development of the project is prohibited by law. Prehistoric or Native American resources can include chert or obsidian flakes, projectile points, mortars, and pestles; and dark friable soil containing shell and bone dietary debris, heat-affected rock, or human burials. Historic resources can include nails, bottles, or other items often found in refuse deposits.
39. If human remains are discovered, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the discovery site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the project applicant has complied with the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). In general, these provisions require that the County Coroner shall be notified immediately. If the remains are found to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The most likely descendant of the deceased Native American shall be notified by the Commission and given the chance to make recommendations for the remains. If the Commission is unable to identify the most likely descendent, or if no recommendations are made within 24 hours, remains may be reinterred with appropriate dignity elsewhere on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. If recommendations are made and not accepted, the Native American Heritage Commission will mediate the problem.
Air Quality
40. Reduce Fugitive Dust To reduce fugitive dust emissions, and the applicant shall require the following measures to be included as part of construction grading and building plans:
a. Limit grading to 8.1 acres per day, and grading and excavation to 2.2 acres per day. b. Water graded/excavated areas and active unpaved roadways, unpaved staging areas, and unpaved parking areas at least twice daily or apply nonǦtoxic chemical soil stabilization materials per manufacturer’s recommendations. Frequency should be based on the type of operations, soil and wind exposure. c. Prohibit all grading activities during periods of high wind (more than 15 mph). d. Apply chemical soil stabilizers on inactive construction areas (disturbed lands within construction projects that are unused for at least four consecutive days). e. 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.
f. 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, nonǦinvasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
g. Plant vegetative ground cover in disturbed areas as soon as possible.
h. Use street sweepers, water trucks, or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the project site. Reclaimed (nonǦpotable) water should be used whenever possible;
i. Spray dirt stockpile areas daily as needed.
j. 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.
k. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site.
l. 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. m. 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. n. 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 carryǦout to paved roadways. o. 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.
Noise and Vibration
41. Construction Noise Reduction To reduce the effects of construction noise, the project applicant shall ensure that the following notes are included as part of all relevant grading and building construction plans:
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) that 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 tuneup 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.
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 noisegenerating 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 include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule.
Building Department
42. The developer shall pay all applicable City development impact fees before grading and/or building permit issuance.
43. The developer shall pay school impact fees to the Scotts Valley Unified School District before building permit issuance.
44. All trades of electrical, plumbing and mechanical will be issued under one building permit for said project (General Contractor permittee). All subcontractors shall provide their contractor’s license number and their workers compensation insurance information to the Building Department.
45. All buildings shall be designed to comply with the current California Building Code, California Mechanical Code, California Electrical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Energy Code and California Green Building Code, in effect at the time of building permit application.
46. The building permit plans must comply with the current California Plumbing and Green Building Code for water-conserving fixtures and fittings and with the CA Energy Commission Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which includes energysaving fixtures and appliances to be used throughout the building.
47. All structures shall comply with the most current California Energy Commission
Standards (California Energy Code).
48. All new construction shall comply with the California Green Building Code and the City’s current Green Building Guidelines, which require various low-impactdevelopment and resource efficient techniques, to the satisfaction of the CDD.
49. Structural calculations shall be submitted and wet-signed by the Engineer of record.
50. A Special Inspection form shall be submitted and the names of Special Inspectors with certifications as required shall be provided.
51. A soils report by a qualified geologic engineer shall be submitted with the application for any building permits. The developer shall submit a plan review letter from the project Geotechnical Engineer confirming that the construction documents comply with the project geotechnical engineer’s recommendations.
52. The developer shall comply with the City’s standard erosion control measures. The plans submitted for a building permit must include best management practices (e.g. erosion control practices and procedures) during construction, which include complying with Regional Air Quality Control Board emissions for construction equipment.
53. Site drainage, erosion control, and foundation plans must be reviewed and approved by the soils engineer of record.
54. To ensure that City requirements are met, the developer shall specify to the Building Official the off-site disposal location of any exported soil material at a pre-construction meeting or before grading permit issuance. If the disposal site is located outside the City, the site shall be a legal facility such as a licensed landfill or permitted fill site.
55. Developer shall submit a plan showing temporary (during construction) and permanent erosion control measures will need to be submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the agency that administers NPDES, and the City Building Department for review and approval.
56. A completed City of Scotts Valley Construction and Waste Management Plan form shall be submitted with the Building permit application.
57. The project shall comply with all California Building Code Accessibility requirements and show the required features as they apply to this project.
58. If grading in the rainy season (October 15th to April 15th) is necessary, approvals from the Building Department shall be obtained.
City Public Works Department
59. A final subdivision or parcel map in conformance with the California Government
Code, Section 66410 et seq, and with the City Subdivision Ordinance, and including the conditions of the tentative subdivision map, shall be filed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director/City Engineer.
60. All required documents, final or parcel map sheets, covenants, developer and city improvement agreements and bonds, shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director/City Engineer prior to the recordation of any final map or application for any building permit. (Applicant should be advised that officials of Santa Cruz County, such as the Auditor-Controller, Recorder and Clerk of the Board have requirements, such as payment of taxes and present title guarantee, which precede recordation of the map.)
61. Engineered Improvement Plans shall be submitted for all on-site and off-site work and will be approved by the Public Works Director/City Engineer. On-site and off-site (encroachment) civil engineering permits must be issued by the City prior to commencing any work. Improvement Plans shall include any necessary grading, drainage, masonry retaining walls, driveway, utilities, utility pole relocation, frontage improvement and/or repair of sidewalk, curb and gutter or similar facilities required satisfying tentative map conditions to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director/City Engineer. All improvements shall conform to the design standards contained in text and illustration in the "City of Scotts Valley Standard Details", latest revision adopted by the City Council.
62. Applicant shall construct street improvements for the full parcel frontage in accordance with the City of Scotts Valley Standard Details, latest revision, adopted by the City Council.
