to less-than-significant levels unless the CEQA Lead Agency makes and supports Findings of Overriding Consideration (FOC). The CEQA Lead Agency’s FOC does not eliminate the Project proponent’s obligation to comply with Fish and Game Code, § 2080.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project consists of a mixed-use commercial and residential development on a 3.56- acre site in the City of Scotts Valley, APN 022-162-76. There will be two lots on the property. Lot 1 would consist of eight town home apartments over approximately one acre. Lot 2 would consist of two types of buildings, commercial and residential. There would be 24,841 square feet of commercial buildings including surface parking and 12- foot-wide sidewalks. There would be 74,100 square feet of residential buildings on Lot 2 including a mix of apartments. The Project would require regrading of Lots 1 and 2, requiring several hundred yards of fill to be imported. Per the Project’s Stormwater Control Plan, the Project would include flow-through planters in the residential area to retain and treat stormwater runoff. A stacked underground storage chamber system which would provide treatment of runoff by infiltration would be used in the mixed-use and commercials portions of the Project.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND LOCATION
The Project is located at the intersection of Glen Canyon and Mt. Hermon Road, in the City of Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz County.
The Project is adjacent to Mt. Hermon Road, a commercial office building on Glen Canyon Road, and single-family residences. There are no watercourses on the property, but creeks in the vicinity of the Project site include tributaries to Bean Creek and Carbonera Creek. The Project site supports annual grassland, a small patch of coastal prairie, coast live oak tree groves, a poison oak thicket, and non-native tree groves.
COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the following comments and recommendations to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on biological resources.
Comment 1: Surveys for special status plant species
Issue: The DEIR does not provide the methodology of the special-status plant species surveys in Mitigation Measure Bio-1.1. The DEIR on page 7-13 of the Biological Resources section states that the small patch of coastal prairie habitat may provide habitat for special-status plant species such as Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdonii), a California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare Plant Rank 1B.1, DocuSign Envelope ID: 76D64D7A-8D29-44F5-905B-EA276502697C 104 070 271
Mr. Taylor Bateman
City of Scotts Valley
November 24, 2021
pending the results of a spring season plant survey. Furthermore, Table 2 of the Biotic Report states that there is marginal habitat for other CNPS rare plant species including but not limited to Scotts Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe robusta var. Hartwegii), shortleaved evax (Hesperevax sparsiflora var. brevifolia), Point Reyes horkelia (Horkelia marinensis) and State endangered species including white-rayed pentachaeta (Pentachaeta bellidiflora) and Santa Cruz tarplant (Holocarpha macradenia). Mitigation Measure Bio 1.1 states that plant surveys will be conducted; however, the methodology for the surveys is not disclosed. Without following proper survey protocol for spring or early summer blooming plant species, it is possible to miss detection of special-status plant species on the site.
Recommendation
CDFW recommends the City update MM Bio 1.1 to include methodology capable of detecting special-status plant species.
Recommended update to MM Bio 1.1
An experienced botanist (with expertise in coastal prairie plant communities of Santa Cruz) shall conduct a minimum of two focused rare plant surveys over two seasons prior to the initiation of construction and include the information in the Project environmental document. Surveys shall be conducted according to: Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (CDFW 2018), available at:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959&inline.
In the event rare, threatened or endangered plants are discovered, additional measures may be needed, which may include work stoppage, flagging and avoidance of occurrences, collection of propagation material, site restoration and/or obtaining an Incidental Take Permit (Fish and Game Code section 2081, subd., (b).) COMMENT 2: Tree Removal
Issue: The Project has the potential to remove all trees on the Project site including six Coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia), one Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), six ash trees (Fraxinus sp.), four sycamore trees (Platanus acerifolia), and a large group of acacia trees (Acacia baileyana). According to the Tree Resource Evaluation, at least one coast live oak is above 15 inches diameter at breast height (dbh). Large mature trees (e.g., native oak tree that is greater than 15 inches in diameter) are of particular importance due to increased biological values (i.e., nesting bird habitat, bat roost habitat). Furthermore, the Tree Resource Evaluation states that the sycamore trees growing along the perimeter are healthy and recommends their incorporation into the Project. However, it is unclear if the sycamore trees have been incorporated into the landscape plan.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 76D64D7A-8D29-44F5-905B-EA276502697C 105 071 272
Mr. Taylor Bateman
City of Scotts Valley
November 24, 2021
Evidence the impact would be significant: While the DEIR includes on-site tree planting as a minimization measure, on-site planting at higher ratios alone is not sufficient to completely off-set temporal impacts from the loss of mature trees due to an uncertain time lag from when the new resources will be available (Marón et al., 2010).
Recommendation: CDFW recommends the Project avoid large diameter tree removal to the greatest extent feasible. CDFW recommends Project mitigation include in-kind preservation of mature native trees. Where in-kind preservation of mature native trees is not feasible, CDFW recommends planting larger sized native trees, (such as 15-gallon sized trees or larger) to help address the temporal loss of mature trees on-site.
COMMENT 3: Figures and Labels
Issue 1: Figure 3-11: Stormwater Control Plan, does not include a legend or figure labels to explain the meaning of the colors in the figure. The DEIR also references a Figure 7-2: Landscape Plan; however, only Figure 7-1: Vegetation Map is included in the DEIR.
Recommendation: CDFW recommends the final EIR should include labels with Figure 3-11 and include Figure 7-2 either in the EIR or as an attachment.
FILING FEES
CDFW anticipates that the Project will have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of filing fees is necessary (Fish and Game Code, section 711.4; Pub.
Resources Code, section 21089). Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Project’s DEIR. If you have any questions regarding this letter or for further coordination with CDFW, please contact Ms. Serena Stumpf, Environmental Scientist, at (707) 337-1364 or [email protected]; or Mr. Wesley Stokes, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory), at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Stephanie Fong
Acting Regional Manager
Bay Delta Region
ec: State Clearinghouse # 2019110250
DocuSign Envelope ID: 76D64D7A-8D29-44F5-905B-EA276502697C 106 072 273
Mr. Taylor Bateman
City of Scotts Valley
November 24, 2021
REFERENCES
CDFW, 2018. Protocols for surveying and evaluating impacts to special status native plant populations and sensitive natural communities.
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959&inline.
Marón, M., Dunn, P. K., McAlpine, C. A., & Apan, A. (2010). Can offsets really compensate for habitat removal? The case of the endangered red-tailed black-cockatoo. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(2), 348–355.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 76D64D7A-8D29-44F5-905B-EA276502697C 107 073 274
Plan Review Team
Land Management
[email protected]
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 1
October 20, 2021
Susie Pineda
City of Scotts Valley Planning Dept
One Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
Ref: Gas and Electric Transmission and Distribution
Dear Susie Pineda,
Thank you for submitting the Oak Creek Park plans for our review. PG&E will review the submitted plans in relationship to any existing Gas and Electric facilities within the project area.
If the proposed project is adjacent/or within PG&E owned property and/or easements, we will be working with you to ensure compatible uses and activities near our facilities.
Attached you will find information and requirements as it relates to Gas facilities (Attachment 1) and Electric facilities (Attachment 2). Please review these in detail, as it is critical to ensure your safety and to protect PG&E’s facilities and its existing rights.
Below is additional information for your review:
1. This plan review process does not replace the application process for PG&E gas or electric service your project may require. For these requests, please continue to work with PG&E Service Planning: https://www.pge.com/en_US/business/services/buildingand-renovation/overview/overview.page.
2. If the project being submitted is part of a larger project, please include the entire scope of your project, and not just a portion of it. PG&E’s facilities are to be incorporated within any CEQA document. PG&E needs to verify that the CEQA document will identify any required future PG&E services.
3. An engineering deposit may be required to review plans for a project depending on the size, scope, and location of the project and as it relates to any rearrangement or new installation of PG&E facilities.
Any proposed uses within the PG&E fee strip and/or easement, may include a California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) Section 851 filing. This requires the CPUC to render approval for a conveyance of rights for specific uses on PG&E’s fee strip or easement. PG&E will advise if the necessity to incorporate a CPUC Section 851filing is required.
This letter does not constitute PG&E’s consent to use any portion of its easement for any purpose not previously conveyed. PG&E will provide a project specific response as required.
Sincerely,
Plan Review Team
Land Management
108 074 275
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 2
Attachment 1 – Gas Facilities
There could be gas transmission pipelines in this area which would be considered critical facilities for PG&E and a high priority subsurface installation under California law. Care must be taken to ensure safety and accessibility. So, please ensure that if PG&E approves work near gas transmission pipelines it is done in adherence with the below stipulations. Additionally, the following link provides additional information regarding legal requirements under California excavation laws: https://www.usanorth811.org/images/pdfs/CA-LAW-2018.pdf
1. Standby Inspection: A PG&E Gas Transmission Standby Inspector must be present during any demolition or construction activity that comes within 10 feet of the gas pipeline. This includes all grading, trenching, substructure depth verifications (potholes), asphalt or concrete demolition/removal, removal of trees, signs, light poles, etc. This inspection can be coordinated through the Underground Service Alert (USA) service at 811. A minimum notice of 48 hours is required. Ensure the USA markings and notifications are maintained throughout the duration of your work.
2. Access: At any time, PG&E may need to access, excavate, and perform work on the gas pipeline. Any construction equipment, materials, or spoils may need to be removed upon notice.
Any temporary construction fencing installed within PG&E’s easement would also need to be capable of being removed at any time upon notice. Any plans to cut temporary slopes exceeding a 1:4 grade within 10 feet of a gas transmission pipeline need to be approved by PG&E Pipeline Services in writing PRIOR to performing the work.
3. Wheel Loads: To prevent damage to the buried gas pipeline, there are weight limits that must be enforced whenever any equipment gets within 10 feet of traversing the pipe.
Ensure a list of the axle weights of all equipment being used is available for PG&E’s Standby Inspector. To confirm the depth of cover, the pipeline may need to be potholed by hand in a few areas.
Due to the complex variability of tracked equipment, vibratory compaction equipment, and cranes, PG&E must evaluate those items on a case-by-case basis prior to use over the gas pipeline (provide a list of any proposed equipment of this type noting model numbers and specific attachments).
No equipment may be set up over the gas pipeline while operating. Ensure crane outriggers are at least 10 feet from the centerline of the gas pipeline. Transport trucks must not be parked over the gas pipeline while being loaded or unloaded.
4. Grading: PG&E requires a minimum of 36 inches of cover over gas pipelines (or existing grade if less) and a maximum of 7 feet of cover at all locations. The graded surface cannot exceed a cross slope of 1:4.
5. Excavating: Any digging within 2 feet of a gas pipeline must be dug by hand. Note that while the minimum clearance is only 12 inches, any excavation work within 24 inches of the edge of a pipeline must be done with hand tools. So to avoid having to dig a trench entirely with hand tools, the edge of the trench must be over 24 inches away. (Doing the math for a 24 inch 109 075 276
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 3
wide trench being dug along a 36 inch pipeline, the centerline of the trench would need to be at least 54 inches [24/2 + 24 + 36/2 = 54] away, or be entirely dug by hand.) Water jetting to assist vacuum excavating must be limited to 1000 psig and directed at a 40° angle to the pipe. All pile driving must be kept a minimum of 3 feet away.
Any plans to expose and support a PG&E gas transmission pipeline across an open excavation need to be approved by PG&E Pipeline Services in writing PRIOR to performing the work.
6. Boring/Trenchless Installations: PG&E Pipeline Services must review and approve all plans to bore across or parallel to (within 10 feet) a gas transmission pipeline. There are stringent criteria to pothole the gas transmission facility at regular intervals for all parallel bore installations.
For bore paths that cross gas transmission pipelines perpendicularly, the pipeline must be potholed a minimum of 2 feet in the horizontal direction of the bore path and a minimum of 12 inches in the vertical direction from the bottom of the pipe with minimum clearances measured from the edge of the pipe in both directions. Standby personnel must watch the locator trace (and every ream pass) the path of the bore as it approaches the pipeline and visually monitor the pothole (with the exposed transmission pipe) as the bore traverses the pipeline to ensure adequate clearance with the pipeline. The pothole width must account for the inaccuracy of the locating equipment.
7. Substructures: All utility crossings of a gas pipeline should be made as close to perpendicular as feasible (90° +/- 15°). All utility lines crossing the gas pipeline must have a minimum of 12 inches of separation from the gas pipeline. Parallel utilities, pole bases, water line ‘kicker blocks’, storm drain inlets, water meters, valves, back pressure devices or other utility substructures are not allowed in the PG&E gas pipeline easement.
If previously retired PG&E facilities are in conflict with proposed substructures, PG&E must verify they are safe prior to removal. This includes verification testing of the contents of the facilities, as well as environmental testing of the coating and internal surfaces. Timelines for PG&E completion of this verification will vary depending on the type and location of facilities in conflict.
8. Structures: No structures are to be built within the PG&E gas pipeline easement. This includes buildings, retaining walls, fences, decks, patios, carports, septic tanks, storage sheds, tanks, loading ramps, or any structure that could limit PG&E’s ability to access its facilities.
9. Fencing: Permanent fencing is not allowed within PG&E easements except for perpendicular crossings which must include a 16 foot wide gate for vehicular access. Gates will be secured with PG&E corporation locks.
10. Landscaping: Landscaping must be designed to allow PG&E to access the pipeline for maintenance and not interfere with pipeline coatings or other cathodic protection systems. No trees, shrubs, brush, vines, and other vegetation may be planted within the easement area.
Only those plants, ground covers, grasses, flowers, and low-growing plants that grow unsupported to a maximum of four feet (4’) in height at maturity may be planted within the easement area.
110 076 277
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 4
11. Cathodic Protection: PG&E pipelines are protected from corrosion with an “Impressed Current” cathodic protection system. Any proposed facilities, such as metal conduit, pipes, service lines, ground rods, anodes, wires, etc. that might affect the pipeline cathodic protection system must be reviewed and approved by PG&E Corrosion Engineering.
12. Pipeline Marker Signs: PG&E needs to maintain pipeline marker signs for gas transmission pipelines in order to ensure public awareness of the presence of the pipelines.
With prior written approval from PG&E Pipeline Services, an existing PG&E pipeline marker sign that is in direct conflict with proposed developments may be temporarily relocated to accommodate construction work. The pipeline marker must be moved back once construction is complete.
13. PG&E is also the provider of distribution facilities throughout many of the areas within the state of California. Therefore, any plans that impact PG&E’s facilities must be reviewed and approved by PG&E to ensure that no impact occurs which may endanger the safe operation of its facilities.
111 077 278
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 5
Attachment 2 – Electric Facilities
It is PG&E’s policy to permit certain uses on a case by case basis within its electric transmission fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) provided such uses and manner in which they are exercised, will not interfere with PG&E’s rights or endanger its facilities. Some examples/restrictions are as follows:
1. Buildings and Other Structures: No buildings or other structures including the foot print and eave of any buildings, swimming pools, wells or similar structures will be permitted within fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) areas. PG&E’s transmission easement shall be designated on subdivision/parcel maps as “RESTRICTED USE AREA – NO BUILDING.”
2. Grading: Cuts, trenches or excavations may not be made within 25 feet of our towers.
Developers must submit grading plans and site development plans (including geotechnical reports if applicable), signed and dated, for PG&E’s review. PG&E engineers must review grade changes in the vicinity of our towers. No fills will be allowed which would impair ground-toconductor clearances. Towers shall not be left on mounds without adequate road access to base of tower or structure.
3. Fences: Walls, fences, and other structures must be installed at locations that do not affect the safe operation of PG&’s facilities. Heavy equipment access to our facilities must be maintained at all times. Metal fences are to be grounded to PG&E specifications. No wall, fence or other like structure is to be installed within 10 feet of tower footings and unrestricted access must be maintained from a tower structure to the nearest street. Walls, fences and other structures proposed along or within the fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) will require PG&E review; submit plans to PG&E Centralized Review Team for review and comment.
4. Landscaping: Vegetation may be allowed; subject to review of plans. On overhead electric transmission fee strip(s) and/or easement(s), trees and shrubs are limited to those varieties that do not exceed 15 feet in height at maturity. PG&E must have access to its facilities at all times, including access by heavy equipment. No planting is to occur within the footprint of the tower legs. Greenbelts are encouraged.
5. Reservoirs, Sumps, Drainage Basins, and Ponds: Prohibited within PG&E’s fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) for electric transmission lines.
6. Automobile Parking: Short term parking of movable passenger vehicles and light trucks (pickups, vans, etc.) is allowed. The lighting within these parking areas will need to be reviewed by PG&E; approval will be on a case by case basis. Heavy equipment access to PG&E facilities is to be maintained at all times. Parking is to clear PG&E structures by at least 10 feet.
Protection of PG&E facilities from vehicular traffic is to be provided at developer’s expense AND to PG&E specifications. Blocked-up vehicles are not allowed. Carports, canopies, or awnings are not allowed.
7. Storage of Flammable, Explosive or Corrosive Materials: There shall be no storage of fuel or combustibles and no fueling of vehicles within PG&E’s easement. No trash bins or incinerators are allowed.
112 078 279
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 6
8. Streets and Roads: Access to facilities must be maintained at all times. Street lights may be allowed in the fee strip(s) and/or easement(s) but in all cases must be reviewed by PG&E for proper clearance. Roads and utilities should cross the transmission easement as nearly at right angles as possible. Road intersections will not be allowed within the transmission easement.
9. Pipelines: Pipelines may be allowed provided crossings are held to a minimum and to be as nearly perpendicular as possible. Pipelines within 25 feet of PG&E structures require review by PG&E. Sprinklers systems may be allowed; subject to review. Leach fields and septic tanks are not allowed. Construction plans must be submitted to PG&E for review and approval prior to the commencement of any construction.
10. Signs: Signs are not allowed except in rare cases subject to individual review by PG&E.
11. Recreation Areas: Playgrounds, parks, tennis courts, basketball courts, barbecue and light trucks (pickups, vans, etc.) may be allowed; subject to review of plans. Heavy equipment access to PG&E facilities is to be maintained at all times. Parking is to clear PG&E structures by at least 10 feet. Protection of PG&E facilities from vehicular traffic is to be provided at developer’s expense AND to PG&E specifications.
12. Construction Activity: Since construction activity will take place near PG&E’s overhead electric lines, please be advised it is the contractor’s responsibility to be aware of, and observe the minimum clearances for both workers and equipment operating near high voltage electric lines set out in the High-Voltage Electrical Safety Orders of the California Division of Industrial Safety (https://www.dir.ca.gov/Title8/sb5g2.html), as well as any other safety regulations.
Contractors shall comply with California Public Utilities Commission General Order 95 (http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/gos/GO95/go_95_startup_page.html) and all other safety rules. No construction may occur within 25 feet of PG&E’s towers. All excavation activities may only commence after 811 protocols has been followed.
Contractor shall ensure the protection of PG&E’s towers and poles from vehicular damage by (installing protective barriers) Plans for protection barriers must be approved by PG&E prior to construction.
13. PG&E is also the owner of distribution facilities throughout many of the areas within the state of California. Therefore, any plans that impact PG&E’s facilities must be reviewed and approved by PG&E to ensure that no impact occurs that may endanger the safe and reliable operation of its facilities.
113 079 280
Subject: FW: EXTERNAL: EIR on Traffic for Oak Creek Park - Mixed Use Development From: Mike Hemmert <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 2:06 PM
To: Bradley, Paula <[email protected]>
Subject: EXTERNAL: EIR on Traffic for Oak Creek Park ‐ Mixed Use Development Paula,
I would like to make sure that the EIR on Traffic impact for this project includes the impact of residents traveling to rt 17. If there is not sufficient room for a vehicle to enter onto Mt. Hermon and get to the left lane to do a U-turn at the SV Drive intersection, then vehicles may turn right onto SV Drive and then drive to Quien Sabe/Oak Creek Blvd residential neighberhood. As you know this neighberhood has young children on bikes and many walkers. This problem was compeletely missed in the EIRs for the new developments behind the Shell station and the upcoming adjacent development (stating that vehicles would do U-turns on SV Drive is not realistic given the bend in the road).
If however an EIR states that vehicles will predominently drive through the commercial parking lot and use the light at Glen Canyon then all is well.
Thank you,
- Mike Hemmert
114 080 281
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Response to Comments on the Draft EIR | Page 2-2
5/31/22
2.2 Response to Comments
2.2.1 Response to Comment Letter #1: State of California, Department of Transportation, Caltrans District 5
1-1: Comment noted regarding Caltrans support of transportation demand management strategies to further reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
2.2.2 Response to Comment Letter #2: State of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife 2-1: Comment noted. As summarized in the Biological Resources section of the Draft EIR and described more fully in Appendix C-b Biotic Report by Biological Resources Group, a plant survey was conducted in 2018 (March, April and May) and again in 2019 (May). Both of those survey years were negative for special status plant species. Also both 2018 and 2019 were average rainfall years, so these were good survey years for adequate plant expression.
Because these surveys are almost three years old, Mitigation Measure BIO 1.1 Focused Plant Surveys requires the project applicant to have a qualified biologist conduct a spring season plant survey, with a focus on the coastal prairie and the bottom of the detention basin. This survey must be completed at least one year prior to issuance to grading permits, and/or any clearing, grading, or excavation work on the project site.
These previous surveys, and the additional required survey are considered prudent and acceptable per CA Department of Fish & Wildlife protocols (email from Kathy Lyons, Biotic Resources Group, to Bill Wiseman, Kimley-Horn & Associates, 12/15/21). As such, there is no change in significance and no revisions to the Draft EIR are necessary. 2-2: Comment noted. The proposed project will avoid large diameter tree removal to the extent feasible. Additionally, it is noted that the landscape plans call for a tree replacement ratio of 3:1, for a total of 21 replacement trees. In total, the landscape plan calls for the planting of 136 trees throughout the project site.
2-3: Regarding Figure 3-11: Stormwater Control Plan, there is no legend in the plans. The different colors only represent different stormwater management areas and are not colorcoded to a particular meaning. There is a detailed table associated with the figure that identifies (for each area) total area, previous and impervious areas, and stormwater runoff coefficients and flow factors. This information is further described in the Stormwater Control Plan (C2G/Civil Consultant Group, July 2019).
Regarding the Draft EIR reference to Figure 7-2: Landscape Plan, this has been corrected to read Figure 3-8: Landscape Plan.
2.2.3 Response to Comment Letter #3: Pacific Gas and Electric 3-1: Comment noted regarding construction-related activities associated with PG&E-owned gas and electric facilities.
115 081 282
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Response to Comments on the Draft EIR | Page 2-3
5/31/22
2.2.4 Response to Comment Letter #4: Mark Hemmert
4-1: Comment noted regarding traffic to Highway 17 and potential impacts on neighborhood streets. As shown in Figure 15-1: Study Intersection & Trip Distribution, traffic existing from the project site would exit directly onto Mount Hermon Road and would not use residential streets.
Most vehicles going to Highway 17 would travel east of Mount Hermon Road. 116 082 283
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Changes to the Draft EIR | Page 3-1
5/31/22
3 Changes to the Draft EIR
Changes to the Draft EIR are shown on the following pages in the order that they appear in the EIR. New text is shown in underline, and removed text is shown in strikethrough. These text changes do not constitute substantial new information and do not result in significant new impacts or the increase in severity of impacts already disclosed. 117 083 284
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park
Biological Resources | Page 7‐15
Draft EIR
12/16/21
The project would result in the removal of trees, including a large group of acacia trees, six Coast live oaks, and one Ponderosa pine. In addition, six immature ash trees and four sycamore trees growing behind the existing sidewalk may also require removal because these trees may be in conflict with the sidewalk and landscaping proposed for the development. All six Coast live oaks and one Ponderosa pine on the project site are proposed to be removed are protected. The group of acacia trees to be removed are not protected by Scotts Valley ordinances. Table 7 2: Tree Inventory lists the trees included in the survey area and those proposed for removal.
Table 7-2: Tree Inventory
Species
Trees Identified in Arborist
Report
Trees Proposed for
Removal
Ash 6 6
Sycamore 4 4
Coast Live Oak 6 6
Group of Acacia At least 200 At least 200
Ponderosa Pine 1 1
Source: Maureen Hamb, 2018
The loss of trees regulated by the City’s Tree Protection Regulations would require a Tree Removal Permit from the City processed concurrently with the other requested entitlements.
Pursuant to the Tree Protection Regulations, the Tree Removal Permit, inclusive of Planning Commission approval for removal of Heritage Trees, if required, would be obtained and submitted to Scotts Valley Building Department prior to approval of Improvement Plans, issuance of grading permits, and/or any clearing, grading, or excavation work on the project site.
