Karla Gutierrez
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 6:34:41 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail, • It is an environmentally sustainable development,
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core, • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to ourdowntown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Dave Paolinelli
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 11:16:52 AM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail
• It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Molly O’Leary
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 6:52:15 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail
• It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
--
Diyar
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 6:12:56 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail,
• It is an environmentally sustainable development,
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core, • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to ourdowntown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Erica
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Friday, May 12, 2023 9:02:19 AM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail
• It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Angelina Paolinelli
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Friday, May 12, 2023 9:43:44 AM
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote YES for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail
• It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Samantha
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 9:37:30 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail
• It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Alexandria Raffo
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 11:24:01 AM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th! Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail
• It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Devon Mercurio
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe -Letter of Support
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 7:57:12 PM
Dear Council Members:
I'm writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara.
Please vote YES for this project on JULY 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail.
• It is an environmentally sustainable development.
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area. • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals. • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core. • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing.
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Thank you,
Lindsey Davidson
--
NOTICE: This email and all attachments are confidential and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 11:22:49 AM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail • It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Jay Gutierrez
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe -Letter of Support
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 7:57:12 PM
Dear Council Members:
I'm writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara.
Please vote YES for this project on JULY 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail.
• It is an environmentally sustainable development.
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area. • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals. • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core. • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing.
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Thank you,
Lindsey Davidson
--
NOTICE: This email and all attachments are confidential and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: Ariana Gasper
Subject: 950 Monroe st letter of support
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 8:09:14 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail • It is an environmentally sustainable development
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Shaun
-
From:
To: Steve Le
Subject: 950 Monroe Street - Support Letter
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 9:05:49 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals.
Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Bobby Caya
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
From:
To: Steve Le; [email protected]
Cc: Ariana Gasper
Subject: 950 Monroe Street
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 7:20:20 AM
Dear Council Members -
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara.
Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Below are some of the benefits to the city:
It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara
It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown Thank you for your consideration, and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Best,
Riley
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
From:
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Street Project
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 3:43:03 PM
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Streetcondominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail,
It is an environmentally sustainable development,
The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area, This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core,
The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing,
Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Emily
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-
1 Lucy Garcia
From: David Paolinelli
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 6:34 PM
To: Steve Le
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Letter of Support
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail, • It is an environmentally sustainable development,
• The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area, • This mixed‐use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core, • The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to ourdowntown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Dave Paolinelli
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
From: Carrick Young
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 1:33 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara - Support Letter Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area,
• This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
From: Kevin Coyle
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 8:40 AM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara - Support Letter Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area,
• This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals.
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Kevin
--------------
Kevin Coyle
From: Nick Casaccia
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 11:46 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara - Support Letter Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals.
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
• Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Nick Casaccia
From: Lane Hustead
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 1:37 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara - Support Letter Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Lane Hustead
_________________________
Lane P. Hustead, CPA, CFP®
Associate Wealth Advisor
Bordeaux Wealth Advisors
Silicon Valley | Seattle
(650) 419-1181 Direct
[email protected]
Website | LinkedIn
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
This message is intended only for the designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential or proprietary information and may be subject to other confidentiality protections. If you are not a designated recipient, you may not review, copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you.
From: Ethan Clements
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 9:30 AM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Ethan Clements
From: Michael Liebes
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 8:50 AM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
•
BORDEAUX
WEALTH ADVISORS
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Michael Liebes
From: Grant Chou
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 3:50 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Subject: [email protected]
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, RTC 23-637
Correspondence
• It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Grant
--
Grant Chou
Santa Clara University '17
From: Max Kollmorgen
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 9:20 PM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Subject: [email protected]
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara.
Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
It can revitalize downtown Santa Clara with much needed housing and community serving ground floor retail,
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
It is an environmentally sustainable development,
The architectural quality will create a dynamic and vibrant downtown area, This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, New walkable housing helps energize the downtown core,
The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan and Housing goals while providing much needed affordable housing,
Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for further growth to our downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your support on this project.
Sincerely,
Max
RE: PLN2020-14457
906 – 950 Monroe Street & 1341 Homestead Road
Dear Mayor, Council Members, Planning Commissioners, and Historical Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Clara:
The Downtown Community Task Force (DCTF) has been working on developing a Precise Plan for the revitalization of Santa Clara’s Downtown to ensure that there is a clear vision to achieve a successful and vibrant “place” for all to enjoy for many generations to come.
The effort to restore Santa Clara’s Downtown has taken years to culminate into the opportunity that lays before us. Over the past 60+ years, numerous attempts have been made to heal the scar that urban renewal left on our city, but all have fallen short due to logistics, long term lease agreements, and a need for the community to lead. “No land-use decision of the last half-century has damaged the urban fabric of a city more than Santa Clara’s decision to tear down its eight-block downtown in the 1960s. The result has no coherence, no center, no charm.”
(Herhold, S. (2017, April 24) The Worst Local Decisions of the Last 50 Years. San Jose Mercury News) The current community led effort to return a key section of Franklin St. to the public has created the opportunity to re-connect the downtown area by means of a main street that many thought was not possible. For the first time since the early 1980’s, Santa Clara’s Downtown could be connected by a public right-of-way. Residents and community groups have spent RTC 23-637
Correspondence
countless hours researching, analyzing, and understanding the complexities of development, urban planning, and current government policies to incorporate them into the current Precise Plan that is near completion. The Downtown Precise Plan will provide a clear set of guidelines that will allow us to create a thoughtful “place” for all Santa Clara community members to enjoy.
The proposal for the 906 – 950 Monroe & 1341 Homestead (Monroe Development) being submitted prior to the approval of the Precise Plan and Form Based Code will only result in the same “parcel-by-parcel” development the area has struggled with since being leveled by urban renewal. The current proposal does not follow the Downtown Precise Plan or Form Based Code requirements that will outline and guide future development within the 10-blocks.
If the Monroe Development is allowed to proceed, this will undermine the intention of the Downtown Precise Plan and set a bad precedent for other development proposals to follow as we continue to work diligently to complete the Downtown Precise Plan.
The proposed Monroe development does not consider the Downtown Precise Plan, Form Based Code, or even the current General Plan, thus requiring it to be submitted as a Planned Development. The Planned Development (PD) zoning designation was intended for “unique and unusual” sites that do not allow traditional zoning and/or planning guidelines to apply. This site is not “unique or unusual” and the current General Plan zoning and planning guidelines could be applied. Since the current General Plan requirements are applicable, the developer should either comply with these requirements or wait and follow the Downtown Precise Plan and Form Based Code, which are scheduled to be approved later this year.
Development projects of today will last beyond most of our time together and as we face many challenges and are pressured to meet goals, we must not make the same mistake leaders in the past made by rushing to approve “something” through a parcel-by-parcel approach, resulting in a mish mash of buildings that do not contribute to the community that we believe Downtown Santa Clara once was and can be again. We believe we should stay focused on the larger vision that will create a thoughtful, community-oriented “place” for many generations of Santa Clara residents to come.
“A society grows great when old men (women) plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit” – Greek Proverb
The DCTF respectfully asks that the development proposal for 906 – 950 Monroe & 1341 Homestead not be approved until the Downtown Precise Plan and Form Based Code are approved, implemented, and enforced. This parcel should be developed, but it should be consistent with the community vision articulated within the approved Downtown Precise Plan and Form Based Code.
Sincerely,
Chair - Adam Thompson
Co-Chair - Dan Ondrasek
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
On behalf of all members of the Downtown Community Task Force From: Ariana Gasper <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2023 6:39 AM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara - Support Letter Hi Steve,
It looks like they forgot to add the Ca at the end of your email address. Please see letter of support below.
Best regards,
Ariana Gasper
From: Nick Casaccia
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 11:43 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: Ariana Gasper <[email protected]>
Subject: 950 Monroe Street, Santa Clara - Support Letter
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Nick Casaccia
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
From: Travis McAuley
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 8:34 AM
To: Steve Le <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: In Support of 950 Monroe Street Condominium Project Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of the 950 Monroe Street condominium and townhome project in Santa Clara. Please vote yes for this project on July 11th!
Among the many benefits to the city:
• It is an efficient use of land in downtown Santa Clara, • It is the perfect example of environmentally sustainable development, • The architectural quality will help create new building design ideas in the downtown area, • This mixed-use project supports the city’s Housing Element Goals, • New walkable housing helps energize the upcoming new downtown core, • The building is consistent with (and was designed with) the Downtown Task Force goals. • Adding housing like this enables local retailers to thrive and plan for expansion in the downtown.
Thank you and we look forward to your yes vote on this project.
Sincerely,
Travis McAuley
Dear Planner Steve,
RTC 23-637
Correspondence
Good day! Attached you will find a letter that I have written in support of the project at 950 Monroe Street in Santa Clara.
Please share it with the Staff and the Planning Commission.
With appreciation,
Emmy
M.E. "Emmy" Moore-Minister
May 12, 2023
Santa Clara Planning Commission
and Planning Staff
c/o Steve Le
Associate Planner
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Ave.
Santa Clara, CA, 95050
Dear Honorable Chair Cherukuru, Fellow Planning Commissioners, and Planning Staff,
I write to you today, in full support of the project at 950 Monroe St., located in the “Heart of the City’s Old Quad” neighborhood, and a project, that is committed to environmental sustainability.
√ This project, which has been in the planning stage for a few years now, (and his received significant citizen input and suggestions from folks including myself), has been designed and redesigned with thoughtful architectural modifications throughout.
√ This project has been reduced in units from the original proposal of 61 down to 54 units.
√ Three homes with historical significance will be saved and maintained. √ The project is extremely compatible with the area and supports plans to bring vitality to the City’s inner core as it moves forward with plans to revitalize the S.C. Downtown Area.
√ The 54 units adds to the City’s much-need for additional housing units. √ The ground floor retail creates a “village” feel where neighbors and their pets will feel welcome.
√ The project is located near public transit and is in walking distance to the Santa Clara Transit Center, with access to VTA, Caltrain, and Capitol Corridor.
√ This particular type of housing stock is compatible for various age groups, and most importantly, appealing to retiring Santa Claran’s (Seniors) who would like to “scale down” from a large family home to a smaller and more efficient living space, while still being able to reside in the Mission City, close to amenities and just blocks from the City’s Senior Center.
It is for all the reasons above, and more, that I respectfully request that you approve this project. It’s well-thought-out, it’s great for Santa Clara’s Downtown, and it’s good for the overall community.
Respectfully Submitted,
M. E. Emmy Moore-Minister
Co-Founder
Old Quad Residents Association
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR
906, 930, 940, 950 MONROE STREET & 1341 HOMESTEAD RD.
SANTA CLARA, CA 95050
PfSIGN PBPEESSKUWS:·
s,.i_vAIORECORI.JSODESIGNCORPORIIIKlN
HO[L CAMINORUI...SUIT[200
S,l,'ITACl>AA,CAi!,050
Pl«:>i'IE: (ooeJ ;gs-•oe1 rl)C, {<aeJ!llls- ,oss
""'--""""
2"SHOIIEUl[D"1Y!:,SUITE200
O:WWOOOCITY,CAg~
PttONE,(-)ole2-6JOO
PBOIECI DESCBIPDPN·
LAMBPAA'TN[fl:S.ll.C
=w•ooLUl!1D RO.O.D,SUIT[ 190
MEl<l.OP-,CAi•OZS
PHONE: (650) 20!!- 4H5
DEMOUTICfl Of' TH[ SMAl...l.1£1MLIO BLM.Il ANEW &l CONDOS .YID .YID410WNHOIJS[Of'flOUSINGPROJ[CJINCWDl~GENEJw.
REl.u./CAl"[ON TH[CIIOONOFI.OORIOREVITAl.llETH[OOWl<TOWM LOTUN[=ME~tSf'IIOl'OS!:0 roR Tl<EEllSTINOSl~lE •Al,ILl
ffOWES:ANEW1"0C.oJIGN!NJ£.roRi:IOMONR0£~0A1CAA
CAl!loG[f'ORTl<[906-ROEPUJSASUflFACE ...... KINGIS
F'ROPOS[D IOPAAKTH!:S..CU:rN.ILY l«)M[SONSIIE
F'fl<:Ml)[15l<Of'IOTAL UNITS..S""1'QAo,a_.[>IOUSllfCUNISONSIIE f'ERarr"SOROIMO.NC[17.40.0IIO:Al...l.""1'0AIWII..E UNITSMU.BE OISPERS[D ONTHEPROJ!:CTS/l[(ON[Wl!HINTOWMHOUS[~07
WrTHIN COl'IXIS)
,..
IIIXEO-USE (RETAJL~OCAFE, RESIOENTIAL - lllll.~ - FN.IIL'f) LOT I , 55 FIESl[)ElflW_ CONOOMMUII UNITS
Lor I• 1 CO>IOOM,N'-'11 f"OR All 'lOOR COll..,N AREA5 LOT l ,16"SEIIENI ...... KINGG,1,!W;ECONOOMflUII Ut,IIS Lor , . l RETAJL COHOOM:NIUM ums
LOT2,1([)SINGU:r>J,"LY HOME
WW>HOUsEalWOf'l.DOl<S:
""'""'-""
CONOOM:NIUll, 1 L.£VaOf'8'&11DIT+&STORl[S(,a(M:TH[GRNl£j R 2 511.00RSOfR.SIOOITlAL , A 2 CROU~WIELCAFITERO..S. 11 (GIIOUNOLE\'ELREHll.).S - 2 (P-ING), A- J{TIRR,l,C[),B(GYII) ,! __
-..=;-9
' "\. ..
,,,,,. \ ~.
\ \~:;,-
\
EB
.,,.. . . ,.
q -_
Af Pl ICAfil E CODES·
PAAT1.0, OJ.lfORNlA.o.DMINISTFIATI\IECOO!:
PAAT 2.0, 2019 LJ.LFORNLo, BULDINC COOE (CBC) PAAT 2.~. 2019 LJ.LlfORNlA R[SIOEITTW. CODE (CRC) PAAT 3.0, 2019 LJ.lFORNLO, ELECTRIC COO[ (CEC) i~il. (CMC) FflA...CCESSIBLE CUIDEUNES USINC Tl-lE SM'Ef!AABOR
/,S PERMITTED PER Tl-IE 1998 FflA DESIGN M- WTn<
ANSIAll 7. l - 1986PER1k2AND201DNJA
TH EAPPUCJ,BL.£CODESARE"5AMENDEDBYTHE
STATE OF CAI.FtiRIM. ANDTl-lECrTYOF SNfTACI.MA
AffOROABI E HOlJSING NOW
NEWPIAHNEDDE\IELOPMENTISONLY INLOT1
LOT Z AND LOT3 WI LL RE w.lN /,S HISTORIC SI NGLE
TOTALNEWllESIOENT~ UNITPROPOSEDIS55
CONOOMINIOM UNITS(50CONOOMINIOM + 4TOWN
::g;:~m-..:~ONEffiEESTANOINGHOMEAT IJ41
NU MBEROF.o,fFORCWllEHOUSINCUNITSWILLEIE
55x0.15•8.25UNITS
PROVIDES: 1TOWNHOM[Aff0Ro.o.BL[UNIT
7CONOOM INIOM UNITS INMAINBUIUJINC
COMMON SPACE CALCULATION M~"
SHEET INOEX
f'l!OPO',EOEIASEME~,v,<
F'ROPOS[O ISi l'LOOR ,v,<
f'R0P0SE02N0 '1.00l<Pv.N
""'°"°5EOlROrLOOII.,_... f'ROPOSEO•THl'LOORPL.N<
""'°"°5ED,T~Fl.OOI<-
llill.
STO!"fW_.TER COl,'JROL OCIMLS
B[S! l,W,LO,(;[IIDITPFW:IICr!; nREl)[PAAl11£HI WATERSIJPPLl~OACC£SSPI.AH .eJ:::!QIQMEIBJ
TRASH MANAGEMENT
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
LAf!O.S.C6E.E
"'QO..O•rncus,1,.•m,ALl!Ol<PU.N
l:EQO..O.EOCAUS l l'E•OTYCOMME N'TS
iro•m1orl6'-"''" 1cow,ow,a,"""'""'"'" OF"UM"
FLOOIO. JOTAL"8P"CI\IIOlD. 70FTHEWSPACESME
All.OCAITOFO<W.ST•A•<l~G.
PO.OVIO<DIN NT¼''l!>JQUlli1'
PIICMOIOOM~NOl'I.OO!t
Po:o\llD£00M6'0UMOrlOOR PllO\IIOIOONGP;OUMOrlOOI'
2. ILICTI\ICtl~[ CHA!~NG ISAYAILAlllll< THE IA$EV(NTIK"<CL!PM,,Na A11£AW>!IOtC0"1AJNS!4Uel ). !L!CTI\IC .. ~, CHA!~NG'MU. AllO ee. AVAIL.AOL! .. , &Ql\j THE Cw.I I A~O CV.SI-,, Ol<C .... ,,Na AOC,. or.: THE Gf<OUOO "00,, ·~; a ..... u, .. ,.,,...,NGSPACB
c,=, "'"'""'°"'m""""'"""'~"o''""'=• I
SCDC
AllCIHlITIECTUlRE
OOBOO!l.DED
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
911ELOO!OOw.t,f)l)l),WITAWIA.CAf!OlO 'ltl.Mo(Q)99M:$7 • FAX. Mo(Q)99Mlll """'
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~M0/1100~
SAlifA(UlA,CA950lll
1:Mllnl[SruDRD. •
SA.WACI.ARA.C'AmlO
, ... ..,,.-...... , ... ,. ... _ 'MJl:t,,,"" ... ~----- ·-:.~ ..
COVER SHEET
A0.1
VIEW FROM MONROE ST 3 STORY 4 STORY
3 STORY 6 STORY
URBAN FORM FRAMEWORK AS SHOWN ON PAGE 45 OF THE SANTA CLARA DOWNTOWN
PRECISE PLAN
6 STORY
6 STORY
SCDC
ARCIHIITIOCTIJRJE ][Nf]OO[IDED
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION 91lrLCAWIDlEAl.,flll,W.TA(l.W,CA.!lm IH.l4o.(QlMCI • fAJ:l41.(Ql9IMIII
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~ll)NR(IIST
SANTAO.W,CA9SOSO
. llolllDlmEADlD.
!.A.NTAILUA,CA9!050
RENDERING
L_ _________________________________________________________ A0 .2 __, --~---
VIEW FROM MONROE ST
INDOOR OUTDOOR CONNECTIONS
AS SHOWN ON PAGE 85 OF THE SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN PRECISE PLAN
INDOOR OUTDOOR CONNECTIONS
WITH SIDEWALK AND PARK STRIP PER SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN PRECISE PLAN
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi
llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION 910ELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0 Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)'l!Ml!I
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. • S.00-ACURA,CA9SOSO
1 "'""'""'~'"'""''°·~- ' ,,,_,.,,."'"'""" IIIDI I< ,.._..~.., , r.:s,;:,. ~=st..-Y+"""" ,_,.,,._c.,w_""
RENDERING
DJ
A0.3 L---------------------------------------------------------- • m--
VIEW FROM MONROE ST
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi
llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION 9IOELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0 Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)'l!Ml!I
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. • S.00-ACURA,CA9SOSO
1 ,..,..., "'""...
'""'~'"'""' ,,.ONIWICll><IIIDII(-~"" '°·~-
RENDERING
DJ
A0.4 ,...._ _________________________________________________ __, - • m--
VIEW FROM MONROE ST
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi
llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION 9IOELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0 Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)'l!Ml!I
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. • S.00-ACURA,CA9SOSO
1 ,..,..., "'""'""'~'"'""' ... ,,.ONIWICll><IIIDII(-~"" '°·~-
RENDERING
DJ
A0.5 ..__ ____________________________________________ ___, - • m--
VIEW FROM HOMESTEAD RD
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi
llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION 9IOELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0 Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)'l!Ml!I
"""'
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. • S.00-ACURA,CA9SOSO
1 "'""'""'~'"'""''°·~- ' ,,,_,.,,."'"'""" IIIDII<,.._..~.., , r.:s,;:,. ~=st..-Y+""""
RENDERING
DJ ,__ ___________________________________________________ __J _ _ m_A_0_.6_ I I
~---------~
RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL
I I
f-----------------------7
i i i i
i COMMERCIAL USE i L--------------------7
i i
: ~e~~':Eo;~IAL USE i
--·-·;;-·-·1,j_ - --- --- --- --- -- ~:I
- 269 20085
COMMERCIAL USE
I
i
. i
\...._ ___ ,,.,. _ _l_ ____ w ___ _l_ _______________ ~ ------------------------_j 269-20-086
052/22588
MONROE
CD EXISTING SITE PLAN
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
910ELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0
Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)'l!Ml!I
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. •
S.00-ACURA,CA9SOSO
1 "'""'""'
~
'"'""''°·~-
,
·-··:--%.,,y-::,.•
,_,..,._"'"'_ ""
EXISTING
SITE PLAN
DJ
A1.0
I
~-----------~
I
i i
I I
f---------------------j i i i i i i
l----------------------7
I . . I I .
. I
I .
. I
rn+-::-;::;:::==;rr----;J-------""'---'----7-------------------7 i
-~--c_.r
CD PROPOSED SITE PLAN
L_ _____________________________ _
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
910ELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0
Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)'l!Ml!I
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. •
S.00-ACURA,CA9SOSO
1 "'""'""'
~
'"'""''°·~-
,
·-••m-,{-,,y-l"-"
,_,..,._"'"'_ ""
PROPOSED
SITE PLAN
DJ
A1.1
- • m--
\ ·,. ' -----------------------------
G) PROPOSED BASEMENT PLAN
i
i
77 -------- ,t ----------------------------------~--------~- - ~ - --------~! " ~~~:~~~:~:;: ~SPACES ..... I •=• : ::.:;~;::~:. .. "'·"~ .. m•• : ' ~= :·~::;:::::~F.. ~~~:~:?.~J::~~,~ ~-:.. :::::::" ,,, . • ::-::;::" 1 ~<ING'·'"" ~RU.O" ~ THfGll:OlO<OflOOIO roo ~N I SCDC
AR(C]H]ITJE(CTIJlffi
~ DED
DJ~~ 8&Mtf~SO Ill.l4a.(Q)~f»l,W.TACWA,C'.1.~N • FAX.Ko.(Q)'lll-QI
SANTA CLARA
~,!1;!.TOWN
W.TA~~e::
1),llll.WlFADRD
s.OO'AaJ.RA.CA9SOSO
...,_..,.
: :=::~=::::: :.
EXISTING STRUCTURE 0
139 1 HOMESTEAD RD
G) PROPOSED 1 ST FLOOR PLAN
[__J
M
AJ.