63. Engineered improvement plans for all work, signed and prepared under the direction of a registered civil engineer, shall be approved by the Public Works Director/City Engineer prior to commencing work.
64. All work in the public right-of-way will require an encroachment permit application made to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director/City Engineer. The civil on-site work, as plan reviewed by the Public Works Department, will require an on-site civil engineering permit and inspection.
65. All public improvements shall be guaranteed by written Agreement with the city, Faithful Performance Bond, and Labor and Material men's Bond, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director/City Engineer.
66. All signing and striping shall be approved and completed as required by the Public Works Department, and shall be in conformance with current editions of Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and the State Department of Transportation "Standard Specifications".
73. The project shall connect to the sanitary sewer system and existing septic systems, if any, shall be properly abandoned.
74. The applicant shall repair any damage caused to the City streets [or the private roadway] by applicant or its contractors, consultants, and/or employees prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. A videotape log, DVD format, clearly showing the existing condition of the applicable street to the project site shall be presented to the Department of Public Works prior to the start of construction. Applicant is advised that, absent clear video evidence to the contrary, road damage must be repaired to the satisfaction of the City prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Damage assessment will be at the sole discretion of the City.
75. Prior to issuance of building permit, provide letter from City’s hauler, Greenwaste, approving site design and serviceability. 831.768-9505. Project shall be design in compliance with SB1383 requiring collection of 3 waste streams for all customer types. Garbage, Recycle and Compost/Food Waste.
Stormwater Management Plan:
76. Applicant shall construct storm drain facilities in conformance with data and analysis in the adopted City of Scotts Valley Storm Drain Master Plan, December 1989 and in accordance with the city’s SWMP Ordinance No. 184.1.
77. A registered civil engineer shall provide storm (hydrologic and hydraulic) calculations for appropriate storm drain facilities to control on-site drainage and mitigate off-site impacts. The design shall follow the criteria contained in the City of Scotts Valley Standard Details and the data and analysis contained in the latest adopted City of Scotts Valley Storm Drainage Master Plan.
78. Development shall not increase the rate of flow (cubic feet per second) or velocity (feet per second) of site run-off water to any off-site drainage areas beyond the measured or calculated pre-project rate and velocity. Impervious areas must be shown on coversheet.
See the Stormwater Technical Guide on the Scotts Valley City website for requirements and formatting under Public Works
Dedication of land for Park and Recreational Purposes:
79. Applicant shall comply with SVMC Chapter 16.35 – Dedication of land for Park and Recreation Purposes.
80. Applicant shall pay the cost to accomplish the utility design and construction to underground the telephone, electric power, and television cables in each project contained easement, private or public road frontage. This under grounding of utilities to remove utility poles comes in addition to the state required under grounding of transmission for the project and any new service connections.
81. The final map shall be submitted to the City's Public Works Department on an AutoCAD drawing version 2018 LT or earlier electronic version prior to recording.
82. Applicant shall submit electronic files for all civil plans for review and As-Builts when project is completed.
83. Applicant shall submit a completed "segregation of assessment" form for each assessment district in which the subdivision participates.
84. Prior to the filing of the final/parcel map, applicant shall contact the Santa Cruz County Assessor's Office or the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to ensure that the subdivided property is within a single tax code.
Scotts Valley Fire Protection District
85. This project as proposed shall conform to the 2022 California Fire Code as amended by the Scotts Valley Fire Protection District.
86. The required number of fire hydrant(s) and the location shall be in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix C. The Fire District shall approve placement of fire hydrants prior to the approval of the final site map drawings. The required fire hydrants shall be installed and operative prior to any building construction on the site.
87. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in all buildings in accordance with Chapter 9 of the California Fire Code, current NFPA 13-D standards, and Santa Cruz County FPO standards. (Contact the Scotts Valley Fire Protection District to review the FPO standards)
a. Automatic sprinkler system design plans and calculations shall be submitted directly to the Scotts Valley Fire Protection District for review and permit.
Separate permits may be necessary for the “overhead” and “underground” parts of the system.
b. The automatic sprinkler system drawings must be prepared and submitted for approval by a California State Licensed Contractor (Class A, or C-16) meeting the requirements of NFPA-13, “ Standard for the Installation of Fire Sprinkler Systems”. Designer/installer shall submit three (3) sets of plans and calculations to this agency for approval.”
c. Fire Department connections for automatic sprinkler systems shall be installed in accordance with Section 912 of the California fire code. Buildings equipped with a fire sprinkler system in accordance with this chapter shall have a fire department connection located within 100 feet (183m). The location of the fire department connections shall be approved by the fire code official. d. With respect to hydrants, driveways, buildings, and landscaping, fire department connections shall be so located that fire apparatus and hose connected to supply the system will not obstruct access to the buildings for other fire apparatus. (CFC 912.2)
88. A 100-foot clearance shall be maintained around and adjacent to the building or
structure to provide additional fire protection or fire break by removing all brush, flammable vegetation, or combustible growth.
EXCEPTION: Single specimens of trees, ornamental shrubbery or similar plants used as ground covers, provided they do not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire from native growth to any structure.
89. Smoke alarms shall be installed and maintained to shall conform to the 2016 California Fire Code as amended by the Scotts Valley Fire Protection District.
90. A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS NOTICE to the Fire District is required prior to any inspection.
91. Job copies of the building and fire systems plans and permits must be on-site during inspections.
92. Building numbers shall be provided. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches in height on a contrasting background and visible from the street. Where numbers are not visible from the street, additional numbers shall be installed on a directional sign at the property driveway and the street. Final design and location of the building numbers are subject to Fire District approval.
93. Access to building and fire lanes shall be in accordance of Section 503 of the California Fire Code. A FIRE LANE shall be 20 feet minimum unobstructed width, with red painted curbs and approved signage. FIRE LANES shall be maintained hereafter.
Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD)
94. The Developer will be required to pay the capacity and meter fees for all proposed lots to the Scotts Valley Water District, prior to the sell of any subdivided lot and/or home”.
95. A Main Extension Agreement will need to be executed between the District and Sandraya Heights LLC.
96. A detailed landscape irrigation plan will need to be submitted for review for any common area irrigation. a. The State Water Resources Control Board (Resolution No. 2022-0018) has prohibited the use of potable water for irrigation of non-functional turf for homeowners’ associations. However, the District has a recycled water main in Glenwood Drive that could be utilized to provide recycled water for front yard and common area irrigation. Recycled water is exempt from this resolution. ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
Property Owner Name
____________________________________
Property Owner Signature
PURPLE HILLS CT
SAGELAND CT
NASHUA DR
CASA WY
HACIENDA DR
GRACE WY
NADIA CT
CE WY
MAEVE CT
GOLDEN EAGLE CT
SAN AUGUSTINE WY
VINE
HILL
SCHOOL RD
GLENWOOD
DR
CASA WY
SANDRAYA HEIGHTS RD
KE
R
R
Y CT
GLENWOO
Z
ELDER BERRY CT
SCOTTS VALLEY DR
MEADOW VIEW DR
¯ 0 0.25 0.125
Miles
Project Site
Casa Way Subdivision / APN 023-113-36
Project Site
C0.1
COVER SHEET
1" = 60'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
NO CHANGE TO THE GRADING PLAN SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS AND INVERTS OF EXISTING UTILITY PRIOR TOCOMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES OF VARIANCE FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN BASED ON RECORD DRAWINGS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE FOUND IN FIELD. NO WARRANTY IS MADE REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS ORACCURACY 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 THECROSSING POINTS WITH PROPOSED UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES IF CONDITIONS DIFFER FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND SHALL NOTBEGIN CONSTRUCTION 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.
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITYCOMPANIES AND/OR AGENCIES TO VERIFY THE EXISTENCE AND/OR LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. AND SHALL NOTIFY U.S.A. @ (800) 227-2600 AT LEAST 48-HOURS IN ADVANCE OF EXCAVATION.
IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMIANS 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 NATUREOF THE DISCOVERY AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE EVALUATION PROCEDURES.CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHOULD ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITECONDITIONS, INCLUDING THE SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY, DURING THE COURSE OFCONSTRUCTION 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 FOR LIABILITY ARISING FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE OWNER OR DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.
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 FOR ADJUSTMENT 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.
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 (SOIL STABILIZATION) WITH SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS STRAW WATTLES, SILT FENCE, GRAVEL INLET FILTERS, AND/ORSEDIMENT 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.
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 SEDIMENTPROBLEMS OR ANY OTHER POLLUTANT DISCHARGES. IF ADDITIONAL MEASURES ARE NEEDED, REVISE THEEROSION CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENT THE MEASURES IMMEDIATELY. DOCUMENT ALL INSPECTIONFINDINGS 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).
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE ALL SURVEYING AND OR STAKING BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
CAUTION: THE ENGINEER PREPARING THESE PLANS WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, OR LIABLE FOR, UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES TO OR USES OF THESE PLANS. ALL CHANGES TO THE PLANS MUST BE IN
WRITING AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PREPARER OF THE PLANS CIVIL
C0.1 - COVER SHEETC0.2 - TENTATIVE MAPC0.3 - ROW & CUT_FILLC1.1 - EXISTING SITE & DEMOLITION PLANC1.2 - EXISTING SITE & DEMOLITION PLANC2.1 - SITE ACCESS PLANC2.2 - SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANC3.0 - GRADING PLAN INDEXC3.1 - GRADING PLANC3.2 - GRADING PLANC3.3 - GRADING PLANC3.4 - SECTIONSC4.1 - UTILITY PLANC5.1 - STORMWATER CONTROL PLANC6.1 - DETAILSC6.2 - DETAILSC6.3 - DETAILSC6.4 - SVWD DETAILSC6.5 - CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY DETAILS
DESCRIPTION PROPOSED EXISTING
PROPERTY LINEEASEMENT LINE
CENTERLINECURB AND GUTTER
SIDEWALKSTANDARD HOODED
INLET
FIRE HYDRANT
STREET LIGHT
WATER METER
DOMESTIC WATER
SERVICESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAINSANITARY MANHOLESTORM MANHOLE
DRIVEWAYHANDICAP RAMP
IRRIGATION METER
AND BACK FLOW
PREVENTERMONUMENT WELLS
AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE
BFC BOTTOM FACE OF CURBBFP BACK FLOW PREVENTER
CONC CONCRETECB CATCH BASINCL CENTERLINECONC CONCRETE
DI DROP INLET/DRAINAGE INLETEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEG EXISTING GRADEER END OF RETURN (E) EXISTING
FF FINISH FLOORFG FINISH GRADEFH FIRE HYDRANTFL FLOW LINEFS FINISH SURFACE GB GRADE BREAKGF GARAGE FINISH FLOOR @ GARAGE DOOR
HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT
JP JOINT POLE
LP LOW POINTMAX MAXIMUMME MATCH EXISTINGMIN MINIMUMNAP NOT A PARTNTS NOT TO SCALEP/L PROPERTY LINEPSE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTR/W RIGHT OF WAY
SD STORM DRAINSDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLESF SQUARE FEETSS SANITARY SEWERSSMH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
TC TOP OF CURBTYP TYPICAL
WV WATER VALVE
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
225 DEMETER ST.
EAST PALO ALTO, CA 94303
C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE, STE. 6
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
OFFICE: (831) 438-4420
LIVE OAK ASSOCIATES, INC.
6840 VIA DEL ORO, SUITE 220
SAN JOSE, CA 95119
OFFICE: (408) 224-8300 OFFICE: (669) 699-1198
EARTH SYSTEMS
48511 WARM SPRINGS BLVD., STE. 210
FREMONT, CA 94539
OFFICE: (831) 427-1770
SCALE: NTS
HWY 17
SCOTTS VALLEY DR.