Per the City’s Tree Protection Regulations, the applicant would be required to provide for the planting of two trees for each “protected” tree removed (2:1 ratio). Because the project would remove seven protected trees, a minimum of 14 trees would be required to be replanted. As shown in Figure 7‐23‐8: Landscape Plan, the project would replace the protected trees at a 3:1 ratio for a total of 21 trees, or seven tree more than required the City’s Tree Protection Regulations. In total, 136 trees will be planted, as shown in Figure 7‐23‐8: Landscape Plan.
Because the project would exceed the tree replacement requirements as defined in the City’s Tree Protection Regulations per Section 17.44.080 of the City of Scotts Valley Zoning Ordinance, impacts from tree removal would be less than significant.
Tree and vegetation removal may also affect nesting birds. The Biotic Report concluded that nesting birds (protected by the MBTA) may occur within the project site (Biotic Resources Group, 2017). Removal of trees or understory vegetation has the potential to harm nesting 118 084 285
Figure 3-13: ExisƟng and Proposed Zoning DesignaƟon
Oak Creek Park
DraŌ EIR
Project Site
Existing Zoning Classiöcation Proposed Zoning Classiöcation Legend
119 085 286
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-1
5/31/22
4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
4.1 Public Resources Code
When approving projects with Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) that identify significant impacts, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to adopt monitoring and reporting programs or conditions of project approval to mitigate or avoid the identified significant effects (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(1)). A public agency adopting measures to mitigate or avoid the significant impacts of a proposed project is required to ensure that the measures are fully enforceable, through permit conditions, agreements, or other means (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(b)). The mitigation measures required by a public agency to reduce or avoid significant project impacts not incorporated into the design or program for the project, may be made conditions of project approval as set forth in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The program must be designed to ensure project compliance with mitigation measures during project implementation.
The MMRP includes the mitigation measures identified in the EIR required to address only the significant impacts associated with the project being approved. The required mitigation measures are summarized in this program; the full text of the impact analysis and mitigation measures is presented in the DEIR.
The MMRP is organized in a table format (see Table 4-1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Oak Creek Park Project, keyed to each significant impact and each EIR mitigation measure. Only mitigation measures adopted to address significant impacts are included in this program, based upon whether the measure applies to the hotel development, residential development, or both developments. Each mitigation measure is set out in full, followed by a tabular summary of monitoring requirements. The column headings in the tables are defined as follows:
Mitigation Measures: This column presents the mitigation measure identified in the EIR. Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility: This column contains an assignment of responsibility for the monitoring and reporting tasks.
Monitoring and Reporting Requirement: This column refers the outcome from implementing the mitigation measure.
City Staff/Notes: This column will be used by the lead agency to document the person who verified the implementation of the mitigation measure and the date on which this verification occurred.
4.2 Enforcement
If the project is approved, the MMRP for each development would be incorporated as a condition of such approval. Therefore, all mitigation measures for significant impacts must be carried out to fulfill the requirements of approval. A number of the mitigation measures would 120 086 287
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-2
5/31/22
be implemented during the course of the development review process. These measures would be checked on plans, in reports, and in the field prior to construction. Most of the remaining mitigation measures would be implemented during the construction, or project implementation phase.
121 087 288
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-3
5/31/22
Table 4-1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Oak Creek Park Project Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-2: Future
construction activities
would generate dust and
exhaust emissions of
criteria pollutants and
toxic air contaminants.
MM AQ-2.1 Reduce Fugitive Dust
The applicant for future residential development shall
implement the following measures to minimize
nuisance impacts and to significantly reduce fugitive
dust emissions, and the applicant shall require all of
the following measures to be shown on grading and
building plans:
Limit grading to 8.1 acres per day, and
grading and excavation to 2.2 acres per day.
Water graded/excavated areas and active
unpaved roadways, unpaved staging areas,
and unpaved parking areas at least twice
daily or apply non-toxic chemical soil
stabilization materials per manufacturer’s
recommendations. Frequency should be
based on the type of operations, soil and
wind exposure.
Prohibit all grading activities during periods
of high wind (more than 15 mph).
Apply chemical soil stabilizers on inactive
construction areas (disturbed lands within
construction projects that are unused for at
least four consecutive days).
Planning
Department
Contractor
Review and approve
construction
specifications prior to
issuance of building
permit.
Include in construction
specifications and
implement during
construction.
Review during site
inspections.
122 088 289
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-4
5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
All disturbed soil areas not subject to
revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting,
or gravel for temporary roads and any other
methods approved in advance by MBARD.
Exposed ground areas that are planned to be
reworked for durations longer than 1 month
after initial grading shall be sown with a fast
germinating, non-invasive grass seed and
watered until vegetation is established.
Plant vegetative ground cover in disturbed
areas as soon as possible.
Use street sweepers, water trucks, or
sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to
prevent airborne dust from leaving the
project site. Reclaimed (non-potable) water
should be used whenever possible;
Spray dirt stock pile areas daily as needed.
Place gravel on all roadways and driveways as
soon as possible after grading. In addition,
construct building pads as soon as possible
after grading unless seeding, soil binders, or
frequent water application are used.
Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles
shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved
surface at the construction site.
123 089 290
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-5
5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other
loose materials shall be covered or shall
maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard
(minimum vertical distance between top of
load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code Section 23114.
Unpaved road travel shall be limited to the
extent possible, for example, by limiting the
travel to and from unpaved areas, by
coordinating movement between work areas
rather than to central staging areas, and by
busing workers where feasible.
Install wheel washers where vehicles enter
and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash
off trucks and equipment leaving the project
site, and inspect vehicle tires to ensure they
are free of soil prior to carry-out to paved
roadways.
Sweep streets at the end of each day, or as
needed, if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with
reclaimed water shall be used where feasible.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: Cause a
direct or indirect adverse
effect on special-status
invertebrate species.
MM BIO-1.1 Focused Plant Surveys
At least one year prior to issuance to grading permits, and/or any clearing, grading, or excavation work on
the project site, the project applicant shall have a
Planning
Department
Review documentation
from relevant
Responsible Agency(s).
124 090 291
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-6
5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
qualified biologist conduct a spring season plant
survey, with a focus on the coastal prairie and the
bottom of the detention basin. The survey shall
ascertain whether the site supports any special status
plant species. The survey findings shall be subject to
review by the City of Scotts Valley. If no special status species are found, no additional actions are required.
If special status species are found on site, the
applicant shall confer with regulating agencies (i.e.,
City, CDFW, and/or USFWS) on measures to avoid,
minimize, or compensate for the impact. A mitigation
plan shall be prepared and implemented that
provides preservation, salvage, or presents other
compensation for the impact, such that impacts are
reduced to a less than significant level.
CA Dept of Fish
and Wildlife
Qualified
biologist
Demonstrate mitigation
compliance.
Impact BIO-3: Cause a
direct or indirect adverse
effect on nesting bird
sites.
MM BIO-2.1 Avoid Nesting Birds
The applicant shall schedule tree removal to occur
between September 1 and March 1 of any given year,
which is outside the bird nesting season for Central
California Coast to avoid impacting nesting birds, if
present. Because this tree grove is adjacent to very
busy roadways, it would be difficult to detect nesting
birds by listening for their vocalizations; the dense
acacia vegetation also makes it difficult to ascertain
visually if any small bird nests such as hummingbirds
are present. Therefore, this measure to avoid impacts
to nesting birds, is the only practical method to avoid Planning
Department
Qualified
biologist
Construction
specifications prior to
issuance of grading
permits.
Preconstruction surveys.
125 091 292
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-7
5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
disturbance or destruction of active bird nests, if any are present.
GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND
SEISMICITY
Impact GEO-3: Be located
on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that
would become unstable
as a Result of the project,
and potentially result in
on-or off-site landslide,
lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse.
MM GEO-3.1 Implement Geotechnical Report
Recommendations
The project applicant shall ensure that the project
incorporates appropriate geotechnical
recommendations for the seismic ground shaking,
seismic-related ground failure and liquefaction,
landslide susceptibility, erosion and erosion control,
soil stability, expansive soils, and any other
appropriate issue. Prior to building permit issuance,
the project geotechnical engineer shall review the
plans submitted for a grading/building for compliance
with the recommendation of the geotechnical report.
Once the plans comply with the recommendations,
the project geotechnical engineer shall provide a plan
review letter stating that the project design meets all of the geotechnical report recommendations.
Planning
Department
Registered
geotechnical
engineer
Review geotechnical
report and ensure
recommendations are
included in plans prior
to issuance of building
permits.
Prepare design-level
geotechnical
investigation.
NOISE
Impact N-1: Cause a
temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise
levels during
construction that would
MM N-1 Construction Noise Reduction
To reduce the effects of construction noise, the
project applicant shall ensure that the following is
Planning
Department
Review of and approval
of construction plan
prior to issuance of
grading and building
permits.
126 092 293
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-8
5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
substantially disturb
sensitive receptors.
included as part of all relevant construction plans for any future proposed project:
Construction Equipment. Properly maintain
construction equipment and ensure that all internal
combustion engine driven machinery with intake and
exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds (if the
equipment had such devices installed as part of its
standard equipment package) are in good condition
and appropriate for the equipment. Equipment
engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment
operation. The project applicant shall require all
contractors, as a condition of contract, to maintain
and tune-up all construction equipment to minimize
noise emissions.
Vehicle and Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles
and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than
5 minutes when not in use.
Stationary Equipment. All noise-generating
stationary equipment, such as air compressors or
portable power generators, shall be located as far as
possible from sensitive receptors. Temporary noise
barriers shall be constructed to screen stationary
noise generating equipment when located near
adjoining sensitive land uses. Temporary noise
barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 10
dBA.
Building
Department
Contractor
Prepare construction
plan, including noise
specifications; adhere to
plan provisions during
construction.
127 093 294
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-9
5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
Construction Route. All construction traffic to and
from the project site shall be routed via designated
truck routes where feasible. All construction-related
heavy truck traffic in residential areas shall be
prohibited where feasible.
Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall
be controlled to a point that they are not audible at
sensitive receptors near the construction activity.
Construction Plan. Prior to issuance of any grading
and/or building permits, the contractor shall prepare
and submit to the City of Scotts Valley Building
Department for approval a detailed construction plan
identifying the schedule for major noise-generating
construction activity.
Disturbance Coordinator. A “noise disturbance
coordinator” shall be designated by the contractor
and be responsible for responding to any local
complaints about construction noise. The noise
disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of
the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad
muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable
measures warranted to correct the problem be
implemented. The coordinator shall conspicuously
post a name and telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator at the construction site and
128 094 295
City of Scotts Valley Oak Creek Park Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-10 5/31/22
Category/Impact Mitigation Measures
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring/ Reporting
Requirement
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding
the construction schedule.
Transportation
Impact TR-2:
Substantially increase
hazards due to a design
feature or incompatible
use.
MM TR-2.1 Mt. Hermon Road Project Site
Access
Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the project
applicant shall submit an analysis by a qualified traffic engineer demonstrating that ingress access from Mt.
Hermon Road is designed to adequately
accommodate bus access to the existing transit stop
(even if not currently used) and provide safe access
for vehicles entering the project site from Mt.
Hermon Road.
Planning
Department
Traffic
engineer
Letter of compliance
with associated plans.
129 095 296
130 096 297
CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831-440-5630
MEETING LOCATION
City Council Chambers
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
Remote Access Only
POSTING: The agenda was
posted on May 6, 2022, at
City Hall and on the Internet at
www.scottsvalley.org.
Appointed Officials City Staff Members
Lori Gentile, Chair
Chuck Maffia, Vice Chair
David Hodgin, Commissioner
Steven Horlock, Commissioner
Shawn Mosley, Commissioner
Taylor Bateman, Community Development Director
Olivia Beers, Assistant Planner
Jonathan Kwan, Contract Planner
Susie Pineda, Contract Planner
Lauren Lambert, Deputy City Clerk
CALL TO ORDER: 6:04pm
ROLL CALL: Present: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
ALTERATIONS TO CONSENT AGENDA: None
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Approve the Action Meeting Minutes from the following meetings:
a. August 12, 2021
b. September 9, 2021
c. October 21, 2021
d. December 9, 2021
e. February 24, 2022
f. March 10, 2022,
g. March 24, 2022
h. May 12, 2022
M/S: Maffia/ Mosley
To approve the Consent Agenda.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
Minutes
Scotts Valley Planning Commission
Meeting was Remote Access Only
Date: June 9, 2022
Time: 6:00 PM
131 298
City of Scotts Valley Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2 Date: June 9, 2022
ALTERATIONS TO REGULAR AGENDA: Move the regular agenda first.
M/S: Maffia/Mosley
To move the regular agenda first.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
REGULAR AGENDA
1. Proposed Project: Capital Improvement Program for FY2022/23-2026/27 Location: City-wide
Applicant & Property Owner: City of Scotts Valley
Project Description: State law requires cities to adopt a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to implement the cities’ General Plan. The CIP is a list of the proposed public works projects. The City’s Public Works Department develops the CIP as a 5-year program and updates the program each year. By law, the Planning Commission must review the CIP for consistency with the General Plan.
Staff: Chris Lamm, Public Works Director, [email protected] M/S: Hodgin/Maffia
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
ALTERATIONS TO PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA: None
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA:
2. Proposed Project: Lloyd’s Tires Office Trailer
Location: 5310E Scotts Valley Drive / APN 022-042-08
Planning Permit Application: Design Review DR22-005
Applicant & Property Owner: Courtney Hughes & Steve Bogner Project Description: Consideration of a Design Review application to legalize an existing, unpermitted 317 square foot office trailer with an attached, unpermitted, 103 square foot deck.
Staff Planner: Jonathan Kwan, Contract Planner, [email protected] M/S: Horlock/ Hodgin
To approve Resolution No. 1773 for DR22-005 for the Lloyd’s Tires Office Trailer at 5310E Scotts Valley Drive.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
3. Proposed Project: Oak Creek Park
Location: Intersection of Mount Hermon Road and Glen Canyon Road / APN 022-162-76
Planning Permit Application: Environmental Impact report EIR19-004 132 299
City of Scotts Valley Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 2 Date: June 9, 2022
General Plan Amendment GPA18-001
Zone Change ZC18-001
Planned Development PD18-002
Minor Land Division MLD18-003
Design Review DR18-007
Applicant & Property Owner: Charlie Eadie & Granum Partners Project Description: Consideration of an Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change, Planned Development Zoning and Planned Development Permit, Design Review application and a Minor Land Division to allow for the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development on a 3.56-acre site at the intersection of Glen Canyon and Mt.
Hermon Road. Project land uses include 24,973 square feet of commercial, eight townhomes, and 44 apartments
Staff Planner: Susie Pineda, Contract Planner, [email protected] M/S: Maffia/Horlock
To direct the applicant to work with staff to address the following items and bring the revised project back to the Planning Commission with a resolution for consideration.
Lot 1
a. Setbacks of the townhomes
b. Parking
c. Size of the units
Lot 2
a. Reduced Parking Dimensions
b. Shared Parking
c. Enhanced Parking Lot Design
d. Private open space regarding rooftop screening from neighbors e. Architectural enhancements
f. Circulation and parking
g. Trash bin location
h. Redwoods behind the buildings
i. Parking Garage Venting
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
DISCUSSION ITEMS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – FOR INFORMATION ONLY: None
DIRECTOR UPDATES: None
ADJOURNMENT: 9:34pm
133 300
VICINITY MAP
A1.0
C 12725
THOMAS THACHER
DECEMBER 31, 2023
EXPIRATION
UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED. LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT. BE THE USER'S RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER
REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, ARCHITECTS. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THACHER & THOMPSON
THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS
THACHER &
THOMPSON
ARCHITECTS
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
No. DATE
215 OREGON STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
(831) 566-3079 V
www.tntarch.com
c 2019 THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
DRAWING DATE
FEBRUARY 2017
PROJECT FILE NAME:
GRANUM 16.SD
No. PLAN CK 7/15/19
O A K C R E E K P A R K OAK CREEK PARK MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT GLEN CANYON ROAD SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
G L E N C A N Y O N
M T. H E R M O N R O A D
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT ADDRESS: MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT
GLEN CANYON ROAD
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
PROJECT APN: 022-162-76
ZONING: CS- COMMERCIAL SERVICE
GENERAL PLAN: SERVICE COMMERCIAL
PROJECT DATA
AREA TOTAL LOT 1 LOT 2
LOT AREA: 155,350 SF 45,250 SF 110,100 SF
LAND USE
DRIVEWAY/SURFACE PARK: 40,470 SF 13,426 SF 27,044 SF
% LOT AREA: 26.0% 29.7% 24.6%
BUILDING COVERAGE: 54,685 SF 11,430 SF 43,255 SF
% LOT AREA:* 35.2% 25.2% 39.3%
LANDSCAPE: 48,436 SF 18,095 SF 30,341 SF
%LOT AREA: 31.2% 40.0% 27.5%
SIDEWALK & PATIO/TERRACE: 11,759 SF 2,299 SF 9,460 SF
%LOT AREA: 7.6% 5.1% 8.6%
*C-S ZONE DISTRICT MAXIMUM COVERAGE: 45%
BUILDING
COVERAGE:
35.2%
LANDSCAPE
31.2%
DRIVEWAY
SURFACE PARK
26.0% SIDEWALK
PATIO/TERRACE
7.6%
SHEET INDEX
A1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
A1.1 PROJECT DATA
A1.2 ILLUSTRATIONS
A1.3 COLOR PHOTO SIMULATIONS
A2.0 SITE PLAN
A3.0 BUILDING A FIRST LEVEL
A3.1 BUILDING A SECOND LEVEL
A3.2 BUILDING A THIRD AND FOURTH LEVELS
A3.3 BUILDING A ROOF PLAN
A3.4 BUILDING A ELEVATIONS
A3.5 BUILDING A ELEVATIONS / SECTIONS
A3.6 BUILDING A SECTIONS
A4.0 BUILDING 'B' PLANS
A4.1 BUILDING 'B' ELEVATIONS / SECTION
A5.0 TOWNHOUSE PLANS
A5.1 TOWNHOUSE ELEVATIONS
A6.0 SITE CONTEXT ILLUSTRATIONS
A6.1 SITE SECTIONS
A7.0 SIGN PROGRAM
C0.1 COVER SHEET
C0.2 EXISTING SITE
C0.3 TENTATIVE MAP
C1.1 TOPO AND DEMOLITION PLAN
C2.1 HORIZONTAL CONTROL & PAVING PLAN
C3.1 GRADING PLAN
C3.2 CUT-FILL PLAN
C4.1 UTILITY PLAN
C4.2 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN
C5.1 EROSION CONTROL PLAN
C6.1 SECTIONS
L LANDSCAPE PLAN
TC TREE CANOPY
E1.0 SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
E1.1 PARTIAL SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
E1.2 PARTIAL SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
E1.3 PARTIAL SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
E3.1 LIGHT FIXTURE CUT SHEETS & FIXTURE SCHEDULE
AERIAL VIEW PROJECT TEAM
ARCHITECT: THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
215 OREGON STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
(831) 246-2109
CONTACT:
[email protected]
[email protected]
EADIE CONSULTANTS
P.O. BOX 1647
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95061
(831) 431-3396
CONTACT: CHARLIE EADIE
[email protected]
LAND USE
PLANNER:
LANDSCAPE
C2G CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
(831) 426-5313
CONTACT: DAVID DAUPHIN
[email protected]
CIVIL ENGINEER/
OWNER: GRANUM PARTNERS
340 UNIVERSITY AVE. #1
LOS GATOS, CA 95030
(408) 395-0101
CONTACT: GREG
[email protected]
ARCHITECT:
SURVEYOR:
ELLEN COOPER
612 WINDSOR STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95062
(831) 426-6845
[email protected]
ELECTRICAL
ENGINEER:
MIRACLES UNLIMITED, INC.
P.O. BOX 1808
APTOS, CA 95001
(831) 688-8013
ARBORIST: MAUREEN HAMB
849 ALMAR AVENUE, SUITE C 319
SANTA CRUZ, CA. 95060
(831) 234-7739
[email protected]
BIOLOGIST: KATHLEEN LYONS
BIOTIC RESOURCES GROUP
P.O. BOX 14
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95063
(831) 476-4803
[email protected]
PLANNING & BUILDING: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
FIRE: SCOTTS VALLEY FIRE DEPT.
WATER: SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DEPT.
SANITATION: SCOTTS VALLEY SANITATION
APPROVAL AGENCIES
No. PLAN CK 6/01/20
134 301
PARKING DEMAND
TOTAL COMMERCIAL: 23,629 SF @ 1:250 = 94.5 SPACES
RESIDENTIAL: 52 @ 2.2 / D.U. = 114 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING DEMAND: 208.5 SPACES
PARKING SUPPLY
LOWER LOT:
UPPER LOT:
TOWNHOUSE GARAGE:
COMMERCIAL GARAGE:
LOWER RESIDENTIAL GARAGE:
UPPER RESIDENTIAL GARAGE:
TOTAL PARKING SUPPLY:
58 SPACES
18 SPACES
8 SPACES
21 SPACES
41 SPACES
60 SPACES
206 SPACES
A1.1
C 12725
THOMAS THACHER
DECEMBER 31, 2023
EXPIRATION
UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED. LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT. BE THE USER'S RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER
REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, ARCHITECTS. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THACHER & THOMPSON
THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS
THACHER &
THOMPSON
ARCHITECTS
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
No. DATE
215 OREGON STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
(831) 566-3079 V
www.tntarch.com
c 2019 THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
DRAWING DATE
FEBRUARY 2017
PROJECT FILE NAME:
GRANUM 16.SD
No. PLAN CK 7/15/19 OAK CREEK PARK MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT GLEN CANYON ROAD SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
NET AREAS BY LEVEL
AREA TOTAL LOT 1 LOT 2
FIRST LEVEL GROSS: 54,685 SF 11,456 SF 43,229 SF
NET RESIDENTIAL: 7,616 SF 7,616 SF 0
% 13.9% 66.5% 0
NET COMMERCIAL: 19,691 SF 0 19,691 SF
% 36.0% 0 45.5%
NET PARKING GARAGE: 25,222 SF 3,840 SF 21,382 SF
% 46.1% 33.5% 49.5%
COMMON AREA: 2,156 SF 0 2,156 SF
% 4.0% 0 5.0%
NET ASSIGNED COMMON OPEN SPACE: 0 0 0
NET PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 388 SF 388 SF 0
SECOND LEVEL GROSS: 39,644 SF 9,992 SF 29,652 SF
NET RESIDENTIAL: 9,992 SF 9,992 SF 0
% 25.2% 100% 0
NET COMMERCIAL: 3,938 SF 0 3,938 SF
% 9.9% 0 13.3%
NET PARKING GARAGE: 24,123 SF 0 24,123 SF
% 60.9% 0 81.4%
COMMON AREA: 1,591 SF 0 1,591
% 4.0% 0 5.3%
NET ASSIGNED OPEN SPACE: 1,164 SF 0 1,164 SF
NET PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 388 SF 388 SF 0
THIRD LEVEL GROSS: 26,326 SF 0 26,326 SF
NET RESIDENTIAL: 22,600 SF 0 22,600 SF
% 85.8% 85.2%
NET COMMERCIAL: 0 0 0
NET PARKING GARAGE: 0 0 0
COMMON AREA: 3,726 SF 0 3,726 SF
% 14.2% 14.2%
NET ASSIGNED OPEN SPACE: 4,314 SF 0 4,314 SF
NET PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 2,088 SF 0 2,088 SF
FOURTH LEVEL GROSS: 26,326 SF 0 26,326 SF
NET RESIDENTIAL: 22,600 SF 0 22,600 SF
% 85.8% 85.2%
NET COMMERCIAL: 0 0 0
NET PARKING GARAGE: 0 0 0
COMMON AREA: 3,726 SF 0 3,726 SF
% 14.2% 14.2%
NET ASSIGNED COMMON OPEN SPACE: 0 0 0
NET PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 564 SF 0 564 SF
PARKING DATA
RESIDENTIAL HOUSING MIX
AVERAGE SIZE
STUDIO: 4 712 SF
1 BEDROOM: 18 906 SF
2 BEDROOM: 22 1,184 SF
3 BR TOWNHOUSE: 8 2,172 SF
TOTAL 52
#
DENSITY
LOT 1: 45,250 / 8 = 5,656 SF PER D.U. = 7.7 D.U.s PER ACRE LOT 2: 110,100 / 44 = 2,502 SF PER D.U. = 17.4 D.U.s PER ACRE TOTAL: 155,350 / 52 = 2,987.5 SF PER D.U. = 15.1 D.U.s PER ACRE
BUILDING AREAS BY FUNCTION
AREA TOTAL LOT 1 LOT 2
GROSS BUILDING AREA: 146,981 SF 21,448 SF 125,533 SF
COMMERCIAL: 24,973 SF 0 24,973 SF
NET: 23,629 SF 0 23,629 SF
COMMON AREA: 1,344 SF 0 1,344 SF
RESIDENTIAL: 72,633 SF 17,608 SF 55,055 SF
NET: 62,808 SF 17,608 SF 45,200 SF
COMMON AREA: 9.855 SF 0 9,855 SF
PARKING GARAGE: 49,345 SF 3,840 SF 45,505 SF
PARKING GARAGE RESIDENTIAL: 42,650 SF 3,840 SF 38,810 SF PARKING GARAGE COMM: 6,695 SF 0 6,695 SF
GROSS BUILDING AREA: 146,154 SF 21,448 SF 125,533 SF
BASEMENT BUILDING AREA: 45,505 SF 0 45,505 SF
% 31.1% 0 36.5%
NON BASEMENT AREA: 100,649 SF 21,448 SF 79,201 SF
% 68.9% 100% 63.5%
OPEN SPACE USES
OPEN SPACE TOTAL: 9,230 SF 776 SF 8,454 SF
PER DWELLING: 177.5 SF 97.0 SF 192.1 SF
TOWNHOUSE BALCONY: 1,436 SF 0 1,436 SF
TOWNHOUSE PATIO: 1,540 SF 0 1,540 SF
TOWNHOUSE DECK: 776 SF 776 SF 0
NET PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 3,752 SF 776 SF 2,976 SF
PER DWELLING: 72.2 SF 97.0 SF 67.6 SF
COMMON T.H. TERRACE: 1,164 SF 0 1,164 SF
COMMON T.H. ROOF-TOP: 4,314 SF 0 4,314 SF
NET COMMON OPEN SPACE: 5,478 SF 0 5,478 SF
PER DWELLING: 105.3 SF 0 105.3 SF
COMMERCIAL DATA
BUILDING A
TYPE 1: 6,786 SF
TYPE 2: 3,975 SF
SUBTOTAL FIRST FLOOR: 10,761 SF
TYPE 3: 2,958 SF
COMMON AREA: 1,344 SF
TOTAL BUILDING A: 15,063 SF
BUILDING B
TYPE 1: 8,930 SF
TYPE 3: 980 SF
TOTAL BUILDING B: 9,910 SF
TOTAL COMMERCIAL LOT 2: 24,973 SF
PARKING SPACES BY TYPE
STANDARD SURFACE PARKING: 73 SPACES
STANDARD COVERED PARKING: 127 SPACES
ADA SURFACE PARKING: 3
ADA COVERED PARKING: 3
BICYCLE TENANT STOREROOM BLDG. A: 46
BICYCLE PARKING IN TOWNHOUSE GARAGE: 16
BICYCLE PUBLIC LOCKERS: 8
BICYCLE RACKS: 40
EV CHARGING STATIONS PER CALIF. CODE TBD
TRUCK LOADING: 1
AUTO PASSENGER LOADING: 1
PLAN CK 6/01/20
3. MIXED USE RATIO
(CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE)
NON-RESIDENTIAL
A, B, M, S-2 OCCUPANCIES
70,478 SF = 56.1%
CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE:
A OCCUPANCY: RESTAURANTS, ASSEMBLY AREAS
B OCCUPANCY: BANKS BUSINESS OFFICES, ETC.