/: BASEMENT PARKING RAM ~
r6~~~I~~ FLOOR i----- ~ - ---------------~----
_ 1_ ___________________________________ ' I
I
l __
SCDC
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION !lllll !l.C\MISOlf.ALJlOlS,l.'ilAU.W.CATaNo.~1..i • FJ\Ul (Q)flMJII
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
!116,9J0~.9SOMO);RC£ST :,AZ:
SAl!TACUIA.C\9!450
, .. .., , ... O' , lflH,OIIO,m-
: ~=:~,.--
PROPOSED
1 ST FLOOR PLAN
A2 .2 -•=----
:r:
0 <'::
rT7
(/)
----j
rT7
)>
0 2L
CD PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN
8AYWNJ,0
26"-ii• (A,.O)
l
2K
J5'-~-
MONROE
TOWN HOMES
THREE BEDROOMS, FOUR
UNITS, TOTAL TWO FLOORS.
CONDOMINIUM
ONE BEDROOM
TWO BEDROOM TOTAL 12
2J
.,,_,,,
SCDC
AlClHITI1ECTURIE
JWTI1ErumDJESIDN
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
911!LCAML'«.lw.L.IXO.SA.'!l"Aa..w.,CAm
IPL!io(Q)991-m • fAX.lio(G)fll-m
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN --· S.00-ACl.AlA.CAmsG .
IJ.ll ll;ME;lliAD!tD.
SAJil"A(l.ARA.CA9S0511
1 "'""''""~'"'""'~"'"""'"'- '~=:::-_a_··=
,.,.,. .. ,
~---""'
PROPOSED
2ND FLOOR PLAN
:r:
0 <'::
rT7
U)
---,
rT7
)>
0 G) PROPOSED 3RD FLOOR PLAN
TOWN HOMES
THREE BEDROOMS FOUR
UNITS, TOTAL Two' FLOORS.
CONDOMINIUM
ONE BEDROOM
TWO BEDROOM TOTAL 12
SCDC
AR(C]H]ITJE(CTIJlffi llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
:~c;:~,~~~~=
"""'
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,~MQt.ll.cE~
SMTAQ.W,,Ci\950:50
1),1111.WlFADRD. •
5.00'At1ARA,CA9SOSO
...,_..,.
: --.,.,·::+--:.
PROPOSED
3RD FLOOR PLAN
DJ
I
0 rT7
U)
---,
rT7
)>
0 i
~-------------- I
___ 7 ___ 1
i i i CONDOMINIUM
i
i i i i i i i
i
1--
1 i
\
\
\ -, -,_
i ~rn~gg~ i TOTAL 10
L
______________________ _
4B 4C
MONROE
CD PROPOSED 4TH FLOOR PLAN
----------------------
4D
SCDC
ARrnITECTIJRE
llN'IBlmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO DJ~~ CORPORATION Ill.)(o.(Q)~,~~~~r= """'
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~~'RCE~
SMTA(l.AM,Ci\95050
1)11IQIES1IAD • RD.
S.00-AC..W..CA,SOSO
..... ..,.
: :::·=-~Jr;:.
PROPOSED
4TH FLOOR PLAN
DJ
06/17/'Zl=
I
0 "=
rT7
Lf)
---,
rT7
)>
0 l
r SC
CONDOMINIUM
ONE BEDROOM
TWO BEDROOM TOTAL 8
5D
~
,I __
I -~,,::-- I
i """ i
\\''•----·---~-----·-·-·-·-· -~~,~•·-••=·
=""===~as·-~•·=====~~~=""==~~=~~~=="==~===L,,J
MONROE
G) PROPOSED 5TH FLOOR PLAN
rT7
;;o
)>
z
;,;:
' z
SCDC
AIR(C]H]ITElCTIJRffi ][N1UJ[aRDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
91GELCAMll()l£AL,f»l,W.TACUU..C'>.950lf
Jn. l4o.(Q)991-1117 • FAX.l4a.(Q)9lll-QI
_,,
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~MONRCEST
SMTAQ.At,\CA9SO:SO
Jl.ll l!CIIESJI.AD • RD.
S.00ACl.AlA.CA911m
PROPOSED
5TH FLOOR PLAN
DJ
06/17/=
:r:
0 rT7
1/)
---,
rT7
)>
0 ~ !-- i
i i i
i
\
SC
CONDOMINIUM
ONE BEDROOM
TWO BEDROOM TOTAL 8
\ I i
'-,., _________________ J_ ____________________ L~I =="·=·•l·=='==="=' _,,•=======~==='======'======'==="====='•J l MONROE
CD PROPOSED 6TH FLOOR PLAN
rT7
::U
)>
z
;,c::
' z
.._ ________________________________________________________________________ __, SCDC
MJClHIITlECTUlffi
IOOBlmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
91l1ELCAMOOWl.flll,W.TAQ.AIA.C'.l.!SO!O
Ill.Ko.((1)911-«:17 • FAX.Ko.(,Q)9!Ml!I
_,,
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,9)0'40,9SO~'RCEi,r
SMTACLW.,CA9SO:lll
lJ,IIIUIESJF.ADlD. •
SA.'fl'Aa.w.CAmo
1 "'""'""'~"''""''°·~-
, .... ..., ... ,,.""""""'""' .. ,.._,.,~..,
PROPOSED
6TH FLOOR PLAN
DJ
- •m___!-1.]_
I
0 ;c;:
'7
U)
---,
'7
)>
0 BB
f--------------------------------------------------------7 i i i
i
I
i
\
\,_
L-----------------------------------------------------------------7 ----7
I AWNING 1
r----1
I AWNING I
ELEVATOR t,ACHINER00M
ROOFTOPUNITSTOBE
Pl.ACED ABOVE HALLWAY BELOW
......... .._~---------~-----------~-------------------------------------------------~ MONROE
G) PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
'7
XI
)>
z
;,;:
' z
SCDC
AR(C]H]ITJE(CTIJlffi llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
911ELCAMOOWJ.,f»l,W.TACUMC'.1.!SO!O
Ill. l4a.(Q)9!1-Q7 • FAX.Ko.(Q)'lll-QI
"""'
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,~MQt.ll.cE~
SMTAQ.W,,Ci\950:50
1),1111.WlFADRD. •
5.00'At1ARA,CA9SOSO
1 "'"""""'~.,., ...... ~-
,.., .. "'"'"'ONIWICll><'""I(-~""
PROPOSED
ROOF PLAN
DJ
FF +84'-8"
MAX HEIGHT
FF +73'-6"
ROOF
FF +61 '-o" 6TH FLOOR
FF +49 '-6"
5TH FLOOR
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF -13' -6"
BASEMENT
I I
L _________________________________ J
® PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION (MONROE)
@ WINDOW DETAIL
I
L ______________ ~
CD PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION (FRANKLIN)
PL
FF + 8 4 '- s "
MAX HEIGHT
FF +73'-6"
ROOF
FF +61 '-0"
6TH FLOOR
FF +49' -6"
5TH FLOOR
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF +26' -6"
3RD FLOOR
FF +15'-o"
2ND FLOOR
FF -13'-6"
BASEMENT
,-',,
SCDC
ARlCfflTJECTllmE
nrnEru[II, llllE§D!
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION !IOIJ.CAllll«:lll'AL,,lll,5A.'IIA(UlA,CA!l!lj, 11!1.lio.{-i!lll-ffl,FAX.lio.{-i!III-CU
,..,,
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
.......,....,,..
SA.Vl'ACURA,O.m.G
. 13411KlMmFJ.DlD.
SANTAQ.W,,CAr.,o50
PROPOSED
ELEVATIONS
FF +84-8"
MAX HEIGHT
FF +73'-6"
ROOF
FF +61 '-0"
6TH FLOOR
FF +49' -6"
5TH FLOOR
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF +26'-6"
3RD FLOOR
FF +15'-0"
2ND FLOOR
FF +O' -0"
1 ST FLOOR
PL
I FF -13'-6"
BASEMENT L _______________________________________ _
@ PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION
PL
FF
MAX
FF +73'-6"
ROOF
FF +61 '-0"
6TH FLOOR
FF +49' -6"
5TH FLOOR
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF +26' -6"
3RD FLOOR
FF
2ND
FF +0' -0" l-+'--,.,.. _______ _.__ ..... _____ ...__ ..... ______ ..... ____________ 'r--_+-'-.... -- 1ST FLOOR L
G) PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION (HOMESTEAD)
_J FF -13'-6"
BASEMENT
~8'-Q"PRECASTCONCRITEFENC:E
12'-0"0/C
@ PRECAST CONCRETE FENCE
SCDC
ARlCfflTJECTllmE
nrnEru[II, llllE§D!
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION !IOIJ.CAllll«:lll'AL,,lll,5A.'IIA (UlA,CA!l!lj, 11!1.lio.{-i!lll-ffl, FAX. lio.{-i!III-CU
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
.......,....,,..
SA.Vl'ACURA,O.m.G
. 13411KlMmFJ.DlD.
SANTAQ.W,,CAr.,o50
PROPOSED
ELEVATIONS
CD TOWNHOMES PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION
@ TOWNHOMES PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION
® FIRE DEPARTMENT GROUND LADDER ACCESS
+25'-0"
MAX HEIGHT
6'TALL
FENCE
+2s·-o·
MAX HEIGHT
6'FENCE
@ TOWNHOMES PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
© TOWNHOMES PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION ® FIRE DEPARTMENT GROUND LADDER ACCESS FF+10'-6"
2ND FLOOR
r 6' FENCE
FF+o·-o·
1ST FLOOR
FF+10'-6"
2NDFL00R
FF+0'-0" 1ST FLOOR
SCDC
Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
9IOELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0
Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)991-«R
"""'
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. •
S.00-ACURA,CA9S050
1 ,..,...,
"'""
...
'""'~'"'""''° ,,.ONIWICll><IIIDII(-~"" ·~-
PROPOSED
TOWNHOME
ELEVATIONS
DJ
- • m A3
_
._1_o_
PL
_/ l '
=e- SOE'//"-~•e
906 ~ONROE
0 PROPOSED SECTION B-B
PL
0 PROPOSED SECTION A-A
i i
I I
(
I
930MONROE
PL
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF + 26'-6"
3RD FLOOR
FF + 15' -0"
2ND FLOOR
FF +10 '-6"
FLOOR TOWNHOMES
FF +0'-0"
1ST FLOOR
FF -13'-6"
BASEMENT
FF SCDC MAX PL
FF +73'-6" Al(C]H]ITJECTUlffi ROOF llN'IBmDED
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
+61 '-0" DESIGN CORPORATION 9IOELCAMOOl£Al,fl00,W.TAQ.AIA,C'.l.!l0!0 6TH FLOOR Ill.Ka.(Q)911-Q7 • FAI.Ka.(,Q)991-«R
"""'
+49' -6"
5TH FLOOR
+Js'-o" SANTA CLARA
4TH FLOOR DOWNTOWN ~9!0~'RC£:,f
SMTAa..w.CA950:50
1),lllUIESlFADRD. •
+26' -6" S.00-ACURA,CA9S050
3RD FLOOR
'1JEAil.llll:S:
FLOOR 1 "'""'""'~'"'""''°·~- '
, ,,_,.,,.°'"'""" IIIDII<,.._..~..,
, r.:s,;:,. ~=st..-Y+""""
,_,.,,._c.,w_""
,.,J,rn•e SJEW,',U( + o'-o"
1 ST FLOOR
-13'-6"
BASEMENT
SECTIONS
DJ
@ PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION (MONROE)
FF +84-8"
MAX HEIGHT
FF +73'-6"
ROOF
FF +61 '-0"
6TH FLOOR
FF +49 '-6"
5TH FLOOR
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF +26'-6"
3RD FLOOR
FF +75'-0"
2ND FLOOR
FF ' -0"
1 ST FLOOR
srucco
TOON"""-
KM 4597-1
srucco
THUNOERSTRI..ICK
KM 4924- 5
==--
l=:111=:I
---- ----
r--•
PAINTED METH. SHEET IN 8RONZE
SNCCO
~511~
srucco
ACTOR.SST.AR
KM 5815-2
I I
L _________________________________ J
BRONZE WINOOW TRIM, TYP. PAINTED METAL SHEET IN 8RONZE
SNCCO
SUGAAS~K
KM 4619-1
mm
srucco
THUNDERSTRUCK
KM 41124-5
PAI KTED METAL STUCCO
SHEET ACTOR'S STAR IN 8ROMZE KM 5815-2 HORIZONTAL
.... BOAAO N<D
~mN SIDIMG
srucco
~N-IGEL
KM 4597-1
SNCCO
CLEAR SAND KM 4569-1
I I FF -13'-6"
BASEMENT L __________________________________________ ~ (j) PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION
BRONZE WINDOW TRIM. l'l'P.
FF
MAX
FF +73'-6"
ROOF
FF +61'-0"
6TH FLOOR
FF +49'-6"
5TH FLOOR
FF +38' -0"
4TH FLOOR
FF +26'-6"
3RD FLOOR
FF +15'-0"
2ND FLOOR
FF +0'-0"
FF -73'-6"
BASEMENT
"""°"'o S-.mN SIDIMG
SCDC
ARCfflTJECT\UlE
[Nf]OO(I IOl§IDN
SAL VA TORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION !llELCAWOOJJ!ALllllll.lA.'rrAClJJ.A.~l!t!O 11!1..lio.(-iM-«:117 • FAX.lio.~fll-W """''
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
!06,9l0,940,!S(Ml:MOOST
SA.'l'J"A~CA,SO,O
134l lllMmFJ.lllD.
SANTAO.W.,CA~
MATERIAL BOARD
(FOR REFERENCE)
A3.3
I
I
h,
Iii
© BKF ENGINEERS
I
' '
~==='=='c="~===!l ;"' IL~EG~E~N~D===~I
'
I
i•
'
I.
'
l.
C
<
0 Cl:
C
<
w
I-
(/)
w
::!!:
0 ::c
-1"
t
;;,,
I 1
'
'
I
I
' '
~--------------------J
, I
J i
!,i ,
Ii
APN
269-20-095
LA~B
PARTNERS.
LLC
906
~ONROE
STREET
2 STORY
WOOO
FRA~E
RESIDENCE
APN
269-20-0~7
LA~B
PARTNERS,
LLC
930
~ONROE
STREET
2 STORY
WOOD
FRA~E
RESIDENCE
' I
I\
," ;
ji
I
I
I
I
I
"'"_... I
1 ~ . u .... r
l[ =·· I
i, 1- i I I' I I \.l_' ___ ,..__3l.JS" (J.2.01") -~:) _________ _L_ I _________ /, _______________ 200.00"(200. 00")DEED ___________________ lf ___ _J./ - S24'09"4.lli:3D2.93"(302.50")R3 - .-4 I :p::E s ....... -«(
i
w
r
*---, ______ ----------------------------- ___ S2♦'09'4.IJ"EJ7,_~T (S24'09'1,i:J7~~•<._ - 'i)R2 _______________ ---------- ---------------- ' , 1 • MONROE STREET --I I _,
·1~. ii
'
I
I
f
I SURVEY NOTES
r·
) I
t I, Ile "'-,
0.91r(R1)
..... ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------ C1.0 .__ ____________________________________________________ _j_ _ __J 9:l:-t' ~ -- - -- .. ______ _ _
'
)
~-~-+
()
I\)
0 Dotoo 01/U/202J
•
'
~ I z,
:0 I ~ 1'.-- I
~I
m,
!!l lo•h
~~,~
I
'
!)jig
ll,i~
0~
8 , I o.:::t
' I •• ,-- 0'-':
µ
I~
~ '
g
~! i! J N66'0 '3J.( J7 ,g l'
- 1- - r-- 111, ~ h ----- '· I} I ~!~!" > .. ~-,o 8 -
---------- ----
~ -= '1 ~!-- I ~~ •
. >f>4 _· \. . 7 1• ·-· .. ; • .:. ;,. ; .
~J i.
,!ii
,.n
H;I.,.) CJ
-=
I
---] ~--
---I
]!
HOMESTEAD ROAD
--- -~3~ 6~n (305~),!3 __ __ ---i-
' '
I
' ' Ii '• ji
' ' ~
1' i <:-,q,_ S6500'43Z,W I~ ""¥
)~; - - - - - ~6&'0J'2J E I~.~• - - --• • -
r /
fii
~!
-~
• I . I-----
•, !'
I
I•
. r" , hi,' I 11
. I, I.
I
,i"~ l
: ·r
I
l
I.
I•
I·
I
.. /t
:t
~ u
~ii- ~
;!!"! '";;l~J~ 1;~:! :i!~~i!;
~8~£~
<.O
(,<
7)0
;;o I
o"' 7) (J1
00 ~~ oO z CD ;;o
co
;= rr,
0 _ (/)
Z -1 G) ;;o
rr,
rr,
-I
'
I•
..
--I
-l l' ~J
,r:. l
\ ,; >
lb
lrl'
if¼,,-t
1!
3§
·]-
l~;i CJ --1 >~::ll
a,s I§
S66'0(f•J"W 52.45'(5.2.50')DfiD
-----r--------"""•;~,""'--- ------
Ii [1
!,
a I ' ,.,.__ __ _,__ _ _._l----t--,,-'- ~--"'""""'·--'~-- "-"-~...+= c:U./LLLLd.J"?..LLL.,c _ _J_ _ <_'.: •_•· ___ _J_ __ 3~ __ _J_ _ N6&lio •E'30♦.II0 (305.00')RJ
FRANKLIN STREET
~ ~ i!; 2' li__ ;:i~ =~
I I - :;? - ~
~ 8 ~
;"_lr~ j,
]
~~
~~! ~
- woo·~·• ,ml·•~"' •~ Sj ' ,a, •_ • __ "5 .• •••. ~. -•'· i ,. ' ' II ,, ,a !I --
l~ l""''
SANTA CLARA
. ---
!
SANT A CLARA DOWNTOWN PROJECT
906, 930, 940, & 950 MONROE STREET
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SANTA CLARA COU NTY
~"' .al =- ~ i;;~ ~ i'°' o o~ ,;i ~Ill i!; ~ ffl ~i "'~ ! ---; 3§ 3~ ~ le:§ ~ gg ! ~ G) ii o, • I : ' • j 1' o " "' ~1 ! ' :, ~ 1
i ~ C ~ ~"' ; ,., ,. --< :i:; i
~ 1r1 II ~ ~ l u u uu i I ! !
11!1 ;111111511 CALI FOR NIA
SA.NJOSE,CA!l511.I
<M- ...s1- ; 1~(r,xJ
9:l:-t' ~ -- - -- .. ________ _
"
------+-$ [ • ------)-r !
HOMESTEAD ROAD
'
)
()
w
0 ,·it:
3::
0 z
:0
0 m
(/)
-t
:0
m
m
-t
;(
Doto, 01/12/2023 I No_
,--
1 jl;/ ~---~
.J
i~
,~
'"
- ',,..::-
---- +--
~
·---r··- ---
!
J---- .- I., ·1~ ]
. ·I
qp
I I
I , i ll 1~:. I : ~
I
I
1~ \
I
I I ' I 1
I' ; i.
I :
I J
I
I I' '
' I I I
I
I I
I
I
I I' I
' I
I :,
r I
I I
I I
I
CJ
f
~
~
qp
l
It f
i
l
~
ll\ fil
.. ] ~ i;
K
-------r--------,--------
. I -~ ~ im·~ I
I L.-c=----,,,,--__,..:.:.....--.-,.,.r,---':---- --f:"."c'.LLU~LilLU~L'.L½ ._l__ _____ _J____ _____ __l_ I !I fl L --
+:_ l'fi c
I ~ ?< -
I " I - '
I ...
I l~ l""''
SANTA CLARA
cW~
FRANKLIN STREET
SANT A CLARA DOWNTOWN PROJECT
906, 930, 940, & 950 MONROE STREET
PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN SANTA CLARA COU NTY !I !i!!il il!I''' !il ~o ~ ~ ~ g !!z!,. ' i!;jSl!i ; t:~ II-~ ~ !: ~ l ~ ~ ! e; ~ I I ~ ii ~ !~ ~ § ~ 6 i z ;l~ ! '§ j ~ ~ ~~ ~ : 0 ~ j l i I j I I
~ uI I •• •I ··I " ·H " --' -.i ' ~;~ • • uuuul, I I " .. - ~ E ' I I I 11!1
;111111511 CALI FOR NIA
SA.NJOSE,CA!l5112
<M- ...s1- ; 1~(r,xJ
I
I
h,
Iii
C
<
0 Cl:
C
<
w
I-
(/)
w
::!!:
0 ::c
TQE)(SI)
<'.l INV 78..W
1"'1
r
I
~--------------------7
MONROE STREET
I
I
I
• l
SECTION A MONRQcSIBEET
1"•10"HORIZ
!"•<'VERT
SECTION B FR.lNKUNSTREET
1"•10'HORI Z 1·-··- 1
~'- GRAPHICSCALE
1 ~ • U--Jo j
Pa~:~~' •1; so--so--so--so- f---so--so--c_ ___ ---ci
. " " ~• i al ----------i
• '
~ r
T
ILEGEND
AOJJ,CENT LOTLJNE
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
COMMUNICATION LINE
DOMESTICWAT£RUNE
GAS Ul<IE
JOINTm£Nc,ji.Jl'IE
S,\NITARY SEWERLINE
STORlolORAIN(Dlf<ECTION)
STOl,lol DRAIN (PERfORAllll)
STORMDRAIN(ll!EATID)
STORM ORAIN (UNTREATED)
STORM DRAIN AREA DRAIN
STORM DRAIN BUBBLER BOX
STORM DRAINUD.NOUT
STORMORAINCATOi BASII<
STORMOR.oJNOl'ERFlOWORAIN
STOl<lol DRAIN .UNCTION SO~
STOl<lolORAINt.lANffOI.E
STORlol ORIJN t.lEOIA
TREATMEN T FllTER
S,.M!TARY SEWERCU:NIOOT
S,.NITAAYSEWERMANHCU:
--+-so-
- f~j - -----=,r-
~soFlRE DEPAAn.lENTCONNECTION
-
c:t roc
© BKF ENGINEERS
I IUTILITY NOTES
~="'fh'lc1 ·la-'---tf+-t-'"Hal/
w T +,
~ ' Rl"l &2.~3 ---J, h'. ll<V77.l50 12"1N - SW
'1NV 7e.8,12" 1N -SE
f/ ~ l{ ~~;- N') W
-~-~
C4.0
m-t:'· !!f=I"'"---·-·--·---·-
'
1 3::
0 z
:IJ
0 m
U)
-I
:IJ
m
m
-I
!/ '
(
I
I
J
• I
I
. ·r-------------- • I .,
'·1
I
.,
·"I
I •· ,I
::
~r;- ■ w,.
r -~.,.. itt·F ........... Wi. ....... ~ T~.;.; ... . "' ,,11--~so-so~o-------y-so- • "'~'ii [i;l I !
~~ :::j .
E •
-4 1·
il~l!
~ .
JI i
1 • w
1r
=
HOMESTEAD ROAD
--------r-------
~~ lliili~
,u~·
!!!•
~~ ..
l
I
~ ,.