GLEN CANYON RD.
GRACE WAY
SAN AUGUSTINE WAY
NASHUA
DR.
YORK RD.
PROJECT
SITE
HACIENDA
DR.
HACIENDA
DR.
CASA WAY
CASA WAY
SANDRAYA HEIGHTS
PROJECT APN: 023-113-36
CURRENT ZONING: R-1-20
PROPOSED ZONING: R-1-20PROJECT AREA: 5.714 ACRES (248,981 SQ.FT.) MARK GROSS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
8881 RESEARCH DRIVE
IRVINE, CA 92618
OFFICE: (949) 387-3800
ALPHA LAND SURVEYORS, INC.
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE, SUITE 7
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
OFFICE: (831) 438-4453
TENTATIVE PLANS FOR THE
CASA WAY 9 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
CASA WAY, SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN: 023-113-36
SCALE: 1" = 60'
LANDSCAPE
L100 - LANDSCAPE PLAN
C0.2
1" = 60'
TENTATIVE
MAP
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
PRIVATE STORM DRAIN EASEMENTPUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT (P.A.E.)
TRACT BOUNDARY LINEADJOINING PROPERTY LINE
BUILDING SETBACKS PER CURRENT ZONINGNEW RESIDENTIAL LOT ID
INGRESS/EGRESS & PUE PORTION OF PROPERTY
OFFERED FOR DEDICATION TO THE CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY
A. 23-PM-25
B. 108-M-25
C. 108-M-26
D. 68-M-59E. 44-PM-01F. 46-PM-23
G. 36-PM-25
H. CR149
I. 52-PM-43
SHUGART PARK
WALKWAY &
BRIDGES SCOTTS
VALLEY
VINE HILL SCHOOL RD
SAN AUGUSTINE WAY GLENWOOD DR SCOTTS VALLEY DR 17 GRACE WAY
CASA WAY
CASA WAY
ZINFANDEL CIR
SCALE: NTS
FRONT : 30 FT
SIDE YARD : 10% OF LOT WIDTH WITH A MAXIMUM OF 10 FEET
REAR : 15 FTLOT FRONTAGE: 60 FT MIN.MAX. LOT COVERAGE: 50% OF THE LOTMIN. LOT SIZE: 20,000 SQ FT OWNERS / SUBDIVIDER: GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
225 DEMETER STREET
EAST PALO ALTO, CA 94303
408.799.7395
CIVIL ENGINEER: CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, C2G INC.
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE, SUITE 6
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
SURVEYOR ALPHA SURVEY
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066831.438.4420
EXISTING USE: -EXISTING ZONING: R-1-20 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL / 20,000 SQ. FT. LOTS)PROPOSED USE: RESIDENTIALPROPOSED ZONING: R-1-20 (SAME AS EXISTING)
SANDRAYA HIGHTS
HACIENDA DR
C0.3
1" = 50'
RIGHT-OF-WAY LAYOUT &
CUT & FILL ANALYSIS
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
Scale: 1":50'
CUT & FILL ANALYSIS 2
Scale: 1":50'
RIGHT-OF-WAY COMPARISON 1
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY OFFERED FORDEDICATION IN PARCEL MAP 46PM23 PER
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY RECORDER'S
OFFICE. RIGHT OF WAY TO BE VACATED.
PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY OFFERED FORDEDICATION TO THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY.
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 2,550 9,800
NET VOLUME =
7,250 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.
C1.1
1" = 30'
EXISTING SITE &
DEMOLITION PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C1.2
ATTACH SIGNTO POST
FENCE MATERIAL:
ORANGE UV RESISTANT
HIGH TENSILE STRENGTHPOLYETHYLENE LAMINARBARRICADE FABRIC
EDGE OF DISTURBED AREA
DRIP LINE
Scale: NTS
TREE PROTECTION 1
GRADE
NOTES:
1. ALL PLANTS DESIGNATED TO BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY FENCING.
2. INSTALL TREE PROTECTION FENCE AT TREE DRIP LINE OR AT EDGE OF DISTURBED AREA, AS SHOWN ON PLANS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION.
3. SPACE TREE PROTECTION ZONE SIGNS AT A MINIMUM OF ONE EVERY 30 FEET. SIGN MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 2'X2' AND BE VISIBLE FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE. SIGN SHALL READ "TREE PROTECTION ZONE, KEEP OUT", IN BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
4. THERE SHALL BE NO STORAGE OF MATERIAL WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
5. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT.
TREE
PROTECTION
ZONE
KEEP OUT
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDE IN THE BID THE COST OF REMOVING ANY EXISTING SITE FEATURES AND APPURTENANCES NECESSARY TOACCOMPLISH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO INCLUDE IN THE BID THE COST NECESSARY TO RESTORE SUCH ITEMS IF THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN AS PART OF THE FINAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS. REFER TO PLANS TO DETERMINE EXCAVATION, DEMOLITION AND TO DETERMINE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS.THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REVIEW ALL MATERIALS DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL AND TO RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF SUCH MATERIALS. IF THE OWNER RETAINS ANY MATERIAL THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE OWNER TO HAVE THOSEMATERIALS REMOVED OFF SITE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.
UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED TO BE SAVED / STOCKPILED (R&S) OR REUSED / RELOCATED (R&R), ALL SITE FEATURES CALLED FOR REMOVAL
SHALL BE REMOVED WITH THEIR FOOTINGS, ATTACHMENTS, BASE MATERIAL, ETC, TRANSPORTED FROM THE SITE TO BE DISPOSED OF IN A LAWFUL MANNER AT AN ACCEPTABLE DISPOSAL SITE AND AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.
ALL EXISTING SITE FEATURES TO REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. ANY FEATURES DAMAGED
DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.