M OCCUPANCY: STORES, RETAILERS
S-2 OCCUPANCY: GARAGES
R-2 OCCUPANCY: MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL
R-2 OCCUPANCY
55,055 SF = 43.9%
4. MIXED USE RATIO
(BASED ON AREA BY FUNCTION)
NON-RESIDENTIAL
24,973 SF = 31.2%
RESIDENTIAL
55,055 SF = 68.8%
5. MIXED USE RATIO
(BASED ON BUILDING COVERAGE)
NON-RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL: 19,691 SF
COMMRCIAL PARKING: 6,695 SF
TOTAL: 26,386 SF = 64.2%
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL PARKING: 14,687 SF = 35.8%
6. MIXED USE RATIO
(ALLOCATION OF BLDG. AREA BY BLDG.
COVERAGE RATIO)
NET COMMERCIAL: 23,629 SF x 64.2% COVERAGE = 15,170 SF 48.4% NET RESIDENTIAL: 45,200 SF x 35.8% COVERAGE = 16,182 SF 51.6% 31,352 SF 100%
2. MIXED USE RATIO
(BASED ON ZONING CONSISTENCY - 17.20.020 (H))
GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL, NET 19,691 SF 100%
GROUND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL, NET 0 SF 0%
ABOVE OR BEHIND COMMERCIAL, NET 3,938 SF 8%
ABOVE OR BEHIND RESIDENTIAL, NET 45,200 SF 92%
1. MIXED USE RATIO
(BASED ON NET BUILDING AREAS ON LOT 2)
COMMERCIAL 23,629 SF 34.3%
RESIDENTIAL 45,200 SF 65.7%
135 302
136 303
137 304
SITE PLAN
1 SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"
GLEN CANYON ROAD
APN
022-162-61
APN
022-162-62
APN
022-162-63
APN
022-162-64
APN
022-162-65
M T . H E R M O N R D .
EXISTING OFFICE
BUILDING
PROPOSED MIXED USE
BUILDING 'A'
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSE
BUILDING 'D'
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSE
BUILDING 'C'
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDING 'B'
A2.0
C 12725
THOMAS THACHER
DECEMBER 31, 2023
EXPIRATION
UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED. LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT. BE THE USER'S RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER
REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, ARCHITECTS. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THACHER & THOMPSON
THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS
THACHER &
THOMPSON
ARCHITECTS
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
No. DATE
215 OREGON STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
(831) 566-3079 V
www.tntarch.com
c 2016 THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
DRAWING DATE
OCTOBER, 2016
PROJECT FILE NAME:
GRANUM 16.SD
PLAN CHECK 7/15/19
PLAN CHECK 6/01/20 5'
5% SLOPE
5% SLOPE
FIRE
ENGINE
17' 8'
FIRE ENGINE
30'-6"
20'-0"
20'-0"
28'-0"
8'
10'-0"
3'-0"
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 1
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 2
10 11
47 46 45 44 43 42 41 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
TRASH/
RECY OAK CREEK PARK MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT GLEN CANYON ROAD SCOTTS VALLEY, CA B
B
A
A
5' CLEAR S.W.
EXIT WIDTH
UNDERGROUND
PG&E VAULT, TYP.
APARTMENT
ENTRANCE
5' CLEAR S.W.
EXIT WIDTH
POTENTIAL ONGRADE TERRACE
8' WIDE CONC.
SIDEWALK
8' WIDE CONC.
SIDEWALK
12' WIDE SIDEWALK
12' WIDE SIDEWALK
6' WIDE CONC.
SIDEWALK
PT. 'B' EL. 506.7'
PT. 'C' EL. 515.5'
PT. 'A' EL. 512.0'
PT. 'D' EL. 523.0'
PT. 'A' EL. 519.0'
PT. 'B' EL. 516.5'
PT. 'C' EL. 520.0'
PT. 'D' EL. 529.0'
PT. 'E' EL. 529.5'
PT. 'H' EL. 538.0'
PT. 'G' EL. 525.5'
PT. 'F' EL. 519.0'
3' DRAINAGE
SWALE
16 BIKES
26'
17' 17'-0" 26'-0" 17'-0" 84'
9'-0"
TYP
12' BIKES
12' BIKES
8 BIKE LOCKERS
32' 7' 5' 7'-0"
20'
12'
23'
17'
26'
TRASH
15'
15'-0"
20'-0"
12'-0"
45'-0"
TRUCK
LOADING
AREA
POTENTIAL
FUTURE BUS STOP 10'-4"
PG&E
PYLON
20' SETBACK
ROOF TOP
COMMON
AREA
ROOF TOP
COMMON
AREA
ROOF TOP
COMMON
AREA
COMMON
AREA TERRACE
5' HIGH STONE WALL
PASSENGER
LOADING
EMERGENCY VEHICLE
ACCESS POINT WITH
REMOVEABLE BOLLARDS
TYPICAL BICYCLE RACK
18"
2"Ø STEEL TUBING 36"
GRID PATTERN = TYPICAL
ROOFTOP OPEN SPACE
40 39 23
TYPICAL STAGING
AREA FOR WASTE
CARTS 26'-0"
20' WIDE x 7' HIGH DOOR
138 305
139 306
140 307
141 308
142 309
A3.4 C 12725 THOMAS THACHER DECEMBER 31, 2021 EXPIRATION UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED. LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT. BE THE USER'S RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, ARCHITECTS. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THACHER & THOMPSON THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS DESCRIPTION REVISIONS No. DATE 877 CEDAR STREET SUITE 248 SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060 (831) 457-3939 V (831) 426-7609 F www.tntarch.com c 2016 THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS DRAWING DATE OCTOBER, 2016 PROJECT FILE NAME: GRANUM 16.SD No. PLAN CHECK 7/15/19 PLAN CHECK 6/01/20
OAK CREEK PARK
MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA NORTH ELEVATION 2 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION 1 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" FLOOR ELEV: 517.8' FLOOR ELEV: 527.8' FLOOR ELEV: 537.8' GRADE PLANE = 514.2' 35'-5" FLOOR ELEV: 506.8' FLOOR ELEV: 517.8' FLOOR ELEV: 527.8' FLOOR ELEV: 537.8' ELEV. 515.5' STONE VENEER BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE BOTTOM EDGE OF STOREFRONT WINDOW FRAMES. TYPICAL 37'
32'
26' 24" DIA. CAFE TABLE SHOWN
4'-0" 8'-0" TYP. BALCONY PLAN 3 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0"
45'-4"
143 310
144 311
145 312
146 313
147 314
148 315
149 316
150 317
ACCESS ROAD &
PERPENDICULAR
PARKING
EXIST. SFR @
115 LUCIA LANE
528.0' FLOOR ELEV
554.85' FLOOR ELEV TOWNHOUSE 'C'
P.L.
8' SIDEWALK
FENCE
P.L.
SECTION A
1 SCALE: 1" = 16'-0"
FLOOR ELEV: 506.8'
FLOOR ELEV: 517.8'
FLOOR ELEV: 527.8'
FLOOR ELEV: 537.8'
P.L.
COMMERCIAL BLDG. 'B'
MIXED USE BLDG. 'A'
P.L.
A6.1
C 12725
THOMAS THACHER
DECEMBER 31, 2023
EXPIRATION
UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED. LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT. BE THE USER'S RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER
REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, ARCHITECTS. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THACHER & THOMPSON
THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS
THACHER &
THOMPSON
ARCHITECTS
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
No. DATE
215 OREGON STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
(831) 566-3079 V
www.tntarch.com
c 2016 THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
DRAWING DATE
OCTOBER, 2016
PROJECT FILE NAME:
GRANUM 16.SD
PLAN CHECK 7/15/19
PLAN CHECK 6/01/20 OAK CREEK PARK MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT GLEN CANYON ROAD SCOTTS VALLEY, CA SECTION B 2 SCALE: 1" = 16'-0"
13' LANDSCAPE
8' SIDEWALK
151 318
152 319
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
PROPOSED MIXED
USE BUILDING
PROPOSED
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING
SD
SS
SS SS
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
SD SS
SS
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
COVER SHEET
1" = 40'
C0.1
WATER: SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT GAS AND ELECTRIC: PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC SANITARY SEWER: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY STORM DRAIN SYSTEM: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY THE WITHIN PLANS ARE COPYRIGHTED AS AN UNPUBLISHED WORK BY C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. ALL IDEAS DESIGNS,ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED OR REPRESENTED BY THESE DRAWINGS ARE OWNED BY, AND THE PROPERTY OF C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. AND WERE CREATED, EVOLVED AND DEVELOPED FOR USE ON, AND IN CONNECTION WITH, THE SPECIFIED PROJECT. NONE OF SUCH IDEAS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS OR PLANS SHALL BE USED BY OR DISCLOSED TO ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
LN
LUNDY
CANYON
GLEN
DR PINES
WHISPERING
DR VALLEY
SCOTTS
LUCIA
LN
WY GREENTREE
BLVD
CREEK
OAK
RD
HERMON
MOUNT C0.1 - COVER SHEET C0.2 - EXISTING SITE
C0.3 - TENTATIVE MAPC1.1 - TOPO AND DEMOLITION PLANC2.1 - HORIZONTAL CONTROL & PAVING PLANC3.1 - GRADING PLANC3.2 - CUT-FILL PLANC4.1 - UTILITY PLANC4.2 - STORMWATER CONTROL PLANC5.1 - EROSION CONTROL PLANC6.1 - SECTIONS
PROJECTLOCATION
CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY
CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHOULD ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITE CONDITIONS,INCLUDING THE SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY, DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, AND THAT REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED DURING WORKING HOURS. THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD THE OWNER AND THE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS HARMLESS FROM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY, REAL OR ALLEGED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT, EXCEPTING FORLIABILITY ARISING FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE OWNER OR DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.
DISCREPANCIES
IF THERE ARE ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS WHICH WILL AFFECT THE WORK, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BRING SUCH DISCREPANCIES TO THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL FORADJUSTMENT BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPER FITTING
OF ALL WORK AND FOR THE COORDINATION OF ALL TRADES, SUBCONTRACTORS, AND PERSONS ENGAGED UPON THIS CONTRACT.
EROSION CONTROL NOTE
1. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS REQUIRED
THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY AND THEASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
2. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE BACK-UP EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES (SOIL STABILIZATION) WITH SEDIMENT
CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS STRAW WATTLES, SILT FENCE, GRAVEL INLET FILTERS, AND/OR SEDIMENT TRAPS OR BASINS. ENSURE CONTROL MEASURES ARE ADEQUATE, IN PLACE, AND IN OPERABLE CONDITIONS. SEDIMENT
CONTROLS, INCLUDING INLET PROTECTION, ARE NECESSARY BUT SHOULD BE A SECONDARY DEFENSE BEHIND GOOD EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.
3. ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPAIRED THROUGHOUT THE SEASON. REPLACEMENT SUPPLIES SHOULD BE KEPT ON SITE.
4. SITE INSPECTIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED BEFORE AND AFTER EACH STORM EVENT, AND EVERY 24 HOURS FOR
EXTENDED STORM EVENTS, TO IDENTIFY AREAS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO EROSION AND SEDIMENT PROBLEMS OR ANY OTHER POLLUTANT DISCHARGES. IF ADDITIONAL MEASURES ARE NEEDED, REVISE THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN ANDIMPLEMENT THE MEASURES IMMEDIATELY. DOCUMENT ALL INSPECTION FINDINGS AND ACTIONS TAKEN.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR CONTROL OF STORM WATER RUNOFF (E.G. GRAVEL BAGS AT CATCH BASIN INLETS).
GENERAL NOTES
1. NO CHANGE TO THE PLANS SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES AND THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS AND INVERTS OF EXISTING UTILITY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES OF VARIANCE FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
3. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN BASED ON RECORD DRAWINGS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE FOUND IN FIELD. NO WARRANTY IS MADE REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. PRIOR
TO CONSTRUCTION, DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES, AND PRESERVE SAME FROM DAMAGE. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT THE CROSSING POINTS WITH PROPOSED UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES IF CONDITIONS DIFFER FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND SHALL NOT BEGINCONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE CHANGED CONDITION HAS BEEN EVALUATED. CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICES ALERT (USA) (1-800-227-2600) TWO (2) WEEKS PRIOR TO DIGGING. REPAIR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITH CONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATED AND PRESERVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES AND/OR AGENCIES TO VERIFY THE EXISTENCE AND/OR LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OFWORK. AND SHALL NOTIFY U.S.A. @ (800) 227-2600 AT LEAST 48-HOURS IN ADVANCE OF EXCAVATION.
5. IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMAINS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, ALL WORK SHALL BE HALTED WITHIN 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE FIND. OWNER
SHALL RETAIN A QUALIFIED ARCHEOLOGIST RETAINED TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THE DISCOVERY AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE EVALUATION PROCEDURES.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE FAMILIAR WITH, KEEP AND MAINTAIN A COPY OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) ONSITE, IN THE JOB TRAILER AT ALL TIMES.
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: NTS
CIVIL SHEET INDEX
ARCHITECT:
CIVIL ENGINEER:
SURVEYOR:
C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE STE. 6
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066OFFICE: (831) 438-4420
1. STORMDRAIN PIPE SHALL BE SDR-26 P.V.C., A.D.S. N-12 SMOOTH INTERIOR CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE PIPE OR APPROVED SUBSTITUTE, OR AS NOTED ON PLAN. ALL DRAINAGE PIPE SHALL BE SHIPPED, STORED, AND INSTALLED PER THE PIPE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
2. ALL CONCRETE DRAINAGE INLETS CALLED OUT ON THE PLANS SHALL BE CHRISTY BRAND PRECAST CONCRETE OR EQUIVALENT. ALL STRUCTURES SHALL BE STORED, HANDLED, AND INSTALLED PER THE MANUFACTURER'SRECOMMENDATIONS. ALL GRATES IN PAVEMENT AREAS SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT.
3. ALL CONCRETE DRAINAGE INLETS CALLED OUT ON THE PLANS SHALL HAVE A HEAVY RATED FRAME WITH A ADA COMPLIANT GRATE. CATCH BASINS THAT HAVE SILT AND GREASE TRAPS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE PLAN.
4. STORM DRAIN TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL CONFORM TO CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY FIG SD-9.
5. JETTING OF BACKFILL MATERIALS TO ACHIEVE COMPACTION IS NOT ALLOWED.
6. ALL THE WATER PIPING SHALL BE AWWA CLASS 150 OR APPROVED EQUAL, ALL VALVES , ANGLES, AND THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CURRENT CPC SPECIFICATIONS.
7. ALL FIRE SERVICE PIPING AND APPURTENANCES SHALL CONFORM TO NFPA STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS8. ANY EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RELOCATED AS A PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE.
UNDERGROUND NOTES ABBREVIATIONS
LEGEND
UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES AND USES
CAUTION: THE ENGINEER PREPARING THESE PLANS WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, OR LIABLE FOR, UNAUTHORIZED CHANGESTO OR USES OF THESE PLANS. ALL CHANGES TO THE PLANS MUST BE IN WRITING AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PREPARER OFTHE PLANS
AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE
B/SS BOTTOM OF SANITARY SEWERBFC BOTTOM FACE OF CURBBFS BOTTOM FACE OF STEPB/STEP BOTTOM OF STEPBFW BOTTOM FACE OF WALLBW BACK OF WALLBFP BACKFLOW PREVENTERE ELECTRICAL (PG&E) (E) EXISTING
EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT
C AT&T CABLECB CATCH BASIN
FH FIRE HYDRANTFL FLOW LINEFG FINISHED GROUNDFS FINISHED SURFACE
G GASGV GATE VALVE
HYD HYDRANTME MATCH EXISTING
(N) NEW
OH OVERHEAD LINES
P PAVEMENTPOC POINT OF CONNECTIONREC RECLAIMED WATERPE POLY ETHYLENE TUBING
SAN SANITARYSSCO SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUTSD STORM DRAINSTA STATION
T TELEPHONET/REC TOP OF REC WATER LINETC TOP OF CURBTOW TOP OF WALLT/STEP TOP OF STEP
SW TOP OF SIDEWALK
W WATERWM WATER METERWV WATER VALVE
VALLEY GUTTER
RETAINING WALL
STORM MANHOLE
DRAIN/DROP INLET
SEWER MANHOLEGATE VALVE
UTILITY POLE
SEWER LATERAL
WATER SERVICE &WATER METER
FIRE HYDRANT
CLEAN OUT
STORM DRAINSANITARY SEWERCENTER LINE
PROPERTY LINE
JOINT TRENCH
ELECTRICAL
WATER MAIN
PROPOSED EXISTING DESCRIPTION
AREA DRAIN
CONTOURSOVERLAND RELEASE
FS FS FIRE SUPPRESSION
C 2016 TODD R. CREAMER, D.B.A. AS C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
UTILITIES/NOTIFICATIONS
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2
OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
AB
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
877 CEDAR STREET, SUITE 248SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060831.457.3939 THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY IS BASED UPON NAVD88.
BENCHMARK : SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE RIM FOUND IN
THE CENTER OF LUNDY LANE
ELEV=505.89
PROJECT DATUM
ALPHA SURVEY
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
OFFICE: (831) 438-4420
HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW
CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING / STAKING
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE ALL SURVEYING AND OR STAKING BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR OAK CREEK PARK
3640 GLEN CANYON ROAD
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 95066
APN: 022-162-76
THRUST BLOCK
153 320
20'
EXISTING
PARCEL 'A'
EXISTING
PARCEL 'B'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
EXISTING SITE
1" = 30'
C0.2
LEGEND
NOTES
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: NTS
I.D. ACTION
154 321
SD
SS
SS
SS
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
SD
SS
SS
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
32'
20'
5'
LOT 2
LOT 1
EXISTING
PARCEL 'A'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
TENTATIVE MAP
1" = 30'
C0.3
LEGEND
NOTES
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: NTS
UNIT #1
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #2
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #3
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #4
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #5
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #6
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #7
1513 SQ.FT.
UNIT #8
1513 SQ.FT.
LOT AREAS
155 322
Date:
Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
ZONING MODIFICATION MAP
NTS
C0.4
R-M-6: MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALESTATE 6,000 SQ. FT. MIN. LOT SIZE R-1-10: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
10,000 SQFT MIN. LOT SIZE
EXISTING ZONING
PROPOSED ZONING
C-S: COMMERCIAL SERVICE
45% MAX. BLDG COVERAGE
35' HEIGHT LIMIT
I-L: INDUSTRIAL LIGHT
50% MAX. BLDG COVERAGE
35' HEIGHT LIMIT
R-1-20: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
20,000 SQFT MIN. LOT SIZE
C-P: COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL
50% MAX. BLDG COVERAGE
35' HEIGHT LIMIT
PUBLIC / QUASI PUBLIC
ZONING LEGEND
156 323
(TYP)
(TYP)
ADJACENT
PROPERTY N.A.P.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#10
#18
#7
#8
#9
#11 - 15
#16
TREE GROUP #17
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
1" = 30'
C1.1
EXISTING SITE AND DEMOLITION PLAN
EXISTING EASEMENTS
EXISTING WATER MAINEXISTING SANITARY SEWEREXISTING CONTOURSSURVEYED TREE DRIP LINEEXISTING FENCEEXISTING SPOT ELEVATION LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
1-800-227-2600
REMOVE (E) UNDERGROUND STORM DRAIN LINES.REMOVE (E) AC PAVEMENT (APPROX. 1,406 FT).REMOVE (E) CONCRETE. (E) SSCO TO BE REMOVED AND CAPPED FOR FUTURE CONNECTION.(SEE IMPROVEMENT PLANS).(E) WATER METER TO BE REMOVED AND CAPPED FOR FUTURE CONNECTION(SEE IMPROVEMENT PLANS).(E) TREE TO BE REMOVED.(E) FENCE TO BE REMOVED.(E) TREE TO REMAIN. PROTECT TREE THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING CONCRET REMOVALEXISTING AC REMOVAL
DEMOLITION KEY NOTES
123
4 5
EXISTING CONCRETE REMAIN
6 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED
78 SLOPE ANALYSIS TABLE
25.01% TO 30%
30.01% & GREATER
S =
0.00229 A I L
S = AVERAGE SLOPE
I = CONTOUR INTERVAL IN FEET
L = COMB. LENGTH OF CONTOUR LINES
WITHIN PARCEL
A = AREA OF THE PARCEL TO BE
SUBDIVIDED (IN ACRES)
S = 16.42%
I = 1 FOOT INTERVAL
L = 7,435
A = 1.037 ACRES (LOT 1, SEE C0.3)
S =
0.00229
1.037 (1) (7,435)
AVERAGE SLOPE CALCULATION (PER SV HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS)
TREE NUMBER IDENTIFIED IN
PROJECT'S ARBORIST REPORT
#1
(E) PG&E TOWER TO REMAIN
157 324
SD
SS
SS SS
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
SD SS
SS
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
1 3
3 3
1 2
5 6
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
1 17
18 20
21 29
30 42
68 58 57 43
69 70
71 75
7 6
6 6
6 6
6 6
6 6
6 PROPERTY LINE
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
PROPOSED MIXED
USE BUILDING
PROPOSED
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING
7 3
8 8
2 2
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 1 1
1 6
LOT 2
LOT 1
10 11
13 12 13
13 10 CITY-BUS - City Transit Bus
Volvo V 40
WB-40 - Intermediate Semi-Trailer
WB-40 - Intermediate Semi-Trailer
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2
OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
HORIZONTAL CONTROL AND PAVING PLAN
1" = 20'
C2.1
HORIZONTAL CONTROL ANDPAVING NOTES
IMPERVIOUS AREA PAVEMENT LEGEND
PROPOSED SQFT
BUILDING
COVERAGE 54,685
DRIVEWAYS &PARKING 40,470
SIDEWALK 11,759
TOTAL 106,914
GUEST AND EMPLOY = 68 PERPENDICULAR STALLS
ACCESSIBLE SPACES = 3 ACCESSIBLE STALLS (9' X 18')
EV CHARGING SPACES = 5 STALLS (9' X 18')
TOTAL = 76 PARKING STALLS
X PARKING STALL CALCULATIONS
6 CONCRETE SIDEWALK
5 TYPE "B" CURB & GUTTER TO TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER
TRANSITION
4 1' WIDE STOP BAR PAINTED WHITE (TYP)
3 TYPE "C" VERTICAL CURB. SEE DETAIL 5, SHEET C6.42 TYPE "B" CURB AND GUTTER (CATCH). SEE DETAIL 5, SHEET C6.4 1 TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER. SEE DETAIL 5, SHEET C6.4
RETAINING WALL
CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALK
MAIN DRIVE - ASPHALT SECTION. SEEDETAIL 1 ON C6.4
7 3' WIDE VALLEY GUTTER
8 CONCRETE WEIR9 20' SWING GATE - EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS 10 CONCEPTUAL LOCATION FOR NEW TRANSFORMER11 VAN ACCESSIBLE EV CHARGING SPACE12 STANDARD ACCESSIBLE EV CHARGING SPACE13 STANDARD EV CHARGING SPACE Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
1-800-227-2600
STORMWATER FLOW-THROUGH
TREATMENT PLANTER
1- PER PLAN
6" MIN FREE
BOARD VOLUME
HIGH
INFILTRATING
SOIL MEDIA
(5 IN/HR)
CLEAN 3/4"
DRAIN ROCK
PERF. PIPE
NO INFILTRATION
NOTES:
1. OVERFLOW DRAIN PIPE
CONNECTED TO STORM
DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
10 MIL VISQEEN
(IMPERMEABLE FABRIC)
FG
GENERAL NOTE:
1. SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR
PLANTING REQUIREMENTS
Scale: NTS
FLOW THROUGH PLANTER 1
3" MIN.