~
1 i
i
" I . =~ • ~·::.::..J --- --- . i~
··r■
J;
a
()
C1I
0 I '
. ~ .: C ; 1: . ; .\J
• i~········ JJ a
. i I. I
: -~l 1
,h I
:1 r ·1
I ~
:J ru r 1... r
,. ~- "
r- 1 • .. l "
·1 .. . : 1 I
1-• /·u JJ ·1t· . . · · - . -l "•••• . ~ • ~so---.:. lllli ~ , • "" • (
8 :::::J - -
-- !
, - ' --
:,-.• ~/.-,-- ~ ~ "
""' :,c
FRANKLIN STREET
p11 •fl:
olJ !I,
'••·1
H11 ii~i
iii
m
Ii' ii
"''! . .l o.t, SANT A CLARA DOWNTOWN PROJECT
SANTA CLARA
906, 930, 940, & 950 MONROE STREET
PRELIMINARY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN SANTA CLARA COUNTY i,I
!,I
jliiij!IW!!'!!'il
11 :!Nl!i,i'i,11
,! ,!, !'!' ii 'II !! 1! :•· 'i! 11 l,1 !111111111!1: !• ,,, i1 '1 q l j!I !I 1,, !l !'· 0 •-!i Ii i1 1 ,1 !i :nP. ii :- 111 -1!1,i! i 1 ,, !• '-e,,, ,, •I
',i '"''i' ,, !1 , I jj i[ • ll 1,
! I !I !•jj I ji
! ! ! ~ i ~; iii~ I m,m::iU
m'i:i•il'i
a a a ~ ~;, ~ ~ ~ i ! ... !,'.11,11,
111
ii! .,l
"ii~
~ U)
ii lj!j!j_ lii li'II
!: !: !: I ~ ~~ ~~ e
m;n i'',
'" - ' ' ! . ]b .a ~ " f l 1i ~ 9 S
'II "' H h .,,. iU ll
~ e ~ ; ~s i
;;;
!!
1 • , 1
i
'
!
!~ ~~ H !~ ,. ~~ ' a ' !; ~ r ;1 ~" ~ ~ le ~ ~ ~
.,
I!
! ' 1111
~ I 1 1 I LJ LJ LJ u ::"~": I I @ 11 ■ I • c, 0 gi I J . · .. =~= :: · 11~11·• 1 :1 ., :. • .: 11 II.I
:.IIIIIGI CALIFORNIA
SN<JOSE,CA95111
408- 4&?-Q 199(rAlf)
I
I
h,
Iii
---- __ ...., .. _ .. ~-~---"" ... IHlOI .. ..,._.,,... ™-"""""' ____ ""'""'"- _ ------------1-•--- ________ .,._ * Treatme nt Flow RatH •how,, conform to WH hln!Jlon Staie GULD Specification• _,,,,,,_a,_,._..., __ ..,,
·-""""""--·"""""""--'""",,,..,,.,,, ,... __ ,..,, ... ._......,_ ..................... _,. .. ._.,,._.,,,..,,_, __ _....,.,.,.""' ___ ,.., __ ,,,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,1oe,.....,.,_,_,.,,,_.,..,.ec,,,,-,....,._,.._, .. _.,,.. __ ,,_,, ___ , .. """""""_. _ __, .....,....,.,,, ........ ,,.,._..,._..,,tt,,,:,.,,.,...,.., .. ....,.,.,...,,_..,..._.,,... 1...,..,, .. ...,,.,.,,.. """""'·••""""""'.,.."""""'"'""ConlA««--.,.,,,.,_.,u .,.._,., .,.,,,n.,,,....,s,.,..,.,. ____.... ~-__ .... --., __ ...... , .. --o,_....., .. --- ...... -. Thts_,,......, ____ ,_••""..--'"°""_'..,,,,._., .. ......, ITSSl ____ ..,._...,.,._ ,. .... __
____ ,.. .......
__ " ... _
~-....... - ,.,._, ... ....,.,,,..,,_,,,...,...,,.....,.,,....,.,_ .. """""'..,,.o....,,.., .. ,_....,,_ ............. -,--,.,...,.. .. _____ .... .. .... __ ThtS_, ___ ,_..,,_,,_..,...,.,...,_.,_..., .. "'"'·"""" ""'""'"'"'""'_'"" .. """'"'_, __ .. _...,....._, fd,_. ____ .. _ .... , _ __ ... .. , °""""' __ .. .., --"'-'"'""'"'"' ______ .. __ .. ,...,_.,....,°"~""' , ... ,1,,_.,, ___ .,._.,.,,_~-~ .. -., .. - ... """-~--.._.-.............. _ .. .,..b....,_bO"~",._""'_"_Y .. ----"""'-""--""'""""''"""""-•"""' ••--•, __ .,.eono--"""i..-""'"""'""-rn.-s,.,,""-•"" ... -• .. .,,,.,_""'"'"'-"'"""' __ .. ""....,.""'---~ u.1-- 0.• ._c.,,,,._,...,...,,_,,_.,r,.-s.,i,m,....,.,_.,,r,s--,.,c,11.0m""' caso.,.,.,,..."""'"•••.,.--~ 1"'•"-"""""I""""'"'•"""°"'""'"""""--...,,........,_., '°"""'"' "S20-"4("'511)-•-•--.. •- 1_,_,.._ --__ l'_"_j<rc,_, ... ,,_,.,_, -to.STMC9IIO
. l ~-
l bol,.,.( lo,""""""°-'-""''11'°,SlMCl~ ,.. ___ , .. """'.,. .. _____ .,,,.,,,,.,,__ -,,........,,,__,......,_..,....,.,,.,OOC ... ll8_r,,_ .... -~..,...,..,. S.Plot--.. ~ ...... -_ ..... _"'"1•1--1•1 ................. '"" """'"""" ____ .,.,,.,..,"-STM l). ___ ,_,.ro .STMCS3,..,.,._th,_. _ ,,..,-.., -l"Ot,_. _,,,.,,_co __ ..,., __ ..,.
1._,, ... ...,...,,,...,.,oc,J-toASlMA82"'••98.o1••"""' -""""' ,o.lSTMAl~r,,•"87, .,_40 ___ .,,.."ll'°ASTM ASl~ I ~b-~---•""""'"'_..,.....,;.s)M MS,CUOII -AAS>fTO MlO!i.Tht---,_,,/, .... bo_.,.HS,0.4'-l- ""'""'"°""'",......_ .. JO.ir<O _ _..,g I. .,_,,,.....,,...,.,,,.._,..,_,..,..._._mtoASTMC:n 10,oi..,...,,-~- «ASTMC13ll ..., .... --b<_lodn~- ...... .tt~ ..... , .. .. _.....,,_,,. --~ ... __ __ ,,_......,.........,,_ ......... ..., ..... toASTMAl40.
11. "1t,_.,...,,..,_..,.~--""""°,,_ .. 304SS,,,._l_
8."1t--~·---.. ---........ -·"""''l1•'·''"' --:,ci,,...-ia,..,.c,! .. on,._....,..,.,.,,.~..,""""'..--.,. """ __ ___ .,,_ .... _.,...__.,.,,.30< .,. __ ,o/ASTMA14/l. , ,...,.........,_"" __ ..,..,.,.,.,...,.hood•holL .. _, .. hm>q, ,...:,..__ -•-~IHCffl,r""--""""'"""°''" ,..., ...... ___ - ... ,_ -Pl<: .. ~ .. __ 4 ·,-- .,, _ •½_, "-.. 12 _lll_,,00,-1,llll>"lll.-co,!-,l•-!2<---SlO .,...,,,lll.__,,....,., ... ,,, _ _,_.,.,._;,o..,-~ J. T,..l,ltt,-rr.M"""_,,..• .. ..,..,.....,. .. .,.~.,.....,;,;,o"'•"'"""' .. .,.._ ,,...,,.._ .... ., _____ , .. _., .... ,...,, __ _ ""'"'¥¥-too,t,oig,,_,o,,TN...,,.,,,__,_,..,.._, ½"""'-''""'"'""""'-""'""''"'"""'""""""- -•0-~""'---on•U-~-·"- .. __ , ___ , .. ,_.,_""""'"'9«-• _,,.,,.,.._>tru<1',,, .. _ -.,.,,_,.._.,.,,_ __ ,w., ..... ,,_,..._ .. ., ,..,""'3...,_..,..,_...,, __ ,..._,u.ss-, ••-'""'"'"'"""~,u~-.."'---•-•- _,""""9"°"'1.Do,u"""'~ , ___ ., ...... __ f(w:J ........... .. , ___ ._,,,.,,,_,.,., __ ,,..0,0,C_ ..... _,.,.., ...ir,,,...._,,.,...:11 .. 11 ,omJ ........... .,... ,..._"""' ..... ""''"'G .._,u,s.s...-.,4-0,u,o,.u_s _St __ _ o.l<oi. .. ~=ll'<:bo..--.--, .. -ot• ....,. .. -..1--1.Plrt .. { ... -l""'°'""'-""°'-t:ort.:., , __ o, 1_,.....,,..{?f'l·l!'b1_,._....,,.... .. .,,.,,_.,, ..... <t ,-1--1--t-oo-1 ._to:,,_. .. _ow_S<or-Fl~1t""S.-"''".,_"'~'°""' .,..,....,,..., , __ S.W.ITSSl""'-"'''~-•"'• .. l\l- .....,.,ss,__...,.__.,_,,._"" -~-,,,.......,. ___ __ "°"-'""'_,_,,. """ '"""'""_,_ __ ~ ... .,,., "'"-'"""""""'"'"' ____ ,._" __ .. .. ,....,.,.,_,_,.., .. ...,...._.. ...... ~,.,.~
1.1 --
u ~ 1-" Doi,_, ___ _
1.1 -C,,0-1:1),oSO:, __ , , ...
1.1.1-
111--Cltsig,o
11,0.,,,.,......,...,,.
" Ul _ __,,
1 ... no.w .. ......., 3-u_,_., __ _
l.4J~
..... Sotttj!<,uot"""
lH Joo,q 3,4& -r.i.-.ii 3.Ul-11.l½--"'
'"""" 3.4&1-otC..-'""lon-.
,._s.c,...,01m--..~-°"""'"'.-..,.t>ot,n-.. S Soc•""C)UJO.r,,-.. t,,_,,""_k>.lil-- c.-02aro-en,,;on ___ l>rud 1..;,_SWPW, ,.. __,
,._.,.,_.., __ o.-"""9o___,,.,,._...,.,~
-mm-,,._, _ _, __ ..,,
....... ._, ..... 1on.,.,,..,,.., ·· · """"""""_ ... _ ... -· ..,...,,,.,.,.,.,..,,1o_ ... ,_ ... holl1.,..,,.,._..,.,.,...,._,,,,..._ thom_,,,....,.......,~-"'°b"Otto_!_D_,, .. ....,......,, ..... _ _, __._ ... .,. ... .. rttt,-___ ~ t""9"tho_.-.:j_ ....,_.,, __ L_ttn.\)hth,Sl """""'' te, C. """-"'""_s,,, ____ .. , ....... ,;,o..,, ....... _ .. ..,..'" ... ___ ,,, ______ ..... s,,.,m __ _ D. --···--•u..<-<o.-10Ul0\. 1 .. s.:,,,_., ,-.,_s,,,_ ....... _ .............. ,, ..... .,,, ....... _, _,,..-...,_,_ ... ,_ ... ,.. .. _ __,,, .. __ .,,,..,...__ l.1.4 CM111yA,...-onco , .......... ~ ....... ., _ _ .. .,.,. Sy>t,m ...... - -lonby ,..E,.__,.,_.,,,...,,,.m_,.,_..,.,,._.,,.,._,.. _,...,_,.,__,_ __ .. _ .. ...,..ojocto:,tho_ .. ,..E_ ~--·-~-... ..,. ...... """'""""""'(>, __ .,., 1100....,..s.-,.Stoco...,,Cl<-~l\le "·""""'_...,.. ................. -........ ...._ __ ...,...._.,.""' ,.., ____ _ J,,c..-.,-.,, ___ __ ,.,., """ .. __ _ , .. ._,,.,....,. ,. .,,. .. ..,...,.,.,¥1'_,..., .. .,.,_, ____ , .. ....,., ...... ,_ .... , ... - ..,.,.,_Ion_,_ ........ __ , _,, .. on, .. .,...,. ..
C .• .,.......,.._,,.,,,.....,,,.,.,,.. .. ,_,,.,_ltl..,..,.,,. ..... _,.12...._., ,_,,,,, ,....,,,,,,._.,1 ____ ,...,. ___ ...,." __ ) .. .. ~0UI n..-.;......., ............... ___ ,_._ .,_, _..,....,..,,_, .. __ _ ! .,,,_"'""'"'-·"-"'_,,""'" ..
- ...... - ' ,,,,_,..,, ____ .,,-.;o,,too.,,,, ... _.
.__L.oc_,..,..,_,,C>-,g .... , .......... ____ _ .,,,__ .. __,_.,"""'"" ___ .,,..__,,,_ ., __ ,,..,s,,,,..,,.~-.... ----....... ..., -----·--- """''·"'" ~ ,.,,,......,._ .............. ___ _.,.,,._ "''"'""..-~""' ...., .. _.,...,.._,,,,,,,,,"" .......... _ ... ,_ ._......,_.._.., .. ,..__.-.:jl,...,....i.-()11 .... ,e,..<Sl<l ll) L MSl<TOMlte-,;,.,- ...,eo, .....
1.-Soc;tt,,..T""""'""'-•...S!M I L .lSTM .. lC:L30B•....., .... - OAS1M .. l-S-W.t,P\.-,.O:,Cont<eo,- ,. ASTM"18S •Stooi-W.O --,l'\.,"'C....--
ll..lSTM_,ill!·-ML0.b"""-"'Coo<mo- o, .lSTM.Ull•Sl"'_w., ___ O,,O:,"'°"bC...0-- . .lSTMAS1'• Dol-..,..._-,.._.._,,.. ___ ,
~ AS•MBm---"1t<¥St.e,_Plot, ~ A5TMC3l•S.----,-~omet., .. Sloolol l A5TMC131·C<,,o--.._.,lht,,.,,.,..,.--..,.,,,.,.,,.,_..,........., JA5!MC15(1-""'"""c.,,,.,, ,.ASTMC471 •--C<nt.-•t1-- LAST"ICY!i•- Hy1hW::c.m.,,_ m.A5TMC,0Sf--St.-no.,ion_b __ C<nt,_ ~ASTMC8'1 """''"'"""'" ·---...... S!ru<tum ~ ASTMCtlU· ... -of __ ,_,..,,-., o AS•Mewl--b---""-t>18o.,Soctlon1U."!, ...._"' ___ , , ...s•Mcuo,-......_er, . .............,c.rn.,,,°"""-- ' ASTM,-.f..,_,_,., ,__,,_c,,,,o<t-"'S.. ................ [lk,t AIIMP-S..l-l'rodffl
H,TSS,lot"..._....'°""'
,,....__...,..., ___ .,.,.,.._ .. ........., .... eono-oc"'" ___ ..,01ncrs..o,,,,"'"..,..,,_ L-Cr-Smrmw,to,_RI,_ ,_ .. ___ ,,_,... __ ,, ___ ..,.
,........,...,...,.,........
J.St>oo"'~""' ----'"''"-""'"'''"""''"''""""""-"'""'"""" ..... ~--'""""""""'""""-"'-"'"'"" ,
....,..._..,.
_ ....... __ .,_,_ ,,,,_,..,,., .. _, .. _""' __ __ ..,.,"""""-_ .. _ •-~-&--- ,..___..,.,..,,,_..,,..,,," __ ,, __ ,, ,.,.,.._,_.,_.,.,._,,__~~ ... ,lod .. , .. ~
1.-.-.,,. 1.1..-..,u,.....,.,_ 3--· . __ ,,_., ___ _
c._,,_,..,.,__._....,. __ ""' ... ___..,.,..,.._,Sobm!l!Olfo, .. __..,._,,___ ..,-....,,,_....,,_ .,..-.,i.., .. .,, __ , .. .._,.,_,.,..,....,..,"' __ "'""'""- -·,-·•">-·-"'"""""""'°' .... .,""'"'"""""'""""''" ., ... ______ ..,,""'""'--°""""""""'' .. _ ;~;::.:":.:.:0C::.,,,=:·:::=:~
._E_,,.....,...,,,.....,,.,.._.,..., ___ ,~-- -""""'••LL•c,-- ., ___ ,. __ _ _ .......... ,.0.-.,., .. ,,....., .. ....,..,.,.. .. __ ., .. .._ __ ....._,,, .. ,, ................ ............ .... """"'_._..,.,.., :~::::::
._o._,.,.,....,..,,_.,,.. .. _,.. .......... _._,.,. .,,_ _ _ .,.1,..,...,.._"""1..., __ ~om- •---~-- .,_ ... -...... ... _..,.., _. .... __ -.. ...,_..,, _,_,., __ ............ ,, _ .. """-"""""'-·"""-"'··» ~-· _____ ,,, ___ .. ...., __ ,,_.,.,_,.,,.-~.,,.---• w··"' .,.--n,qv....,. """'.,...., ___ thoOott""'otwtototl_,_ _,,..,........,.........,,,,~~ol-t,...,w .. ~- ... - --~ ol-~t"'o.tdl"""""_""_""_"'_""_ ...... ,..,, ,.,.,,__,,,,_ .. .,.._..,._,, ......... ,, ..... ....._..,"' ....... ,,....,.,.. ...... .,., __ ----.. -.. ,--,· - .. R, ____ ·+ ..... _ .. ___ , .. _ . ., ___ , .. , ________ .., '""''•"o,e,-oto<....,11-!0Jml,Aoc>""""'""""""'",oee"°" --..--1on02,oo·r,,--· ..-. __ .... .. ,..---...--· ..,_ ..... E-.M--n•""-"' .... ~~ ... -... ""' ----·-""'""" ___ """''"''""'
© BKF ENGINEERS
i
,j
! ! ~ i'i~ ~ ~
~ j f ! l o,.,,..-,~ Numbor
C5.1
I
I
h,
~
Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Materials & Waste Management
No n~Hazanlous Matcrfals
0 Berm and cover s1ockpiles of sand. din or oLherco,isLmctio n material with tarps whe n r.:iin is forecast or when they are not in use.
D Use (but do n't ovemsc) reclaimed water for dust control.
D Ensure dust control waterdocsn·1 leave site or discharge to stom1 drnins.
Hazardous Materials
□ Labe l all hazardous materials and hazardous w::1stcs (such as pesticides. paints. thinners, sol\'c nts. fuel. o il. a nd antifreeze) in accord:ux:e wi1h Oty, COlrnty. Slate and Fedeml regulmions. □ Store hazardous materials and wastes in wate r tig hl containers. store in appropriate secondary co ntai nmcnl. and cover them at the end of every workday or during wet weather or when rain is forecast.
D Follow manufacturer's application instmctions for k 17.ardous materials and do not use more than necessary. Do not apply chemicals outdoors when min is rorecas1 within 24 hours. □ Arra nge for appropriate disposal of all hazardous wastes.
Wa stcMana1,.oemcnt
D Co\·er ard maintain dumpsters. Check frequently for leaks. PL.1ee dumpsters under roofs or cover wilh 1arps or pl:1s1ic sheeting secured aro und the outside oftJte dmnpster. A plastic liner is recommended to prevent leaks. Never c lean out a dtunpster by hosing it down on 1he constmction site.
□ Place po rtable toilels away from sto nn drains. Make sure they are in good working order. Check frequently for leaks.
D Dispose of all wastes and demolition debris properly. Recycle materials and wastes that can be recyc led. including so l,•ents.. water• based paints. vehicle flu ids. broken asphalt and concrete. wood. and cleared vegetation.
D Dispose of liquid residues from painlS, 1him1ers. solve nts. glues. and cleaning fluids as ha7,ardous waste.
□ Keep si1e free of liuer (e.g. lunch items. cigarelle buns). □ Prevent litter from unco,•ered loads by co,1eri ng loads that are being transported to and from site.
Co nstnu:tion Entrances and Perimeter
D Establish and maimain effective perimeter controls and stabilize aU construction entrances and exits to sufftciern ly co111rol erosion and sedimelll discharges from site and tracking off site.
□ Sweep or vacumn any street tracking immediately and secure sediment source 10 prevclll further tracking. Never hose down streets to clean up tr.JCking.
Constmction projects are required to implement year-round stormwater Bl\1Ps.
Equipment Management &
Spill Control
Maintenance and Parkin g
□ Designate an area of the constmction site. well away
from st.reams or stonn drain inlets and lilted with
appropria!e BMPs. for auto and equipment pa rk ing.
and sto rage.
D Perfom1 major maintenance. repair jobs. and ve hicle
and equipment washing off silc.
□ If refueling or vehicle maimenance must be done
onsite. work in a benned area away from storm drains
and over a drip pan or drop cloths big enough to collect fluids. Recycle or dispose of fluids as hazardous waste. □ If vehicle or equipmem cleaning must be done onsitc.
clean wit h water only in a benned area that \\~II not
allow rinse water to nm into gutters. StreclS. storm
drains. or surface waters.
□ Do not clean vehic le or equipment onsilc using soaps. so lvenlS. degreasers, or steam cleaning equipment. and do not use diesel oil to lubricate equipment or parts
onsite.
Spill -Pn..,·cntion and Control
□ Keep spill cleanup materials (e.g .. rags. absorbenls and c:11 lit1er) available at the constniction site at alt times. □ Maintain all Ychicles and heavy equipment. I n.spccl
frequently for and repair leaks. Use drip pans to catch leaks until rcp:1irs arc made.
□ Clean up leaks. drips and otJter spills immediately and dispose of cleanup materials properly.
□ Use d ry cleanup methods whenever possible
(abso rbent materials. cat liner and/or rags).
□ Sweep up spilled dry materials immediate ly. Never
attempt to "·wash them away .. with water, or bury
them.
Ea11hmoving
Grading ,wd Ea rthwork
□ Sc heduJe grading and ex:cavmion work
during dry weather.
D Stabilize all denuded areas. install and
mainta in temporary erosion coiurols (such
as erosion co ntro l fabric or bo nded liber
matrix) luttil vegetation is eslablisbed.
D Remo\'e existing \'egetatio n only when
absolu1ely necessary. plant lempor:11)'
vegetation for erosion control on slopes
or wlrre construction is not i.mmedia1clv
planned. ·
□ Prevenl sediment from migmting offsite
an:I. protect stom1 drain inlets. drainage
courses and streams by installing and
maintaining appropriate BMPs (i.e. silt
fe nces. grave l bags. fibe r rolls. temporary
swales. etc.).
D Keep excavated soil on site and transfer ii
to dump tmcks on site. not in the streets.
Co ntaminated Soils
□ lf any of the following co ndi tions are
obse rved. test forconL.1 ntination and
contact the Regional Water Quality
Control Board:
• Unusual soil conditions. discoloration.
or odor.
• Abandoned lurlerground tanks.
• Abandoned wells
• Buried barrels. debris. o r trash.