DURING EARTHWORK OPERATIONS, CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CARE TO NOT DISTURB EXISTING MATERIALS TO REMAIN, OUTSIDE THELIMITS OF GRADING AND BACKFILL AND SHALL TAKE WHATEVER MEASURES NECESSARY, AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE, TO PREVENT ANYEXCAVATED MATERIAL FROM COLLAPSING. ALL BACKFILL MATERIALS SHALL BE PLACED AND COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED TO THE SUBGRADEREQUIRED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONTRACT WORK.
IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S OPTION, WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE OWNER, TO REUSE EXISTING GRAVEL IF IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRAVEL BORROW.
ALL ITEMS CALLED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE REMOVED TO FULL DEPTH INCLUDING ALL FOOTINGS, FOUNDATIONS, AND OTHERAPPURTENANCES, EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. 'CLEAR AND GRUB VEGETATION' SHALL INCLUDE REMOVAL OF GRASS, SHRUBS, AND UNDERBRUSH, REMOVAL OF ROOTS, ROUGH GRADING, INSTALLATION OF LOAM (IF APPLICABLE), FINE GRADING, SEEDING AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT BY THE CONTRACTOR.
TREES DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE TAGGED BY CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION.
THE STORAGE OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT WILL BE PERMITTED AT LOCATIONS DESIGNATED BY OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.
PROTECTION OF STORED MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.
STRIP & STORE EXISTING TOPSOIL FOR LATER REUSE WHERE APPROPRIATE, AND AS NOTED ON PLAN, WITH APPROPRIATE EROSION ANDSEDIMENT CONTROLS.
LOAM / TOP SOIL DESIGNATED FOR REUSE AS GENERAL FILL SHALL BE BLENDED WITH SUITABLE BORROW MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TREE PROTECTION BARRIER AFTER CLEARING UNDERBRUSH AND TAKE DUE CARE TO PREVENT INJURY TO TREES DURING CLEARING OPERATIONS.
1. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WITHIN THE DEMOLITION AREA SHALL BE PROTECTED IN PLACE.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. DAMAGE DONE TO ANY EXISTING UTILITIES NOTED OR OTHERWISE SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE.
3. 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.
4. 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'S RECOMMENDATIONS. ALL GRATES IN PAVEMENT AREAS SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT.
5. 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.
6. JETTING OF BACKFILL MATERIALS TO ACHIEVE COMPACTION IS NOT ALLOWED.
7. ANY EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RELOCATED AS A PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE. NOTE: PER THE PROJECT ARBORIST REPORT 39 REES IDENTIFIED IN THE TABLE ABOVE ARE CONSIDERED "PROTECTED". REFER TO
SHEET L100 FOR THE 2:1 TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT.
1. PROPERTY AND EASEMENT LINES SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE NOT FOR THE USE SUBDIVIDING AND/OR DEVELOPING.
2. BOUNDARY SURVEY HAS NOT BEEN CONDUCTED
3. CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2'
4. CONTOURS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY DRONE AERIAL SURVEY
5. BOUNDARY INFORMATION PROVIDED IS FROM RECORDED DOCUMENT 46M23 FROM THE SANTA CRUZ
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
ARROYO WILLOW WOODLAND AREA
COAST LIVE OAK WOODLANDCOYOTE BRUSH SCRUB
REFER TO PAGE 12 OF THE CASA WAY / SANDRAYA HEIGHTS ROAD PROPERTY BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION.
1. REMOVE ASPHALT SECTION
2. SAWCUT (E) AC PAVEMENT
3. REMOVE PORTION OF (E) ROLLED CURB & GUTTER
4. REMOVE PORTION OF (E) 24" RCP STORM PIPE
5. REMOVE (E) CONCRETE HEADWALL
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 =
S = 8.84%
I = 2 FOOT INTERVAL
L = 9,947
A = 5.715 ACRES
0.00229
5.715 (2) (9,947)
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR
SHALL INSTALL TREE PROTECTIVE FENCING.
Tree ID
Trunk Size
Deescription Circumfrance
(inches) Diameter (inches)
101 67.5 21 Coast Live Oak102 54.3 17 Coast Live Oak103 28.3 9 Coast Live Oak 104 20.1 6 Coast Live Oak
107 40.5 13 N. Calif. Balck Walnut QUD
108 78.8 25 Coast Live Oak
109 30.8 10 N. Calif. Balck Walnut QUD
110 31.1 10 Coast Live Oak
111 30.1 10 Coast Live Oak
118 17.6 6 Coast Live Oak
119 27.6 9 Coast Live Oak
120 19.8 6 Coast Live Oak
121 18.2 6 Coast Live Oak122 31.4 10 Coast Live Oak
123 22 7 Coast Live Oak
126 20.4 6 Coast Live Oak
127 21 7 Coast Live Oak
128 66.6 21 Coast Live Oak
129 29.5 9 Coast Live Oak
130 29.2 9 Coast Live Oak
131 20.4 6 Coast Live Oak132 52.8 17 Coast Live Oak133 55.6 18 Coast Live Oak 134 60.6 19 Coast Live Oak
139 57.8 18 Coast Live Oak147 29.2 9 Cherry Plum155 14.1 4 Box Elder157 22.6 7 Coast Live Oak159 36.1 11 Arroyo Willo 160 25.4 8 Arroyo Willo
161 17.3 6 Arroyo Willo162 37.7 12 Arroyo Willo165 26.7 9 Arroyo Willo 166 17.3 6 Arroyo Willo
171 47.4 15 Coast Live Oak175 26.4 8 Coast Live Oak
176 29.8 9 Coast Live Oak
177 22.3 7 Coast Live Oak
178 34.5 11 Coast Live Oak
179 28.6 9 Coast Live Oak
180 28.3 9 Coast Live Oak
181 21 7 Coast Live Oak
182 29.8 9 Coast Live Oak189 24.5 8 Coast Live Oak
190 24.5 8 Coast Live Oak
191 29.8 9 Coast Live Oak192 20.1 6 Coast Live Oak197 60.9 19 Coast Live Oak199 178 57 Monterey Cypress 200 57.1 18 Coast Live Oak
204 25.4 8 Coast Live Oak
205 31.1 10 Common Pear
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 9.4 3 Coast Live OakN/A 9.4 3 Coast Live OakN/A 9.4 3 Coast Live OakN/A 18.8 6 Tree
C1.2
1" = 30'
EXISTING SITE &
DEMOLITION PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C1.2
1. PROPERTY AND EASEMENT LINES SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE NOT FOR THE USE SUBDIVIDING AND/OR DEVELOPING.