SOLID PIPE TO
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
(N) TEE W/RIVER ROCK
(N) STORM DRAIN
INFLOW
FG
(N) RETAINING
WALL
(N) RETAINING WALL (LOWEST
HEIGHT OF PLANTER WALL)
2" MIN.
18" - 24"
EJ
PL
8'-WIDE
PUBLIC
SIDEWALK
1- T
T
(E) PG&E TOWER TO REMAIN
158 325
SD
SS
SS
SS
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
SD
SS
SS
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
520
525
535
530
520
525
520
515
515
520
525
540
535
530
525
525
520
515
510
505
505
510
505
505
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
GRADING PLAN
1" = 40'
C3.1
EXISTING SHELL STATION
EL = 518'(+/-)
NOTE: THE EARTHWORK QUANTITIES SHOWN HEREON ARE
EXCLUSIVE OF WALL FOOTINGS, EXISTING PAVEMENT REMOVAL
AND OVER EXCAVATION AND RECOMPACTION, UTILITY TRENCH SPOILS & SOIL EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION FACTORS.
ITEM DESCRIPTION CUT (cu.yds) FILL (cu.yds)
1 EG VS. FG 5687 7686
NET VOLUME =
1999 CU.YDS. OF FILL
THE ABOVE QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY.
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CUT AND FILL TO ACCOMPLISH FINISH GRADE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.
EARTHWORK QUANTITIES
159 326
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
520
525
535
530
520
525
520
515
515
520
525
540
535
530
525
525
520
515
510
505
505
510
505
505
Elevations Table
Number
1 23456789
10 Minimum Elevation
-16.00-13.00-10.00
-7.00-4.00-1.00
2.00 4.00
6.00 8.00
Maximum Elevation
-13.00-10.00
-7.00-4.00-1.00
2.00 4.006.008.00
10.00 Area
1479.85
4928.17
9006.52
15414.11
47398.11
54630.07
13516.74
6588.66
2849.17
431.25
Color
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
GRADING CUT - FILL PLAN
1" = 20'
C3.2
M T. H E R M O N R O A D
G
L
E
N
C
A
N
Y
O
N
R
D
160 327
SD
SS
SS SS
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
SD SS
SS
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
PROPOSED MIXED
USE BUILDING
PROPOSED
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2
OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
UTILITY PLAN
1" = 20'
C4.1
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SSMH #1
48Ø
502.5
497.0
PROPOSED EXISTING DESCRIPTION
1. P.O.C. TO (E) SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY INVERT ELEVATION, LOCATION, MATERIAL & SIZE PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.
2. (N) 4" PVC SDR-35 SEWER LATERAL @ 2.0 MIN SLOPE W/ CLEAN OUT PER THE CITY OF SCOTT'S VALLEY STANDARDS.
3. P.O.C. TO BUILDING SNAITARY SEWER SERVICE. INSTALL CLEANOUT
4. INSTALL CLEANOUT
X
1. ALL SANITARY SEWER LATERALS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A (N) CLEAN OUT 5-FT MIN FROM FACE OF BUILDING
2. ALL SANITATION DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE MET AT ALL TIMES
1. (N) UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS TO MEETING TIER 4 MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN THE SCOTTS VALLEY STORMWATER GUIDANCE MANUAL.
2. P.O.C. TO EXISTING 18" CMP SD PIPE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT SIZE, DEPTH, MATERIAL & LOCATION PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION
3. P.O.C. TO EXISTING STORM DRAIN INLET
X
X
1. 15" HDPE
2. 12" HDPE3. 8" HDPE
4. 6" HDPE
1. REFER TO DETAILS ON GRADING SHEETS FOR MORE STORM DRAINAGE INFORMATION WITHIN BIO-RETENTION AREAS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE & INSTALL ALL TRANSITIONS FROM PERF. PIPE TO SOLID PIPE W/ NECESSARY COUPLER FOR DISSIMILAR MATERIAL AND/OR SIZE.
3. ALL NEW STORM DRAIN INLETS AND CATCH BASINS SHOWN IN THESE PLANS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A THERMOPLASTIC STENCILING STATING "NO DUMPING - DRAINS TO BAY", IN BLUE LETTERING, AS SHOWN BELOW. CONTRACTOR MAY SUBSTITUTE STENCILING FOR EMBLEM WITH ENGINEERS APPROVAL.
1. 8" PVC SDR-35 PIPE
2. 6" PVC SDR-35 PIPE
3. 4" PVC SDR-35 PIPE
X
1 3
1 1. ALL WATER UTILITY INSTALLATIONS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SVWD APRIL 2011
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS
2. WHERE NECESSARY, DEFLECT WATER ONSITE MAINS NOT TO EXCEED 3° FOR EVERY 20-FT OF PIPE.3. ALL SERVICE LATERAL INSTALLATION SHALL BE PER SVWD DETAIL 14 ON SHEET C6.6.
4. REFER TO SVWD DETAIL 19 FOR ALL THRUST BLOCK REQUIREMENTS.
1. 10" PVC C900 DR 14
2. 8" PVC C900 DR 14
3. 6" PVC C900 DR 14
4. 4" PVC C900 DR 14
5. 2" TYPE "K" COPPER TUBING
6. 1" TYPE "K" COPPER TUBING
7. 6" PVC C900 (PURPLE PIPE)
X
1. P.O.C. TO WATER MAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXACT SIZE, DEPTH, LOCATION AND MATERIAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
2. (N) FIRE HYDRANT INSTALLATION PER SVWD DETAIL 10.3. 2" DUAL-SERVICE CONNECTION PER SVWD DETAIL 4A. TYPICAL OF 8 (1 PER UNIT).
4. P.O.C. TO EXISTING 6" RECYCLED WATER MAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXACT SIZE, DEPTH, LOCATION AND MATERIAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
5. BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY PER SVWD DETAIL 8
6. P.O.C. TO BUILDING FIRE SPRINKLER SERVICE.
7. DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTION PER SVWD DETAIL 1.
8. CAP AND INSTALL UTILITY IDENTIFICATION MARKER. STUB FOR FUTURE SVWD P.O.C.9. REMOVE EXISTING BLOW-OFF AND INSTALL ARV AT HIGH POINT OF WATER MAIN PER SVWD DETAILS 24 OR 25.
10. FIRE SERVICE CONNECTION TO BUILDING11. INSTALL DCDA PER SVWD DETAIL 912. IRRIGATION METER13. REMOVE (E) BLOW OFF ASSEMBLY14. INSTALL ARV PER SVWD DETAILS 24 OR 25 X
2 TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SSMH #2
48Ø
504.8
498.5 1
1 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
3 TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #2
48Ø
503.3
XX
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #1
48Ø
504.7
XX
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #3
48Ø
509.8
XX
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SSMH #4
48Ø
508.1501.4
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #1
2KR
527524
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #2
U23
510.9
XX
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #3
2KR
510.8
XX
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #4
U23
505.5
XX
7 7
3 3
3 4
4 4
WATER PIPE SCHEDULE
WATER NOTES
GENERAL WATER NOTES
STORM DRAINAGE PIPE SCHEDULESTORM DRAIN NOTESGENERAL STORM DRAIN NOTES
SANITARY SEWERPIPE SCHEDULESANITARY SEWER NOTES
GENERAL SANITARY SEWER NOTES
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
1-800-227-2600
UTILITY LEGEND
1 1
3 2
2 2 2
7 7 7
3 3
7 8
2 2
2 2
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 2
2 2
2 9
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SSMH #5
48Ø
510.2502.5 7
2 TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SSMH #3
48Ø
506.8
499.2
1 1
10 4
10 4
5 4
4 4
5 1
1 12
11 11
12 12
13 14
3 3
T
T
3 1
4 7
5 5
5 5
5 3
161 328
SD
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR/
VAN POOL / EV
EV CHARGING ONLY
SD
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
EV CHARGING
ONLY
520
525
535
530
520
525
520
515
515
520
525
540
535
530
525
525
520
515
510
505
505
510
505
505
M-2
M-4
M-1
M-3
S-1
S-18
R-4
S-22
R-3
R-2
R-1
S-24
S-25
S-23
S-26
S-21
S-19
S-20
S-17
S-14
S-10
S-12
S-11
C-1
S-9
C-3
S-8
S-7
C-2
S-5
S-4
S-27
S-3
S-2
S-16
S-13
S-15
S-6
SCM 2
SCM 1
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
TENTATIVE
STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN
1" = 20'
C4.2
DRAINAGE AREA TABLE
TOTAL AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA (SQ. FT.) PERVIOUS AREA STORMWATER ID SQ FT ACRES (A) BUILDING CONCRETE ASPHALT TOTAL SQ. FT.
RUNOFF
COEFFICIENT
(C)
RAINFALLINTENSITY
(I) FLOW (Q)
C-1 3125 0.0717 3125 0
0 3125
0 0.95 2.0 0.14
C-2 3076 0.0706 3076 0
0 3076
0 0.95 2.0 0.13
C-3 2823 0.0648 2823 0
0 2823
0 0.95 2.0 0.12
M-1 11535 0.2648 11535 0 0 11535
0 0.95 2.0 0.50
M-2 5400 0.1240 5400 0
0 5400
0 0.95 2.0 0.24
M-3 8206 0.1884 8206 0
0 8206
0 0.95 2.0 0.36
M-4 8965 0.2058 8965 0
0 8965
0 0.95 2.0 0.39
R-1 3875 0.0890 3100 645
0 3745 130 0.93 2.0 0.16
R-2 3388 0.0778 2736 587
0 3323 65 0.94 2.0 0.15
R-3 3794 0.0871 2977 692
0 3669 125 0.93 2.0 0.16
R-4 4067 0.0934 2904 925
0 3829 238 0.91 2.0 0.17
S-1 18134 0.4163 0 802
0 802 17332 0.28 2.0 0.23
S-2 4567 0.1048 0
0 0
0 4567 0.25 2.0 0.05
S-3 3313 0.0761 315 813 2186 3313
0 0.95 2.0 0.14
S-4 2627 0.0603 0 638 1989 2627
0 0.95 2.0 0.11
S-5 9154 0.2101 234 2294 6507 9035 119 0.94 2.0 0.40
S-6 545 0.0125 0 359
0 359 186 0.71 2.0 0.02
S-7 4448 0.1021 0
0 0
0 4448 0.25 2.0 0.05
S-8 1233 0.0283 0 1233 0 1233
0 0.95 2.0 0.05
S-9 2677 0.0615 0
0 0
0 2677 0.25 2.0 0.03
S-10 2225 0.0511 0 1083 0 1083 1143 0.59 2.0 0.06S-11 9774 0.2244 0 2808 6285 9093 681 0.90 2.0 0.40S-12 2273 0.0522 0 310 1563 1873 400 0.83 2.0 0.09 S-13 3040 0.0698 0 417 2277 2694 346 0.87 2.0 0.12
S-14 3949 0.0907 0 762 2746 3508 442 0.87 2.0 0.16
S-15 503 0.0115 0 40
0 40 464 0.30 2.0 0.01
S-16 789 0.0181 0 50
0 50 739 0.29 2.0 0.01
S-17 3645 0.0837 0 321 3097 3418 227 0.91 2.0 0.15S-18 8931 0.2050 0 717 7041 7758 1173 0.86 2.0 0.35S-19 1620 0.0372 0 0 0
0 1620 0.25 2.0 0.02
S-20 185 0.0042 0
0 0
0 185 0.25 2.0 0.00
S-21 1875 0.0430 0
0 0
0 1875 0.25 2.0 0.02
S-22 1374 0.0315 0
0 0
0 1374 0.25 2.0 0.02
S-23 2591 0.0595 0
0 0
0 2591 0.25 2.0 0.03
S-24 4495 0.1032 0 18 4477 4495
0 0.95 2.0 0.20
S-25 1252 0.0287 0
0 0
0 1252 0.25 2.0 0.01
S-26 1530 0.0351 0 1530 0 1530
0 0.95 2.0 0.07
S-27 498 0.0114 0 498
0 498
0 0.95 2.0 0.02
SCM 1
SCM 2
M-1
C-2
M-3
R-1
R-3
S-1
R-4
R-2
M-4
M-2
C-3
C-1 S-2
S-3 S-4
S-5
S-6
S-7
S-8
S-9
S-11 S-10
S-12 S-13
S-14 S-15 S-16
S-17
S-18
S-19 S-20
S-21
S-22
S-23
S-24
S-25
S-26
S-27
SELF-TREATING
(BYPASS LINE) TO PUBLIC SD
Scale: NTS
ONSITE DRAINAGE DIAGRAM
1 RESTRICTOR
(TO CONVEY 10-YR PRE-DEVELOPMENT RATE)
INTERNAL OVERFLOW BYPASS(TO CONVEY UP TO A 25-YR STORM EVENT)
FLOW DIRECTION
LEGEND
FLOW THROUGH PLANTER
UNDERGROUND INFILTRATION CHAMBERS
OFFSITE
RUN-ON
TO PUBLIC SDTO PUBLIC SD
162 329
SD
SD
SD
SD
520
525
535
530
520
525
520
515
515
520
525
540
535
530
525
525
520
515
510
505
505
510
505 505
C
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
PROPOSED MIXED
USE BUILDING
PROPOSED
COMMERCIAL
BUILDING
MT. HERMON ROAD
GLEN CANYON ROAD
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSES
7'-0"
Notes:
ERTEC® ProWattle
Installation Details
File Name:Layout Name:
8.5" x 11"
Default Print Size: Page:
©
Flow
Flow
Notes:
Notes:
ERTEC® S-Fence
Installation Details
Important
8", 10" or 14", SF08, SF10 or SF14
File Name:Layout Name:
8.5" x 11"
Default Print Size: Page:
©
S-Fence "A" "B"
SANDBAG
A A
PLAN
3'
SECTION A-A
BERM
VARIES
10 MIL PLASTIC
LINING
B B
STAKE
(TYP.)
WOOD FRAME SECURELY
FASTENED AROUNDENTIRE PERIMETER WITH
TWO STAKES
10 MIL PLASTIC
LINING
VARIES
10 MIL
PLASTIC LINING
PLAN
SECTION B-B
STAKE
(TYP.)
STRAW BALE
(TYP.)
B B 10 MIL PLASTIC LINING
STRAW BALE(TYP.)
BINDING WIRE
WOOD OR
METAL STAKES
(2 PER BALE)
STAPLES(2 PER BALE)
4"
STAPLE DETAIL
2"
VARIESSANDBAG
NOTES
1. ACTUAL LAYOUT DETERMINED IN
FIELD.
2. THE CONCRETE WASHOUT SIGN
SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 FT.OF THE TEMPORARY CONCRETE WASHOUT FACILITY.
10 MIL
PLASTICLINING
10 MIL PLASTIC
LINING
TWO-STACKED
2 X 12 ROUGH
WOOD FRAME
10' MIN
10' MIN
10' MIN
1 8 IN DIA.
STEEL WIRE
PLAN
NOT TO SCALE
TYPE "ABOVE GRADE"
LATH & FLAGGING ON
ALL SIDES
BERM
NOT TO SCALE
NATIVE MATERIAL
(OPTIONAL)
NOT TO SCALE
NOT TO SCALE
TYPE "BELOW GRADE"
NOT TO SCALE
TYPE "BELOW GRADE"
NOTES
1. ACTUAL LAYOUT DETERMINED IN
FIELD.
2. THE CONCRETE WASHOUT SIGN SHALL
BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 FT. OF THE
TEMPORARY CONCRETE WASHOUT
FACILITY.
PLYWOOD
48" X 24"
PAINTED WHITEBLACK LETTERS
6" HEIGHT0.5" LAGSCREWS
WOOD POST
3" X 3" X 8"
CONCRETE
WASHOUT
CONCRETE WASHOUT
SIGN DETAIL
(OR EQUIVALENT)
3'3'
SECTION B-B
NOT TO SCALE
ImportantMaintenance:
Installation Notes
1. Placement: Select correct size (Table 1). DO NOT remove grate.
Lay GR8 Guard on top of grate. GR8 Guard shall extend at least 3 inches beyond grate in each direction.
2. Anchor methods: A) Attach with 16 gauge tie-wire. Cut wire to 18” length. At each corner of GR8 Guard , feed one end of wire down through GR8 Guard , around grate bar, and back up thru GR8 Guard . Above ground, twist wires several times, cut-off excess(Fig 1). or B) Place small snake bags or equivalent (gravel bags) containing clean, pea-sized graded gravel around perimeter of GR8 Guardä (
ä (
3. Clean: Accumulation of leaves, debris and sediment can cause backups! Clean after every storm or as necessary.
4. Protect: In stop and go traffic areas where exposed to constant tire abuse, it is useful to place traffic cones or delineators on or near GR8 Guard to discourage run-overs.GR8 Guard
Installation Guide
Unprotected
drainage inlet
Protected drainage inlet
ERTEC® GR8 ” ” Grates less than
Table 1
GG size ” ” ERTEC® GR8 Guard For drainage inlets with grates in paved areas File Name:Layout Name:
NONE
Page:
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2
OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
1" = 20'
C5.1
EROSION CONTROL NOTE
IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES AS REQUIRED THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT IN CONFORMANCE WITH
THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY AND THE ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE BACK-UP EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES (SOILSTABILIZATION) WITH SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS STRAW WATTLES, SILT FENCE, GRAVEL INLET FILTERS, AND/OR SEDIMENT TRAPS OR BASINS. ENSURE CONTROLMEASURES ARE ADEQUATE, IN PLACE, AND IN OPERABLE CONDITIONS. SEDIMENT
CONTROLS, INCLUDING INLET PROTECTION, ARE NECESSARY BUT SHOULD BE A SECONDARY DEFENSE BEHIND GOOD EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.
ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPAIRED THROUGHOUT THE SEASON. REPLACEMENT SUPPLIES SHOULD BE KEPT ON SITE.
SITE INSPECTIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED BEFORE AND AFTER EACH STORM EVENT, AND EVERY 24 HOURS FOR EXTENDED STORM EVENTS, TO IDENTIFY AREAS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO EROSION AND SEDIMENT PROBLEMS OR ANY OTHER POLLUTANT DISCHARGES. IFADDITIONAL MEASURES ARE NEEDED, REVISE THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTTHE MEASURES IMMEDIATELY. DOCUMENT ALL INSPECTION FINDINGS AND ACTIONS TAKEN.
CONTRACTOR SHALL USE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR CONTROL OF STORM WATER RUNOFF (E.G. GRAVEL BAGS AT CATCH BASIN INLETS).
EROSION CONTROL BMP'S
EROSION CONTROL LEGEND
DIRECTION OF DRAINAGEPRO WATTLE (SEE DETAIL 3)
S-FENCE (SEE DETAIL 4)
ROCKED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
(SEE DETAILS 1)INLET PROTECTION (SEE DETAIL 2)
PROPOSED STORM WATER SAMPLING LOCATION
CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA (SEE DETAIL 5)SANITARY FACILITY
MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT STORAGE AREA
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE/FUELING AREA
ALL CONSTRUCTION SITES
1. DELINEATE CLEARING LIMITS, SENSITIVE OR CRITICAL AREAS, TREES, DRAINAGE COURSES, AND BUFFER ZONES TO PREVENT EXCESSIVE OR UNNECESSARY DISTURBANCE AND EXPOSURE OF SOIL.
2. IDENTIFY ALL STORM DRAINS, DRAINAGE SWALES AND CREEKS LOCATED NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE
AND MAKE SURE ALL SUBCONTRACTORS ARE AWARE OF THEIR LOCATIONS TO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING THEM.
3. PRESERVE EXISTING VEGETATION, WHERE REQUIRED AND WHEN FEASIBLE, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
4. PHASE GRADING OPERATIONS, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, TO LIMIT AREAS OF DISTURBANCE AND TIME OF
EXPOSURE
5. AVOID AND/OR MINIMIZE IMPACTS OF EXCAVATION AND GRADING DURING WET WEATHER AND IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING EXPECTED WET WEATHER.
6. MINIMIZE CUTS AND FILLS.
7. IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO MINIMIZE EROSION, MANAGE STORM WATER RUNOFF, AND PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FROM ENTERING STORM DRAINS.
8. ALIGN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT ROADS AND DRIVEWAYS ALONG SLOPE CONTOURS.9. WASH VEHICLES AT AN APPROPRIATE OFF-SITE FACILITY. IF EQUIPMENT MUST BE WASHED ON-SITE, USE
WASH DOWN AREAS DEVELOPED FOR SPECIFIC SITE REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVED BY THE CITY REPRESENTATIVE. DO NOT USE SOAPS, SOLVENTS, DEGREASERS, OR STEAM CLEANING EQUIPMENT, ANDPREVENT WASH WATER FROM ENTERING STORM DRAINS.
MINIMIZE SOIL MOVEMENT1. STOCKPILED SOIL AND MATERIALS SHOULD BE COVERED AND STABILIZED WITH TARPS, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, HYDROSEEDING AND/OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS.
2. CREATE A BERM AND/OR INSTALL SILT FENCING AROUND STOCKPILED MATERIALS TO PREVENT STORM WATER RUNOFF FROM TRANSPORTING SEDIMENT OFFSITE.
3. USE STANDARD EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, PLANTING, MULCHING, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AND/OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS TO STABILIZE DISTURBED SOIL AND REDUCE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION.
4. USE OTHER SOIL STABILIZERS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY.
STRUCTURES TO CONTROL AND CONVEY RUNOFF
1. CONVEY RUNOFF BY USE OF EARTH DIKES, DRAINAGE SWALES AND/OR DITCHES WHEN FEASIBLE.
2. USE SLOPE DRAINS TO COLLECT AND CONVEY WATER FOR DISCHARGE BELOW SLOPES WHEN FEASIBLE.3. USE VELOCITY DISSIPATION DEVICES, FLARED CULVERT END SECTIONS AND/OR CHECK DAMS TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITY AND MITIGATE EROSION WHEN FEASIBLE.
CAPTURE SEDIMENT
1. USE TERRACING, RIPRAP, SAND BAGS, ROCKS, APPROVED TEMPORARY VEGETATION AND/OR OTHER APPROVED BMP’S ON SLOPES TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITY AND TRAP SEDIMENTS. DO NOT USE ASPHALT RUBBLE OR OTHER DEMOLITION DEBRIS FOR THIS PURPOSE.
2. PROTECT STORM DRAIN INLETS FROM SEDIMENT-LADEN RUNOFF. STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION DEVICES INCLUDE GRAVEL BAGS, FILTER FABRIC FENCES AND BLOCK AND GRAVEL FILTERS.