□ If the above conditions :ire obse,ved.
document any signs of potential
contamination and clearlv mark them so
they arc not distmrbcd b)• co nstmction
activities.
Concrete Management
and Dewatering
Concrete Mana1,.>cment
□ Slore bolh dry and wet materials Wl(icr
cover. protected from rai nfall and nmoJT and
away from stom1 drains or waterways. Store
materials off the ground. on pallets. Protect
dry mate rials from wind.
□ Wash down exposed aggregate concrete
only when U~ wash waler can ( I) flow onto
a dirt area: (2) drajn onto a be nned surface
from which it ca n be pwnpcd and disposed
of properly: or(]) block any slo nn drain
inlets and vacuum washwater from the
guuer. If possible. sweep lirst.
□ Wash out concrete equipment/trucks offsite
or in a designaled washout area onsite.
where ti~ water wi ll llow into a temporary
waste pit. and make sure wash water docs
not leac h into the underlying soil. (See
CASQA Co nstmclion BMP Handbook for
properly designed concrete washouts.)
Dt..,,·atcring
□ Discharges of groundwater or captured
mnoff from dew:nering operations mus\
be property managed and disposed. Whe n
possible. send dewatering discharge to
landscaped area or sanitary sewer. If
dischargi ng to the sanitary sewer. call your
local \\astewatcr treatment plant
□ Diven nm-on water from olJsile away from
all d..isitubed areas.
0 When dewatering. notify and obtain
approval from u~ local mu1ticipality before
discharging water to a s1reet guneror stonn
drain. Filtrnlion or diversion through a basin.
lank. or sediment trap may be required.
Paving/Asphalt Work
Paving
D Avoid paving and seal coating i.n wet
we:uher orwhen rain is forecast. to
prevenl materials tha\ hm·e not cured
from conwcting stormwater mnoff.
□ Cover storm drain inlets and manholes
when applying sea l coat. slurry sea l. fog
seal.or similar materials.
D Collect and recycle or prope rly dispose of
excess abrasi\·e gravel or sand. Do NOT
sweep or wash it into gutters.
Sawcutting & As11halr/Concrt!lc Removal
D Protect stonu drain inlets during saw
cutting.
□ If saw cul slurry e!l1ers a catch basi•L
clean it up immediately.
□ Shovel or vacuum saw cut shill)' deposits
ard remove from the site. When making
saw cuts. nse as li1t)e water as possib\c.
Sweep up. and properly dispose of all
residues.
Painting & Paint Removal
Painting Oe.tnu11 .tnd Removal
D Never clean brushes or rinse paint
containers into a street. guller, storm
drain. or stream.
D For water-based paints. paint out brushes
lo Uie extent possible. :md rinse into a
drain that goes to lite sanitary sewer.
Never pour paint down a storm drain.
□ For oil-based pa.inlS. paint out brushes to
the extent possible and clean with thinner
or soh·ent in a proper conta.incr. Filter and
reuse th.inners and solvems. Dispose of
excess liquids as ha.7.mdous waste.
□ Sweep up orcolleet paint chi ps and dust
fro m non-hazardous dry stripping aixl
sand blasting into plastic drop cloths and
dispose of as trash.
□ Chemica l paint stripping residue and chips
and dust from marine pain\S or paints
containing lead. mercury, or tributyltin
must be disposed ofas hazardous waste.
Lead based p.1i111 removal requires a statecerti fi ed co ntractor. □ Clean up spills on din are:1s by digging up and
properly disposing of contaminated soil. La.mlscaping
□ In are:1s of known or suspec ted
conlaminat.io1L call your local agency 10
determine whether the ground wate r musl be
tested. Pmnped grour.:iwatcr may need to be
collected and hauled off.site fo r tre:umern
and proper disposal.
Pollution Prevention Program
□ Report significant spills to the appropriate local spill respoase agencies inm1ediately. lftl1e spill poses a
sign..ilic:rnt bazrd to human health and safety. propeny or the environme nt. you must report it to the State
Office of Emergeocy Services. (800) 852-7550 (2➔
hours).
D Protect stockpiled landscapi ng materials
from wind and rain by sto ring them under
L.'lf))S al I year-round.
D Stack bagged material on pallets and
under cover.
0 Discontinue application of any erodible
landscape material within 2 days before a
forecast min e\'ent or during wet weather.
Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines ofup to $10,000 per day! © BKF ENGINEERS
C6.0
~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~---~ I
I
h,
(N) FH
= ==>--------------::g. ..
PIERCEFIRETRUCI<
(105.\oERTIC'-1./100'
HORIZONT...i.)
FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS:
PEIICDTA(l[ ~ 8.s£WJ<lf1ST ROOR (Ill" I-A~ l1,7M / M,022 • PU!CoalA(l[~~STOltVIU.DtlG(IJl"l- •):N,ffl/M,022 •
11ECAAU1 Fil[ fl.CM' PO! CONSlflUCT1(rl TWE 1-A e M,(1;22 IF (TAIU 81~1(1)}. 1.000 Q>W (r•-~J."°'Q>W'lOll,.,.,,_,._PM"CFCT-81~2.-lnoto, - - I.COlCPM) (r--"':'.""'"""',:'=.!"~.::-:!';_n 'e:"·'(')'::!.".,"':'....., ,.oooCPMJ ~
• - - 2- Sltl'IYIU.Oll«,(J,..,-ei,
JOTAl. rll( MS(TAkl: 81~1(2)) •
87.~~;;~=~--~- TA9.E~02.I),
- -DIST/IICC(fll(ll-'l<YP<JIH tl'mtEEl~OO-'llfl!Cf<JA(l[JO AFll)c Hill fl NIMBDl:(FDISJM:Fll!:lllDRANTS.
="c.-~1.:'=~,Slll[[T) (AI.ONGllQiOESIU,00().1,1))
~--------------~
I I
I
fj:-:::j:::::;;;~::::=::;;;;=-::,=:,==".,=1.:';, ;".,-=~=YD::~:-:.~=NT-::_:-:::~;i-- __________________ _J I J APPROX 20· I '§ t
MONROE STREET (FIRE ACCESS ROAD)
(N) MIXED-USE BUILDING
ROOF ELEVATION: 73.5'
(E) FH
LEGEND
(E)
FH
(E) FH , ~--------------------------------------
(
© BKF ENGINEERS
_..
GRAPHIC SCALE wwo T
C7.0 Iii ._ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ _.._ __ __, I
I
h,
PROJECT SUMMARY:
1. O'MIIER/SUBOl'VIDER: LAMB PARlNERS LLC.
535 MIDOLEFIELD RO, SUITE 190
MENLOPARK. CA94025
2. MAP PREPAREO BY: BKF ENGINEERS CONSULTING ENGINEERS
17JON.FIRSTSTREET,SUITE600
SAN JOSE, CA 95110
(408) 467-9100
ca-lTACT:PATR1CKCHAN,P.E.(LICENSEfC831B9)
3. GEOTECHNICAL ENG.: CORNERSTONE EARTHGROUP
1259 OAKMEAO PARKWAY
SUNNYVALE, CA940B5
(408) 245-4620
ca-lTACT: MAURA F. RUFF"ATTO, P.E.
4. APN 269-20-086/087/095
5. GENERAL PL.AN USE: eo,jMUNITY MIXED-USE
7. PROPOSED LANO USE: MIXED-USE (RESIDENTIAL/MULTI-FAMILY ANO COMMEROAL/RETAIL-RESTAURANT)
8. EXISTING ZONING: HT-HISTORICAL COMBINING
(906 MONROE ST. ANO 1341 HOMESTEAD ST., APN 269-20-095):
CG-GENERAL OFFICE
(930 MONROE ST., APN 269-20-087);
CC-COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
(940-950 MONROE ST., APN 269-20-086);
0.88 ACRES (38,217-SF)
SILTY CLAY LOAM/SANDY LOAM
13. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 12- FT
14. FLOOD ZONE ELEVATION: ZONE X
15. NUMBER OF STORY: 1 LEVEL Cf" BASEMENT
TO'MIIHOI.IES: 2 STORIES (ABOVE GRADE)
ca-lOOMINIUM: 6 STORIES (ABOVE GRADE)
16. OCCUPANCY GROUP: R-2 (5 STORIES Cf" RESIDENTIAL, 2 STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL), A-2 (GROONO LE'.£!.) ANO S-2 (PARKING AT BASEMENT LEVEL)
17. TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: TO'MIIHOl,IES: V-A
NOTES:
ca-lOOMINIUM: I-A FOR BASEMENT ANO GROONO LEVEL. V-A FOR UPPER 74'-o"
60 CONOOMINIUl,I UNITS PROPOSED
LOT 1- 55 RESIOENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS
1 ca-lOOMINIUM UNIT FOR ALL FLOOR CO,jMON AREAS
2 BASEMENT PARKING GARAGE CONOOI.IINIUM UNITS
3 RETAIL CONOOMINIUM UNITS
LOT 2- (E) SINGLE FAMILY HOME
LOT 3- (E) SINGLE FAMILY HOME
1. THE FILING OF THIS VESTING TENTATIVE MAP IS CONCURRENT TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING ANO THE PL.ANNEO OEVELOPI.IENT PERMIT PLN2020-14457.
THOSE PLANS ANO STANDARDS 'MU BE INCLUDED IN THIS SUBMITTAL
2. THIS MAP PRO-..,OES FOR THE CREATION OF TWO SEPARATE LOTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIOENTIAL ANO A SINGLE. OEVELOPABLE LOT TO BE FURTHER SUBOIVIOEO ,._,A SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL CONOOMINIUl,I MAP INTO 60 ca-lOOMINIUM UNITS.
3. UTILITY OEOICATl<»IS: THE ON-SITE STORM ORAIN, SANITARY SEv.£R, ANO WATER SYSTEMS 'MU BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
4. ANY EXISTING WEU(S) ON THE SUB.£CT PROPERTY: TSO.
5. ANY POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AREAS WITHIN ANO ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ANO ON LANDS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT THERETO: NONE.
6. NO EXISTING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE EASEMENTS OF UTILITY, DRAINAGE, SEVIER, PARKING ACCESS ANO OTHER PURPOSES.
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
MONROE STREET
FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
906, 930, 940 & 950 MONROE STREET
AND 1341 HOMESTEAD STREET
CITY OF SANT A CLARA, CALIFORNIA 95050
PLN2020-14457
LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1·-so·-0·
BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARING OF S66W'43"W ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF FRANKLIN
STREET, BETWEEN MADISON STREET ANO MONROE STREET AS SHO'MII HEREON, ANO AS SHOv.111 ON BOOK 442 OF MAPS, PAGE 26.
BENCHMARK: THE BENCHMARK USED FOR THIS SURVEY IS BENCHMARK A-9, FOOND AT BENTON STREET ANO MONROE STREET, SE CORNER, TOP OF LETTER •c• IN WORD "CAL" ON TOP OF CATCH BASIN HOOD.
ELEVATION• 78.21 FEET (NAV088 DATUM)
UTILITY COMPANY:
I. ELECTRICITY SILICON VALLEY POWER
OTY OF SANTA CLARA.
MISSION TRAIL WASTE SYSTEM (CllAN GREEN)
""""'-
AC
AD
A>N
BLOG
BM
BW
C&G
c,a.
CON
CR
eve
DIA
DWG
ECR
EL
EP
EVC
EX
F/C
FT
tT
LF
IE
STREET CENTER LINE
MINETA SAN JOSE
INTER~i~~ Ci
VICINITY MAP
NTS
SHEET INDEX
SilW
OH
TM- 2
llillBlfllllli
TITLE SHEET
SITE PL.AN/MAP SHEET
© BKF ENGINEERS
ABBREVIATIONS
WOBlfllill! """"'- WOBlfllill!
ASPHALT CONCRETE LG LIP OF GUmR
AREA DRAIN MH MANHOLE
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER MON MONUMENT
BUILDING (N} NORTH/NEW
BENCH lr.lARK N.A.V.O. NORTH AMERICAN ~TICAL DATUM
:~~orJA~Ji_ N.G.V.O. NATIONAL GEODETICS VERTICAL DATUM
NO., I NUMBER
CURB & GUmR NTS NOT TO SCALE
CENTERLINE P.A.E.
CONCRETE PCC NCRETE
CURB RETURN PL
CENTER OF VERTICAL CURVE
DIAMETER " PV
DRAWING R RADIUS
END OF CURB RETURN RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
ELEVATION " RIGHT
EDGE OF PAVEMENT ROW RIGHT OF WAY
END VERTICAL CURVE (S) ORS. SOUTH EXISTING ST. STREET FACE OF CURB STD STANDARD FEET SW SIDEWALK LEFT T'<I'. TYPICAL LENGTH UGEE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL EASEMENT LINEAR FEET ., VERIFY IN FIELD W/ ~TH
(W} WEST
W.U.E. WATER UTILITY EASElr.lENT
CEITFtcATl!I 6 APPROVALS
Drawing Numt>a-:
~ ~ rn ~-------------------------------------------------------_..L _____ _..L...!.1~"'-'2!:...J rn
2. AU.IISTN«:ESIINDOIIOISKIISN1£SHOlflNFEE1
AHDD£OIIAI.Sll£REa'.
GRAPHIC SCALE
1-\-+K-
© BKF ENGINEERS
!LEGEND ~ s
"' f- ;;; ---- (/) "'o ---- t;; -,:o
---- u- "' "' ----- G:gw;
:z:<0~~ w'1
d a:,\;:', K g5~:g
~VlVJV 11
~ ~
~1
-< q z
e "'
::J
~ I- -<
u SAMTAAYSE'IIERa..EAHOUT w SAMTAAYSE'IIERM~Ot.E ~ w SIORMORAINCAT01BASIN Iii! a: SIORMOR.u!OROPINLIT !!!I I- SIORMORAIN M.t.NHOlE @ a. 1/) c( w1- SURYEYSTREETMONl.l,IENT C :IE Ow
a:w l5 wz::i::: > 011> 1=
i= :iEa. s
ce oce s
---------------
I- U) :IE ;:; z o,' "" w z d C0NCRET£ SOCIIM.K/PA\OIENT I- '4c( ;<:
la\\\\\\11 <., • .J z
z 00. oi IRIMCAlED OCM: m i= Vw (Alaffll-) 1/) 0) I-
;1 ~ ~ ocn
(I) \OllCM. CIJR8 a- GUTlIR 0)
.., u;
0 ;:; GROUl«l El.£V~TICII 0) (P£R.C£RIN..SUM'I) :'i OISllNCIMECNla>T CJ u (PER.<£RIN..SUM'I) ;'.':
z
.:\
CEITFtcATl!I 6 APPROVALS
Drawing Numb.-:
TM-2
2 "' 2
20 1
10 10
2 2
4 15
ARROW
TRANSF. LOCATING
20 5
26 20
2 2 7
2 9
8 4
2 3
25 25
EF/A2
ES/L2
EU/E2
F/A2
S/L2
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC SERVICE ENTRANCE BY
U/E2 U/E UTILITY/ELECTRICAL
F/A FIRE ALARMS/L OR ST. LT. STREET LIGHTCLARA BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION CODES.DEVELOPER IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF SANTA 13 31
9 11 12 13
20 23
15 18 19
26 26
2524
25 24
19 19
21 21
18 18
13 34
EXISTING
USE OF CONDUIT
EXISTING
(ABOVE NOTATION TYPICAL)
NUMBER OF CONDUITS
SIZE OF CONDUIT
E2P5E2S5
2P52S5
"A" OR "B"
PB-ID#
TYPE "A" OR "B"
PLEE
SHEET 34
COUPLINGS ANYWHERE ON THIS JOB. ONLY USE
CONDUITS/TRENCH INSTALL PER NOTE
ELECTRICAL EASEMENTPROPERTY LINE
S OR SEC SECONDARYP OR PRI PRIMARY
LOW VOLTAGE PULL BOX
PER NOTE
PER NOTE
PER NOTE
LVPB
PB
DEPT. UNDERGROUND ENGINEERING
GUARD PIPE PER NOTETYPE "A" OR "B" AS REQUIRED
PRIMARY PULLBOX PER NOTELABEL "PB-ID#" (USE ID# SHOWN
(AS NOTED ON PLAN)S/L, LV, OR U/E
FOR TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION SEE UG-1000 REV.5
BENDS WHERE CALLED FOR BY CONSTRUCTION NOTE.
NOTE!!! DO NOT USE FLEX CONDUIT, OR DEGREE
NEW/INSTALL
MH-ID#V-ID#
REVISION 5.SEE THE CORRESPONDING PAGE NUMBER IN UG-1000
FOR DETAILS OF THESE BALLOON NOTE NUMBERS
ON PLAN)ON PLAN)
MH
V
REV. 5UG-1000
STANDARD, REVISION NUMBER 5.CITY OF SANTA CLARA ELECTRIC PRIMARY SWITCH VAULT PER NOTEPRIMARY MANHOLE PER NOTELABEL "MH-ID#" (USE ID# SHOWNLABEL "V-ID#" (USE ID# SHOWNON PLAN) 32 16
33 34 37
LEGEND
SPLICE BOX U/E 20 20
14 14
ARROW
TRANSF. LOCATING
CONCRETEAPRON
TRANSFORMER PAD PER NOTE 15 15
EXISIN. .ONTPClE
EXlSTtlG CM1IOO UIE
ElCISIKl.-"1-' TI)-
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
MADISON ST
I
I
I
I
I I
-, r
11 I
I
""T'1
:::0
)>
z
;;,:;:
C
z
(/)
--i
~S~¥f~/L
"'rD
J---,;~~., f i l~rAZ
,.,
/
..... ....., ..
~ r,,.. 0 0
0 0 =O
0 DO
-
0 DO
0 oo ll
ooo IDI
ooo Ill
00 Q3fu IJ
CSffiffi'"""'"'"""'· U/E ~-- ---
T9
T10
T17
T16
T15
T13 T12 T11
T6
T7
T19
T20T22T21T23
T25
T24
T26
T5
T14
T18
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
TO REMAIN
MONROE STREET
HOMESTEAD ROAD
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
TO REMAIN
EXISTING
STRUCTURE
TO REMAIN
PROPOSED GARAGE
PROPOSED
TOWNHOME
PROPOSED
TOWNHOME
PROPOSED
TOWNHOME
PROPOSED
TOWNHOME
PRIVATE PATIO PRIVATE PATIO PRIVATE PATIO PRIVATE PATIO FIRE ACCESS LANE 8' TALL FENCE
FENCE
GROUND FLOOR
DRIVEWAY
PERVIOUS
CONCRETE SEE
DETAIL #1/C0.5
6'-0" TALL FENCE
ROJECT
TREE MITIGATION
TREE # DIAMETER MATURE HEIGHT RATIO BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME REMOVE OR RETAIN T1 28" N/A 4:1 LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA LIQUIDAMBAR REMOVE T2 12" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS CERASIFERA PURPLE LEAF PLUM REMOVET3 12" 20' N/A PYRUS CALLERYANA CALLERY PEAR RETAIN T4 11" 20' N/A PYRUS CALLERYANA CALLERY PEAR RETAIN
T5 6" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS CERASIFERA PURPLE LEAF PLUM REMOVET6 21" N/A 3:1 LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA LIQUIDAMBAR REMOVE T7 26" N/A 4:1 LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA LIQUIDAMBAR REMOVE T8 6" 25' N/A DIOSPYROS KAKI PERSIMMON RETAINT9 6" 15' N/A CITRUS SPP. CITRUS RETAIN T10 6" 25' N/A DIOSPYROS KAKI PERSIMMON RETAINT11 28" N/A 4:1 CATALPA BIGNONIOIDES COMMON CATALPA REMOVE T12 6", 5", 5" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVE
T13 4", 4", 3", 3" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVE T14 4", 4", 4" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVET15 4", 4", 4" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVET16 12" N/A 2:1 QUERCUS PALUSTRIS PIN OAK REMOVE T17 11" N/A 2:1 QUERCUS PALUSTRIS PIN OAK REMOVE
T18 4", 3", 3" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS CERASIFERA PURPLE LEAF PLUM REMOVE T19 4" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS SPP. PLUM REMOVE
T20 8", 8", 7", 7" N/A 2:1 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM GLOSSY PRIVET REMOVE T21 16", 9" N/A 2:1 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM GLOSSY PRIVET REMOVET22 12", 7", 5" N/A 2:1 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM GLOSSY PRIVET REMOVE T23 8", 6" N/A 2:1 CITRUS SPP. CITRUS REMOVE
T24 11" N/A 2:1 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA QUEEN PALM REMOVE T25 8" N/A 2:1 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA QUEEN PALM REMOVET26 6" N/A 2:1 MALUS SPP . APPLE REMOVE TOTAL: 49 - 24" REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED
T# T# EXISTING TREE
TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING TREE
TO BE RETAINED
SITE TREES
NAME COUNT WUCOLS SIZE NOTES
CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS - MULTI 1 VL 24" STANDARD - MULTI TRUNK LAGERSTROEMIA X 'MUSKOGEE' 4 L 24" STANDARD
TOTAL: 15 - 24" BOX TREES PROVIDED. LIMITED SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL 28 MITIGATION TREES.
ARBUTUS UNEDO - STANDARD 7 L 36"
FTP PLANTING LEGEND
NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES
ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM 'LA LUNA' 80 1G M
CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER' 20 1G L SUCCULENTCAREX DIVULSA 54 1G L C. TUMULICOLA, HORT.
CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM 'EL CAMPO' 17 5G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HEMER0CALLIS 'TOYON' 2 1G M 18"O.C.IRIS DOUGLASIANA 20 1G L LIMONIUM CALIFORNICUM 17 1G L
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA 'BREEZE' 5 1 5G L
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 2 5G LPENSTEMON X GLOXINIOIDES 'MIDNIGHT' 7 1G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE SAMBUCUS MEXICANA 1 5G L
SEDUM 'AUTUMN JOY' 12 1G L
OFFSITE PLANTING LEGEND
Name Count SIZE WUCOLS NOTES
AGAPANTHUS 'BABY PETE' 537 1G L 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE FRAGARIA VESCA 73 1G MLOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA BREEZE 115 1G L
PLANTING
PLAN
REVISED: 01/26/2023
DESIGN BY: RJDDRAWN BY: GEM/MO
SCALE: 1"=10'-0"
L1.1
DESIGN FOCUS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
& CONSTRUCTION
DESIGN
FOCUS
PO BOX 485
BEN LOMOND, CA 95005
(831) 336-3100
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,930,940,950 MONROE ST
SANTA CLARA, CA 95050
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2
I
y
I
'-------J___
I
_____ _J______________ .,,/ /
- - - - -1- - - - - - - - - -=--- - _/
-<::i=== _J__ <>~
,~~I ~I ~I
X
X 0
0 el
@~ ~========t==t==~===~============j ___ ____l _ _j___J _ __J ______ __J T3
T4
T8
T9
T10
T6
T5
T1
T2
FRANKLIN STREET 2ND FLOOR OUTLINE
MONROE STREET
BASEMENT PARKING RAMP
TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
SEE L1.3-1.4 FOR TREE PROTECTION NOTES AND SPECIFICATIONS 4' DIA TREE POTS
6'-0" TALL FENCE
ROJECT
TREE MITIGATION
TREE # DIAMETER MATURE HEIGHT RATIO BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME REMOVE OR RETAIN T1 28" N/A 4:1 LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA LIQUIDAMBAR REMOVE T2 12" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS CERASIFERA PURPLE LEAF PLUM REMOVET3 12" 20' N/A PYRUS CALLERYANA CALLERY PEAR RETAIN T4 11" 20' N/A PYRUS CALLERYANA CALLERY PEAR RETAIN
T5 6" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS CERASIFERA PURPLE LEAF PLUM REMOVET6 21" N/A 3:1 LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA LIQUIDAMBAR REMOVE T7 26" N/A 4:1 LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA LIQUIDAMBAR REMOVE T8 6" 25' N/A DIOSPYROS KAKI PERSIMMON RETAINT9 6" 15' N/A CITRUS SPP. CITRUS RETAIN T10 6" 25' N/A DIOSPYROS KAKI PERSIMMON RETAINT11 28" N/A 4:1 CATALPA BIGNONIOIDES COMMON CATALPA REMOVE T12 6", 5", 5" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVE
T13 4", 4", 3", 3" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVE T14 4", 4", 4" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVET15 4", 4", 4" N/A 2:1 MAGNOLIA SPP. MAGNOLIA REMOVET16 12" N/A 2:1 QUERCUS PALUSTRIS PIN OAK REMOVE T17 11" N/A 2:1 QUERCUS PALUSTRIS PIN OAK REMOVE
T18 4", 3", 3" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS CERASIFERA PURPLE LEAF PLUM REMOVE T19 4" N/A 2:1 PRUNUS SPP. PLUM REMOVE
T20 8", 8", 7", 7" N/A 2:1 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM GLOSSY PRIVET REMOVE T21 16", 9" N/A 2:1 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM GLOSSY PRIVET REMOVET22 12", 7", 5" N/A 2:1 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM GLOSSY PRIVET REMOVE T23 8", 6" N/A 2:1 CITRUS SPP. CITRUS REMOVE
T24 11" N/A 2:1 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA QUEEN PALM REMOVE T25 8" N/A 2:1 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA QUEEN PALM REMOVET26 6" N/A 2:1 MALUS SPP . APPLE REMOVE TOTAL: 49 - 24" REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED
T# T# EXISTING TREE
TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING TREE
TO BE RETAINED
SITE TREES
NAME COUNT WUCOLS SIZE NOTES
CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS - MULTI 1 VL 24" STANDARD - MULTI TRUNK LAGERSTROEMIA X 'MUSKOGEE' 4 L 24" STANDARD
TOTAL: 15 - 24" BOX TREES PROVIDED. LIMITED SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL 28 MITIGATION TREES.
ARBUTUS UNEDO - STANDARD 7 L 36"
FTP PLANTING LEGEND
NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES
ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM 'LA LUNA' 80 1G M
CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER' 20 1G L SUCCULENTCAREX DIVULSA 54 1G L C. TUMULICOLA, HORT.
CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM 'EL CAMPO' 17 5G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HEMER0CALLIS 'TOYON' 2 1G M 18"O.C.IRIS DOUGLASIANA 20 1G L LIMONIUM CALIFORNICUM 17 1G L
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA 'BREEZE' 5 1 5G L
MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 2 5G LPENSTEMON X GLOXINIOIDES 'MIDNIGHT' 7 1G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE SAMBUCUS MEXICANA 1 5G L
SEDUM 'AUTUMN JOY' 12 1G L
OFFSITE PLANTING LEGEND
Name Count SIZE WUCOLS NOTES
AGAPANTHUS 'BABY PETE' 537 1G L 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE FRAGARIA VESCA 73 1G MLOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA BREEZE 115 1G L
PLANTING
PLAN
REVISED: 01/26/2023
DESIGN BY: RJDDRAWN BY: GEM/MO
SCALE: 1"=10'-0"
L1.2
DESIGN FOCUS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
& CONSTRUCTION
DESIGN
FOCUS
PO BOX 485
BEN LOMOND, CA 95005
(831) 336-3100
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,930,940,950 MONROE ST
SANTA CLARA, CA 95050
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.1
I
t
I
_____ _L_ ,--- -
X 0
I 0
I
,~,--------=====r===- 1 ~I i=====i==-11
® ~=======t::==+==t==i===========~ L__ ___ L___L___l_ _ _L_ _____ _J e,
ARBORIST NOTES +
WIRE WALL TRELLIS
REVISED: 01/26/2023
DESIGN BY: RJDDRAWN BY: GEM,MO
SCALE: NTS
L1.3
DESIGN FOCUS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
& CONSTRUCTION
DESIGN
FOCUS
PO BOX 485
BEN LOMOND, CA 95005
(831) 336-3100
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,930,940,950 MONROE ST
SANTA CLARA, CA 95050
l.
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
ARBORIST NOTES
1 Nocuttingofanypartofcitytrees,includingroots,shllilbedonewithwtsecuring approvalanddirect supervision fromthecityarboristorarboristemployedbycity (408-615-3080)
2 Nocuttingofanypartofprivatetrees, indudin groot,,.,sha.ll bedonewithoutdirect supervisionofaninternationalsocietyofarboriculture(TSA)certifiedarhorist
3. Whcn constructionoccurs withinthcdriplineofcxistingtr ces,contraetor shallpile the aoil on the side away from thetrre. When this is notpossihle, place soil on plywood,tarp,or4"-5"thickbedofmulch. Thisistohelppreventcuttinginto thesoil surfacewhcnthcbackhooor tractorbladereftllsthctreneh
4 FtefillopentrenchesquicklywithinhoursofeJ1cavationwhentheyoccurwithinthe drip lineofcxistingtroos.Jfthis isnotpoS.'!iblcandthewcatherishotdry,or windy, contractormustkccprootendsmoistbycoveringthemwithwetburlap.lfthc temperatnreis80°forgreater,theburlapmustbeinspecte<leveryhourandre-wetas neccssnl1' tOmaintainaconstant coolmoistcondition. lfthetemperA1ureisbelow 80°.thcburlapmustbeinspectcdeveryfourhouniandrc-wctasncccssaryto maintainaconstantcool moistcondition.Smallrootscandryoutanddieinto-l5 minutes. Larger root!! can succumb in an hour or less under unfavorable weather conditions
5 When rootl!2"orLlrger arerequiredtobecut,shovel byhand nMrthe root.'!and prunethcrootswitl1ru1industry-approvedpruning tooL Rootsthatareaccideutally broken should be pruned two inches from the damaged end. Crushed or torn roots are more likdytoallowdecay tobegin. Sharplycutrootl!produceallushofnewroots hclpingthetrectorecoverfrom itsinjury
6 Contract.or shall notifythecityarboristorarhoristemploycdbycity72hours in advanccofruiyworkrequiringdigginguroundorwithinthedriplineofcxistingtrees.
1. Aclcarsystemofllaggingmustbeprovidcdaroundt.reeswithin20'ofthcproposed grading, Contractor shall oocurc approval of such S}'Sh,m from tliocityarlloristor arboristemployedbycity
8 MatcrillIB,cquipment,tcmpornJ"J,'building,;, fuels,paintsandothcrconstruction itemsshallnotbeplacedwithinthe driplineofexisting trees.
Pagelof4
SECTION A- A
Bookf .. wit" OPP"""'O loom
topsolloroundrooll>oll ond
wote, o\ timo of ploMin',l
1· ~r-2~~"~1;~"'1..l~~;. ":~, (~~,.,<,:>i
e, ca>'fflionw<>rl<lo locotedffioUn9uti,uos
2· ;t~•.1~":"ide~IK~,!:~ian~•~:. ~ed b~n
<IO<lnO<lup imme.i.,tef,PyControcto,
3 · ::ir,. 0/~ tr;,::. b<i~~d" u-::uredlo',lro\es
4. Pr,,.,id• mlnim1Jm rOOloblo toil vol;mo !or lrM
T%J1'=.'t r:1;:;:~~<~-~bi~1:ti~r:.fl
Ap proved by:
Tree Well Detail PE No . ...xxxxx.__
Dale ~
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
ARBORIST NOTES
9 Fence all trees tu be retained to~-ompletely enclo,rethe tf"" PrDl.e<'LiDP zoor oriorto demolition,grubbingorgrading. Fencingshallbeplacedat thedriplineof exibijng treosor, ifpos,iible. l.5timostheradiusofthedriplineoutfromthetrnnkofthetrcc A warning sign shall be prominently displayed on each fence. The sign shall be a minimumofs.5•xn•andclesrlystate"warni ng tree prolection znnethis fence shall not bercmovedwithout approval fromtheeltyarborist/pr ojectarborist".
Fencesshallbe6-foottallchain llnkor
cquivalent,asapprovedbythecityarboristorarboristemployedbycity.Fenc~shall remain until allgradingand construction work is completed. In addition. wrap all treeswithstrawwaddleuptothefirstmainbranch,nnd thenwrapsnowfencing aro11ndthewaddleonalltreesin theoonstructionzonetoprotectthemfrombark d~mngeCAusedbythework
10. Notrenchingshallbedonewithinthedriplineofexistingtreeswithout theapproval ofthecityarborist orarboristemployedbycity.Opentrenchingintherootzoneof a publictreeisprohibitcdcxceptincaseswherctl1etreuchingfallsoutsidethedrip lineofthe tree involved. Exceptionsmaybeallowedif,intheopinionofthecit)I arbori.<!tor arborist employedbycity, thelmpactoftrenohingonthetreewill be negligible
11. Anycuttingof cxistingroot.sofcitytreesshall bedonewith apprO\--cd lishtequipment uudertl1edirectsupcrvisionofthecityarhoristorarhoristcmployedbycity. A1iy cuttingofexistinsrootsofprivatetreesshallbedonewithapprovedequipment under thedirectsupc,..,i slon ofanlSAcN1ificdarborisl
12. Grading should not create drainage problems for treee by channeling water into thcm, orcreatinssun.ken areas.
13.All gradingwithinthedriplineofcitytreesshall bedonewithapprovedlight cquipmcnt underthedirectsupervision of thecityarboristor arhoristemploycdby city.Allgradingwithinthcdriplineofprivatetreesslmllbcdonewithapproved e-quipment under the direct supervision of,m !SA certified arborist. The original gradeat thebaseofcxistingtreesshall notbemodified.lfagradeincreaseis noccssary,drywollsshouldbeuscd
14. When trenching is allowed. the contractor must first cut roots with II vermecrroot cuttvrprior to llllYlrenchingtoavoidtuggingorpulling ofroots
15.Trecs thataredetermined to beremovedbythocityarboristorarboristemployedloy cityduetoanunfo,.,,..,.,ncircumstanceduringcoru,truction shallbereplacedbythe Page2of4
A
_J
Approved by:
Tree Detail
Planter Strip
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
ARBORIST NOTES
PE No. ____xxxxx___
Dote XXLXXf____xx_
contractor. Thecity,u-boristorarboristemployedbycityshalldeterminetlie replacernentspecie,11ize,quantity,sndspacing.
16. Place 4"-5"thick mulcharoundallexistingtrees(out to theirdrip llne)tl111t11retobe retainedpriortoanyoonstruction. Thiswillhelpmaintainmoistureunderthetree withinthefencing area.
17. Borepitaarenotallowedwithinthedriplineofanytree
JI . .HQillHQ
Wherethere is in.<mfficicntspacetobypassthedriplinebytrenchingruljacent toall existing trees in excessof5" DBH, the installation must be made by boring. The beginningandendingdistanceofthehorefromthefaceofthetreeinanydirectioni11 dotcrmincdbythediametcr ofthetreeass])«!ificdbytheaccompanyingtabl,:,:
'T'renchingwillbereplacedby boring a t
When the tree dismeter at 4½feet i~, thls minimum d istance from tho face of thelree in anydin!ction:
3-4 inches
6-9 inches
inches
ovcrl9 inches
Tree diameter
9 incbo11or less
10-14 inches 15-19 inches
20 inche,iormore
111 IDEE PDOTECTJON
2 feet
5 feet
10 foot
12 feet
15 feet
(minimum)dcpthof bore
2.5 foot
3.0 feet
3.5 feet
4.0 feet
I Contract.orshall tagandidentifyexistingtrecswhicharetoremainwithinthe projectlimitsandonthepublicright-of-waypriortostanofwork.Protectalltagged trees at all times from damage by the work. Treatment of a.II minor dmnagc to tagged trees ~hall be performed by an ISA cenified arborist or other personnel approved by thecityarboristorarboristemployedbycity. lfataggedtreeispermanently Page3of4
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
ARBORIST NOTES
dii<fll(ured or killed as a result of the work. ~-onlracto r shall remove the tree, including itarooL«,fromthesiteandreplaceeachremovedtreewithanequal-sizedtree.If suchrcplace1ncntisnotpossiblo,thecontractorshallrelmbursetot.botreoownertho amountlistedin thetablebelow.Thecityarboristorarboristemployed bycityshall be thesolejudgeoftheconditionofanytree. Contrsctor shall provideregular wateringofcxisting landscapingwithinthooonstructionareathroughtlie construction period
2. Contractorshallpaythctreeowncrthevalucofcxistingtreestoremainthatdicdor wcredamagcd becauseofthecontractoi'sfailureto provideadequateprotection nnd maintenance. TI,epayment amountshall be in accordance with the following scheduleofvalues,using ~treecaliper"methodestablishedinthem011trecentissueof the"guideforestablishingvaluesoftreesnndothc rplantl!", preparcdbythecouncil oftreeand landscapearchitect&
10 '
13 inches
14 inches
15 inches 16 inohes
17 inehes
18inchesandover:
Addforeachcali erinch
S2.400
$3.4 00
$4,400 $5,200 $6,200
$1,200
• 8.20-0
$9,200
$10,000
Sll,000
$ 12,000 $1.,.200
Page4of4
ARBORIST NOTES
REVISED: 01/26/2023
DESIGN BY: RJDDRAWN BY: GEM,MO
SCALE: NTS
L1.4
DESIGN FOCUS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
& CONSTRUCTION
DESIGN
FOCUS
PO BOX 485
BEN LOMOND, CA 95005
(831) 336-3100
SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN
906,930,940,950 MONROE ST
SANTA CLARA, CA 95050 Append"x H- TREE PROTECTIO N GUIDELINES AND RESTRICTIONS Protecting Trees During C.onstruction:
1) Befa-e lhe start of si1e won<., equipment a- ma1elials mcwe in. clearing, excavation, construction, orothe.-work on the sije, every tree to be re1ained shall be securely fenced- offasdelinea1ed inapprovedplans.Suchlencesshallremaineon1inU01.1sly in place for the durationof1heworkunderlaken ineonnectionwiththedevelopment 2) lftheproposeddevelopment.iridud1nganysiteWOfk,willencr0ochuponthetree protectionzone, specaalmeasuresshallbeut,lized, asapproved~theproject arborist, to allowlherootstooblainnecessaryorygen,water.and nutrients. 3) Undergroundtrenchingshallavoidthemajorsuppo,1andabsort>ingtreerootsof protectedtrees. lfavoidance isimpractical,handexcavationundertakenunderthe supeivisionoftheprojectartloristmayberequired.Trenchesshallbeeonsolidatedto serviceasmanyunitsaspossible.Boringllunnelingunderrootsshouldbeeonsidered as analtemativetotrenching 4) Concreteorasphaltpav1ngshaNnotbeplacedovertherootzones ofprotectedtrees,unlessotherwisepennijtedbytheproject
arboris1
5) Artificialirrigationshallnotoccurwilhintherootzoneofnativeoaks,unless deemed appropriate on a 1emporary basis by the project arborist to improve 1ree vigor or m~igate root loss.
6) Compactionofthesoilwithinthetreeprotectionzoneshallbeavoided 7) Anyexcavation,cutting,orfillingoftheexistinggroundsurfacewithinthe treeprotectionzoneshallbeminimizedandsubjecttosuchcondijionsestheprojeci albolist may impose. Retaining walls shall likewise be designed. s~ed. and constJ\lcted tom1nimizetheirimpactonproteciedtree1.
8) Burning or use of equipment wnh an open flame near or within the tree protection zoneshalbeavoided. Allt>rush,earth,andolherdebrisshallberemovedina manner thatpre\1811tsinjurytotherree
9) Oil,gas, chemicals,paims,cement,stuccoa-01hersubstancesthatmaybeharmlutto treesshallnotbest0<edordumpedwithinthetreeprotectionzoneofanyprotected tree, oratanyotherlocationonthesi1efromwhichsuchsubstancesmightenterthe treepro1ectionzoneofaprotectedtree 10)Constructionmatelialsshallnotbestoredwithinthetreepro1ect1onzoneofa protected tree.
ProjectArbOflstDutiesandlnspectlonSdledule:
TlleprojectarbolistislhePl!fSon(s)responsibleforcarryingou1technicaltree inspections, assessmentol treehealth,struetureandrisk,artloris1reportpreparation, eonsultationwith designersandmunicipalplanners.specilyingtreepro1ectionmeasures,monitoring, progress reports and final inspection.
Aqualifledprojectarborist(orfirm)shouldbedes1gnatedandass1gnedtofacihla1eand insuretree preseJVat1onpractices. Helsheltheyshouldperformthefotlowinginspections:
lnsped"on ofs~e: Priortoequipmen1 and ma1@rialsmoye in s·teworl< demortion COQStrlJction andtreeremoval:Tlleprojectarboristwillmeetwith1hegeneral contractor, archi1ect I engineer, and owner or their representative to revieW tree preservation meas...-es, designatetreeremovals,delineatethelocationoftreeproteciion fencing,specifyequipment acoessroutesandma1erialsst0111ge11reas, reviewtheexisting cond~ionoltree1.andprovide anynecessaryrecommeodations.
•nsoedion of stre· ounnq exc,waJipn or any acti~~ies that could atrect trees· inspect site duringanyactivitywithintheTreeProteC1ionZonesofpreservedtreesandany recommendations implemented. Assess any changes in the health of trees since last inspection.
Final ln§pectigno(§i]ff lnspectionolsi1efotlowingcompletionofconstJ\lction. Inspect for treehealthandmakeanynecessaryrecommeoda1ions
KurtFoutsshallbetheProjec1Arboristf0<thisprojeci.Allscheduledinspectionsshall includeabriefTreeMonijolingreport,documentingactivitiesandprovidedtotheCily Arbolist.
Tree Protection Fencing
TreeProtection fencingshallbe instaledpriortotheanivalofconstructionequipment or materials. Fenceshall becomprisedofs1x -footchain link fencemountedon eight - foottaN, 1 and718-inchd1ameter galvanizedposts,driven24inchesintothegroundandspacedona minimum of 10-foot centen;. Onoe established, the fence mus1 remain undis1urbed 11nd 00 maintainedlhroughouttheconstructionprocessunt• tinalinspection.
Afinal inspectionbylf1eC~yArboris1at theendof theproject willberequiredprior1oremoving anytreeprotectionfenc1ng.
Tree Protection Signs
Allsectionsol1encingshouldbedearlymarkedwithsignsstatingthatallareaswithin thefencingareTreeProtectionZonesand1hatdisturbanceisprohibited Monitoring
Anytrenching,constructionordemolitionthatisexpeciedtodamageorencountertreeroots shouldbemoni1oredbytheprojectarborist0<aqualif,edlSACertifiedArOOl"istandshouldbe documented.
ThesiteshouldbeevaluatedbytheprojectarboristoraqualifiedlSACertifiedArboristafler ;:n:~~n is complete, and any necessary remedial work that needs to be performed should Root Pruning
Rootpruningshallbesupeivisedbytheprojectarborist.Whenrootsovertwoinches in diameterareeneounteredtheyshouldbeprunedbyhandwithloppers, handsaw, reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left CJ\IShed or tom. Roots should be cut beyond sinker roots 0< outside root branch junctions 11nd be supe('lised by the project arbolis1. When completed, exposedrootsshouk:lbekep1moistwithburlaporbeckfilledwithinonehour TreeWorkStandardsandQualifications
Altreewo.-k,remcwal,pruning,planting,shal beperlormedusingindustrystandards of wor1<.manship as established in the Bes1 Management Practices of the International SOCiety of Artloriculture (ISA) and the American Na1ional Standards lnstijute series. ,Safety Requirements in Arboriwllure Operations ~SI 2133-2017,
contractor licensing and insurancecoverageshallbeve<ified Ouringtreeremovalanddearance,seclionsoftheTreePro1ectionFencingJJ111yneedtobe 1emporalily dismanffed to complete removal and pJ\lning specifications. Mer each section is eompleted, thefenc.ingistobe ra-installed.