2. BOUNDARY SURVEY HAS NOT BEEN CONDUCTED
3. CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2'
4. CONTOURS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY DRONE AERIAL SURVEY
5. BOUNDARY INFORMATION PROVIDED IS FROM RECORDED DOCUMENT 46M23 FROM THE SANTA CRUZ
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
ARROYO WILLOW WOODLAND AREA
COAST LIVE OAK WOODLANDCOYOTE BRUSH SCRUB
ATTACH SIGNTO POST
FENCE MATERIAL:
ORANGE UV RESISTANT
HIGH TENSILE STRENGTHPOLYETHYLENE LAMINARBARRICADE FABRIC
EDGE OF DISTURBED AREA
DRIP LINE
Scale: NTS
TREE PROTECTION 1
GRADE
NOTES:
1. ALL PLANTS DESIGNATED TO BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY FENCING.
2. INSTALL TREE PROTECTION FENCE AT TREE DRIP LINE OR AT EDGE OF DISTURBED AREA, AS SHOWN ON PLANS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION.
3. SPACE TREE PROTECTION ZONE SIGNS AT A MINIMUM OF ONE EVERY 30 FEET. SIGN MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 2'X2' AND BE VISIBLE FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE. SIGN SHALL READ "TREE PROTECTION ZONE, KEEP OUT", IN BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
4. THERE SHALL BE NO STORAGE OF MATERIAL WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
5. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT.
TREE
PROTECTION
ZONE
KEEP OUT
REFER TO PAGE 12 OF THE CASA WAY / SANDRAYA HEIGHTS ROAD PROPERTY BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION.
1. REMOVE (E) CONCRETE DRAINAGE CHANNEL
2. REMOVE (E) 15"∅ CMP PIPE
3. REMOVE (E) ASPHALT
4. SAWCUT (E) AC PAVEMENT
5. REMOVE (E) STORM INLET
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 =
S = 8.84%
I = 2 FOOT INTERVAL
L = 9,947
A = 5.715 ACRES
0.00229
5.715 (2) (9,947)
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDE IN THE BID THE COST OF REMOVING ANY EXISTING SITE FEATURES AND APPURTENANCES NECESSARY TOACCOMPLISH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO INCLUDE IN THE BID THE COST NECESSARY TO RESTORE SUCH ITEMS IF THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN AS PART OF THE FINAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS. REFER TO PLANS TO DETERMINE EXCAVATION, DEMOLITION AND TO DETERMINE THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS.THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REVIEW ALL MATERIALS DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL AND TO RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF SUCH MATERIALS. IF THE OWNER RETAINS ANY MATERIAL THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE OWNER TO HAVE THOSEMATERIALS REMOVED OFF SITE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.
UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED TO BE SAVED / STOCKPILED (R&S) OR REUSED / RELOCATED (R&R), ALL SITE FEATURES CALLED FOR REMOVAL
SHALL BE REMOVED WITH THEIR FOOTINGS, ATTACHMENTS, BASE MATERIAL, ETC, TRANSPORTED FROM THE SITE TO BE DISPOSED OF IN A LAWFUL MANNER AT AN ACCEPTABLE DISPOSAL SITE AND AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.
ALL EXISTING SITE FEATURES TO REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. ANY FEATURES DAMAGED
DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.
DURING EARTHWORK OPERATIONS, CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CARE TO NOT DISTURB EXISTING MATERIALS TO REMAIN, OUTSIDE THELIMITS OF GRADING AND BACKFILL AND SHALL TAKE WHATEVER MEASURES NECESSARY, AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE, TO PREVENT ANYEXCAVATED MATERIAL FROM COLLAPSING. ALL BACKFILL MATERIALS SHALL BE PLACED AND COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED TO THE SUBGRADEREQUIRED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONTRACT WORK.
IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S OPTION, WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE OWNER, TO REUSE EXISTING GRAVEL IF IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRAVEL BORROW.
ALL ITEMS CALLED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE REMOVED TO FULL DEPTH INCLUDING ALL FOOTINGS, FOUNDATIONS, AND OTHERAPPURTENANCES, EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. 'CLEAR AND GRUB VEGETATION' SHALL INCLUDE REMOVAL OF GRASS, SHRUBS, AND UNDERBRUSH, REMOVAL OF ROOTS, ROUGH GRADING, INSTALLATION OF LOAM (IF APPLICABLE), FINE GRADING, SEEDING AND TURF ESTABLISHMENT BY THE CONTRACTOR.
TREES DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE TAGGED BY CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION.
THE STORAGE OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT WILL BE PERMITTED AT LOCATIONS DESIGNATED BY OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.
PROTECTION OF STORED MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.
STRIP & STORE EXISTING TOPSOIL FOR LATER REUSE WHERE APPROPRIATE, AND AS NOTED ON PLAN, WITH APPROPRIATE EROSION ANDSEDIMENT CONTROLS.
LOAM / TOP SOIL DESIGNATED FOR REUSE AS GENERAL FILL SHALL BE BLENDED WITH SUITABLE BORROW MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TREE PROTECTION BARRIER AFTER CLEARING UNDERBRUSH AND TAKE DUE CARE TO PREVENT INJURY TO TREES DURING CLEARING OPERATIONS.
1. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WITHIN THE DEMOLITION AREA SHALL BE PROTECTED IN PLACE.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. DAMAGE DONE TO ANY EXISTING UTILITIES NOTED OR OTHERWISE SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE.
3. 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.
4. 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'S RECOMMENDATIONS. ALL GRATES IN PAVEMENT AREAS SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT.
5. 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.
6. JETTING OF BACKFILL MATERIALS TO ACHIEVE COMPACTION IS NOT ALLOWED.
7. ANY EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RELOCATED AS A PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR
SHALL INSTALL TREE PROTECTIVE FENCING.
NOTE: PER THE PROJECT ARBORIST REPORT 39 REES IDENTIFIED IN THE TABLE ABOVE ARE CONSIDERED "PROTECTED". REFER TO
SHEET L100 FOR THE 2:1 TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT.
REMOVE (E) WOOD FENCE
REMOVE PORTION OF (E) CONCRETE REMOVE 3" OLIVE TREES (TYP OF 5)
REMOVE PORTION OF
(E) WOOD FENCE/GATE
REMOVE WOOD HEADER
SAWCUT (E) CONCRETE
(E) STORM DRAIN LINE TO REMAIN
Tree ID
Trunk Size
Deescription Circumfrance
(inches) Diameter (inches)
101 67.5 21 Coast Live Oak102 54.3 17 Coast Live Oak103 28.3 9 Coast Live Oak 104 20.1 6 Coast Live Oak
107 40.5 13 N. Calif. Balck Walnut QUD
108 78.8 25 Coast Live Oak
109 30.8 10 N. Calif. Balck Walnut QUD
110 31.1 10 Coast Live Oak
111 30.1 10 Coast Live Oak
118 17.6 6 Coast Live Oak
119 27.6 9 Coast Live Oak
120 19.8 6 Coast Live Oak
121 18.2 6 Coast Live Oak122 31.4 10 Coast Live Oak
123 22 7 Coast Live Oak
126 20.4 6 Coast Live Oak
127 21 7 Coast Live Oak
128 66.6 21 Coast Live Oak
129 29.5 9 Coast Live Oak
130 29.2 9 Coast Live Oak
131 20.4 6 Coast Live Oak132 52.8 17 Coast Live Oak133 55.6 18 Coast Live Oak 134 60.6 19 Coast Live Oak
139 57.8 18 Coast Live Oak147 29.2 9 Cherry Plum155 14.1 4 Box Elder157 22.6 7 Coast Live Oak159 36.1 11 Arroyo Willo 160 25.4 8 Arroyo Willo
161 17.3 6 Arroyo Willo162 37.7 12 Arroyo Willo165 26.7 9 Arroyo Willo 166 17.3 6 Arroyo Willo
171 47.4 15 Coast Live Oak175 26.4 8 Coast Live Oak
176 29.8 9 Coast Live Oak
177 22.3 7 Coast Live Oak
178 34.5 11 Coast Live Oak
179 28.6 9 Coast Live Oak
180 28.3 9 Coast Live Oak
181 21 7 Coast Live Oak
182 29.8 9 Coast Live Oak189 24.5 8 Coast Live Oak
190 24.5 8 Coast Live Oak
191 29.8 9 Coast Live Oak192 20.1 6 Coast Live Oak197 60.9 19 Coast Live Oak199 178 57 Monterey Cypress 200 57.1 18 Coast Live Oak
204 25.4 8 Coast Live Oak
205 31.1 10 Common Pear
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 12.6 4 Coast Live Oak
N/A 9.4 3 Coast Live OakN/A 9.4 3 Coast Live OakN/A 9.4 3 Coast Live OakN/A 18.8 6 Tree
C2.1
SITE ACCESS PLAN
1" = 60'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
LEGEND
PROPOSED PUBLICPEDESTRIAN ACCESSPROPOSED EVAPROPERTY LINEEVA ONLY Scale: 1:20
SIGHT TRIANGLE EXHIBIT 2
DRIVEWAY SITE TRIANGLE. AREA SHALL HAVENO STRUCTURES AND/OR LANDSCAPING GREATER THAN 36" IN HEIGHT. (TYP)
PROPOSED
STOP BAR
PROPOSED
STOP SIGN
115 FT LENGTH OF SIGHT
TRIANGLE FOR 25 MPH PER
EXHIBIT 9-51, AASHTO
STANDARDS (TYP). AREA SHALL
HAVE NO STRUCTURES AND/OR
LANDSCAPING GREATER THAN
36" IN HEIGHT. (TYP)
Scale: 1:60
SITE ACCESS EXHIBIT 1
C2.2
1" = 40'
SITE IMPROVEMENT
PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
PAVING LEGEND
GRIND AND OVERLAY
MAIN DRIVE - AC PAVEMENT
SECTION
CONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE DRIVEWAY
EXISTING AC TO REMAINBIORETENTION
CURBING AND MISC
ITEMS LEGEND
TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTERTYPE "B" CURBTYPE "C" CURB
PROPERTY LINERETAINING WALL
IMPROVEMENT NOTES
TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER - SEE DETAIL 1, SHEET C6.1TYPE "B" ROLLED CURB & GUTTER - SEE DETAIL 1, SHEET C6.1TYPE "C" VERTICAL CURB - SEE DETAIL 1, SHEET C6.1ASPHALT CONCRETE SEE DETAIL 4, SHEET C6.1VALLEY GUTTER - SEE DETAIL 1, SHEET C6.1 WOOD HEADER - SEE DETAIL 7, SHEET C8.1
CONCRETE SIDEWALK - SEE DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.1
VEHICULAR CONCRETE SECTION - SEE DETAIL 5, SHEET C6.1
REMOVABLE BOLLARDS - SEE DETAIL 9, SHEET C6.1BIORETENTION SITE RETAINING WALL - SEE DETAIL 8, SHEET C6.1STORM WATER CHAMBERS. SEE DETAIL 8, SHEET C6.2 MATCH AC @ AC SAWCUT
INSTALL CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON
CROSSWALK PAVEMENT MARKING (WHITE)
INSTALL (N) 6' HIGH WOOD FENCE
MATCH CONCRETE SIDEWALK ELEVATION
INSTALL SIGN STATING "DEAD END"
CURB TYPE TRANSITION
PARALLEL PARKING PAVEMENT MARKING
INSTALL DRIVEWAY FOR NEIGHBOR. INSTALL VEHICULAR CONCRETE SECTION - SEE DETAIL 5, SHEET C6.1. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENT SHALL BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
TURF BLOCK (GRASS PAVERS). REFER TO DETAIL 2 SHEET C6.3
MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW, LEFT
MATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE, RIGHT
Scale: 1" = 10'
FIRE TRUCK TURNAROUND 1
(E) EDGE OF PAVEMENT
(N) PL
(N) PL
C3.0
GRADING PLAN INDEX
1" = 50'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
1. ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL SHALL BE STRIPPED TO A DEPTH TO BE DETERMINED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER.