OTHER RUNOFF CONTROLS
1. TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN
2. SEDIMENT TRAP3. BRUSH OR ROCK FILTER
4. SILT FENCE
5. SAND OR GRAVEL BAG BARRIER
TRACKING CONTROL
1. IMPLEMENT MEASURES AS NECESSARY TO MINIMIZE TRACKING OF SOIL OFF SITE
2. USE DRY SWEEPING METHODS WHEN CLEANING SEDIMENTS FROM STREETS, DRIVEWAYS AND PAVED AREAS BY HAND. WHEN USING MECHANICAL STREET SWEEPERS, USE FINE WATER SPRAY TO REDUCE DUST AND IMPROVE SEDIMENT REMOVAL WHILE MINIMIZING RUNOFF.
PAINT WORK1. DO NOT CLEAN PAINT BRUSHES OR RINSE PAINT CONTAINERS INTO A STREET, GUTTER, STORM DRAIN, OR CREEK.
2. FOR WATER-BASED PAINTS, PAINT OUT BRUSHES TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE AND RINSE TO A DRAIN LEADING TO THE SANITARY SEWER (I.E., INDOOR PLUMBING).
3. FOR OIL-BASED PAINTS, PAINT OUT BRUSHES TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, AND FILTER AND REUSE THINNERS AND SOLVENTS. DISPOSE OF UNUSABLE THINNERS, OIL-BASED PAINT, SLUDGES AND RESIDUE AS HAZARDOUS WASTE.
4. NON-HAZARDOUS PAINT CHIPS AND DUST FROM DRY STRIPPING AND SAND BLASTING MAY BE SWEPT UP OR COLLECTED IN PLASTIC DROP CLOTHS AND DISPOSED OF AS TRASH. CHEMICAL PAINT STRIPPING RESIDUE
AND CHIPS AND DUST FROM MARINE PAINTS OR PAINTS CONTAINING LEAD OR TRIBUTYL TIN MUST BE DISPOSED OF AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE.
5. WHEN STRIPPING OR CLEANING BUILDING EXTERIORS WITH HIGH-PRESSURE WATER, COVER OR BERM STORM DRAIN INLETS. COLLECT (MOP OR VACUUM) BUILDING CLEANING WATER FOR DISPOSAL IN A PRE-AUTHORIZED MANNER.
6. RECYCLE, RETURN TO SUPPLIER OR DONATE UNWANTED WATER-BASED (LATEX) PAINT.
7. DRIED LATEX PAINT MAY BE DISPOSED OF IN THE TRASH.
CEMENT AND CONCRETE WORK
1. AVOID MIXING EXCESS AMOUNTS OF FRESH CONCRETE OR CEMENT MORTAR ON-SITE.
2. STORE DRY AND WET CONCRETE AND CEMENT UNDER COVER, PROTECTED FORM RAINFALL AND RUNOFF.3. WASH OUT CONCRETE TRANSIT MIXERS ONLY IN DESIGNATED WASH-OUT AREAS. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, RECYCLE WASHOUT BY PUMPING BACK INTO MIXERS FOR REUSE. DO NOT DISPOSE OF WASHOUT INTO THE STREET, STORM DRAINS, DRAINAGE DITCHES, OR CREEKS. DESIGNATED WASH-OUT AREAS MUST BE MAINTAINED TO PREVENT OVER FLOW.
4. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, RETURN CONTENTS OF MIXER BARREL TO THE OFF-SITE YARD FOR RECYCLING.
DISPOSE OF SMALL AMOUNTS OF EXCESS CONCRETE, GROUT, AND MORTAR IN THE TRASH.
ROADWORK/PAVEMENT
5. APPLY CONCRETE, ASPHALT, AND SEAL COAT DURING DRY WEATHER TO PREVENT CONTAMINANTS FROM CONTACTING STORMWATER RUNOFF.
6. COVER STORM DRAIN INLETS AND MANHOLES WHEN PAVING OR APPLYING SEAL COAT, SLURRY SEAL, FOG SEAL, AND SIMILAR MATERIALS.
7. ALWAYS PARK PAVING MACHINES OVER DRIP PANS OR ABSORBENT MATERIALS, SINCE THEY TEND TO DRIP CONTINUOUSLY.
8. WHEN MAKING SAW-CUTS IN PAVEMENT, USE AS LITTLE WATER AS POSSIBLE. COVER POTENTIALLY
AFFECTED STORM DRAIN INLETS COMPLETELY WITH FILTER FABRIC DURING THE SAWING OPERATION AND
CONTAIN THE SLURRY BY WET-VACUUMING, OR BY PLACING STRAW BALES, SANDBAGS, OR GRAVEL DAMS AROUND THE CATCH BASINS. AFTER THE LIQUID DRAINS OR EVAPORATES, SHOVEL OR VACUUM THE SLURRY RESIDUE FROM THE PAVEMENT OR GUTTER AND REMOVE FROM SITE.
9. WASH DOWN EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE ONLY WHEN THE WASH WATER CAN: (1) FLOW ONTO A DIRT AREA; (2) DRAIN ONTO A BERMED SURFACE FROM WHICH IT CAN BE PUMPED AND DISPOSED OF PROPERLY; OR (3) BE VACUUMED FROM THE AREA ALONG THE CURB WHERE SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED BY BLOCKING A STORM DRAIN INLET.
10. ALLOW AGGREGATE RINSE TO SETTLE, AND PUMP THE WATER TO THE SANITARY SEWER IF ALLOWED BY YOUR LOCAL WASTEWATER AUTHORITY.
11. DO NOT WASH SWEEPINGS FROM EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE INTO A STREET OR STORM DRAIN.
COLLECT AND RETURN TO AGGREGATE BASE STOCKPILE, OR DISPOSE WITH TRASH.
12. RECYCLE BROKEN CONCRETE AND ASPHALT.HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILL PREVENTION, SPILL REPORTING AND RESPONSE1. ALL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SHALL BE STORED SO THAT THEY ARE PROTECTED FROM INCLEMENT WEATHER AND VANDALISM.
2. MOTOR VEHICLES SHALL NOT BE FUELED ON THE PROJECT SITE.3. SPILL CONTAINMENT MEASURES MUST BE MADE PRIOR TO FUELING WHEN FUELING EQUIPMENT OTHER THAN MOTOR VEHICLES.
4. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE, OTHER THAN EMERGENCY REPAIRS, SHALL NOT BE PERFORMED ON THE PROJECT SITE.
5. APPROPRIATE EMERGENCY SPILL CONTAINMENT SUPPLIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR.
6. SPILLS GREATER THAN ONE QUART SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY REPORTED TO THE CITY'S REPRESENTATIVE AND COUNTY INSPECTOR.
7. SPILLS SHALL BE DIKED OR CONTAINED BY TRAINED PERSONNEL TO PREVENT THE SPILLED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL FROM ENTERING THE STORM WATER SYSTEM OR LEAVING THE PROJECT SITE.
8. SPILLS OF LESS THAN FIVE (5) GALLONS SHALL BE ABSORBED USING AN APPROPRIATE MATERIAL. ALL
CONTAMINATED MATERIALS SHALL BE CONTAINERIZED, REMOVED FROM THE JOBSITE AND DISPOSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.
9. SPILLS IN EXCESS OF FIVE (5) GALLONS SHALL BE ABSORBED USING AN APPROPRIATE MATERIAL AND
PLACED IN CONTAINERS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNTY OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY.
10. ANY CONTAMINATED SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND REPLACED WITH ACCEPTABLE FRESH SOIL.
11. RESPONSE SHALL BE CARRIED OUT BY APPROPRIATELY TRAINED PERSONNEL UTILIZING SAFE PRACTICES.
GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES
1. DO NOT WASH DOWN PAVEMENT OR SURFACES WHERE SILT HAS BEEN DEPOSITED OR MATERIALS HAVE SPILLED. USE DRY CLEANUP METHODS.
2. AVOID CONTAMINATING CLEAN RUNOFF FROM AREAS ADJACENT TO YOUR SITE BY USING BERMS AND/OR TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES TO DIVERT WATER FLOW AROUND THE SITE.
3. COVER EXPOSED PILES OF SOIL, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND WASTES WITH PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS. BEFORE IT RAINS, SWEEP AND REMOVE MATERIALS FROM SURFACES THAT DRAIN TO STORM DRAINS, CREEKS, OR CHANNELS.
4. PLACE TRASH CANS AROUND THE SITE TO REDUCE POTENTIAL LITTER. DISPOSE OF NON-HAZARDOUS CONSTRUCTION WASTES IN COVERED DUMPSTERS OR RECYCLING RECEPTACLES. RECYCLE LEFTOVER MATERIALS WHENEVER POSSIBLE.
5. DISPOSE OF ALL WASTES PROPERLY. MATERIALS THAT CAN NOT BE REUSED OR RECYCLED MUST BE TAKEN TO AN APPROPRIATE LANDFILL OR DISPOSED OF AS HAZARDOUS WASTE, AS APPROPRIATE.
6. COVER OPEN DUMPSTERS WITH PLASTIC SHEETING OR A TARP DURING RAINY WEATHER. SECURE THE SHEETING OR TARP AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DUMPSTER. IF THE DUMPSTER HAS A COVER, CLOSE IT.
7. TRAIN YOUR EMPLOYEES AND INFORM CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS ABOUT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR COMPLIANCE.
Scale: NTS
ROCKED CONSTRIUCTION ENTRANCE 1
Scale: NTS
GR8 GUARD DETAIL 2
Scale: NTS
PRO WATTLE DETAIL 3 Scale: NTS S FENCE DETAIL 4
Scale: NTS
CONCRETE WASH DETAIL 5
C
163 330
PL
109 Lucida Lane
550.64 Deck Elevation
Existing Single Family
Residence
559.68 Deck Elevation
PL
(N) BLDG
FF = 528.0
PL
EC EC
115 Lucida Lane
554.85 Floor Elevation 554.71 Deck Elevation
Existing Single Family
Residence
Existing Fence
STA:1+16.58
ELEV:526.70
STA:1+60.00
ELEV:527.10
STA:1+65.50
ELEV:527.60
STA:1+74.00
ELEV:527.18
RESIDENTIAL ACCESS ROAD &
PERPENDICULAR PARKING
TC TC EC BLDG FF=505.79
PL
(E) BLDG (107 LUCIA LN)
STA:0+25.00
ELEV:524.87
PL
STA:0+37.14
ELEV:521.55
DAYLIGHT
STA:0+46.64
ELEV:518.84
BLDG
STA:0+66.87
ELEV:519.21
BLDG
STA:1+77.46
ELEV:505.42
FACE OF CURB
STA:1+91.46
ELEV:504.68
FACE OF CURB
STA:2+51.46
ELEV:504.66
BLDG
STA:2+65.36
ELEV:505.15
BLDG
STA:2+95.44
ELEV:504.99
EC
STA:3+15.26
ELEV:502.57
PL
STA:3+22.80
ELEV:502.48
SECTIONS
1" = 20'
C6.1
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
12.02.19 DD/JB
318-00
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 OAK CREEK PARK
SCOTT'S VALLEY, CA
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
11 MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
11 12
11 12
H
I
H
I
CITY COMMENTS
NOV. 6, 2019
CITY COMMENTS
MAY 18, 2020
CITY COMMENTS 1 MAY 22, 2019
2 3
DDDDDD
Scale: 1"=10'
SECTION A
1 Scale: 1"=10'
SECTION B
2 MT. HERMON ROAD EG
FG
3 1
Scale: 1"=10'
SECTION C
3 FG
164 331
FF=505.79
TENTATIVE
STORMWATER DETAILS
AS NOTED
C7.1
165 332
166 333
GLEN CANYON ROAD
APN
022-162-61
APN
022-162-62
APN
022-162-63
APN
022-162-64
APN
022-162-65
M T . H E R M O N R D .
EXISTING OFFICE
BUILDING
PROPOSED MIXED USE
BUILDING 'A'
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSE
BUILDING 'D'
PROPOSED
TOWNHOUSE
BUILDING 'C'
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDING 'B'
TC
C 12725
THOMAS THACHER
DECEMBER 31, 2023
EXPIRATION
UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED. LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT. BE THE USER'S RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER
REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, ARCHITECTS. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THACHER & THOMPSON
THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS
THACHER &
THOMPSON
ARCHITECTS
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
No. DATE
215 OREGON STREET
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
(831) 566-3079 V
www.tntarch.com
c 2016 THACHER & THOMPSON ARCHITECTS
DRAWING DATE
OCTOBER, 2016
PROJECT FILE NAME:
GRANUM 16.SD
PLAN CHECK 7/15/19
PLAN CHECK 6/01/20 OAK CREEK PARK MOUNT HERMON ROAD AT GLEN CANYON ROAD SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 8' WIDE CONC.
SIDEWALK
PARTIAL TREE CANOPY DIAGRAM
1 SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"
THE APPROXIMATE TREE CANOPY AT YEAR 15 IS SHOWN
IN THE SHADE CIRCLES ON THIS DRAWING. THE TREE CANOPIES SHOWN ONLY REFLECT TREES ADJACENT TO PARKING AREAS.
FOR A COMPLETE PICTURE OF THE PROPOSED TREE CANOPY
SEE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN (SHEET L). THE MATURE TREE CANOPY WILL COVER OVER 30% OF THE SITE.
167 334
168 335
0.8 0.9
1.1 1.3
1.4 1.5
1.8 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.4
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.3
2.5 2.7
2.8 2.9
3.3 3.5
3.5 3.7
3.9 3.9
3.7 3.5
3.2 3.0
1.1 1.2
1.3 1.4
1.5 1.7
1.9 2.1
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.1 2.0
1.9 1.9
2.1 2.3
2.5 2.8
2.9 3.1
3.4 3.6
3.4 3.5
3.6 3.7
3.6 3.3
3.0 2.7
1.3 1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.9
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.0 2.0
1.9 2.0
2.1 2.3
2.6 2.9
3.0 3.1
3.3 3.6
3.2 3.4
3.6 3.6
3.4 3.1
2.7 2.5
1.5 1.8
1.9 1.9
2.0 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.0 1.9
1.9 2.0
2.2 2.4
2.7 2.9
2.9 3.1
3.3 3.6
3.4 3.6
3.8 3.7
3.4 2.9
2.4 2.1
1.7 2.0
2.1 2.1
2.2 2.4
2.4 2.3
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
1.9 1.9
1.9 2.1
2.3 2.7
3.0 3.0
3.1 3.2
3.5 3.9
3.7 3.8
3.9 3.9
3.5 2.8
2.3 2.0
1.7 1.9
2.0 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.1
2.0 1.9
1.8 1.8
1.9 2.1
2.3 2.8
3.0 3.1
3.3 3.6
4.0 4.0
4.1 4.0
2.2 1.8
1.6 1.8
2.0 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
1.9 1.8
1.8 1.8
1.8 2.0
2.3 2.6
2.8 2.8
3.1 3.4
3.7 1.6
1.9 2.2
2.4 2.5
2.5 2.2
2.0 2.0
1.9 1.8
1.8 1.8
1.8 1.9
2.1 2.3
2.7 2.7
2.7 3.0
3.3 3.6
3.6 1.5
2.0 2.4
2.7 2.8
2.7 2.3
2.0 1.9
1.9 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.5
2.9 2.9
2.8 3.0
3.2 3.1
3.2 2.5
2.9 3.0
2.9 2.5
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.4 2.7
3.0 3.1
2.8 2.8
2.9 2.9
2.7 2.5
2.5 2.1
1.8 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.2
2.5 2.8
3.0 3.1
2.9 2.7
2.7 2.5
2.1 1.3
1.8 1.7
1.6 1.7
1.8 1.9
1.9 2.0
2.2 2.3
2.5 2.8
3.0 3.1
2.9 2.6
2.6 2.3
1.8 1.6
1.7 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.6 2.8
3.0 3.0
2.9 2.7
2.5 1.8
1.7 1.8
2.0 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.5 2.8
3.0 3.1
3.0 2.9
2.7 2.5
1.9 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.8 3.0
3.1 3.0
2.9 2.9
2.8 2.3
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.4
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.7
3.0 3.0
2.8 3.0
3.0 3.1
2.9 2.6
2.5 2.5
2.4 2.5
2.6 2.4
2.3 2.2
2.4 2.6
2.9 2.8
2.8 2.9
3.0 3.3
2.8 2.6
2.5 2.4
2.5 2.6
2.4 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.6 2.8
2.8 2.6
2.8 2.8
3.1 2.9
2.6 2.5
2.4 2.5
2.6 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.6
2.8 2.8
2.5 2.6
2.6 2.7
2.5 2.4
2.4 2.3
2.5 2.6
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.4
2.6 2.8
2.7 2.5
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.5
2.4 2.4
2.5 2.6
2.7 2.7
2.5 2.3
2.1 2.0
1.7 1.8
2.0 2.1
2.4 2.5
2.5 2.5
2.4 2.5
2.5 2.7
2.7 2.6
2.3 2.0
1.9 1.2
1.5 1.6
1.8 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.4 2.4
2.4 2.4
2.5 2.6
2.7 2.6
2.3 2.0
1.9 1.6
1.1 1.5
1.5 1.8
2.0 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.4
2.4 2.5
2.6 2.7
2.6 2.3
2.0 1.9
1.5 1.5
1.7 2.0
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.4
2.5 2.7
2.7 2.6
2.3 2.1
2.0 1.5
1.5 1.7
2.0 2.2
2.3 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.7 2.7
2.6 2.3
2.2 2.1
1.5 1.5
1.6 1.9
2.1 2.2
2.1 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.5 2.7
2.8 2.6
2.3 2.4
2.4 2.2
1.5 1.5
1.7 1.9
2.0 2.1
2.1 2.0
2.1 2.2
2.3 2.6
2.7 2.5
2.4 2.6
2.7 2.7
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.9
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.2 2.4
2.5 2.4
2.4 2.6
2.8 2.9
1.6 1.7
1.9 2.0
2.2 2.2
2.1 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.4
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.7
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.4
2.5 2.3
2.1 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.3
2.3 2.2
2.4 2.5
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.3
2.3 2.2
2.0 1.9
1.9 2.8
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.4
2.5 2.2
2.1 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.2 2.2
2.1 1.9
1.8 1.7
2.8 2.5
2.4 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.3 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.1
1.9 1.8
1.6 1.4
2.4 2.3
2.3 2.2
2.5 2.6
2.4 2.2
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.1
1.9 1.7
1.6 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.2 2.4
2.5 2.4
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.1 1.9
1.7 1.6
1.6 1.7
1.9 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.2
1.9 1.6
1.6 1.5
1.6 1.8
2.0 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.4
2.2 1.9
1.6 1.7
1.5 1.5
1.7 1.9
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.4 2.2
1.9 1.7
1.7 1.5
1.5 1.6
1.9 2.1
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.5
2.2 2.0
1.9 1.9
1.5 1.5
1.5 1.6
1.9 2.1
2.2 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.6
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
1.9 1.4
1.4 1.5
1.8 2.0
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.2 2.4
2.6 2.5
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.7
1.4 1.4
1.6 1.8
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.2
2.4 2.5
2.4 2.4
2.5 2.6
2.9 1.4
1.5 1.7
1.8 2.0
2.1 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.5 2.4
2.2 2.4
2.5 2.6
1.6 1.7
1.8 1.9
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.3 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.3
2.4 2.2
2.1 2.0
2.0 2.2
2.2 2.1
1.9 1.8
1.7 1.7
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.2 2.0
1.9 1.9
1.9 1.9
1.9 1.7
1.5 1.4
1.3 1.0
2.1 2.8
2.5 2.4
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.1
1.9 1.7
1.7 1.6
1.7 1.7
1.5 1.4
1.2 1.2
2.2 2.7
2.5 2.4
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.1
1.8 1.6
1.5 1.5
1.5 1.5
1.4 1.2
1.1 1.2
0.6 0.8
0.9 1.9
2.3 2.2
2.1 2.0
2.2 2.3
2.0 1.7
1.6 1.4
1.4 1.4
1.3 1.2
1.1 1.2
1.4 1.4
1.5 1.8
1.9 1.6
1.3 1.2
1.2 1.5
1.8 1.9
1.6 1.3
1.0 1.0
1.2 1.5
1.7 1.7
1.3 0.9
0.6 0.4
0.5 0.8
1.4 1.8
1.8 1.8
1.9 2.0
2.1 1.9
1.6 1.5
1.4 1.3
1.2 1.1
1.1 1.0
1.2 1.4
1.6 1.9
2.3 2.4
2.1 1.7
1.5 1.6
1.9 2.3
2.4 2.1
1.7 1.4
1.3 1.5
1.9 2.3
2.2 1.8
1.2 0.8
0.3 0.4
0.5 1.0
1.4 1.4
1.5 1.6
1.8 1.8
1.6 1.5
1.3 1.2
1.1 1.0
0.9 0.9
0.9 1.0
1.3 1.4
1.7 2.0
2.0 1.8
1.6 1.4
1.5 1.7
1.9 2.0
1.8 1.5
1.3 1.3
1.4 1.7
1.9 1.9
1.5 1.1
0.8 0.2
0.3 0.4
0.8 1.1
1.2 1.3
1.5 1.6
1.5 1.4
1.3 1.2
1.1 1.0
0.9 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.8 0.9
1.0 1.2
1.3 1.4
1.3 1.1
1.1 1.1
1.2 1.4
1.4 1.3
1.1 1.0
1.0 1.1
1.2 1.3
1.3 1.1
0.8 0.6
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.7
1.0 1.0
1.1 1.3
1.3 1.3
1.2 1.1
1.0 0.9
0.8 0.7
0.6 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.6
0.7 0.8
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.7 0.7
0.8 0.8
0.8 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.5
0.4 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.5 0.8
0.8 0.9
1.0 1.1
1.1 1.0
0.9 0.8
0.7 0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.2 0.4
0.7 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.4
0.4 0.3
0.3 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.3 0.5
0.5 0.5
0.6 0.6
0.7 0.6
0.6 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.4
0.4 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.3 0.2
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.2
0.2 169 336
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.1
0.2 0.2
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.2
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.2
0.3 0.4
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.3
0.2 0.3
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.3
0.3 0.3
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.6
0.5 0.4
0.3 0.4
0.5 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.6 0.5
0.5 0.5
0.8 1.0
0.9 0.8
0.7 0.6
0.6 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.9
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.9
1.1 1.3
1.2 1.0
1.0 0.9
0.9 0.8
0.7 0.5
0.6 0.6
0.6 0.8
1.0 1.3
0.8 1.3
1.8 2.0
1.6 1.4
1.3 1.2
1.2 1.1
1.0 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.6
0.6 0.8
0.9 1.1
1.6 2.6
2.4 2.4
1.9 1.7
1.6 1.6
1.5 1.3
1.2 1.0
0.8 0.7
0.8 0.8
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.6
0.6 0.6
0.7 1.0
1.6 2.8
3.4 3.1
2.6 2.3
2.0 1.9
1.9 1.8
1.6 1.5
1.4 1.3
1.1 1.0
1.1 1.2
1.2 0.5
0.5 0.7
0.8 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.9 1.5
2.4 3.2
3.3 3.1
2.9 2.5
2.3 2.2
2.1 1.9
1.8 1.7
1.6 1.6
1.6 1.7
2.0 2.2
2.4 1.2
0.5 0.5
0.6 0.9
1.0 1.0
1.0 1.1
1.5 2.1
2.7 2.9
3.1 3.1
2.9 2.6
2.6 2.5
2.3 2.0
1.8 1.7
1.6 1.6
1.6 1.8
2.1 2.5
2.9 3.0
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.8
1.1 1.3
1.1 1.3
2.0 2.4
2.5 2.6
2.8 3.0
3.1 2.9
2.8 2.7
2.6 2.3
2.1 1.9
1.9 1.8
1.8 1.8
1.9 2.2
2.5 2.7
2.8 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
1.1 0.8
0.8 2.5
2.9 2.9
2.7 2.7
2.9 3.1
3.1 3.1
3.0 2.8
2.4 2.2
2.0 2.0
1.9 1.9
1.9 1.9
2.0 2.1
2.4 2.6
2.5 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.5 0.6
0.9 1.3
2.6 3.2
3.3 3.1
2.9 2.9
3.1 3.2
3.2 3.2
3.0 2.6
2.3 2.1
2.0 1.9
1.9 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.2 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.7 1.0
2.0 2.9
3.4 3.3
3.2 3.0
3.1 3.3
3.3 3.2
3.1 2.8
2.5 2.2
2.0 1.9
1.9 1.9
1.8 1.9
2.0 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.1 2.2
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.5 0.6
0.7 1.4
2.3 2.9
3.1 3.2
3.0 3.0
3.3 3.4
3.3 3.1
2.9 2.7
2.4 2.1
1.9 1.8
1.8 1.8
1.7 1.7
1.9 2.1
2.2 2.1
2.2 2.2
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5
0.6 1.1
1.8 2.3
2.6 2.8
2.8 2.9
3.1 3.3
3.3 3.0
2.8 2.7
2.6 2.4
2.1 1.9
1.8 1.7
1.7 1.6
1.6 1.6
1.7 1.8
1.8 1.9
2.1 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.7 0.5
0.5 0.7
1.0 1.8
2.0 2.2
2.4 2.6
2.7 3.0
3.1 3.2
3.0 2.8
2.6 2.5
2.5 2.4
2.2 2.0
1.8 1.7
1.8 1.5
1.4 1.4
1.4 1.4
1.5 1.6
1.8 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.9 0.8
0.7 0.9
1.1 1.7
2.0 2.0
2.2 2.4
2.7 2.9
3.1 3.1
2.9 2.7
2.5 2.4
2.4 2.4
2.3 2.2
2.0 1.9
1.8 1.8
1.5 1.3
1.2 1.2
1.2 1.3
1.4 1.5
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.8
1.1 1.0
1.0 1.3
2.0 2.2
2.1 2.1
2.4 2.6
2.8 2.9
3.0 2.9
2.7 2.5
2.4 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.2
2.1 1.9
1.8 1.8
1.6 1.1
1.1 1.1
1.0 1.1
1.2 1.3
0.4 0.4
0.6 0.7
1.1 1.1
1.3 2.5
2.6 2.4
2.2 2.4
2.6 2.8
2.8 2.8
2.8 2.7
2.6 2.4
2.3 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.1
1.9 1.9
1.6 1.1
1.0 0.9
0.9 1.0
1.1 1.1
0.3 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.7 0.9
1.4 1.4
3.1 2.9
2.5 2.4
2.5 2.7
2.8 2.7
2.6 2.6
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.4
2.5 2.3
2.2 2.0
2.0 0.2
0.3 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.7 1.1
2.2 2.9
3.0 2.8
2.7 2.5
2.7 2.8
2.8 2.6
2.4 2.4
2.4 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.5 2.6
2.6 2.5
2.4 2.3
2.3 0.2
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.5 0.8
1.5 2.2
2.6 2.7
2.8 2.6
2.6 2.8
2.9 2.8
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.6
2.8 2.9
2.7 2.7
2.8 2.8
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.6 1.1
1.6 1.9
2.2 2.5
2.5 2.5
2.6 2.8
2.8 2.6
2.5 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.5 2.7
3.0 3.0
2.9 3.1
3.2 3.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.6 0.9
1.4 1.5
1.8 2.0
2.3 2.4
2.6 2.6
2.7 2.5
2.4 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.6
2.7 2.7
2.9 3.2
3.1 3.2
3.4 3.5
3.7 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.8 1.2
1.4 1.5
1.8 2.1
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.6
2.4 2.3
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.4
2.4 2.4
2.6 2.8
2.9 3.0
3.1 3.4
3.4 3.4
3.6 3.6
3.6 0.4
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
1.1 1.3
1.4 1.6
1.9 2.2
2.4 2.5
2.5 2.4
2.2 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.3 2.5
2.6 2.6
2.8 3.1
3.3 3.4
3.5 3.8
3.8 3.7
3.6 3.5
3.3 0.4
0.5 0.6
0.7 0.8
0.8 0.9
1.1 1.3
1.4 1.5
1.8 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.3 2.4
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.3
2.5 2.7
2.8 2.9
3.3 3.5
3.5 3.7
3.9 3.9
3.7 3.5
3.2 3.0
0.5 0.6
0.7 0.8
0.9 1.1
1.2 1.3
1.4 1.5
1.7 1.9
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.1
2.0 1.9
1.9 2.1
2.3 2.5
2.8 2.9
3.1 3.4
3.6 3.4
3.5 3.6
3.7 3.6
3.3 3.0
2.7 0.6
0.7 0.8
0.9 1.1
1.3 1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.9
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.0 2.0
1.9 2.0
2.1 2.3
2.6 2.9
3.0 3.1
3.3 3.6
3.2 3.4
3.6 3.6
3.4 3.1
2.7 2.5
0.8 0.9
1.1 1.3
1.5 1.8
1.9 1.9
2.0 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
2.0 1.9
1.9 2.0
2.2 2.4
2.7 2.9
2.9 3.1
3.3 3.6
3.4 3.6
3.8 3.7
3.4 2.9
2.4 2.1
0.9 1.1
1.2 1.5
1.7 2.0
2.1 2.1
2.2 2.4
2.4 2.3
2.2 2.1
2.0 2.0
1.9 1.9
1.9 2.1
2.3 2.7
3.0 3.0
3.1 3.2
3.5 3.9
3.7 3.8
3.9 3.9
3.5 2.8
2.3 2.0
1.1 1.3
1.5 1.7
1.9 2.0
2.1 2.2
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.2
2.1 2.0
1.9 1.8
1.8 1.9
2.1 2.3
2.8 3.0
3.1 3.3
3.6 4.0
4.0 4.1
4.0 2.2
1.8 1.3
1.4 1.6
1.8 2.0
2.2 2.2
2.2 2.2
2.1 2.0
2.0 1.9
1.8 1.8
1.8 1.8
2.0 2.3
2.6 2.8
2.8 3.1
3.4 3.7
1.1 1.3
1.6 1.9
2.2 2.4
2.5 2.5
2.2 2.0
2.0 1.9
1.8 1.8
1.8 1.8
1.9 2.1
2.3 2.7
2.7 2.7
3.0 3.3
3.6 3.6
1.2 1.5
2.0 2.4
2.7 2.8
2.7 2.3
2.0 1.9
1.9 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.5
2.9 2.9
2.8 3.0
3.2 3.1
3.2 2.5
2.9 3.0
2.9 2.5
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.4 2.7
3.0 3.1
2.8 2.8
2.9 2.9
2.7 2.5
2.5 2.1
1.8 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.0
2.1 2.2
2.5 2.8
3.0 3.1
2.9 2.7
2.7 2.5
2.1 1.3
1.8 1.7
1.6 1.7
1.8 1.9
1.9 2.0
2.2 2.3
2.5 2.8
3.0 3.1
2.9 2.6
2.6 2.3
1.8 1.6
1.7 1.9
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.4
2.6 2.8
3.0 3.0
2.9 2.7
2.5 1.8
1.7 1.8
2.0 2.1
2.1 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.5 2.8
3.0 3.1
3.0 2.9
2.7 2.5
1.9 2.0
2.0 2.1
2.3 2.3
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.5
2.8 3.0
3.1 3.0
2.9 2.9
2.8 2.3
2.2 2.2
2.3 2.4
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.7
3.0 3.0
2.8 3.0
3.0 3.1
2.9 2.6
2.5 2.5
2.4 2.5
2.6 2.4
2.3 2.2
2.4 2.6
2.9 2.8
2.8 2.9
3.0 3.3
2.8 2.6
2.5 2.4
2.5 2.6
2.4 2.2
2.2 2.3
2.6 2.8
2.8 2.6
2.8 2.8
3.1 2.9
2.6 2.5
2.4 2.5
2.6 2.4
2.3 2.3
2.4 2.6
2.8 2.8
2.5 2.6
2.6 2.7
2.5 2.4
2.4 2.3
2.5 2.6
2.5 2.4
2.3 2.4
2.6 2.8
2.7 2.5
2.3 2.3
2.3 170 337
171 338
172 339
173 340
174 341
175 342
176 343
1 Planning Commission Issues and Responses 6-23-22
Issue Response Relevant Details Comment Plan Sheet
Ref.