Treestoberemovedshallbecu1intosmallermanageablepiecesconsistentwithsafe arboriculturalpraciices,andcarafullyremcwedsoasnollodamageanysurroundingtreesor structures. Thetreesshallbecutdownasdosetogradeaspossitlte. Tree removal is lobe perlormedbyaqualifiedeontractorwithvalidCilyBusiness/StateLicensesandGeneral LiabilijyandWorkman'sCompensation insurance
2.2 3.85.66.76.96.25.55.45.44.42.81.60.80.4
2.03.55.16.06.36.25.64.94.84.73.82.41.40.70.4 1.62.53.54.14.44.34.03.63.43.22.61.81.10.60.3
7.0 0.20.30.5
0.41.32.6 0.20.74.48.9
0.30.91.5 0.52.94.9
0.53.46.2 0.41.41.2
0.52.94.5 0.63.56.6
0.41.41.3 0.52.74.0
0.63.66.3 0.41.41.4
0.52.63.6 0.63.75.0
0.51.51.5 0.52.53.3
0.63.83.1 0.51.61.6
0.52.33.0 0.63.81.4
0.41.31.5 0.20.40.4
0.20.32.38.9 0.30.43.412.8
0.50.73.713.0
1.01.44.614.3
1.72.76.916.6
2.64.49.4 3.56.010.613.5
4.06.711.313.6
4.16.711.013.0
4.06.29.310.5
4.06.29.210.1
4.26.610.211.4
4.37.011.413.4
4.16.911.313.5
3.66.110.012.5
2.95.08.410.7
2.13.35.16.3 1.31.92.62.9
0.91.21.41.5 0.91.21.41.4
1.21.82.52.7 1.72.94.75.6
2.13.76.98.6 2.03.45.87.1
1.62.53.54.0 1.41.92.42.6
1.62.22.82.9 2.13.04.34.6
2.63.96.06.5 2.94.36.46.9
3.14.46.16.4 3.24.76.56.8
3.34.96.97.1 3.24.86.76.9
3.04.56.36.6 2.53.75.3
5.6 1.92.63.53.71.2
0.91.21.62.02.10.70.3 0.60.80.91.11.10.50.30.4
0.40.40.50.60.60.40.40.71.4 0.30.30.30.40.30.40.71.3
0.20.20.20.20.30.40.61.1 0.20.2
0.10.10.1 0.1
0.10.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
0.10.1 18.3
0.51.45.012.916.3
0.41.02.95.55.7 0.61.21.61.5
0.50.81.00.8 0.40.81.52.31.9
0.51.33.87.86.4 0.61.75.815.412.5
0.51.44.39.07.0 0.40.91.82.72.0
0.40.71.01.20.8 0.51.11.92.61.0
0.72.04.99.31.9 0.82.78.02.7
0.72.15.610.61.8
0.51.22.23.00.8 0.50.91.2
1.40.6 0.51.32.33.31.1
0.72.25.811.62.5
0.82.78.019.42.6
0.71.94.88.41.6 0.51.11.82.30.8
0.50.91.31.50.7 0.61.42.84.41.3
0.82.46.514.22.4
0.82.67.618.02.4
0.71.73.96.51.4 0.61.01.41.60.6
0.90.80.80.6 0.3 0.3
0.3 19.6
1.54.76.12.51.63.93.10.46.5 0.2
0.40.60.60.50.70.60.50.70.50.50.60.40.20.20.40.60.50.60.70.60.60.70.50.60.70.50.6 1.64.32.91.84.42.72.04.52.42.24.51.80.40.20.42.44.41.82.52.02.84.71.93.04.61.83.3
1.82.13.01.60.62.61.70.42.22.00.21.70.20.32.40.51.52.10.31.52.40.41.42.60.91.33.0 0.1
0.1 0.1
4.8 0.5
1.21.3 3.23.3
6.25.5 5.04.8
2.22.4 1.11.3
1.51.6 3.43.5
6.25.6 4.94.7
2.22.4 1.21.4
1.82.0 4.14.1 5.8
4.24.2 1.82.0
1.01.2 1.71.9
4.04.0 5.7
4.34.2 1.71.8
0.60.7 0.4 6.5 6.5
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
0.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0
A @ 7' 6" A @ 7' 6" A @ 7' 6"
A @ 7' 6" A @ 7' 6"
A @ 16'
A @ 11' 7-3/ 16" A @ 11' 7-3/ 16" A @ 14' 2-3/ 8" A @ 15' 8-3/ 8" A @ 15' 8-3/ 8" F @ 9' 8-3/ 8" F @ 9' 8-3/ 8" F @ 9' 8-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"
G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"
G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"
G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8"
G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" G @ 3' 2-3/ 8" B1 @ 7' 6"B1 @ 7' 6"
B1 @ 7' 6"
B1 @ 7' 6" B1 @ 7' 6" B1 @ 7' 6" B1 @ 7' 6"
A @ 11' 7-3/ 16" A @ 11' 7-3/ 16" A @ 11' 7-3/ 16" A @ 14' 2-3/ 8" A @ 16'
A @ 16'
Project: Santa Clara Downtown, Monroe Street |
PC#20-14810
Client: Salvatore Caruso Design Corporation
DesignerTTK-STDate09/24/2022ScaleAs NotedRevision No.Rv 10Summary Fifth Floor Terrace 2.3 fc 10.8 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/AGround All 0.8 fc 20.3 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/ANeigbours property floor 0.0 fc 0.0 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/AParking and Ramp West Floor 3.1 fc 19.6 fc 0.3 fc 65.3:1 10.3:1Private Patio walkway floor 3.1 fc 6.5 fc 0.4 fc 16.3:1 7.8:1Sidewalk floor 3.4 fc 6.5 fc 0.4 fc 16.3:1 8.5:1Walkalong Homestead floor 1.5 fc 4.8 fc 0.1 fc 48.0:1 15.0:1Walkalong Monroe Floor 3.5 fc 18.3 fc 0.1 fc 183.0:1 35.0:1Walkway along Franklin 3.6 fc 7.0 fc 0.3 fc 23.3:1 12.0:14th Floor Terrace floor 2.3 fc 10.4 fc 0.1 fc 104.0:1 23.0:1 Schedule
Symbol Label Quantity Manufacturer Catalog Number Description Lamp Number Lamps Filename Lumens Per Lamp Lumen Multiplier Wattage Light Loss Factor 17 Lithonia
Lighting
WDGE2 LED P330K 80CRI VF
WDGE2 LED WITH P3 -- PERFORMANCEPACKAGE, 3000K,80CRI, VISUALCOMFORT FORWARDOPTIC 1 WDGE2_LED_P
3_30K_80CRI_VF.ies
3015 1 22.55 0.85
6 Lithonia
Lighting
WDGE2 LED P230K 80CRI VW
WDGE2 LED WITH P2 -- PERFORMANCEPACKAGE, 3000K,80CRI, VISUALCOMFORT WIDEOPTIC 1 WDGE2_LED_P
2_30K_80CRI_VW.ies
1997 1 14.53 0.85
7 Lithonia
Lighting
WDGE2 LED P130K 80CRI VW
WDGE2 LED WITH P1 -- PERFORMANCEPACKAGE, 3000K,80CRI, VISUALCOMFORT WIDEOPTIC 1 WDGE2_LED_P
1_30K_80CRI_VW.ies
1241 1 9.81 0.85
0 Lithonia
Lighting
WDGE2 LED P230K 80CRI VF
WDGE2 LED WITH P2 -- PERFORMANCEPACKAGE, 3000K,80CRI, VISUALCOMFORT FORWARDOPTIC 1 WDGE2_LED_P
2_30K_80CRI_VF.ies
1947 1 14.53 0.85
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE
WFL 3000K Ra84
BLTRPFEL2WF30 LED-WW10.4W_- 1 BLTRPFEL2WF3 0.ies 1148 1 12 0.85 0 TARGETTI Targetti Steplight
ZEP10FWDPFEL330
ZEDGE PRO DEEP 13W3K FE
LED-WW-13W_- 1 ZEP10FWDPFEL
330.ies
2088 1 15 0.85
3 Gotham
ArchitecturalLighting
EVO4SH 30/15 DFFSMO
EVO 4IN SHOWER, 80CRI, 3000K, 1500LM,FLUSH CLEAR
1 EVO4SH_30_15
_DFF_SMO.ies
1281 1 13.7 0.85
16 TARGETTI MB B 41 40 18 L2
40 (finish)100_1xLED-NW17W_-
MR.Bo Bollard, 40"Version 160 17W 40K180 FE
LED-NW-17W_- 1 MBB41__18L24
0FE.ies
2806 1 19 0.85
NoteCeiling Height: Various, per Client's Architectural DrawingsLuminaire Mounting Height: As Noted in Plan DrawingReflectances: 30% for All Exterior ObjectsCalculation Point Height: Indicated in "Statistics"Luminaire illuminance values provided in this report, whether for normal, critical, or emergency applications, are for product application assistance only. Thesevalues were developed in collaboration with, and are subject to approval by, the design professional of record (architect/engineer/LC), and are NOT intendedfor construction. Because these values are approximate and based on limited application information provided to 16500, Inc. at the time of calculation,16500, Inc. does not warrant the installed performance of the luminaire(s) will match that shown in this report. Please verify all data and conditions to assure the accuracy of the report. 16500 shall neither be responsible nor liable for design, approval, or results of emergency lighting under any circumstances. .. ,_5_
,,,,.___
,I>( A
,,,,.___
D B
D Bl
,,,,.___
C
0 D
E
F
0 G
n
...
•
1_.__.__:__.__.__:__.__.__:__.__.__._.__.__._._._ _____________ 1 ~ 1j• ...
""
l
--------------- /
~-'----'----'----'-------'----'---------'-------'--------'-------'----------'--------'------'-------'---'--------'-------'---------'--------'----------'---------'-------'--------'------'----------'---------'--------'---------'---------'--------'--------'------'---------'----'----'-~ \ ____________ _
0.2 0.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.2
0.30.50.60.60.50.50.50.60.60.60.60.50.50.50.60.60.50.3 0.81.41.92.01.51.11.11.52.02.01.61.21.11.52.02.01.40.8
1.63.55.85.83.72.12.13.75.85.93.82.22.13.65.75.93.71.7 1.63.96.86.84.02.12.14.06.87.04.22.22.13.96.77.04.11.7
1.64.710.110.14.82.12.14.710.010.34.92.22.04.59.84.91.7
0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.1 0.10.1
10.4 BB @ 8'
@ 8'
B @ 8'
SummaryRv 10Revision No.As NotedScale09/24/2022DateTTK-STDesigner Description
Statistics
Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min
Fifth Floor Terrace 2.3 fc 10.8 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/A
Ground All 0.8 fc 20.3 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/ANeigbours property floor 0.0 fc 0.0 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/AParking and Ramp West Floor 3.1 fc 19.6 fc 0.3 fc 65.3:1 10.3:1Private Patio walkway floor 3.1 fc 6.5 fc 0.4 fc 16.3:1 7.8:1Sidewalk floor 3.4 fc 6.5 fc 0.4 fc 16.3:1 8.5:1Walkalong Homestead floor 1.5 fc 4.8 fc 0.1 fc 48.0:1 15.0:1Walkalong Monroe Floor 3.5 fc 18.3 fc 0.1 fc 183.0:1 35.0:1Walkway along Franklin 3.6 fc 7.0 fc 0.3 fc 23.3:1 12.0:14th Floor Terrace floor 2.3 fc 10.4 fc 0.1 fc 104.0:1 23.0:1 normal, critical, or emergency applicLuminaire illuminance values provided in this report, whether forCalculation Point Height: As notedLuminaire Mounting Height: As notedCeiling Height: Varies ations, are for product application
neither be responsible nor liable data and conditions to assure the accuracy of the report. 16500 shallthe luminaire(s) will match that shown in this report. Please verify allcalculation, 16500, Inc. does not warrant the installed performance ofapplication information provided to 16500, Inc. at the time ofBecause these values are approximate and based on limited(architect/engineer/LC), and are NOT intended for construction.and are subject to approval by, the design professional of recordassistance only. These values were developed in collaboration with, for design, approval, or results of
emergency lighting under any circumstance.
Schedule
Symbol Label Quantity Manufacturer Catalog Number Description Lamp Lumens Per Lamp Light Loss Factor Wattage A
17 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P3 30K
80CRI VF
WDGE2 LED WITH P3 -OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT FORWARDPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 3015 0.85 22.55
B
6 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P2 30K
80CRI VW
WDGE2 LED WITH P2 -
OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT WIDEPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 1997 0.85 14.53
B1
7 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P1 30K
80CRI VW
WDGE2 LED WITH P1 -
OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT WIDEPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 1241 0.85 9.81
C
0 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P2 30K
80CRI VF
WDGE2 LED WITH P2 -
OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT FORWARDPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 1947 0.85 14.53
D
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE FL 20
degree 3000K Ra84 12W
BLTRPFEL2FL30
-10.4W_-WWLED- 1148 0.85 12
D
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE MFL 30
degree 3000K Ra84 12W
BLTRPFEL2MF30
-10.4W_-WWLED- 1148 0.85 12
D
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE WFL
3000K Ra84
BLTRPFEL2WF30
-10.4W_-WWLED- 1148 0.85 12
E
0 TARGETTI Targetti Steplight
ZEP10FWDPFEL330
ZEDGE PRO DEEP 13W 3K FE LED13W_- WW- 2088 0.85 15
E
0 TARGETTI Targetti Steplight
ZEP10FWWDFEL330
ZEDGE PRO WIDE 13W 3K FE LED13W_- WW- 2088 0.85 15
F
0 ERCO GmbH 34743023_V03 Lightmark Bollard luminaire LED 6W whitewarm
333 0.85 8
F
3 Gotham
LightingArchitectural
EVO4SH 30/15 DFF SMO EVO 4IN SHOWER, 80 CRI, 3000K,
1500LM, FLUSH CLEAR
1281 0.85 13.7
G
16 TARGETTI MB B 41 40 18 L2 40
(finish) 100_1xLED-NW17W_-
MR.Bo Bollard, 40" Version 160 17W
40K 180 FE
17W_-NWLED- 2806 0.85 19
(f)
X
,-+
CD
CD
::J
01 :::J"
C
::J
Q.
'
CD
Q.
0 D
pqnijifi ;rHJii;1t'i ,.,,, !1i
II l Hi
i'·
·fl
i!l
Iii
' i'
Ii:
ii
Ii
~!
0 10 10 1 >ID >
,'I
1 · ............... .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
: : : : : : : : :11f : : : : : : : : + • ' ' • + ' + ' + ' ' • ' + • ' + . C •• · C · • • · C • ••
~
..
"-
Project: Santa Clara Downtown, Monroe Street I
PC#20·14810
Client: Salvatore Caruso Design Corporation
0.1 0.10.20.50.91.72.32.21.50.80.4
0.10.10.10.10.30.71.84.16.76.33.61.50.6 0.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.10.20.30.71.74.07.16.73.51.40.5
0.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.30.30.40.61.74.910.29.34.01.40.4
0.50.60.60.60.50.50.60.60.60.5 1.62.12.01.51.21.21.72.12.01.4
4.06.35.83.52.12.34.16.35.83.3 4.37.26.43.62.02.34.47.16.43.4
5.59.34.11.92.35.410.79.44.1
0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.00.00.00.00.0
10.8 B @ 8'
B @ 8'
B @ 8'
SummaryRv 10Revision No.As NotedScale09/24/2022DateTTK-STDesigner Description
Statistics
Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min
Fifth Floor Terrace 2.3 fc 10.8 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/A
Ground All 0.8 fc 20.3 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/ANeigbours property floor 0.0 fc 0.0 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/AParking and Ramp West Floor 3.1 fc 19.6 fc 0.3 fc 65.3:1 10.3:1Private Patio walkway floor 3.1 fc 6.5 fc 0.4 fc 16.3:1 7.8:1Sidewalk floor 3.4 fc 6.5 fc 0.4 fc 16.3:1 8.5:1Walkalong Homestead floor 1.5 fc 4.8 fc 0.1 fc 48.0:1 15.0:1Walkalong Monroe Floor 3.5 fc 18.3 fc 0.1 fc 183.0:1 35.0:1Walkway along Franklin 3.6 fc 7.0 fc 0.3 fc 23.3:1 12.0:14th Floor Terrace floor 2.3 fc 10.4 fc 0.1 fc 104.0:1 23.0:1 emergency lighting under any circumstance.responsible nor liable for design, approval, or results ofassure the accuracy of the report. 16500 shall neither beshown in this report. Please verify all data and conditions tothe installed performance of the luminaire(s) will match thatInc. at the time of calculation, 16500, Inc. does not warrantbased on limited application information provided to 16500,construction. Because these values are approximate and(architect/engineer/LC), and are NOT intended forby, the design professional of recorddeveloped in collaboration with, and are subject to approvalfor product application assistance only. These values werewhether for normal, critical, or emergency applications, areLuminaire illuminance values provided in this report,Calculation Point Height: As notedLuminaire Mounting Height: As notedCeiling Height: Varies Schedule
Symbol Label Quantity Manufacturer Catalog Number Description Lamp Lumens Per Lamp Light Loss Factor Wattage A
17 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P3 30K
80CRI VF
WDGE2 LED WITH P3 -OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT FORWARDPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 3015 0.85 22.55
B
6 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P2 30K
80CRI VW
WDGE2 LED WITH P2 -OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT WIDEPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 1997 0.85 14.53
B1
7 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P1 30K
80CRI VW
WDGE2 LED WITH P1 -OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT WIDEPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 1241 0.85 9.81
C
0 Lithonia Lighting WDGE2 LED P2 30K
80CRI VF
WDGE2 LED WITH P2 -OPTIC80CRI, VISUAL COMFORT FORWARDPERFORMANCE PACKAGE, 3000K, 1947 0.85 14.53
D
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE FL 20
degree 3000K Ra84 12W
BLTRPFEL2FL30
-10.4W_-WWLED- 1148 0.85 12
D
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE MFL 30
degree 3000K Ra84 12W
BLTRPFEL2MF30
-10.4W_-WWLED- 1148 0.85 12
D
0 TARGETTI Bulletto LARGE WFL
3000K Ra84
BLTRPFEL2WF30
-10.4W_-WWLED- 1148 0.85 12
E
0 TARGETTI Targetti Steplight
ZEP10FWDPFEL330
ZEDGE PRO DEEP 13W 3K FE LED13W_- WW- 2088 0.85 15
E
0 TARGETTI Targetti Steplight
ZEP10FWWDFEL330
ZEDGE PRO WIDE 13W 3K FE LED13W_- WW- 2088 0.85 15
F
0 ERCO GmbH 34743023_V03 Lightmark Bollard luminaire LED 6W whitewarm
333 0.85 8
F
3 Gotham
LightingArchitectural
EVO4SH 30/15 DFF SMO EVO 4IN SHOWER, 80 CRI, 3000K,
1500LM, FLUSH CLEAR
1281 0.85 13.7
G
16 TARGETTI MB B 41 40 18 L2 40
17W_-
(finish) 100_1xLED-NWMR.Bo Bollard, 40" Version 160 17W 40K 180 FE 17W_-NWLED- 2806 0.85 19
(f)
X
,-+
CD
CD
::J
01 :::J"
C
::J
Q.
'
CD
Q.
0 D 0 10 10 > I□ > I~>
I
n:.
□
I
!,:
''
Iii 1,, ! 'I n
j:l!HI
ii!!! 'I'
H '" ' H Ui II
11 •ii •I I
;111! !
\
..
\,,,.-
Project: Santa Clara Downtown, Monroe Street I
PC#20·14810
Client: Salvatore Caruso Design Corporation
,!
·, 1·
, :I
q
,le; '
I I
I I
I I
RESIDENTIAL TRASH ROOM
SEE SHEET TR1.0
RETAIL TRASH ROOM
SEE SHEET TR1.0
GENERAL NOTES.
1. ANY DESIGNS OR SOLUTIONS SHOWN IN DRAWING, EITHER DIRECT OR IMPLIED,
ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TOSUPPLEMENT THE SUBMITTAL PACKAGE FROM ARCHITECT.
2. ANY PARTIAL INFORMATION, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS OF
WORK SHOWN IN DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SCOPE OF WORK, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM COMPLETION OF WORK.
ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE CURRENT APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES AND/OR DISCREPANCIES.
PLAN CHECK NOTES.
1. MANAGEMENT STAFF SHALL PROVIDE DESIGNATED RECYCLING RECEPTACLE IN
MAIL ROOM FOR RESIDENTIAL DISPOSAL OF UNWANTED MAIL, AS WELL AS A
DESIGNATED WASTE RECEPTACLE FOR BATTERIES, PAINT, FLUORESCENT BULBS, OR ANY OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIAL BANNED FROM LANDFILL THAT REQUIRESSPECIAL HANDLING.
2. MANAGEMENT STAFF SHALL PROVIDE SIGNAGE IN ALL TRASH VESTIBULES THAT EXPLICITLY DETAILS PROPER DISPOSAL OF WASTE, RECYCLING, AND COMPOST.
LEGEND:
RESIDENT PATH OF TRAVEL FROM UNIT TO TRASH ROOM
LAZY
SUSAN
LAZY
SUSAN
LAZY
SUSAN
LAZY
SUSAN
AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890
EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608P: 415.292.5400F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
1/32"=1'-0"
CONSULTANT
SITE PLAN
LEVEL 1
TR0.1
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
1 1 l1 1-1 cl§ AMERiCAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
I
I
11/:
~j
,~\t~:,s;''' :
' u__.._ l
~-
CHUTE INTAKE VESTIBULE
SEE SHEET TR1.0
GENERAL NOTES.
1. ANY DESIGNS OR SOLUTIONS SHOWN IN DRAWING, EITHER DIRECT OR IMPLIED,
ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TOSUPPLEMENT THE SUBMITTAL PACKAGE FROM ARCHITECT.
2. ANY PARTIAL INFORMATION, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS OF
WORK SHOWN IN DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SCOPE OF WORK, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM COMPLETION OF WORK.
ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE CURRENT APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES AND/OR DISCREPANCIES.
PLAN CHECK NOTES.
1. MANAGEMENT STAFF SHALL PROVIDE DESIGNATED RECYCLING RECEPTACLE IN
MAIL ROOM FOR RESIDENTIAL DISPOSAL OF UNWANTED MAIL, AS WELL AS A
DESIGNATED WASTE RECEPTACLE FOR BATTERIES, PAINT, FLUORESCENT BULBS, OR ANY OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIAL BANNED FROM LANDFILL THAT REQUIRESSPECIAL HANDLING.
2. MANAGEMENT STAFF SHALL PROVIDE SIGNAGE IN ALL TRASH VESTIBULES THAT EXPLICITLY DETAILS PROPER DISPOSAL OF WASTE, RECYCLING, AND COMPOST.
RW
Ø5'
AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890
EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608P: 415.292.5400F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
1/32"=1'-0"
CONSULTANT
SITE PLAN
LEVEL 2
TR0.2
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
I 111 1 --=----=----_---------
: 11
1 I Ill I
I I
I I I
I Ill
_
1 __ L__
I ' I
I I I
I r
----
I Cl,
1111111 I I
cl§
AMERICAN
TRASH MANAGEMENT
GENERAL NOTES.
1. ANY DESIGNS OR SOLUTIONS SHOWN IN DRAWING, EITHER DIRECT OR IMPLIED,
ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TOSUPPLEMENT THE SUBMITTAL PACKAGE FROM ARCHITECT.
2. ANY PARTIAL INFORMATION, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS OF
WORK SHOWN IN DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SCOPE OF WORK, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM COMPLETION OF WORK.
ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE CURRENT APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES AND/OR DISCREPANCIES.
PLAN CHECK NOTES.
1. MANAGEMENT STAFF SHALL PROVIDE DESIGNATED RECYCLING RECEPTACLE IN
MAIL ROOM FOR RESIDENTIAL DISPOSAL OF UNWANTED MAIL, AS WELL AS ADESIGNATED WASTE RECEPTACLE FOR BATTERIES, PAINT, FLUORESCENT BULBS, OR ANY OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIAL BANNED FROM LANDFILL THAT REQUIRESSPECIAL HANDLING.
2. MANAGEMENT STAFF SHALL PROVIDE SIGNAGE IN ALL TRASH VESTIBULES THAT EXPLICITLY DETAILS PROPER DISPOSAL OF WASTE, RECYCLING, AND COMPOST.
LEGEND:
STAFF PATH OF TRAVEL FROM TRASH ROOMS
TO TRASH STAGING AREA.