Lot 1 (3bdm.
apartments)
1. Setback from
Car wash
Detail added:
setback is
sufficient
1. Current setback is 97
ft from car wash which
is notably more than
Terrace project
setback (83 ft)
2. Grade differential
(20 ft) and landscaping
provide adequate
buffer.
3. Setback expands
from 3 ft to 11.5 ft at
midpoint of apartment
building, and greater
beyond that.
4. Setback averages
11.5 feet.
1. Any concern about
future development
of car wash site
would appropriately
be considered with
any such future
project.
2. Setback could be
increased to 10 ft.
with “Option B”
under item 3, below.
New
Neighborhood
plan: PC-1
2. Parking:
sufficiency of
parking/shared
parking
Add condition
of approval
requiring a
shared parking
agreement if
either lot is
sold separately
1. Each 3-bdrm
apartment has 2
garage spaces, with
another 18 spaces
available collectively.
2. Lots 1 and 2 will be
under one ownership.
3. All units are
apartments – no condo
map or ownership.
Property
management can
establish rules and
lease terms to
manage parking.
PC -1
3. Unit Size:
consideration of
smaller units
No Change; or
Plan B Option
1. Project apartment
mix includes 22
studio/1bdm, 22
2bdm, and 8 3bdm
apartments.
2. Plan B Option would
replace one 3bdm with
a 2bdm in apartment.
1. Part of “missing
middle” housing
need is for 3bdm
apartments for
families needing
more rooms.
2. Plan B option
would increase side
setback to 10 ft.
minimum at car wash
boundary
A5.0 and A5.1
(Plan B
Option)
177 344
2 Issue Response Relevant Details Comment Plan Sheet
Ref.
Lot 2
Commercial
Mixed Use
1. Parking Stall
Dimensions
Detail added:
drawings have
been clarified
1. Parking meets city
standard of 17 ft with
3ft overhang.
2. Shop front variation
adds additional
pedestrian area
Sidewalk width is 9ft
minimum excluding
overhang; plus added
width at entryways
A6.0 rev.
2. Shared
Parking
Add condition
of approval re
shared parking
agreement if
either parcel is
sold separately
1. Parking provided
meets city standards
2. Some retail parking
is in first level of
mixed-use building
3. Excess parking on
Lot 1 available
Any parking issues
can and will be
addressed by
property
management
PC-1; A6.0
rev.
3. Enhanced
Parking Lot
Design:
softening
Add condition
of approval to
include
storefront
planting and
auto irrigation
as appropriate
consistent with
retail needs
1. Storefronts have
entry areas which
provide variety,
interest, and increased
window display area.
2. Property manager
will work with
shopkeepers to
implement.
Retailers typically
design and install
landscaping as part
of entry theme and
products sold.
A4.1 rev.;
A6.0 rev.; L1
(landscape
plan)
4. Rooftop
Private Open
Space: Concern
re neighborhood
impact
Plan
clarification:
open area is
passive open
space – not
active or
shared
1. “Rooftop” area of
concern is 25 ft feet
below the roof peak (is
on floor of first
apartment level above
the parking.)
2. Apartments have
private open space,
either balconies on
upper level or patios
on the lower level
below (with the open
space area of concern.)
Landscaping can be
added
A3.5 rev. (see
elevation/sect
ion ‘A’); A3.2;
A6.1
5. Architectural
enhancements
Plan revision
shows mural
on east wall of
mixed-use
building.
1. Extensive tree
planting (Urban Forest
theme) and
landscaping on street
facing side of Building
B screens building.
Service driveway
planting was
eliminated for fire
access. Mural will
provide a good
substitute.
A4.1 rev.; Site
Plan; L1
Landscape
plan; revised
elevation with
mural (A3.5)
178 345
3 6. Circulation:
Review for truck
loading impacts
Detail added:
clarification v/v
added plan
sheet
illustrating
truck
movement
1. Engineering review
confirmed truck
maneuvering is
workable.
2. Cars have 20+ feet
road width to pass a
parked truck in loading
zone in either
direction.
3. Queuing space for
several cars is available
out of the Mt. Hermon
travel lane even with a
bus in the pullout.
3. CEQA mitigation
measure will be
implemented v/v any
transit district
potential future use of
bus pullout
Any delays due to
truck maneuvering
will be short-lived
and are typical for
this type of urban
design.
C1.0 Turning
Exhibit
7. Trash Bin
Location: Review
for impact on
adjacent parcel
Detail added:
plan
clarification
showing
setback,
landscaping,
and grade
differential
1. Trash enclosure is 46
feet from property
line, separated by a
wall and landscaping.
2. Roof over enclosure
limits exposure
Neighboring house
was built close to
property line.
A3.5 rev. East
elevation; site
plan
8. Redwoods on
adjacent parcel:
concern for root
impact and
stability
Review letter
from arborist
1. Minimal grading at
that location – 12” +/-.
2. New building
setback exceeds root
zone.
A3.5 rev.;
review letter
9. Parking
Structure
Venting:
Neighbor
concerns re
potential impact
of exhaust
fumes
Review of
details
1. No mechanical
venting is anticipated
2. Open flow (grated)
garage doors and other
passive ventilation
obviates any problem
Regulated by State
building codes to
prevent impacts
A3.5 rev. west
elevation
179 346
CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831-440-5630
MEETING LOCATION
City Council Chambers
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
Remote Access Only
POSTING: The agenda was
posted on May 6, 2022, at
City Hall and on the Internet at
www.scottsvalley.org.
Appointed Officials City Staff Members
Lori Gentile, Chair
Chuck Maffia, Vice Chair
David Hodgin, Commissioner
Steven Horlock, Commissioner
Shawn Mosley, Commissioner
Taylor Bateman, Community Development Director
Olivia Beers, Assistant Planner
Jonathan Kwan, Contract Planner
Susie Pineda, Contract Planner
Lauren Lambert, Deputy City Clerk
CALL TO ORDER: 6:04pm
ROLL CALL: Present: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
ALTERATIONS TO CONSENT AGENDA: None
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Approve the Action Meeting Minutes from the following meetings:
a. August 12, 2021
b. September 9, 2021
c. October 21, 2021
d. December 9, 2021
e. February 24, 2022
f. March 10, 2022,
g. March 24, 2022
h. May 12, 2022
M/S: Maffia/ Mosley
To approve the Consent Agenda.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
Minutes
Scotts Valley Planning Commission
Meeting was Remote Access Only
Date: June 9, 2022
Time: 6:00 PM
347
City of Scotts Valley Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2 Date: June 9, 2022
ALTERATIONS TO REGULAR AGENDA: Move the regular agenda first.
M/S: Maffia/Mosley
To move the regular agenda first.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
REGULAR AGENDA
1. Proposed Project: Capital Improvement Program for FY2022/23-2026/27 Location: City-wide
Applicant & Property Owner: City of Scotts Valley
Project Description: State law requires cities to adopt a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to implement the cities’ General Plan. The CIP is a list of the proposed public works projects. The City’s Public Works Department develops the CIP as a 5-year program and updates the program each year. By law, the Planning Commission must review the CIP for consistency with the General Plan.
Staff: Chris Lamm, Public Works Director, [email protected] M/S: Hodgin/Maffia
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
ALTERATIONS TO PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA: None
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA:
2. Proposed Project: Lloyd’s Tires Office Trailer
Location: 5310E Scotts Valley Drive / APN 022-042-08
Planning Permit Application: Design Review DR22-005
Applicant & Property Owner: Courtney Hughes & Steve Bogner Project Description: Consideration of a Design Review application to legalize an existing, unpermitted 317 square foot office trailer with an attached, unpermitted, 103 square foot deck.
Staff Planner: Jonathan Kwan, Contract Planner, [email protected] M/S: Horlock/ Hodgin
To approve Resolution No. 1773 for DR22-005 for the Lloyd’s Tires Office Trailer at 5310E Scotts Valley Drive.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
3. Proposed Project: Oak Creek Park
Location: Intersection of Mount Hermon Road and Glen Canyon Road / APN 022-162-76
Planning Permit Application: Environmental Impact report EIR19-004 348
City of Scotts Valley Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 2 Date: June 9, 2022
General Plan Amendment GPA18-001
Zone Change ZC18-001
Planned Development PD18-002
Minor Land Division MLD18-003
Design Review DR18-007
Applicant & Property Owner: Charlie Eadie & Granum Partners Project Description: Consideration of an Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change, Planned Development Zoning and Planned Development Permit, Design Review application and a Minor Land Division to allow for the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development on a 3.56-acre site at the intersection of Glen Canyon and Mt.
Hermon Road. Project land uses include 24,973 square feet of commercial, eight townhomes, and 44 apartments
Staff Planner: Susie Pineda, Contract Planner, [email protected] M/S: Maffia/Horlock
To direct the applicant to work with staff to address the following items and bring the revised project back to the Planning Commission with a resolution for consideration.
Lot 1
a. Setbacks of the townhomes
b. Parking
c. Size of the units
Lot 2
a. Reduced Parking Dimensions
b. Shared Parking
c. Enhanced Parking Lot Design
d. Private open space regarding rooftop screening from neighbors e. Architectural enhancements
f. Circulation and parking
g. Trash bin location
h. Redwoods behind the buildings
i. Parking Garage Venting
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
DISCUSSION ITEMS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – FOR INFORMATION ONLY: None
DIRECTOR UPDATES: None
ADJOURNMENT: 9:34pm
349
CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831-440-5630
MEETING LOCATION
Zoom Videoconference
Remote Access Only
POSTING: The agenda was
posted on 9/02/22, at
City Hall and on the Internet at
www.scottsvalley.org.
Appointed Officials City Staff Members
Lori Gentile, Chair
Chuck Maffia, Vice Chair
David Hodgin, Commissioner
Steven Horlock, Commissioner
Shawn Mosley, Commissioner
Taylor Bateman, Community Development Director
Susie Pineda, Contract Planner
Lauren Lambert, Deputy City Clerk
CALL TO ORDER: 6:06 PM
ROLL CALL: Present: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
PUBLIC COMMENT: No one came forward
ALTERATIONS TO CONSENT AGENDA: None
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Approve the Action Meeting Minutes from the following meetings:
a. August 11, 2021
M/S: Mosley/Horlock
To approve the Consent Agenda.
Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
ALTERATIONS TO PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA: None
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA:
1. Proposed Project: Oak Creek Park
Location: Intersection of Mount Hermon Road and Glen Canyon Road / APN 022-162-76
Minutes
Scotts Valley Planning Commission
Meeting was Remote Access Only
Date: September 8, 2022
Time: 6:00 PM
350
City of Scotts Valley Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2 Date: September 8, 2022
Planning Permit Application: Environmental Impact report EIR19-004 General Plan Amendment GPA18-001
Zone Change ZC18-001
Planned Development PD18-002
Minor Land Division MLD18-003
Design Review DR18-007
Applicant & Property Owner: Charlie Eadie & Granum Partners Project Description: Consideration of an Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change, Planned Development Zoning and Planned Development Permit, Design Review application and a Minor Land Division to allow for the construction of a mixed use commercial and residential development on a 3.56-acre site at the intersection of Glen Canyon and Mt.
Hermon Road. Project land uses include 24,973 square feet of commercial, eight townhomes, and 44 apartments
Staff Planner: Susie Pineda, Contract Planner, [email protected] Public Comment:
Henry Hooker, member of Santa Cruz YIMBY, spoke in favor of the Oak Creek Park Project
Patrick Shay, Scotts Valley resident, spoke on concerns regarding his redwood trees in proximity to the back of building A on lot 1. Mr. Shay also spoke on concerns regarding the underground springs in the area, the location of the trash bins, and the parking lot ventilation.
Linda Kerner, speaking on behalf of Affordable Housing Now, spoke in favor of the Oak Creek Park Project regarding the housing that is needed in Scotts Valley M/S: Horlock/Mosley
The Planning Commission added the following Conditions of Approval:
• Amendment to the condition regarding the neighboring trees to include other trees along the shared property line that may be impacted by the grading plan as determined by the arborist for the project. • Adding trees to the parking area.
The Planning Commission also recommends the City Council consider:
• Sufficiency of the common space areas on the roof top • The architectural appearance of the first commercial building on Glen Cayon and Mt. Hermon Road while the landscaping is maturing Carried: 5-0-0
Ayes: Gentile, Hodgin, Horlock, Maffia, and Mosley
Noes: None
DISCUSSION ITEMS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – FOR INFORMATION ONLY: None
DIRECTOR UPDATES: None
ADJOURNMENT: 7:05 PM
351
352
From: Henry Hooker <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 12:58 PM
To: Jim Reed (EXT) <[email protected]>; Randy Johnson (EXT) <[email protected]>; Donna Lind (EXT) <[email protected]>; SVCH-cityhall <[email protected]>; Jack Dilles <[email protected]>; Derek Timm <[email protected]> Subject: Oak Creek Housing Project
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Esteemed Scotts Valley City Council Members,
I write in support of the Oak Creek Project coming before you on December 7. This is a project that deserves your support, and should be approved without further delays or modifications. The affordable homes are a huge benefit to the community, as are the market rate homes. All will help Scotts Valley achieve its RHNA goals, and provide housing opportunities for people trying to find housing in our area. Please approve this next step forward.
Respectfully,
Henry Hooker
Santa Cruz
353
From: Daniel Rodriguez Ramirez <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 4:03 PM
To: Jim Reed (EXT) <[email protected]>; Randy Johnson (EXT) <[email protected]>; Donna Lind (EXT) <[email protected]>; SVCH-cityhall <[email protected]>; Jack Dilles <[email protected]>; Derek Timm <[email protected]> Subject: In support of Oak Creek Project
CyAs Tech
Warning: Sender [email protected] is not yet trusted by your organization.
Please be careful before replying or clicking on the URLs.
Report This Email Mark Safe
powered by Graphus®
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Scotts Valley City Council,
I support the Oak Creek Project proposed in Scotts Valley. Scotts Valley is WAY behind in meeting RHNA goals for affordable homes of varying levels, including having 0% progress in very-low homes. All the homes, but especially the 8 affordable homes included in this project are much needed. Please move this project forward.
Be well,
Daniel
Daniel Rodriguez Ramirez, M.Ed.
Ph.D. Candidate in Social Psychology
Community Psychology Research and Action Team
Emphasis in Latin American and Latino Studies (LALS)
Graduate Student Researcher on yPAR project We Belong Too University of California Santa Cruz
[email protected]
Pronouns: he/they (click here to know more about this)
354
ARBORIST REPORTTree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan Oak Creek Park
3640 Glen Canyon Road
Scotts Valley, CA
APN: 022-162-76
11/10/2022
Prepared for:
Eadie Consultants
877 Cedar Street #248
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Prepared by:
ISA Certified Arborist WE0681A
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification
355
Table of Contents SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 1 Background .................................................................................................................... 1 Assignment .................................................................................................................... 1 Limits of the Assignment................................................................................................ 2 Purpose and use of the report ....................................................................................... 2 Resources...................................................................................................................... 2 OBSERVATIONS....................................................................................................................3-6 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................. 7 Species List.................................................................................................................... 7 Tree Evaluation and Recording Methods ...................................................................... 7 Condition Rating ............................................................................................................ 8 Suitability for Preservation ............................................................................................. 8 Tree Protection Zone ..................................................................................................... 9 Critical Root Zone .......................................................................................................... 9 Root Disturbance Distance…………………………………………………………………10
Impacts to Subject Trees ……………………….....………………………………………11-12 Tree Protection Specifications…………………………………………………………….
Tree Replacement..………………………………………......………………………………….…………………………..……13 Certificate of Performance…………………………………………………………….……14
CONCLUSION …………………………….……………………………………………………………….……………….15 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 356
Attachments: Appendix A - I
Appendix A – Tree Assessment Chart
Appendix B – Criteria for Tree Assessment Chart
Appendix C – Sheet T1 – Tree Protection Plan
Appendix D – Tree Appraisal Chart
Appendix E – Arborist Report by Maureen Hamb, Dated 7/2018 Appendix F – Glossary of Terms
Appendix G - Bibliography
Appendix H - Tree Protection Guidelines & Restrictions
Protecting Trees During Construction
Project Arborist Duties & Inspection Schedule
Tree Protection Fencing
Tree Protection Signs
Monitoring
Root Pruning
Tree Work Standards & Qualifications
City of Scotts Valley Protected Trees
Appendix I - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions
357
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 1
SUMMARY
This report provides the following information:
1. A summary of the health and structural condition of 15 trees.
2. An evaluation of anticipated construction impacts to the trees.
3. Recommendations for retention or removal of assessed trees based on their condition and anticipated construction impacts
4. Appraised value of Protected, impacted trees, to determine a tree protection security deposit.
The Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A is the condensed reference guide to inform all tree management decisions for the trees evaluated.
A mixed-use project is proposed for a 3 ½ acre parcel at Mt. Herman & Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley.
Fifteen trees growing on adjacent properties, and defined as Protected Trees, by the City of Scotts Valley, were surveyed.
The Protected Trees are in good or fair condition and are suitable for preservation. The Protected Trees will have low or moderate construction impacts and can be incorporated into the project.
Four of the fifteen Protected Trees will have moderate impacts and will require mitigation methods to reduce construction impacts.
Data Summary
General
Total Trees Inventoried Count
Total 15
Species (3)
coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 8
ash (Fraxinus spp.) 6
coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) 1
Regulated Trees
Protected Trees
All trees 13” or greater trunk diameter 15
Tree Disposition Categories – All Trees
R.I. – Remove due to construction impacts 0
R.C. – Remove due to condition (poor condition) 0
R.T., I.M. - Retain tree. Preservable, low or moderate impacts that can be mitigated. 15 358
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 2
Background
Plans for this project have been submitted to the City of Scotts Valley Planning Department and received preliminary review. As a condition of the review process, Eadie Consultants has requested my services, to assess the condition of 15 trees growing on properties adjacent to the applicant’s property, and the construction impacts that may affect them. Further, to provide a report with my findings and recommendations to meet City of Scotts Valley planning requirements.
A tree resource evaluation and project impact analysis report, regarding trees on the project site was completed by arborist Mareen Hamb on 7/2018. For reference, the Hamb report is attached to this report. Since the date of that report, refinements have been made to the proposed development. Off-site trees growing on adjacent private properties not included in the earlier arborist report are evaluated in this report.
This report contains anticipated construction impacts to these off-site trees based on the latest plan set.
Final recommendations for retention or removal of all trees (from both arborist reports), based on refinements in the current plan set, but not developed at the time of the original arborist report, are included in this report.
Assignment
Provide an arborist report that includes an assessment of the trees within the project area. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter, height and canopy spread), condition (health and structure), suitability for preservation ratings. Review preliminary development plans assess potential impacts to trees, provide recommendations for retention or removal, and specify tree protection mitigation treatments for impacted trees that will be retained. Provide valuations of impacted trees to calculate a tree security deposit.
To complete this assignment, the following services were performed:
Tree Resource Evaluation: Inventory, evaluate and assign suitability for preservation ratings for subject trees.
Plan Review: Reviewed provided plans including: Plan Set, Architectural, Civil & Landscape Plan, reviewed in July and September of 2022 by Planning Commission, and recommended to City Council for approval.
Construction Impact Assessment: Combine tree resource data with anticipated construction impacts, to provide recommendations for removal or retention of trees. Tree Protection Plan: Develop tree protection specifications to mitigate anticipated impacts to retained trees.
Mapping: Tree locations were plotted onto: Sheet 3.1 Grading Plan, and a Sheet T1, Tree Protection Plan, was created.
359
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 3
Limits of the Assignment
The information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection on 9/16/2022 & 11/3/2022.
The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without climbing, dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the trees in questions may not arise in the future.
Purpose and use of the report
The report is intended to identify all the trees within the plan area that could be affected by a project. The report is to be used by the developer, their agents, and the City of Scotts Valley as a reference for existing tree conditions and to help satisfy the City of Scotts Valley planning requirements.
Resources
All information within this report is based on site plans as of the date of this report. Resources are as follows:
Plan Set, Architectural, Civil & Landscape Plan, reviewed in July and September of 2022 by Planning Commission, and recommended to City Council for approval. Landscape Plan, Sheet L, by Ellen Cooper
Site Visit, Tree Inventory & Condition Evaluation at 3640 Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley on 9/16/2022 & 11/3/2022.
City of Scotts Valley Municipal Code –Section 17.44.080 Tree Protection Regulations (applicable sections).
Guide for Plant Appraisal 10th Edition
.
360
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 4
OBSERVATIONS
The undeveloped 3 ½ acre parcel borders existing commercial and residential areas, (Image #1).
Image #1 - Aerial image of 3 ½ acre parcel, with project boundaries.
I surveyed fifteen trees defined as Protected trees according to City of Scotts Valley ordinance.
They meet City ordinance criteria:
E. Any single-trunk tree greater than or equal to 13-inch diameter (40-inch circumference). 361
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 5
The trees I surveyed grow on adjacent properties. Three species were surveyed including a row of coast redwood and a row of ash and one coast live oak.
Trees T2-A through T9-A include a row of eight maturing to mature coast redwoods that grow in the backyards of properties uphill and to the east, but outside the project limits, (Image #2).
Image #2- Trees T2-A – T9-A, coast redwood, (circled). The eight coast redwoods grow off-site, east of project limits.
The coast redwoods have trunk diameters ranging from 16” to 48”. The tree canopies overhang the project limits from 5-10 feet.
The redwoods are well structured and in good condition.
T7
362
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 6
Trees T10-A through T15-A include six mature ash that grow in the backyard of a property uphill and to the east, but outside the project limits, (Image #3).
Image #3- Trees T10-A – T15-A, ash. The six ash grow off-site, east of project limits.
The ash trees have trunk diameters ranging from 18” to 30”. All of the ash are multi-trunked. All lower limb structure has been removed, reducing wind dampening, and increasing stress on trunk attachments during wind events. The tree canopies overhang the project limits from 15-18 feet.
Some of the co-dominant trunks have developed included bark1 . Overall, the ash are in fair
condition.
1 Included bark – Bark that becomes embedded in a union between co-dominant trunks. Lacks auxiliary wood and causes a weak structure.
363
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 7
One 15” diameter coast live oak grows on the adjacent commercial property, south of the project limits, (Image #4).
Image #4- Tree T1-A, coast live oak, (circled). The oak grows on the adjacent commercial property.
The oak is well structured and in good condition. Its canopy overhangs the project limits by 5 feet.
The remainder of the trees in this project are on-site trees and were assessed in the arborist report dated 7/2018.
364
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 8
DISCUSSION
The initial arborist report for this project Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis, by Maureen Hamb, dated July 2018, surveyed 17 trees and a grove of more than 200 acacia trees.
For this report, I surveyed an additional 15 trees, all located on adjacent properties.
Species List
Table 2 – Protected Trees
PROTECTED TREES
Common Name Botanical Name Count
coast redwood ` (Sequoia sempervirens) 8
ash (Fraxinus spp.) 6
coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) 1
coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) 1
Total Protected Tree Count 15
A complete species list can be found in the Tree Assessment Chart spreadsheet, Appendix A.
Tree Evaluation and Recording Methods
Site evaluations were made on 9/16/2022 & 11/3/2022. The inventory included some trees within the project limits, and some outside the project limits with canopies overhanging the project limits. The health and structural condition of each tree was assessed and recorded.
Based on the trees health and structural condition, each trees suitability for preservation was rated and recorded.
The recorded data is included in the Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A, of this report. Tree numbers were plotted on the attached Sheet T1, Tree Protection Plan. To correlate the data in the Tree Assessment Chart to the tree’s location on the site, refer to Appendix C, Sheet T1, Tree Protection Plan.
365
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 9
Condition Rating
A trees condition is determined by an assessing both the health and structure, then combining the two factors to reach a condition rating. Tree condition is rated as poor, fair or good. The quantity of trees assigned for each category (good, fair or poor), is indicated below:
Tree Condition Rating
Good - 9
Fair - 6
Poor - 0
Suitability for Preservation
A trees suitability for preservation is determined based on its health, structure, age, species characteristics and longevity using a scale of good, fair or poor. The quantity of trees assigned to each category (good, fair or poor), is listed below.
Suitability Rating
Good - 9
Fair – 6
Poor - 0
366
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 10
Tree Protection Zone
The tree protection zone (TPZ), is a defined area (radius from trunk), within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to minimize potential injury to designated trees during construction.
The size of the optimal TPZ can be determined by a formula based on 1) trunk diameter 2) species tolerance to construction impacts, and 3) tree age (Matheny, N. and Clark, J 1998). In some instances, tree drip line is used as the TPZ. Development constraints can also influence the final size of the tree protection zone.
Fencing is installed to delineate the (TPZ), and to protect tree roots, trunk, and scaffold branches from construction equipment. The fenced protection area may be smaller than the optimal or designated TPZ area in some circumstances. Tree protection may also involve the armoring of the tree trunk and/or scaffold limbs with barriers to prevent mechanical damage from construction equipment. See Tree Protection Guidelines & Restrictions – Appendix E.
Once the TPZ is delineated and fenced (prior to any site work, equipment and materials move in), construction activities are only to be permitted within the TPZ if allowed for and specified by the project arborist.
Where tree protection fencing cannot be used, or as an additional protection from heavy equipment, tree wrap may be used. Wooden slats at least one inch thick are to be bound securely, edge to edge, around the trunk. A single layer or more of orange plastic construction fencing is to be wrapped and secured around the outside of the wooden slats. Major scaffold limbs may require protection as determined by the City arborist or Project arborist. Straw wattle may also be used as a trunk wrap and secured with orange plastic fencing.
Data has been entered in the Tree Assessment Chart – Appendix A, which indicates the optimal Tree Protection Zone for each tree.
Additional general tree protection guidelines are included in Tree Protection Guidelines & Restrictions – Appendix G.
Critical Root Zone
The CRZ is the biological limit of a tree’s capacity to recover from root loss. It is “the area of soil around a tree where the minimum number of roots that are biologically essential to the structural stability and health of the tree are located. There are no universally accepted methods to calculate the CRZ.” (Clark, Metheny, Smiley, et al, The Tree Protection Zone & the Critical Root Zone, 12/2021). The methods utilized to determine the Critical Root Zone are varied and can be based on professional guidelines and/or industry standards. Criteria such as trunk diameter, tree age and vigor, species tolerance, tree architecture and existing site constraints are commonly used criteria.
Using this information, the arborist can find the distance from the trunk that should be protected per unit of trunk diameter. The CRZ does not always represent a radius around the tree. When necessary, the area can be offset or shaped in a manner that accepts tree canopy constraints or existing conditions.
367
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 11
Critical Root Zone, Continued:
For purposes of this report the CRZ is the minimum tolerable distance between the trunk, and excavation that requires root cutting. I have estimated it to be five times the trunk Diameter at Breast Height, (DBH is 4.5’ above grade). For example, if a tree has a one-foot trunk diameter, the CRZ extends to five feet from the trunk.
If encroachment into the CRZ or TPZ is required to retain the tree during development, the arborist must provide alternative construction methods or preconstruction treatments to reduce impacts.
Root Disturbance Distance
No one can estimate and predict with absolute certainty what distance from a tree, a soil disturbance such as excavation for construction should be, to ensure it will not significantly affect tree stability or health. Or to what degree, (low, moderate or high), a tree might be impacted. There are simply too many variables involved that we cannot see or anticipate.
However, three times the D.B.H. (diameter at breast height), is a widely accepted minimum used in the industry for root disturbance, on one side of the trunk, and is supported by several research studies including (Smiley, Fraedich & Hendrickson 2002, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories). This distance is often used during the design and planning phases of a project in order to estimate root loss due to construction activities. This distance is a guideline only and should be increased for trees with significant leans, decay or other structural problems.
The ISA, International Society of Arboriculture- Root Management (2017) publication recommends, “cutting roots at a distance greater than six times the trunk diameter (DBH) minimizes the likelihood of affecting both health and stability. This recommendation is given further direction by the companion publication, A.N.S.I. (American National Standard) A300 (Part 8)- 2013 Root Management, when roots are cut in a non-selective manner, i.e. in a straight line on one side of a tree. It says, if the cutting is “within six times the trunk diameter (DBH), mitigation shall be recommended”. Further, A.N.S.I. recommends the “minimum distance from the trunk for root cutting should be adjusted according to trunk diameter, species tolerance to root loss, tree age, health and site condition”.
In general, root cutting that occurs at a distance less than ten times the diameter of a tree should be undertaken by hand digging and hand (or Sawzall), root pruning. These methods help mitigate root loss impacts.
368
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 12
Construction Impacts to Trees
The trees surveyed in the initial arborist report dated 7/2018, are either within or very near the footprint of construction elements. Impacts will be high, the trees will not tolerate the anticipated root loss, and their removal will be necessary.
The fifteen trees surveyed in this report and growing on adjacent properties, will have low or moderate construction impacts that the trees can tolerate, and all 15 are suitable for retention.
A grading cut of 6” – 12” depth will be made within the critical root zone of coast redwood tree T9-A, ash trees T14-A and T15-A, and near the critical root zone of ash tree T13-A. The redwood and ash will suffer moderate root loss, which they can tolerate, and need tree protection treatments to reduce root loss impacts.
Between one to two feet of fill will be added within the canopy dripline of ash trees T6-A, T7-A, T8-A, and coast redwoods T7-A, T8-A and T9-A, which will not significantly affect these trees and impacts will be low.
Construction impacts to tree T1-A, coast live oak will be low.
No grading will occur immediately adjacent to trees T1-A – T6-A. Tree protection fencing will be required to protect these trees from construction activities. For the remainder of trees, the existing fencing will serve as the tree protection fencing.
Impact Level
Impact level rates the degree a tree may be impacted by construction activity and is primarily determined by how close the construction procedures occur to the tree. Construction impacts are rated as low, moderate, high. The quantity of trees assigned for each category (low, moderate, high), is indicated below:
Impact Rating
Low - 11
Moderate – 4
High - 0
Mitigation Measures for Retained Trees
The trees retained on this project may require some or all the following methods to protect them from the impacts described above and to minimize root loss during the construction phases. Tree Protection Fencing
Hand trenching.
Supervised root pruning.
369
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 13
Tree Protection Specifications & Recommended Sequence
(These specifications are included on the Tree Protection Plan, sheet T1) Demolition Phase:
1. Tree Removal – Remove all on- site trees. Use Best Management Practices of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), and the American National Standards Institute, Safety Requirements in Arboriculture Operations ANSI Z133-2017.
2. Tree Protection Fencing - Install Tree Protection Fencing, in location indicated on Tree Protection Plan Sheet T1, prior to beginning of demolition.
Construction Phase:
1. Grading - Use a ditch-witch trencher to pre-cut roots of trees T9-A, coast redwood and T13-A, T14-A and T15-A ash, before grading near the trees. The depth of the trenching shall be 18”. See Tree Protection Plan, sheet T1 for location. This procedure shall be performed under supervision of the Project Arborist. After ditch-witch trenching, roots shall be re- pruned by methods indicated on Tree Sheet T1, Tree Protection Plan, PreConstruction Root Pruning. 370
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 14
Tree Appraisal and Valuation
The City of Scotts Valley requires valuation of all retained, Protected Trees potentially affected by a construction project. The value of fifteen trees has been appraised. Reference includes, 1) Guide for Plant Appraisal 10th Edition.
The total appraised value of four impacted trees to be retained is $127,538. The criteria for appraisal are included in the attached spreadsheet, Appendix D, Appraised Value of Protected Trees – Reproduction Method/ Trunk Formula Technique.
The owner/applicant will be required to obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, a Tree Protection surety bond prior to obtaining Building Division permits. The total value of the security deposit will be $127,538
Summary - Total number of trees: 32 (on-site,17 and off-site,15).
Not including acacia grove.
Number of Protected trees: 24
Total appraised value of 15 impacted, retained trees: $127,538. Recommended security deposit: $127,538
Number of Protected trees requested for removal: Nine Tree Replacement
Nine (9) Protected trees are recommended for removal, due to anticipated construction impacts.
Compensation for tree removal necessary to construct the project include:
Preservation and protection of the retained trees during construction. Pre-construction treatments for specified trees.
Tree re-planting as specified in Sheet L, Landscape Plan.
The City of Scotts Valley recommends a minimum ratio of two trees are to be replanted (15 gallon or 24-inch box size), for every Protected tree removed. Therefore, if removals are approved, a total of 18 or more replacement trees is required.
A total of 140 trees are indicated on Sheet L, Landscape Plan by Ellen Cooper. This represents a replanting ratio of 15 trees replanted for every Protected tree removed. 371
Tree Survey, Impact Assessment & Protection Plan 11/10/2022 3640 Glen Canyon Road, APN:022-162-76 Page 16
CONCLUSION
The Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A is the condensed reference guide to inform all tree management decisions for the trees evaluated.
A mixed-use project is proposed for a 3 ½ acre parcel at Mt. Herman & Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley.
Fifteen trees growing on adjacent properties, and defined as Protected Trees, by the City of Scotts Valley, were surveyed.
The Protected Trees are in good or fair condition and are suitable for preservation. The Protected Trees will have low or moderate construction impacts and can be incorporated into the project.
Four of the fifteen Protected Trees, including trees T9-A coast redwood, and trees T13- A, T14-A and T15-A ash, will have moderate impacts and will require mitigation methods to reduce construction impacts.
Nine Protected Trees are recommended for removal including trees T7 and T9, London plane, T11- T16, coast live oak and T18, Ponderosa pine. One hundred forty trees are included in the Landscape Plan as compensation for the Protected Trees removed.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Obtain all necessary permits prior to removing or significantly altering any trees on site.
2. Remove all on-site trees as shown in Landscape Plan.
3. Follow tree protection specifications for all off-site trees as shown on Tree Protection Plan, sheet T1.
4. Plant replacement trees for Protected trees removed, as shown on Landscape Plan, Sheet L.
Respectfully submitted,
Kurt Fouts ISA Certified Arborist WE0681A
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification
372
Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter
@ 54
inches
a.g.
Protected
Tree
Crown
Height &
Spread
Health
Rating
Structural
Rating
Suitability for
Preservation
(Based Upon
Condition)
Tree
Protection
Zone (radius
from trunk)
Construction
Impacts
(Rating &
Description)
Retention
or
Removal
Code
Comments
T1-A
coast live oak
(Quercus agrifolia ) 15" Yes 40'x30' Good Good Good 20' Low R.T 10' from property line T2-A
coast redwood
(Sequoia
sempervirens)
24" Yes 60'X15' Good Good Good 20' Low R.T 5' from fence line T3-A coast redwood 16" Yes 40'x15' Good Good Good 15' Low R.T 6' from fence line T4-A coast redwood 18" Yes 40'x15' Good Good Good 15' Low R.T < 1' from fence line 1 of 2 11/10/2022
Poor: Trees in poor health and/or with poor structure that cannot be effectively abated with treatment
Suitability for Preservation Ratings: Tree Disposition Code:
Good: Trees in good health and structural condition with potential for longevity on the site
Fair: Trees in fair health and/or with structural defects that may be reduced with treatment procedures
RT: Retain Tree
RI: Remove Due to Construction Impacts
I.M. Impacts Can Be Mitigated With Pre-Construction Treatments R.C. Remove Due to Condition
Protected Tree City of Scotts Valley: Any tree 13 inches or greater in diameter measured at 4.5 feet above grade. Any multi-trunk with one trunk 8" in diameter or greater. Any oak 8 inches or greater. Any tree 8 inches or greater, if located within 20 feet of a slope > 20%. Certain undesirable species exempt.
Tree Assessment Chart - Appendix A
3640 Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley
Trees Located on Adjacent Properties
373
Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter @
54 inches
a.g.
Protected
Tree
Crown
Height &
Spread
Health
Rating
Structural
Rating
Suitability for
Preservation
(Based Upon
Condition)
Tree
Protection
Zone (radius
from trunk)
Construction
Impacts
(Rating &
Description)
Retention
or
Removal
Code
Comments
T5-A coast redwood 18" Yes 65'X15' Good Good Good 15' Low R.T < 3' from fence line T6-A coast redwood 20" Yes 65'x15' Good Good Good 15' Low R.T < 2' from fence line T7-A coast redwood 24" Yes 65'X15' Good Good Good 20' Low R.T < 1' from fence line T8-A coast redwood 24" Yes 65'x15' Good Good Good 20' Low R.T < 3' from fence line T9-A coast redwood 48" Yes 65'x30' Good Good Good 25'
Moderate
(root loss,
grading)
R.T Average 16' from grading cut. < 2' from fence line
T10-A ash 24" Yes 65'X30' Fair Fair Fair Low R.T 33' from 6" - 12" grading cut. Average 2' from fence line T11-A ash 30" Yes 65'X30' Fair Fair Fair Low R.T 23' from 6" - 12" grading cut.. Average 2' from fence line.
T12-A ash 18" Yes 65'X30' Fair Fair Fair Low R.T 16' from 6" - 12" grading cut. 18' from 6" - 12" grading cut. Average 2' from fence line.
T13-A ash 24" Yes 65'X30' Fair Fair Fair
Moderate
(root loss,
grading)
R.T 12' from 6" - 12" grading cut, (6X trunk diameter).
Average 2' from fence line.
T14-A ash 24" Yes 65'X30' Fair Fair Fair
Moderate
(root loss,
grading)
R.T 7' from 6" - 12" grading cut, (3.5X trunk diameter).
Average 2' from fence line.
T15-A ash 24" Yes 65'X30' Fair Fair Fair 20'
Moderate
(root loss,
grading)
R.T 5' from 6"-12" grading cut, (2.5X trunk diameter). May be boundary tree. Trunk straddles fence line.
Tree Assessment Chart - Appendix A
3640 Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley
Trees Located on Adjacent Properties
374
APPENDIX B – CRITERIAFORTREE ASSESSMENT CHART
Following is an explanation of the data used in the tree evaluations. The data is incorporated in the Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A.
Trunk Diameter and Number of Trunks:
Trunk diameter as measured at 4.5 feet above grade. The number of trunks refers to a single or multiple trunked tree. Multiple trunks are measured at 4.5 feet above grade.
Health Ratings:
Good: A healthy, vigorous tree, reasonably free of signs and symptoms of disease Fair: Moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback, crown may be thinning and leaf color may be poor
Poor: Tree in severe decline, dieback of scaffold branches and/or trunk, most of foliage from epicormics
Structure Ratings:
Good: No significant structural defects. Growth habit and form typical of the species Fair: Moderate structural defects that might be mitigated with regular care Poor: Extensive structural defects that cannot be abated.
Relative Age:
I estimated tree age as young, semi-mature, mature, or over-mature.
Suitability for Preservation Ratings:
Rating factors:
Tree Health: Healthy vigorous trees are more tolerant of construction impacts such as root loss, grading, and soil compaction, then are less vigorous specimens.
Structural integrity: Preserved trees should be structurally sound and absent of defects or have defects that can be effectively reduced, especially near structures or high use areas.
Tree Age: Over mature trees have a reduced ability to tolerate construction impacts, generate new tissue and adjust to an altered environment. Young to maturing specimens are better able to respond to change.
Species response: There is a wide variation in the tolerance of individual tree species to construction impacts.
375
Rating Scale:
Good: Trees in good health and structural condition with potential for longevity on the site Fair: Trees in fair health and/or with structural defects that may be reduced with treatment procedures.
Poor: Trees in poor health and/or with poor structure that cannot be effectively abated with treatment. Trees can be expected to decline or fail regardless of construction impacts or management . The species or individual may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site.
Construction Impacts:
Rating Scale:
High: Development elements proposed that are located within the Tree Protection Zone that would severely impact the health and /or stability of the tree. The tree impacts cannot be mitigated without design changes. The tree may be located within the building footprint.
Moderate: Development elements proposed that are located within the Tree Protection Zone that will impact the health and/or stability of the tree and can be mitigated with tree protection treatments.
Low: Development elements proposed that are located within or near the Tree Protection Zone that will have a minor impact on the health of the tree and can be mitigated with tree protection treatments.
None: Development elements will have no impact on the health and stability of the Tree.
Tree Protection Zone (TPZ):
Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, particularly during construction or development. 376
S S SS SS S S / RI A NAEL C VE/ L OOP NAV EV OCHARGING NLY S SS SS EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY EV CHARGING ONLY • • 520 525 535 530 520 525 520 515 515 520525 540 535 530 525 525 51 510 505 510 505 505 EXISTING SHELL STATION EL = 518'(+/-) 5 5 .
Tree Protection Plan
3640 Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley
Sheet T1
of one sheet
K.F.
11/10/2022
APN: 022-
162-76
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . .
.
.
.
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T10
T1-A
T2-A
T3-A
T4-A
T5-A
T7-A T6-A
T8-A
T9-A
T10-A
T11-A
T12-A
T13-A
T14-A
T15-A
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
T11-T15
T18
T16
X
.
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
TREE GROUP -T17, ACACIAREMOVE ALL ACACIA
T9
T8
T7
------------
--
.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
.
.
.
.
.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Additional tree protection information can be found in Appendix F of arborist report dated 11/10/2022.