LAZY
SUSAN
LAZY
SUSAN
WASTE - 3CY
COMPACTED
RECYCLING - 3CY
COMPACTED
PROJECTED TRASH COLLECTION SCHEDULE / WK
RESIDENTIAL
SERVICE M T W T F Sa
1 Su
TOTAL 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 WASTE - 2CY LOOSE
RECYCLING - 2CYLOOSE
PROJECTED TRASH COLLECTION SCHEDULE / WK
COMMERCIAL
SERVICE M T W T F Sa
COMPOST - 96GLOOSE
1 1 1 1
Su
TOTAL 2 1 21 0 0
11 1
1 ATTEMP AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT 1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890 EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608 P: 415.292.5400 F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
1/32"=1'-0"
CONSULTANT
STAGING DETAILS
RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TR0.3
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
cl§
AMERICAN
TRASH MANAGEMENT
11 I
I I
CHUTE VESTIBULE
TYPICAL AT LEVEL 2-6
RESIDENTIAL TRASH COLLECTION ROOM
LEVEL 1
WASTE - 3CY
COMPACTEDRECYCLING - 3CY
COMPACTED
PROJECTED TRASH COLLECTION SCHEDULE / WK
RESIDENTIAL
SERVICE M T W T F Sa
1 SHEET NOTES.
RESIDENTIAL TRASH ROOM - LEVEL 1:
1. TRASH COLLECTION ROOM IS PART OF 2HR FIRE-RATED
TRASH CHUTE SHAFT - RESTRICTED ACCESS.
2. FLOOR SHALL BE FINISHED WITH WATERPROOF DECK
COATING. FLOOR TO HAVE MINIMAL SLOPE (1° MAX) AND
FLOOR DRAIN. FLOOR LEVEL UNDER COMPACTOR.
3. WALLS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH WASHABLE WATERPROOF
SURFACE SUCH AS FRP OR HIGH-GLOSS ENAMEL PAINT,8'-0" AFF.
4. INSTALL WALL PROTECTION: 11-1/4"Hx6"W CONCRETE CURB
AT BASE OF ALL NON-CONCRETE WALLS. DO NOT INSTALL
THE CURB AROUND THE COMPACTOR OR POWER PACKS.
5. 8'-0" WIDE ROLL-UP DOOR, AND 3'-0" WIDE NFPA COMPLIANT FIRE EGRESS DOOR.
6. ROOM SHALL BE MECHANICALLY VENTILATED WITH (1)
CFM/FT PER 2019 CBC.
7. (1) 30"Ø #304 S.S. GRAVITY CHUTE WITH COMPACTOR FOR
WASTE. PROVIDE CUSTOM 3CY FL NARROW COMPACTOR
CONTAINERS FOR WASTE.
8. (1) 30"Ø GALVANNEAL STEEL GRAVITY CHUTE WITH
COMPACTOR FOR RECYCLING. PROVIDE 3CY FL NARROWCOMPACTOR CONTAINER FOR RECYCLING.
9. CHUTES SHALL TERMINATE AT 5'-9" AFF.
10. THRU-WALL INTAKE FOR RESIDENTIAL TRASH AT LEVEL 1.
PROVIDE (2) 18x18 SIDE HINGED, ELECTRICALLY
INTERLOCKED, AUTOMATIC OPENING DOORS. SEE DETAIL
1/TR2.0.
11. PP: COMPACTOR POWER PACKS SHALL BE
FLOOR-MOUNTED. (1) 5HP 3-PHASE, 208/230/460V. 30ADISCONNECT 60" AFF.
12. MCP: CHUTE MASTER CONTROL PANEL SHALL BE
WALL-MOUNTED 60" AFF. MUST ALLOW LOCK DOWN OF
CHUTE INTAKES FOR EXCHANGING CONTAINERS AND
WASHING CHUTES. REQUIRES 120V 15A DEDICATED
SERVICE.
13. AC: 2HP CHUTE AIR COMPRESSOR SHALL BE
WALL-MOUNTED 60" AFF. REQUIRES 120V 15A SERVICE
OUTLETS.
14. OC: ODOR CONTROL UNIT SHALL BE WALL-MOUNTED 60"
AFF. REQUIRES 120V 15A SERVICE OUTLETS.
15. HB: HOT AND COLD HOSE BIB SHALL BE WALL-MOUNTED 60" AFF.
16. PROVIDE ELECTRIC PALLET TRUCK FOR TRANSFERRING
CONTAINERS. 4000lb CAPACITY; TURNING RADIUS: 45.5".
REQUIRES 120V 15A SERVICE OUTLETS.
17. CHUTE DISCHARGE DOOR: TYPE-A, HORIZONTALLY
INSULATED SLIDING-STEEL DOOR, HELD OPEN BY 165° F
FUSIBLE LINK.
18. (1) UNDEDICATED 120V 15A SERVICE OUTLET REQUIRED
FOR STAFF MAINTENANCE PURPOSE.
Su
TOTAL 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
CHUTE INTAKE VESTIBULES - LEVELS 2-6:
1. CHUTE INTAKE VESTIBULES SHALL BE 1HR FIRE-RATED WITH 1HR FIRE-RATED DOOR; 5'-0" MIN REQUIRED PER ADA STANDARDS -RESIDENTIAL ACCESS. PROVIDE (2) SELF CLOSING, 15x18 BOTTOMHINGED, ELECTRICALLY INTERLOCKED, AUTOMATIC OPENING
INTAKE DOORS TO DISPOSE TRASH AND RECYCLING INTO
COMPACTORS PER CBC 713.13.1. POWER TO INTAKE DOORSSUPPLIED BY MCP. SEE DETAIL 2/TR2.0. MANAGEMENT SHALL PROVIDE 23-GALLON RUBBERMAID SLIM JIM CONTAINER AT EACH VESTIBULE FOR COMPOST COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL INTOWASTE COMPACTOR.
2. CHUTE SHAFT SHALL NOT BE ERECTED UNTIL CHUTE HAS BEEN INSTALLED. FOR SOUND PROOFING PURPOSES, DOUBLE
STUD-WALLS ARE REQUIRED ADJACENT TO OCCUPIED SPACES.
INTERIOR OF SHAFT SHALL BE TAPED TO PREVENT ODOROUS AIR LEAKING INTO OCCUPIED SPACES.
3. PROVIDE ROUND FLOOR OPENINGS AT CONCRETE FLOORS AND
SQUARED FLOOR OPENINGS AT WOOD-FRAME CONSTRUCTION.
INSTALL FLOOR SUPPORT FRAME AT EACH FLOOR PENETRATION
TO SECURE CHUTE. SEE DETAIL 9/TR2.0 FOR ANCHORING AND
MASON BRA-RED SOUND ISOLATION PAD ASSEMBLY. POUR RINGS
WILL VARY BASED ON THICKNESS OF FLOOR SLAB AND SHALL BE PROVIDED BY MANUFACTURER.
GENERAL NOTES:
1. ANY DESIGNS OR DESIGN SOLUTIONS PRESENTED IN THIS
DRAWING OR SPECIFICATION, WHICH ARE DIRECT OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING NARRATIVES, DRAWINGS, OR DIAGRAMS, ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDEREDCOMPLETE DESIGNS OR DESIGNS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION.
2. OMISSIONS FROM DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS, OR THE
INACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF DETAILS OF WORK, WHICH ARE
MANIFESTLY NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE INTENT OF THEDRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, OR WHICH ARE CUSTOMARILYPERFORMED, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROMPERFORMING SUCH OMITTED OR INACCURATELY DESCRIBEDDETAILS OF THE WORK. WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED AS IF FULLY AND CORRECTLY SET FORTH AND DESCRIBED IN THE DRAWINGSAND SPECIFICATIONS.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND
CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE
ARCHITECT SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF ALL EXISTING
FIELD CONDITIONS AND ANY DISCREPANCIES OR
INCONSISTENCIES.
DESIGN ISSUES:1. COMPACTORS MOVED IN ORDER TO MAKE BETTER USE OF TRASH ROOM AREA.
2. CHUTES MOVED TO MATCH NEW COMPACTOR LOCATION.
3. 8'-0" ROLL-UP DOOR AND 3'-0" EXIT DOOR RELOCATED.
4. THRU-WALL INTAKE DOORS AND CARTS MOVED OVER PAGE
RIGHT.
HB
3CY
NARROW
COMPACTOR
CONTAINER
WASTE
3CY
NARROW
COMPACTOR
CONTAINER
RECYCLING
W
R
18x18 S.H. THRU-WALL
INTAKE DOOR
(2) TOTAL
OC MCP
120V 15A SERVICE
OUTLET, TYP
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL BY
OTHERS (S.A.D.)
CONCRETE CURB WALL
PROTECTION TYP U.O.N.
SEE NOTE 4
ELEC. PALLET
TRUCK
30"Ø GALV. STEEL
CHUTE (2) TOTAL
FD
30A DISCONNECT
(2)TOTAL
4" BOLLARD
3CY SPARE
NARROW
COMPACTOR
CONTAINER
RECYCLING
C-C
TR1.2
AC PP
PP 3'-0" FIRE
EGRESS DOOR
CUSTOM
COMPACTOR BINS
PROVIDED BY
OWNER
3CY SPARE
NARROW
COMPACTOR
CONTAINER
WASTE
(2) 15x18 B.H. NORMALLY
CLOSED LOW-VOLTAGE E.I.
AUTOMATIC OPENING DOORS
3'-0" VESTIBULE
ACCESS DOOR
2HR FIRE-RATED
CHUTE SHAFT WALLS
BY OTHERS (S.A.D.)
1HR FIRE-RATED VESTIBULE
WALLS BY OTHERS (S.A.D.)
MASON BRA-RED SOUND
ISOLATION PADS (4) TOTAL
AT EA FLOOR SUPPORT FRAME
(2) 30"Ø GALV. STEEL
CHUTES W/ 34"Ø
FLOOR OPENINGS
R
W
8'-0" ROLL UP DOOR
APOLLO A500COMPACTOR
APOLLO A500COMPACTOR
A-A
TR1.2
B-B
TR1.2
1 64G CART
WASTE
64G CART
RECYCLING
Ø5'
DESIGN ISSUE #2
DESIGN ISSUE #4
DESIGN ISSUE #1
DESIGN ISSUE #3
AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890
EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608P: 415.292.5400F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
3/16"=1'-0"
CONSULTANT
RESIDENTIAL
TRASH ROOM PLAN
TR1.0
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
cl§
AMERICAN
TRASH MANAGEMENT
HB
OC
FD
3'-0" FIRE
EGRESS DOOR
6'-0" ROLL UP DOOR
2CY
LOOSE
CONTAINER
RECYCLING
ELEC. PALLET
TRUCK SEE NOTE 14
2CY
LOOSE
CONTAINER
RECYCLING
AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890
EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608P: 415.292.5400F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
3/8"=1'-0"
CONSULTANT
RETAIL TRASH COLLECTION ROOM
TR1.1
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
WASTE - 2CY LOOSE
RECYCLING - 2CYLOOSE
PROJECTED TRASH COLLECTION SCHEDULE / WK
COMMERCIAL
SERVICE M T W T F Sa
1 Su
TOTAL 1 0 1 1 1 0 2
1 1
1 SHEET NOTES:
COMMERCIAL TRASH ROOM
1. FLOOR SHALL BE FINISHED WITH WATERPROOF DECK COATING. FLOOR TO HAVE MINIMAL SLOPE (1° MAX) AND FLOOR DRAIN. FLOOR LEVEL UNDER COMPACTOR.
2. WALLS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH WASHABLE WATERPROOF SURFACE SUCH AS FRP OR HIGH-GLOSS ENAMEL PAINT, 8'-0" AFF.
3. INSTALL WALL PROTECTION: 11-1/4"Hx6"W CONCRETE CURB AT BASE OF ALL NON-CONCRETE WALLS.
4. 6'-0" ROLL UP DOOR AND 3FT EXIT DOOR.
5. OC: ODOR CONTROL UNIT SHALL BE WALL-MOUNTED 60" AFF. REQUIRES 120V 15A SERVICE OUTLETS.
6. HB: HOT AND COLD HOSE BIB SHALL BE WALL-MOUNTED 60" AFF.
7. PROVIDE ELECTRIC PALLET TRUCK FOR TRANSFERRING CONTAINERS. 4000lb CAPACITY; TURNING RADIUS: 45.5". REQUIRES 120V 15A SERVICE OUTLETS.
8. (1) UNDEDICATED 120V 15A SERVICE OUTLET REQUIRED FOR STAFF MAINTENANCE PURPOSE.
GENERAL NOTES:
1. ANY DESIGNS OR DESIGN SOLUTIONS PRESENTED IN THIS DRAWING OR
SPECIFICATION, WHICH ARE DIRECT OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING NARRATIVES,
DRAWINGS, OR DIAGRAMS, ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS OR DESIGNS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION.
2. OMISSIONS FROM DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS, OR THE INACCURATE
DESCRIPTION OF DETAILS OF WORK, WHICH ARE MANIFESTLY NECESSARY TO
CARRY OUT THE INTENT OF THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, OR WHICH ARECUSTOMARILY PERFORMED, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM
PERFORMING SUCH OMITTED OR INACCURATELY DESCRIBED DETAILS OF THE WORK. WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED AS IF FULLY AND CORRECTLY SET FORTH AND DESCRIBED IN THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF ALL EXISTING FIELD CONDITIONS AND ANY DISCREPANCIES OR INCONSISTENCIES.
COMMERCIAL TRASH COLLECTION ROOM
LEVEL 1
11 cl§
/
-1
/
AMERICAN
TRASH MANAGEMENT
r1
n
l
SECTIONS
AT RESIDENTIAL TRASH ROOM
SHEET NOTES.SECTIONS AT RESIDENTIAL TRASH ROOM. LEVEL 1.
1. TRASH COLLECTION ROOM IS PART OF 2HR FIRE-RATED TRASH CHUTE SHAFT - RESTRICTED ACCESS.
2. FLOOR SHALL BE FINISHED WITH WATERPROOF DECK COATING. FLOOR TO HAVE MINIMAL SLOPE (1° MAX) AND FLOOR DRAIN. FLOOR LEVEL UNDER COMPACTOR.
3. WALLS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH WASHABLE WATERPROOF SURFACE SUCH AS FRP OR HIGH-GLOSS ENAMEL PAINT, 8'-0" AFF.
4. INSTALL WALL PROTECTION: 12"Hx6"W CONCRETE CURB AT BASE OF ALL NON-CONCRETE WALLS. DO NOT INSTALL THE CURB AROUND THE COMPACTOR ORPOWER PACKS. STEEL DIAMOND TREAD BACKING ALONG WALLS WHERE INDICATEDFOR WALL PROTECTION.
5. ROOM SHALL BE MECHANICALLY VENTILATED WITH (1) CFM/FT PER 2019 CBC.6. (1) 30"Ø #304 S.S. GRAVITY CHUTE WITH COMPACTOR FOR WASTE. PROVIDE CUSTOM 3CY FL NARROW COMPACTOR CONTAINERS FOR WASTE.
7. (1) 30"Ø GALVANNEAL STEEL GRAVITY CHUTE WITH COMPACTOR FOR RECYCLING.
PROVIDE CUSTOM 3CY FL NARROW COMPACTOR CONTAINERS FOR RECYCLING.
8. CHUTES SHALL TERMINATE AT 5'-9" AFF.9. THRU-WALL INTAKE FOR RESIDENTIAL TRASH AT LEVEL 1. PROVIDE (2) 18x18 SIDE HINGED, ELECTRICALLY INTERLOCKED, AUTOMATIC OPENING DOORS. SEE DETAIL 2/TR2.0.
10. CHUTE DISCHARGE DOOR: TYPE-A, HORIZONTALLY INSULATED SLIDING-STEEL DOOR, HELD OPEN BY 165° F FUSIBLE LINK.
GENERAL NOTES.
1. ANY DESIGNS OR DESIGN SOLUTIONS PRESENTED IN THIS DRAWING OR
SPECIFICATION, WHICH ARE DIRECT OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING NARRATIVES, DRAWINGS, OR DIAGRAMS, ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOTBE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS OR DESIGNS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION.
2. OMISSIONS FROM DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS, OR THE INACCURATE
DESCRIPTION OF DETAILS OF WORK, WHICH ARE MANIFESTLY NECESSARY TO
CARRY OUT THE INTENT OF THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, OR WHICH ARECUSTOMARILY PERFORMED, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM
PERFORMING SUCH OMITTED OR INACCURATELY DESCRIBED DETAILS OF THE WORK. WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED AS IF FULLY AND CORRECTLY SET FORTH AND DESCRIBED IN THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF ALL EXISTING FIELD CONDITIONS AND ANY DISCREPANCIES OR INCONSISTENCIES.
FLOORS BY OTHERS
(S.A.D.) SEE NOTE 2
CHUTE DISCHARGE
DOOR, SEE NOTE 10
30"Ø CHUTE
TR2.0
TYP
9 COMPACTOR
ACCESS DOOR
SINGLE SIDE LATCH FOR
CONTAINER REMOVAL
3CY FL NARROW
COMPACTOR CONTAINER
WASTE
SECTION B-B
FLOORS BY OTHERS
(S.A.D.) SEE NOTE 2
CONCRETE CURB WALLPROTECTION TYP U.O.N.SEE NOTE 4
TR2.0
TYP
9 APOLLO MODEL A500 SSL COMPACTOR
(2) TOTAL, CONTAINER NOT SHOWNFOR CLARITY
RECYCLING
(1) 30"Ø GALV. STEELCHUTE, SEE NOTE 7
SECTION A-A
LEVEL 1
(S.A.D.)
LEVEL 1
(S.A.D.)
LEVEL 2
(S.A.D.)
LEVEL 2
(S.A.D.)
FLOORS BY OTHERS
(S.A.D.) SEE NOTE 2
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL BY
OTHERS (S.A.D.) SEE NOTE 3
LEVEL 1
(S.A.D.)
16ga GALV.
STEEL
HOPPER
18x18 S.H. THRU-WALL INTAKE
DOOR (2) TOTAL, SEE NOTE 9
64G
TOTER CART
SECTION C-C
WASTE
(1) 30"Ø #304 S.S. STEEL
CHUTE, SEE NOTE 6
AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890
EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608P: 415.292.5400F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
3/16"=1'-0"
CONSULTANT
SECTIONS AT
RESIDENTIAL TRASH ROOM
TR1.2
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
cl§
AMERICAN
TRASH MANAGEMENT
-
___r4 --<u \.
t - ,- - ,: : ' +
L
--
.,, . . ,.,. ,- '
"'' d----
-
--
I~
-
•· ILJ l 1-J :, • I • \ I-)
j - = j d' -" l;; ! \' '\ J i "
n ! 11 l nl I I Ill I II Ill • M " + I. . I + t +
J L L ..... L
,._,.
-- --
12g GALV.
SHEET METAL
1" x 1" x 18" ANGLE
STIFFENERS TACK WELDED
TO INSIDE POUR RING
STIFFENERS REMOVED
PRIOR TO CHUTE
INSTALLATION
CHUTE SHAFT AT INTAKE
NO CONTACT BTWN GYP BOARD, FRAMING& CHUTE. SEAL GAP W/ FLEXIBLE ACOUSTICRATED FIRE CAULKING AT PENETRATION
THROUGH WALL & SHAFT, ALL AROUND
FIRE-RATED ACOUSTICFLEXIBLE SEALANT
TAPE INTERIOR OF CHUTE SHAFT
TO PREVENT ODOROUS AIR LEAKS
(BY OTHERS)
OPP
HAND
CONC SLAB WHERE
OCCURS (S.S.D.)
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL
PER SCHEDULE (S.A.D.)
TAPE INTERIOR OF CHUTE SHAFT
TO PREVENT ODOROUS AIR LEAKS (BY
OTHERS)
ANCHOR BOLTS W/ NEOPRENE GROMMETS.
PROVIDE MASON BRA-RED SOUND ISOLATIONPADS BELOW FRAME
CHUTE AIR AND SOUND ISOLATION FIRE SPRINKLER DETAILS AND CHUTE SANITATION UNIT
AT HIGHEST INTAKE
ROOF LEVEL
NOTES:
1. ATTACHMENT OF ALL BLOCKING, CURBS, AND OTHER ROOF COMPONENTS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF MANUFACTURER.
2. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL WORK BY OTHERS.
TYP RESIDENTIAL LEVELCL
CONC SLAB WHERE
OCCURS (S.S.D.)
CL
CHUTE INTAKE DOOR: 14" MAXOPENING FROM F.O. WALLSEE DETAIL 1/- CONC SLAB & ROOF ASSEMBLYBY OTHERS (S.S.D.)
ACOUSTIC
SEALANT
VENT CAP W/ CURB FLASHING
BY OTHERS (S.A.D.)
CONC CURB BY
OTHERS (S.A.D.)
CL
5 7
10 A36 FLOOR SUPPORT
FRAME, SEE PLAN
A36 FLOOR SUPPORT
FRAME, SEE PLAN
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL
PER SCHEDULE (S.A.D.)
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL
PER SCHEDULE (S.A.D.)
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL
PER SCHEDULE (S.A.D.)
CONC SLAB WHERE
OCCURS (S.S.D.)
PROVIDE MASON BRA-RED SOUND
ISOLATION PADS BELOW FRAME
A36 FLOOR FRAME
SEE PLAN
ASTM A307 3 8"Ø CAST-IN-PLACE ANCHOR BOLT
(2) TOTAL PER ASSEMBLY
ARCHITECT SHALL VERIFY WITH RECOMMENDATIONS
IN ACOUSTICS REPORT
NOTES:1. REFER TO MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL OTHER INFORMATION NOT LISTED.
ASTM A307 516-18UNCx1 CAP SCREW
W/ STANDARD WASHER & NEOPRENE
GROMMET, (1) TOTAL PER ASSEMBLY
9 9- 9- NOTES: 1. CHUTE SHAFT SHALL NOT BE ERECTED UNTIL CHUTE HAS BEEN INSTALLED. FOR SOUND PROOFING PURPOSES, DOUBLE STUD-WALLS ARE REQUIRED ADJACENT TO OCCUPIED SPACES. INTERIOR OF SHAFT SHALL BE TAPED TO PREVENT ODOROUS AIR LEAKING INTO OCCUPIED SPACES (BY OTHERS). 2. INTAKE DOOR NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
SCALE: 12" = 1'-0"
SCALE: 12" = 1'-0" SCALE: 12" = 1'-0"
DISCHARGE LEVEL
WILKINSON TYPE-A, B-LABEL CONSTRUCTION 90 MINUTE
FIRE-RATED, NARROW GUILLOTINE FIRE DOOR W/ 165° F.FUSIBLE LINK, SHOWN IN CLOSED POSITION 12 FLOOR SUPPORT FRAME ANCHORING
SECTION VIEWS
FLOOR SUPPORT FRAME ANCHORING
PLAN VIEWS
15- TYPE I FLOOR
CONNECTION
SCALE: 112" = 1'-0"
DUCTILE IRON HOUSING
BRIDGE-BEARING
QUALITY NEOPRENE
CHUTE VENT 11 AT ROOF LEVEL SCALE: 12" = 1'-0"
CHUTE INTAKE DOOR 1
12"Ø HOLES FOR 38"Ø
ANCHOR BOLTS (2) TOTAL
PER ASSEMBLY
EDGE OF 34"Ø FLOOR
OPENING: TYPE I FLOOR
EDGE OF 30"Ø CHUTE
SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"
35°
NOTES:
1. SEE DETAIL 1/- FOR CHUTE INTAKE DOOR INFORMATION.
2. SEE DETAIL 9/- FOR ADDITIONAL FLOOR SUPPORT FRAME ANCHORING INFORMATION.
3. ANCHOR FLOOR SUPPORT FRAME AT ONE END AS SHOWN. OTHER SIDE OF FRAME TO REST ON TOP OF FLOOR AT INTAKE WALL. SEE PLAN FOR LAYOUT OF CHUTE SHAFT.