Base map used is Sheet C3.1, dated 12-2-19, Grading & Drainage Plan by C2C Civil Consultants, Scotts Valley. 377
Appraised Value of Heritage Trees - Reproduction Method / Trunk Formula Technique Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter @
4.5'
Basic
Reproduction
Cost
Health X
Weighting
Structure X
Weighting
Form X
Weighting
Weighted
Average
Condition
Functional
Limitations
External
Limitations Appraised Value
T1-A
coast live oak
(Quercus agrifolia) 15" $3,334 .75x.34 70x.33 75x.33 73% 80% 100% $1,900 T2-A
coast redwood
(Sequioa sempervirens) 24" $16,434 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 75% 80% 100% $9,200 T3-A coast redwood 18" $9,235 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 175% 80% 100% $5,200 T4-A coast redwood 18" $9,235 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 275% 80% 100% $5,200 T5-A coast redwood 18" $9,235 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 375% 80% 100% $5,200 T6-A coast redwood 18" $9,235 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 475% 80% 100% $5,200 T7-A coast redwood 24" $16,434 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 75% 80% 100% $9,200 T8-A coast redwood 24" $16,434 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 75% 80% 100% $9,200 T9-A coast redwood 48" $65,484 75x.34 75x.33 75x.33 75% 80% 100% $36,835 T10-A
ash
(Fraxinus spp .) 24" $16,435 75x.25% 37x.50 50x.25 50% 80% 100% $6,600 Appendix D
3640 Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley
378
Appraised Value of Heritage Trees - Reproduction Method / Trunk Formula Technique Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter @
4.5'
Basic
Reproduction
Cost
Health X
Weighting
Structure X
Weighting
Form X
Weighting
Weighted
Average
Condition
Functional
Limitations
External
Limitations Appraised Value
T11-A ash 30" $25,701 75x.25% 37x.51 50x.26 50% 100% $10,300 T12-A ash 18" $9,253 75x.25% 37x.52 50x.27 50% 100% $3,700 T13-A ash 24" $16,435 75x.25% 37x.50 50x.25 50% 100% $6,600 T14-A ash 24" $16,436 75x.25% 37x.51 50x.26 50% 100% $6,601 T15-A ash 24" $16,437 75x.25% 37x.52 50x.27 50% 100% $6,602 Total Value of Appraised Trees $127,538
3640 Glen Canyon Road, Scotts Valley
Sheet 2 of 2 11/10/2022
Appendix D
379
Maureen Hamb-WCISA Certified Arborist WE2280
Professional Consulting Services
849 Almar Ave. Suite C #319 Telephone: 831-763-6919
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Fax: 831-763-7724
email: [email protected] Mobile: 831-234-7735
TREE RESOURCE EVALUATION
PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
OAK CREEK PARK
3640 GLEN CANYON ROAD, SCOTTS VALLEY
APN 022-162-76
Prepared for
Eadie Consultants
July 2018
380
Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis
Oak Creek Park 3640 Glen Canyon
July 2018
INTRODUCTION
This arboricultural resource assessment/project impact analysis includes an evaluation of trees growing on undeveloped property located at 3640 Glen Canyon Road in the City of Scotts Valley.
A proposal for mixed use development has been prepared that will utilize the bulk of the site. This report includes an inventory of the trees on the site, review of the proposed plans and recommendations regarding the future disposition of the trees.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
A mixed-use project is proposed for an undeveloped property located at the corner of Glen Canyon Road and Mount Hermon Road (3640 Glen Canyon Road APN 022-162- 76). The proposal includes two apartment buildings, one mixed use building and one commercial building with associated parking and landscaping.
ASSIGNMENT/SCOPE OF SERVICES
In May of 2018 I met with Charlie Eadie from Eadie Consultants on the Glen Canyon property. As the developers representative he provided the proposed plans for the site (C2G Civil Consultant Group). I was retained to inspect and evaluate the trees within the property boundaries in preparation for development. The following services have been completed to prepare the inventory and report.
• Inventory, number and map all trees growing adjacent to proposed development project.
• Identify tree species and measure trunk diameter at a point 54 inches above grade (DBH).
• Visually inspect each tree to determine health status, structural integrity and suitability for incorporation into the development project. • Provide the “Critical Root Zone” dimensions
• Review development plans to assess potential construction impacts to trees. • Provide recommendations for tree removal/retention based on overall tree condition and construction related impacts.
TREE INVENTORY OVERVIEW
The attached inventory includes the following information on trees growing adjacent to proposed development:
381
Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis
Oak Creek Park 3640 Glen Canyon
July 2018
Tree Species
The inventory indicates the “common” name for each protected tree. The botanical names of the trees are listed here:
Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia)
Acacia (Acacia baileyana)
Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa)
Ash (Fraxinus sp)
Sycamore (Platanus acerifolia)
Trunk Diameter
The diameter of each trunk/trunks was measured at a point 54 inches above natural grade (DBH) using a diameter tape.
Tree Health
Tree health and tree structure are evaluated separately. A “healthy” tree can be weakly structured and represent a risk, a well-structured tree can be “unhealthy” or in poor vigor.
The determination of tree health is made during a Visual Tree Inspection. This analysis includes an evaluation of the biology of each tree using procedures developed by Claus Mattheck and published in The Body Language of Trees. The health of the tree is then rated as “good”, “fair”, or “poor” in the inventory.
The biological assessment determines health status and includes an evaluation of the following:
• Vitality of the leaves, bark and twigs
• Presence of fungi or decay
• Percentage and size of dead branching
• Status of old wounds or cavities.
Healthy trees rated as “good” display dense full canopies with dark green foliage. Dead branching is limited to small twigs and branches less than one inch in diameter. No evidence of disease, significant decay or inspect activity is visible. Vigorous, health trees are much better able to tolerate site alteration and invasive construction impacts than less vigorous trees of the same species.
Trees in “fair” health have 10-30% foliar dieback, small areas of dead branching greater than one inch in diameter and minor evidence of disease, decay, or insect activity.
Trees in “poor” health display greater than 30% foliar dieback, dead branches greater than two inches in diameter and/or areas of decay, disease or insect activity. 382
Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis
Oak Creek Park 3640 Glen Canyon
July 2018
Tree Structure
As with tree health, the structural integrity of each tree is determined using the Visual Tree Inspection methods. This mechanical assessment includes an evaluation of the following:
• Integrity of the framework of the tree (supporting trunk and major branches) • External symptoms (bulges, ribs or cracks) that can indicate internal defects • Lean of main trunk and canopy configuration
• Development of root buttress
Trees with “good” structure are well rooted with visible taper in the lower trunk leading to buttress root development. These qualities indicate that the tree is solidly rooted in its growing site. No significant structural defects such as codominant stems (two stems of similar size that emerge from the same point on the trunk), weakly attached branches, cavities or decay are present.
Trees with “fair” structural integrity may have defects such as poor taper in the trunk, inadequate root development or growing site limitations. They may have multiple trunks, included bark (where bark turns inward at an attachment point), or suppressed canopies. Small areas of decay or evidence of small limb loss may be present in these trees. The condition of these trees can be improved using common maintenance procedures.
Poorly structured trees display one or more serious structural defects that may lead to the failure of branches, trunk or the whole tree due to uprooting. Trees in this condition may have had root loss due to decay or site conditions. The supporting trunk or large stems could be compromised by decay or structural defect (large codominant stems with included bark). Trees in this condition represent a risk. In some situations, maintenance including cable support systems, props or severe pruning can reduce, but not eliminate the potential hazard.
Critical Root Zone (CRZ)
The “Critical Root Zone” is the optimum rooting area around a single tree or group of trees in which no grading or construction activity should occur. The zone should be large enough to retain sufficient root and crown area to maintain tree health and stability. The size of this zone depends on a number of factors (Matheny, Clark & Harris 1999) This optimum area is based on the British Standards Institute (BS5837:1991 and BS 5837:2005). This method is based on ranges in tree diameter, tree age and vigor.
The CRZ does not always represent a radius around the tree. When necessary the area can be offset or shaped in a manner that accepts tree canopy constraints or existing conditions. 383
Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis
Oak Creek Park 3640 Glen Canyon
July 2018
Comments
This provides a short summary of tree condition, location, impacts and recommendations.
Protected Status
The highlighted cells within the spreadsheet indicate “protected” status and require permit approvals from the City of Scotts Valley. Section 17.44.080 of the Tree Protection Regulations outline the specifics of protected trees that include trunk diameter sizes of oaks and other species and trees growing within five feet of a public right of way.
The ash trees growing along the back of the sidewalk are more than five feet from the sidewalk. Two of the sycamore trees growing at the back of the sidewalk are four feet from the right of way and are therefore protected and require a permit.
All oaks (six trees) and one pine on the site are protected based on trunk diameters. The group of acacia are not protected by Scotts Valley ordinances.
OBSERVATIONS
Site Description
The site is generally an open grassland with gentle to steep slopes. The western portion of the property is dense acacia tree growth with several coast live oaks and one Ponderosa pine growing within the grove.
The southeastern side of the site is an existing commercial building. The streetscape is an intersection of multiple traffic lanes where traffic is controlled with lights.
To the north a residential development is under construction, to the east is the back side of an existing residential development.
Tree Description
The attached inventory contains information on 17
individual trees and one large group of acacia. This
group of trees range from less than one inch to 12
inches in trunk diameter (pictured at right).
In general, these trees are in fair health with structural defects that include whole tree failure due to
uprooting, areas of decay and weak branch/stem
attachments.
Acacia as a species is a non-native and has been
identified as “invasive” by the Invasive Plant Council.
The negative species characteristics have been
documented as the following:
• Copious seed spread
• Displacement of native plants
• Increased fuel loads
384
Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis
Oak Creek Park 3640 Glen Canyon
July 2018
Six small diameter ash trees are growing along the Granite Creek Road frontage. Four sycamore trees are growing along Mount Hermon Road behind the sidewalk (pictured below).
The ash trees are young with trunk
diameters that range from five to 10 inches
in trunk diameter. They are in an
unmaintained condition. The wood support
stakes have been left on the trees causing
damage and girdling to trunks. They
display structural defects that include weak
stem branch attachments and crowded
branch structures.
The sycamore trees are well structured and
in good health. Trunk diameters range from
nine to 11 inches.
Six coast live oaks and one Ponderosa pine are
growing within the dense acacia growth at the
northern portion of the grove.
The coast live oaks are a mix of both immature and
mature trees. They are growing amongst the dense
acacia growth and have been suppressed by the
surrounding vegetation.
The pine is growing on a slope within the acacia
growth. It is a young tree in fair condition.
385
Tree Resource Evaluation/Project Impact Analysis
Oak Creek Park 3640 Glen Canyon
July 2018
PROJECT IMPACTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
The project as proposed utilizes the entire property. The trees (acacia, coast live oak and pine) within the central portion of the property cannot be incorporated into the development and removal is required.
The ash and sycamore trees growing at the perimeter may be in conflict with the sidewalk and landscaping proposed for the development. If possible, the sycamore should be considered for preservation and incorporation into the project. They are healthy and young with canopies the currently provide a level of screening from the public roadway. The ash are in fair to poor condition and may not be suitable for incorporation into the landscape plan for the site.
CONCLUSION
The mixed-use development proposed for this site will require the removal of all trees growing within the central portions of the property. This includes six coast live oaks, one Ponderosa pine and a group of acacia trees.
In addition, six immature ash trees and four sycamore trees growing behind the existing sidewalk may also require removal.
Please call my office with any questions regarding the trees on this development site.
Respectfully submitted,
Maureen Hamb-Certified Arborist WE2280
386
Oak Creek Park
Tree Inventory
July 2018
Highlighted Cells Indicate Protected Trees 1
Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter
@ 54"
(DBH)
Health Structure
Impacts:
High
Moderate
Low
CRZ
Radius
in feet
Comments/Recommendations
1 ash 10.4 good fair Moderate 5 young tree growing along the Granite Creek public sidewalk/May be in conflict with landscape plan
2 ash 6.6 fair fair moderate 3 young tree growing along the Granite Creek public sidewalk/May be in conflict with landscape plan
3 ash 5.1 fair fair moderate 3 young tree growing along the Granite Creek public sidewalk/May be in conflict with landscape plan
4 ash 6.2 good fair moderate 3 young tree growing along the Granite Creek public sidewalk/May be in conflict with landscape plan
5 ash 6.8 good fair moderate 3 young tree growing along the Granite Creek public sidewalk/May be in conflict with landscape plan
6 ash 10.1 good fair moderate 5 young tree growing along the Granite Creek public sidewalk/May be in conflict with landscape plan
387
Oak Creek Park
Tree Inventory
July 2018
Highlighted Cells Indicate Protected Trees 2
Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter
@ 54"
(DBH)
Health Structure
Impacts:
High
Moderate
Low
CRZ
Radius
in feet
Comments/Recommendations
7 sycamore 11.5 good good moderate 5 Healthy, well structured street tree/Attempt to incorporate into project
8 sycamore 9 good good moderate 5 Healthy, well structured street tree/Attempt to incorporate into project
9 sycamore 9.6 good good moderate 5 Healthy, well structured street tree/Attempt to incorporate into project
10 sycamore 10.1 good good moderate 5 Healthy, well structured street tree/Attempt to incorporate into project
11 coast live
oak
9.3 to
13.3 fair fair high 8
Growing amongst dense acacia growth, multiple stems
suppressed foliar canopy/Within proposed development
envelope removal required
12 coast live
oak 12 & 14.1 fair fair high 8 Thinning lower medium dead branching/Within development envelope. Removal required 388
Oak Creek Park
Tree Inventory
July 2018
Highlighted Cells Indicate Protected Trees 3
Tree # Species
Trunk
Diameter
@ 54"
(DBH)
Health Structure
Impacts:
High
Moderate
Low
CRZ
Radius
in feet
Comments/Recommendations
13 coast live
oak
19.9 &
18.5 fair fair high 15
Mature tree with two main stems, canopy is suppressed by dense acacia growth/Within development envelope removal required
14 coast live
oak 12.3 fair fair high 6 Growing amongst dense acacia, young tree with suppressed lower canopy/Within development envelope removal required 15 coast live
oak 10.7 fair fair high 5 Younger tree within acacia grove/Within development envelope removal required 16 coast live
oak 4.6 & 4.2 good fair high 5 Young tree with short structure growing in open area/Within development envelope removal required 17 group of
acacia 1 to 12 fair/poor fair/poor high
Large dense grove of (at least 200 small trees) growing behind existing sidewalk. Several uproots, areas decay and thin canopies/Within development envelope removal required
18 Ponderosa
pine 13.5 fair fair high 7 Growing within dense acacia growth/Within building envelope removal required 389
390
Glossary of Terms
Basal rot: decay of the lower trunk, trunk flare, or buttress roots.
Canker: Localized diseased area on stems, roots and branches. Often sunken and discolored.
Critical Root Zone (CRZ): Area of soil around a tree where a minimum number of roots considered critical to the structural stability or health of the tree are located. CRZ determination is sometimes based on the drip line or a multiple of the DBH, but because root growth can be asymmetric due to site conditions, on-site investigation may be required.
Codominant branches/stems: Forked branches (or trunks), nearly the same size in diameter, arising from a common junction and lacking a normal branch union, may have included bark.
Crown: Upper part of a tree, measured from the lowest branch, including all branches and foliage.
Defect: An imperfection, weakness, or lack of something necessary. In trees defects are injuries, growth patterns, decay, or other conditions that reduce the tree’s structural strength.
Diameter at breast height (DBH): Measurement of trunk diameter at 4.5 feet above grade.
Frass: Fecal material and/or wood shavings produced by insects.
Included Bark Attachments (crotches): Branch/limb or limb /trunk, or codominant trunks originating at acute angles from each other. Bark remains between such crotches, preventing the development of axillary wood. The inherent weakness of such attachments increases with time, through the pressure of opposing growth and increasing weight of wood and foliage, often resulting in failure.
Live Crown Ratio (LCR): Ratio of the the crown length (live foliage), to total tree height.
Scaffold branches: Permanent or structural branches that form the scaffold architecture or structure of a tree.
Suppressed: Trees that have been overtopped and occupy an understory position within a group or grove of trees. Suppressed trees often have poor structure.
Tree Protection Zones (TPZ): Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited of restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, especially during construction or development.
Trunk flare: Transition zone from trunk to roots where the trunk expands into the buttress or structural roots.
This Glossary of Terms was adapted from the Glossary of Arboricultural Terms (ISA, 2015) 391
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Matheny, N. and Clark, J. Trees & Development – A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture c. 1998 Costello, L.R., Watson, G., Smiley E.T. Root Management – Best Management Practices, Champaign, ILL: International Society of Arboriculture c. 2017 ANSI Board of Standards Review. A.N.S.I. (American National Standard) A300 (Part 8)- 2013 Root Management
Harris, R.W., Clark, J.R. and Matheny, N.P. Arboriculture: Integrated management of landscape tree, shrubs, and vines. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. c.2004 Matheny, N. and Clark, J. Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas. Champaign, IL: Wadley Graphix Corp. c.1994
Smiley, E.T., Matheny, N., Lilly, S. Tree Risk Assessment – Best Management Practices, Champaign, ILL: International Society of Arboriculture c. 2011 Costello, L., Perry, E., & Matheny,N, Abiotic Disorders of Landscape Plants: A Diagnostic Guide Oakland, CA:UC/ANR Publications (Publication 3420) c.2003. 392
Appendix H - TREE PROTECTION GUIDELINES AND RESTRICTIONS Protecting Trees During Construction:
1) Before the start of site work, equipment or materials move in, clearing, excavation, construction, or other work on the site, every tree to be retained shall be securely fenced- off as delineated in approved plans. Such fences shall remain continuously in place for the duration of the work undertaken in connection with the development. 2) If the proposed development, including any site work, will encroach upon the tree protection zone, special measures shall be utilized, as approved by the project arborist, to allow the roots to obtain necessary oxygen, water, and nutrients. 3) Underground trenching shall avoid the major support and absorbing tree roots of protected trees. If avoidance is impractical, hand excavation undertaken under the supervision of the project arborist may be required. Trenches shall be consolidated to service as many units as possible. Boring/tunneling under roots should be considered as an alternative to trenching.
4) Concrete or asphalt paving shall not be placed over the root zones of protected trees, unless otherwise permitted by the project arborist.
5) Artificial irrigation shall not occur within the root zone of native oaks, unless deemed appropriate on a temporary basis by the project arborist to improve tree vigor or mitigate root loss.
6) Compaction of the soil within the tree protection zone shall be avoided. 7) Any excavation, cutting, or filling of the existing ground surface within the tree protection zone shall be minimized and subject to such conditions as the project arborist may impose. Retaining walls shall likewise be designed, sited, and constructed to minimize their impact on protected trees.
8) Burning or use of equipment with an open flame near or within the tree protection zone shall be avoided. All brush, earth, and other debris shall be removed in a manner that prevents injury to the tree.
9) Oil, gas, chemicals, paints, cement, stucco or other substances that may be harmful to trees shall not be stored or dumped within the tree protection zone of any protected tree, or at any other location on the site from which such substances might enter the tree protection zone of a protected tree.
10) Construction materials shall not be stored within the tree protection zone of a protected tree.
393
Project Arborist Duties and Inspection Schedule:
The project arborist is the person(s) responsible for carrying out technical tree inspections, assessment of tree health, structure and risk, arborist report preparation, consultation with designers and municipal planners, specifying tree protection measures, monitoring, progress reports and final inspection.
A qualified project arborist (or firm) should be designated and assigned to facilitate and insure tree preservation practices. He/she/they should perform the following inspections:
Inspection of site: Prior to equipment and materials move in, site work, demolition, landscape construction and tree removal: The project arborist will meet with the general contractor, architect / engineer, and owner or their representative to review tree preservation measures, designate tree removals, delineate the location of tree protection fencing, specify equipment access routes and materials storage areas, review the existing condition of trees and provide any necessary recommendations.
Inspection of site: During excavation or any activities that could affect trees: Inspect site during any activity within the Tree Protection Zones of preserved trees and any recommendations implemented. Assess any changes in the health of trees since last inspection.
Final Inspection of Site: Inspection of site following completion of construction. Inspect for tree health and make any necessary recommendations.
Kurt Fouts shall be the Project Arborist for this project. All scheduled inspections shall include a brief Tree Monitoring report, documenting activities and provided to the City Arborist.
Tree Protection Fencing
Tree Protection fencing shall be installed prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials. Fence shall be comprised of six -foot chain link fence mounted on eight - foot tall, 1 and 7/8-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced on a minimum of 10-foot centers. Once established, the fence must remain undisturbed and be maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection.
A final inspection by the City Arborist at the end of the project will be required prior to removing any tree protection fencing.
Tree Protection Signs
All sections of fencing should be clearly marked with signs stating that all areas within the fencing are Tree Protection Zones and that disturbance is prohibited. 394
Monitoring
Any trenching, construction or demolition that is expected to damage or encounter tree roots should be monitored by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist and should be documented.
The site should be evaluated by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist after construction is complete, and any necessary remedial work that needs to be performed should be noted.
Root Pruning
Root pruning shall be supervised by the project arborist. When roots over two inches in diameter are encountered they should be pruned by hand with loppers, handsaw, reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left crushed or torn. Roots should be cut beyond sinker roots or outside root branch junctions and be supervised by the project arborist. When completed, exposed roots should be kept moist with burlap or backfilled within one hour.
Tree Work Standards and Qualifications
All tree work, removal, pruning, planting, shall be performed using industry standards of workmanship as established in the Best Management Practices of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and the American National Standards Institute series, Safety Requirements in Arboriculture Operations ANSI Z133-2017, Contractor licensing and insurance coverage shall be verified.
During tree removal and clearance, sections of the Tree Protection Fencing may need to be temporarily dismantled to complete removal and pruning specifications. After each section is completed, the fencing is to be re-installed.
Trees to be removed shall be cut into smaller manageable pieces consistent with safe arboricultural practices, and carefully removed so as not to damage any surrounding trees or structures. The trees shall be cut down as close to grade as possible. Tree removal is to be performed by a qualified contractor with valid City Business/ State Licenses and General Liability and Workman’s Compensation insurance.
395
Development Site Tree Health Care Measures
RECOMMENDED TO PROVIDE OPTIMUM GROWING CONDITIONS, PHYSIOLOGICAL
INVIGORATION AND STAMINA, FOR PROTECTION AND RECOVERY FROM CONSTRUCTION IMPACT.
Establish and maintain TPZ fencing, trunk and scaffold limb barriers for protection from mechanical damage, and other tree protection requirements as specified in the arborist report.
Project arborist to specify site-specific soil surface coverings (wood chip mulch or other) for prevention of soil compaction and loss of root aeration capacity.
Soil, water and drainage management is to follow the ISA BMP for "Managing Trees During Construction" and the ANSI Standard A300(Part 2)- 2011 Soil Management (a. Modification, b. 'Fertilization, c. Drainage.)
Fertilizer / soil amendment product(s) amounts and method of application to be specified by certified arborist.
396
City of Scotts Valley - Protected Tree List*
A. Any size tree located within five (5) feet of a public right-of-way or street.
B. Any single-trunk oak tree greater than or equal to eight (8) inch diameter (25 inch circumference).**
C. Any multi-trunk oak tree with any trunk greater than or equal to four (4) inches diameter (12 inch circumference).**
D. Any tree greater than or equal to eight (8) inch diameter (25 inch circumference)** if located within 20 feet of a moderate slope (greater than 20% slope).
E. Any single-trunk tree greater than or equal to 13-inch diameter (40 inch circumference).**
F. Any multi-trunk tree with any trunk greater than or equal to eight (8) inch diameter (25 inch circumference).**
G. Any tree, regardless of size, required as part of a permit approved by the Planning Department, Planning Commission or City Council, or required as a replacement tree for a removed tree.
H. Any Heritage Tree, as specified in Municipal Code Section 17.44.080 and Exhibit A. A list and map of Heritage Trees are available at the Planning Department. Fees for removal of Heritage Trees are higher than other protected tree removals and applications must be approved at a public hearing before the Planning Commission. * Note: No tree removal permit is required to remove:
C Monterey Pine trees that are infected with pitch canker; proof of infection is required; C Blue Gum Eucalyptus or Acacia trees;
C Bay Laurel trees if they are growing under the drip-line of an established oak tree; or, C Fruit trees.
** Tree measurement shall be taken 4½ feet (54 inches) above the ground. 397
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. Any legal description provided by the appraiser/consultant is assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character nor is any opinion rendered as the quality of any title.
2. The appraiser/consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for accuracy of information provided by others.
3. The appraiser/consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this appraisal unless subsequent written arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for services.
4. Loss or removal of any part of this report invalidates the entire appraisal/evaluation.
5. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person(s) to whom it is addressed without written consent of this appraiser/consultant.
6. This report and the values expressed herein represent the opinion of the appraiser/consultant, and the appraiser/consultant’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value nor upon any finding to be reported.
7. Sketches. Diagrams. Graphs. Photos. Etc., in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering reports or surveys.
8. This report has been made in conformity with acceptable appraisal/evaluation/diagnostic reporting techniques and procedures, as recommended by the International Society of Arboriculture.
9. When applying any pesticide, fungicide, or herbicide, always follow label instructions.
10. No tree described in this report was climbed, unless otherwise stated. We cannot take responsibility for any defects which could only have been discovered by climbing. A full root collar inspection, consisting of excavating around the tree to uncover the root collar and major buttress roots, was not performed, unless otherwise stated. We cannot take responsibility for any root defects which could only have been discovered by such an inspection.
CONSULTING ARBORIST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Arborists are tree specialists who use their education. Knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce risk of living near trees, Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or to seek additional advice.
Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree.
Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like medicine, cannot be guaranteed.
Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate all trees. 398