A36 L112"x112"x14x SQ.
FLOOR SUPPORTFRAME TYP
NOTES:1. PROVIDE HIGH PRESSURE CHUTE WASHDOWN NOZZLE.
2. FILL SANITATION TANK WITH CONCENTRATED DISINFECTING SOLUTION. THE SYPHON HOSE SHOULD REACH THE BOTTOM OF THE SOLUTION CONTAINER. TO FLUSH WITH CLEAR WATER, TURN HANDLE TO THE ON POSITION. FACTORY SETTINGOF THE PROPORTIONING VALVE IS FOR 50-GALLONS PER GALLON OF DISINFECTING SOLUTION.
3. NOTE THAT THE ACCESS DOOR AND D & S UNIT ARE SHOWN OUTSIDE OF CHUTE SHAFT FOR CLARITY. ALL WASHDOWN EQUIPMENT WILL BE INSTALLED WITHIN CHUTE SHAFT, ABOVE THE HIGHEST INTAKE. (1) D & S UNIT PER CHUTE.
4. 2019 CBC - 11B-308.2.1(FORWARD) & 308.3.1(SIDE) HEIGHT: CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE LOCATED NO HIGHER THAN 44 INCHES AND NO LOWER THAN 34 INCHES ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR MEASURED TO THEMEASURED TO THE CENTER OF THE PUSH BUTTON.
5. 2019 CBC - 11B-309.4 OPERATION: CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE OPERABLE WITH ONE HAND AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST. THE FORCE REQUIRED TO ACTIVATECONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 5 POUNDS.
6. SUPPLIED BY CHUTE VENDOR - INSTALLED BY PLUMBER.
5 1
2 4 2
6 3
D & S UNIT (NTS)
INSTALLED BEHIND F.O. WALL
15x15 ACCESS DOOR (NTS) INSTALLED BY
CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO ERECTING WALL
8 9
CL
CONC SLAB OR WOOD
WHERE OCCURS
(S.S.D.)
A36 FLOOR SUPPORT
FRAME, SEE PLAN
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL
PER SCHEDULE (S.A.D.)
2HR FIRE-RATED WALL
PER SCHEDULE (S.A.D.)
CHUTE INTAKE DOOR: 14" MAX OPENING FROM
F.O. WALL, SEE DETAIL 2/- & NOTES 4 & 5 FORHEIGHT REQUIREMENTS 7 SATIN CHROME PULL
HANDLE W/ THUMB LATCH
18x18 SIDE HINGED, AUTOMATIC OPENING
ELECTRICALLY INTERLOCKED INTAKE DOOR
ROUGH
OPENING
THRU-WALL
RED OPEN
BUTTON
ELEVATION VIEW
(WITHOUT TRIM)
PLAN VIEW
ELEVATION VIEW ISOMETRIC VIEW (WITH TRIM: 16 GA. 430 S.S.) NOTES:
1. INTAKE DOOR AND TRIM SHALL BE REMOVED FOR DOOR MAINTENANCE.
2. SIDE HINGED DOORS ARE SELF-CLOSING, NOISELESS, AND SELF-LATCHING. UL CLASSIFIED 90 MINUTE FIRE-RATED DOOR AND FRAME ASSEMBLY AND A TEMPERATURE RISE OF 250° F MAX IN 30 MINUTES.
3. 2019 CBC - 11B-308.2.1(FORWARD) & 11B-308.3.1(SIDE) HEIGHT: CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE LOCATED NO HIGHER THAN 48 INCHES, AND NO LOWER THAN 15 INCHES ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR MEASURED TO THE CENTER OF THE PUSH BUTTON.
4. 2019 CBC - 11B-309.4 OPERATION: CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE OPERABLE WITH ONE HAND AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST. THE FORCE REQUIRED TOACTIVATE CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 5 POUNDS.
SCALE: 12" = 1'-0"
THRU-WALL INTAKE DOOR 2 FLOOR 1
2 NOTES:
1. INTAKE DOOR AND TRIM SHALL BE REMOVED FOR DOOR MAINTENANCE.
2. BOTTOM HINGED DOORS ARE SELF-CLOSING, NOISELESS, AND SELF-LATCHING. UL CLASSIFIED 90 MINUTE FIRE-RATED DOOR AND FRAME ASSEMBLY AND A TEMPERATURE RISE OF 250° F MAX IN 30 MINUTES.
3. MAX OPENING FOR INTAKE DOOR IS 14" FROM FACE OF FINISHED WALL.4. 2019 CBC - 11B-308.2.1(FORWARD) & 11B-308.3.1(SIDE) HEIGHT: CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE LOCATED NO HIGHER THAN 48 INCHES, AND NOLOWER THAN 15 INCHES ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR MEASURED TO THE CENTER OF THE PUSH BUTTON.
5. 2019 CBC - 11B-309.4 OPERATION: CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE
OPERABLE WITH ONE HAND AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST. THE FORCE REQUIRED TO ACTIVATE CONTROLS AND OPERATING MECHANISMS SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 5 POUNDS.
FLUSHING SPRAY
HEAD BELOW
CHUTE VENT AND
ABOVE TOP CHUTE
INTAKE DOOR
FIRE SPRINKLER
HEAD AT
LOWEST LEVEL
OF BUILDING
*FIRE SPRINKLER
HEAD AT
HIGHEST LEVEL
OF BUILDING
FIRE SPRINKLER
HEAD AT EVERY
OTHER FLOOR
EXAMPLE
BUILDING VERTICAL
SECTION VIEW
*WHEN CALCULATING
NUMBER OF FIRE
SPRINKLER HEADS FOR
EVERY OTHER FLOOR
ALWAYS START WITH
HIGHEST LEVEL
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5
- 18x18 AIR ASSIST ACCESS DOOR IS
LARGEST DOOR THAT ATM WILLDESIGN FOR CHUTE INTAKE.
- ATM WILL NEVER DESIGN A 24X24
INTAKE DOOR AS THESE DOOR SIZESHAVE LED TO FATALITIES.
*SOUND CONSULTANT
TO VERIFY DETAILS
AND UPDATE AS
NECESSARY*
WATER LINE FOR WASHDOWN
RISER IF NOT PROVIDED
ABOVE HIGHEST INTAKE (TBD
BY PLUMBING)
SPRINKLER RISER(TBD BY FIRE SPRINKLER
DESIGNER)
34" CONDUIT FOR AIR
COMPRESSOR
112"Ø HOLES (5) (TYP)
1/2" EMT TO
WASHDOWN SOLENOIDABOVE HIGHEST
INTAKE. (OPTIONAL)
1" EMT FOR LOW
VOLTAGE POWER
2 LAYERS OF 5 8" SHEET
ROCK RECOMMENDEDFOR 2HR RATED WALL,
OR EQUIVALENT.
MASON BRA-RED
MOUNT (4 REQUIRED)
(TYP)
J-RUNNER / J-STRUT 212JR-23
USG SHAFT WALL FRAMING SYSTEM
(CHANNEL AT TOP AND BOTTOM)(BY
OTHER)
1" THICK GYPSUM LINER PANEL
(UL TYPE SLXTM) (BY OTHER)
ACOUSTICAL INSULATION. REFER TO
ACOUSTICAL REPORT FOR
LOCATION R-19 MIN. BATT
INSULATION PER SPECIFICATIONS
AT CONDITIONED AREAS.(BY OTHER)
(2) LAYERS 5 8" TYPE "X GWB" OR 5 8" IRE
RATED MOLD AND MOISTURERESISTANT GYP BD. @ BATHS &KITCHENS AND 5 8" DENARMOR @ TUB
LOCATIONS (BY OTHER)
USG SHAFT WALL FRAMING
SYSTEM. E STUD-212ES-23( TYP AT
EACH SIDE OF WALL, BY OTHER)
CH METAL STUD (2-1/2") 212CH -23
USG SHAFT WALL FRAMING SYSTEM
(24" O.C TYP) (BY OTHER)
DO NOT INSTALL THIS
FRONT PORTION OF
THE WALL UNTIL
AFTER CHUTES ARE
INSTALLED.
MINIMUM SHAFT DETAILS
WALL ASSEMBLY AS SCHEDULED
WALL PANELS AS SCHEDULED
CONC. CURB AS SCHEDULED
DOWEL, TYP. S.S.D.
J-MOLD
FURRING AS REQUIRED
EPOXY COVE BASE AND EPOXY
FLOOR AS SCHEDULED
CONC. SLAB, S.S.D.
EPOXY TO LAP OVER CURB AND
TO GO UP THE WALL 6".
WALL PROTECTION CONCRETE CURB 3
SCALE: 3 8" = 1'-0"
SHEET NOTES: 30"Ø CHUTE DETAILS
1. CHUTE MATERIAL: GALVANIZED OR GALVANEAL 16G STEEL
2. ALL WALL ASSEMBLIES ENCASING THE CHUTE SHAFT SHALL BE 2HR FIRE-RATED.
3. SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS TO VERIFY ALL INFORMATION NOT RELATED TO ATM'S SCOPE OF WORK PER AGREEMENT.
4. POUR RINGS WILL VARY BASED ON THICKNESS OF FLOOR SLAB AND SHALL BE PROVIDED BY MANUFACTURER.
GENERAL NOTES:
1. ANY DESIGNS OR SOLUTIONS SHOWN IN DRAWING, EITHER DIRECT OR IMPLIED, ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS FORCONSTRUCTION. THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TO SUPPLEMENT THE SUBMITTAL PACKAGEFROM ARCHITECT.
2. ANY PARTIAL INFORMATION, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK SHOWN IN DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SCOPE OF WORK, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THECONTRACTOR FROM COMPLETION OF WORK. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED TO SATISFY THEMINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE CURRENT APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT SHALL BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES AND/ORDISCREPANCIES.
SCALE: 6" = 1'-0"
MASON BRA-RED MOUNT
DUCTILE IRONHOUSINGRADIAL CLEARANCE (RC)
ASTM A307 5/16" XXX CAP SCREW W/STANDARD WASHER &
NEOPRENE GROMMET , (1) TOTAL PER ASSEMBLY. TYP AT TYPE
I & TYPE III CONSTRUCTION
BRIDGE-BEARING
QUALITY NEOPRENE TYPE I CONNECTION :
12 DIA. HOLES FOR ASTM A307 38" DIA.
POST-INSTALLED ANCHOR BOLTS, (2)
TOTAL PER ASSEMBLY. ARCHITECT SHALLVERIFY W/ RECOMMENDATIONS INACOUSTICS REPORT. PROVIDE SIMPSONSET-XP EPOXY ADHESIVE ANCHORINGSYSTEM FOR POST INSTALLED ANCHORS (ICC-ES-ESR-2508)
3"
2"
3/16"
1-3/8"
1-3/8"
1-5/8"
1-5/8" 4-1/4"
NOTES:
1.ALL HARDWARE PLATED
2.REFER TO MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS
FOR ALL OTHER INFORMATION NOT INCLUDED
2-1/2"
2-1/2"
3 4
"
3 4
"
TYPE III CONNECTION :38" DIA. HOLES FOR SIMPSON 5 PAX #6 x 58" R200PANHEAD ZINC SCREW (4) TOTAL PER
ASSEMBLY. ARCHITECT SHALL VERIFYWITH RECOMMENDATIONS IN ACOUSTICS REPORT(ICC-ES-ESR-2236).
PROVIDE MASON BRA-RED SOUND ISOLATION
PADS BELOW PLATE. SEE MFG.SPECS. TYP AT
TYPE I AND TYPE III CONSTRUCTION
COMPACTOR & POWER PACK ANCHORING DETAILS 4
ZINC PLATED OVERSIZED STEELWASHER 0.688" x 2.25
MASON TYPE HG-75 NEOPRENE BUSHING
PROTECTIVE STEEL BUSHING ALLSTAR ALL18568 -10 REDUCER
3 4" - 58" x 1.25" LONG
HILTI 58" x 5" ANCHOR BOLT
OR WEDGE ANCHOR
MASON 3/4" THICK NEOPRENESUPER "W" WAFFLE PAD, 6" x 4" .CAPACITY PER LEG: 1400 LB 6"x 4"x 14" LEG
BASE PLATE
W/ 1.062 " HOLE
C6 x 13# CHANNEL
COMPACTOR LEG
ZINC PLATED OVERSIZED STEELWASHER
HILTI 1/4" x 3" ANCHOR BOLT OR WEDGE ANCHOR
MASON 3/4" THICK NEOPRENE
SUPER "W" WAFFLE PAD, 2" x 2" .
CAPACITY PER PAD: 230 LB
MASON TYPE HG-25 NEOPRENE BUSHING
POWER PACK LEG 12g
0.562 " HOLECENTERED (4)
C6 x 13# CHANNEL
COMPACTOR LEG
6"x 4"x 14" LEG BASE PLATEW/ 1.062 " HOLE
MASON 3/4" NEOPRENESUPER "W" WAFFLE PAD,6" x 4" .
SCALE: 3 8" = 1'-0"
COMPACTOR ANCHORING
POWER PACK ANCHORING
COAT CHUTE W/ SOUNDCOAT DAUBERT V-DAMP
3680 OR EQUIVALENT ; MATCH THICKNESS OF
METAL
15x18 BOTTOM HINGED, NORMALLY
CLOSED LOW-VOLTAGE
ELECTRICALLY INTERLOCKED,
AUTOMATIC OPENING INTAKE DOOR
PLAN VIEW
SATIN CHROME PULL
HANDLE W/ THUMBLATCH
SECTION VIEW FRONT VIEW
PLAN VIEW
RED OPEN BUTTON
PLUMBING SCHEMATIC LEGEND:1. 3 4"Ø DOMESTIC HOT WATER INLET WITH VACUUM BREAKER. (SUPPLIED/INSTALLED BY PLUMBING SUBCONTRACTOR)
2. QUARTER-TURN GATE VALVE (SHUT-OFF AND BYPASS), (2) TOTAL. (SUPPLIED/INSTALLED BY PLUMBING SUBCONTRACTOR)
3. PLUMBING DESIGN, MATERIALS, AND INSTALLATION BY OTHERS. (SUPPLIED/INSTALLED BY PLUMBING SUBCONTRACTOR)
4. 24-VDC SOLENOID VALVE (OPTIONAL). NOT NEEDED FOR MANUAL OPERATION. (NOT USED HERE)
5. D & S UNIT: 1-GALLON CONTAINER, MOUNTING BRACKET, AND PROPORTIONAL VALVE AT REMOTE LOCATION. (SUPPLIED/MOUNTED BY CHUTE SUBCONTRACTOR. PLUMBED BY PLUMBING SUBCONTRACTOR)
6. FLUSHING SPRAY HEAD BELOW CHUTE VENT. (SUPPLIED/MOUNTED BY CHUTE SUBCONTRACTOR. PLUMBED BY PLUMBING
SUBCONTRACTOR)
7. FIRE SPRINKLER HEAD AT HIGHEST INTAKE, LOWEST INTAKE, AND EVERY OTHER FLOOR BETWEEN, TO BE STARTED FROM HIGHEST INTAKE - CONNECTION BY OTHERS. (SUPPLIED/MOUNTED BY CHUTE SUBCONTRACTOR. PLUMBED BY FIRE
SPRINKLER SUBCONTRACTOR)
8. SIDE-HINGED, UL RATED 90 MINUTE B-LABEL ACCESS DOOR. (SUPPLIED BY CHUTE SUBCONTRACTOR. INSTALLED BY
FRAMING SUBCONTRACTOR OR GC)
9. SATIN CHROME PULL-HANDLE. (SUPPLIED/INSTALLED BY CHUTE MANUFACTURE)
AMERICAN TRASH MANAGEMENT
1900 POWELL STREET, SUITE 890
EMERYVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94608P: 415.292.5400F: 415.292.5410 [email protected]
DRAWING TITLE
MONROE STREET
PROJECT NO.PROJECT
CM
DRAWN
APPROVED
DATE
SCALE
DRAWING NO.
SB
11/05/21
AS SHOWN
CONSULTANT
30"Ø CHUTE DETAILS
TR2.0
ARCHITECT
OWNER / DEVELOPER
NO. DATE ISSUE / REVISION ISSUED BY
SALVATORE CARUSO
LAMB PARTNERS
, , ,·;;
.
.
I]
C'----------~
0 ! ,
{1 I:: ,J
;J
--I lJ" /LJ-1~
Jf
....
cl§
AMERICAN
TRASH MANAGEMENT
-
:·.~~-:~•;~ <'.f <•-:-: :_•:,_--: • .-~,=.••• ... ~>•,"i1 ,,,~ .. ,•••-••• ••• •--d•:~ ~-,:•
=
c:·~-------------------~
Resolution/ 950 Monroe Street Mixed-use Project - EIR Page 1 of 5 Rev. Rev: 11/22/17
RESOLUTION NO. __________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
TO CERTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKE
FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND ADOPT THE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR
THE 950 MONROE STREET MIXED-USE PROJECT LOCATED
AT 906-950 MONROE STREET AND 1341 HOMESTEAD ROAD,
SANTA CLARA
PLN2020-14457 (General Plan Amendment and Rezone)
SCH# 2021100581
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS,
on June 16, 2020, Lamb Partners, LLC (“Owner”) made an application for a General Plan Amendment in connection with development of a 0.87-acre site located at 906-950 Monroe Street and 1341 Homestead Road (APNs: 269-20-086, 269-20-087, and 269-20-095), which is currently developed with a 6,537 square foot commercial building and three existing single-family residences (“Project Site”);
WHEREAS, the Project approvals will include a General Plan Amendment to modify the text of the Community Mixed-use land use designation and related policies; a Rezone of the Project Site from General Office (OG), Historic Combining (HT), and Community Commercial to Planned Development (PD); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to allow a residential mixed-use development consisting of 50 condominium units in a six-story structure, four townhomes, and three existing single-family residences with onsite and offsite improvements (“Project”), as shown on the Development Plans, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the regulations implementing the Act, specifically 14 Cal. Code of Regs § 15081, this Project was determined after an Initial Study to identify potentially significant effects on the environment, resulting in the drafting of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”);
Resolution/ 950 Monroe Street Mixed-use Project - EIR Page 2 of 5 Rev. Rev: 11/22/17
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2021, the City distributed a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") for the Project; and WHEREAS, on October 25, 2021, the City posted the Notice of Preparation at the Santa Clara County Clerk's office, soliciting guidance on the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the DEIR; and
WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA, the EIR was noticed and circulated for a 45-day public review period to the State Office of Planning and Research, Santa Clara County Clerk’s Office, interested parties, and property owners within 1,000 feet of the Project Site from October 14, 2022 to November 30, 2022 (“Comment Period”), where during that period comment letters were received from the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, and Valley Water.
WHEREAS, the City prepared written Responses to Comments Received during the Comment Period and included those responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”). The FEIR consists of a list of agencies and organizations to whom the DEIR was sent, a list of the comment letters received on the DEIR, revisions to the text of the DEIR, responses to comments received on the DEIR, and copies of comment letters;
WHEREAS, the DEIR and FEIR constitute the EIR for the Project; WHEREAS, the EIR identified certain significant and potentially significant adverse effects on the environment that would be caused by the Project as proposed; WHEREAS, the EIR outlined various mitigation measures that would avoid the Project's significant effects on the environment, as well as alternatives to the Project as proposed that would provide some environmental advantages;
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 requires a lead agency, before approving a project for which an EIR has been prepared and certified, to adopt findings specifying whether mitigation measures and, in some instances, alternatives discussed in the EIR, have been adopted or rejected as infeasible;
Resolution/ 950 Monroe Street Mixed-use Project - EIR Page 3 of 5 Rev. Rev: 11/22/17
WHEREAS, the "CEQA Findings" attached to this Resolution is a set of Findings of Fact prepared in order to satisfy the requirements of Guidelines Section 15091; WHEREAS, on July 13, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Commission voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend that the City Council certify the EIR and adopt the CEQA Findings and MMRP; WHEREAS, on August 11, 2023, notices of the public hearing for the City Council meeting of August 22, 2023 were posted within 300 feet of the Project Site and mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the property, according to the most recent Assessor’s roll; WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the EIR prepared for the Project, City staff report pertaining to the EIR and all evidence at a duly noticed public hearing on August 22, 2023, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to provide testimony and submit evidence. All these documents and evidence are herein incorporated by reference into this Resolution.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the City Council hereby finds that the above Recitals are true and correct and by this reference makes them a part hereof.
2. That the City Council hereby finds that all potentially significant environmental impacts that may directly or indirectly result from the Project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level by the mitigation measures specified in the EIR and MMRP.
3. That the City Council hereby finds the EIR has been presented to the Council, which reviewed and considered the information and analysis contained therein before making its determination, and that the EIR reflects the Council’s independent judgment and analysis.
4. That the City Council hereby finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, that all of the proposed mitigation measures described in the EIR are feasible, and therefore will become binding upon the City and affected landowners and their assigns or successors in interest as conditions of approval when the Project is approved.
Resolution/ 950 Monroe Street Mixed-use Project - EIR Page 4 of 5 Rev. Rev: 11/22/17
5. That the City Council hereby finds that the EIR is complete and prepared in compliance with CEQA.
6. That the City Council finds that the approval of this Project as mitigated will have no significant negative impacts on the area’s environmental resources, cumulative or otherwise, as the impacts as mitigated would fall within the environmental thresholds identified by CEQA.
7. That, in order to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as set forth in the attached "MMRP". The MMRP is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the City, affected landowners, their assigns and successors in interest and any other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified. The MMRP identifies, for each mitigation measure, the action to be taken and the party responsible for implementation.
8. That the City Council hereby certifies the EIR, adopts the CEQA Findings, and adopts the MMRP for the Project as required by the CEQA Guidelines.
9. That the City Council hereby designates the Director of Community Development as the Custodian of Records for the Project, and the Planning Division at City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California, is the location of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based. //
//
//
//
Resolution/ 950 Monroe Street Mixed-use Project - EIR Page 5 of 5 Rev. Rev: 11/22/17
10. Effective date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF A RESOLUTION PASSED
AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 22nd DAY OF AUGUST 2023, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: COUNCILORS:
NOES: COUNCILORS:
ABSENT: COUNCILORS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:
ATTEST:
___________________________
NORA PIMENTEL, MMC
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Attachments Incorporated by Reference:
1. Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
2. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
3. CEQA Findings
4. Responses to Comments Received on the EIR
5. Development Plans
Resolution/ 950 Monroe Street Mixed Use Project - General Plan Amendment Rev. Rev: 11/22/17