ANY (E) A.C. OR P.C.C. PAVING SHALL BE SCARIFIED & REMOVED & SUBGRADE PREPARED & COMPACTED AS SHOWN IN THESE PLANS.
2. ALL MATERIAL TO BE USED AS FILL WITHIN BUILDING PAD AREAS & PARKING OR DRIVEWAY AREAS TO BE FREE OF ALL VEGETATION & FOREIGN MATTER AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER.
3. ALL BUILDING PADS TO BE COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION; DRIVEWAY & STREET AREAS TO BE COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION PER ASTM D1557-91.
4. BUILDING PADS TO BE LEVEL SIDE-TO-SIDE, FRONT-TO-REAR, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.
5. STRIPPINGS MAY BE PLACED IN PLANTING AREAS; ALL EXCESS STRIPPING SHALL BE HAULED OFF. PAVING DEBRIS SHALL BE HAULED OFF TO AN APPROVED DISPOSAL SITE.
6. ALL WORK SHOWN OR NOTED IN THESE PLANS SHALL BE IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER, ALL LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL MINIMUM STANDARDS AND THE LATEST ADDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS NOT IDENTIFIED FOR REMOVAL DURING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REPAIR ANY DAMAGE TO NEW CONDITION AT THEIR EXPENSE.
8. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, SITE DIMENSIONS AND GRADES PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.
9. ALL GRADING AND RELATED WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AND THE PROJECT'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
10. GRADING SLOPES FOR BOTH CUT AND FILL SHALL NOT EXCEED 2(H):1(V) UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY
THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
11. ALL SOFTSCAPE GRADES ADJACENT TO (N) BUILDINGS SHALL BE 8" (MIN.) BELOW FINISH FLOOR.12. CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE TO ENSURE DRAINAGE FLOWS AWAY FROM NEW BUILDINGS
AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE
B/ BOTTOM OF ...BLDG BUILDINGBS BOTTOM OF STAIRBW BACK OF WALK
CONC CONCRETE
DWY DRIVEWAYEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEL ELEVATIONFF FINISH FLOORFL FLOWLINE
G GROUND
HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT ELEVATION
LP LOW POINT
NG NATURAL GROUNDP.O.T. PATH OF TRAVELPL PROPERTY LINEPVR PERVIOUS PAVER
SD STORM DRAINSDAD STORM DRAIN AREA
DRAIN
SDDI STORM DRAIN DROP
INLET
SDMH STORM DRAIN
MANHOLE
T/ TOP OF ...TG TOP OF GRATETS TOP OF STAIRTW TOP OF WALL
UG UNDERGROUND
W/ WITH
PERFORATED PIPE
STORM DRAIN PIPE
PORTION OF (E) STORM DRAIN PIPE TO REMAIN
STORM DRAIN INLETSTORM DRAIN MANHOLE
250 GRADING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOURRETAINING WALL
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 2,550 9,800
NET VOLUME =
7,250 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.
C3.1
GRADING PLAN
1" = 20'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
1. 611 LF OF 15"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
2. 122 LF OF 8"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
3. 252 LF OF 8"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
4. 67 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
5. 52 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
6. 60 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
7. 64 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
8. 78 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
9. 65 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
10. 100 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE11. 56 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
12. 32 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
13. 58 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
14. 69 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
15. 35 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
16. 111 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
17. 92 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
18. 52 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
19. 76 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
20. 34 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE21. 102 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE22. 63 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
23. 4"∅ STORM DRAIN LATERAL @ 2% MIN SLOPE
(LENGTH VARIES)
AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE
B/ BOTTOM OF ...BLDG BUILDINGBS BOTTOM OF STAIRBW BACK OF WALK
CONC CONCRETE
DWY DRIVEWAYEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEL ELEVATIONFF FINISH FLOORFL FLOWLINE
G GROUND
HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT ELEVATION
LP LOW POINT
NG NATURAL GROUNDP.O.T. PATH OF TRAVELPL PROPERTY LINEPVR PERVIOUS PAVER
SD STORM DRAINSDAD STORM DRAIN AREA
DRAIN
SDDI STORM DRAIN DROP
INLET
SDMH STORM DRAIN
MANHOLE
T/ TOP OF ...TG TOP OF GRATETS TOP OF STAIRTW TOP OF WALL
UG UNDERGROUND
W/ WITH
PERFORATED PIPE
STORM DRAIN PIPE
PORTION OF (E) STORM DRAIN PIPE TO REMAIN
STORM DRAIN INLETSTORM DRAIN MANHOLE
250 GRADING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOURRETAINING WALL
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C3.2
PIPE CONTINUES ONTO SHEET C3.2
BIORETENTION PER DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2
10" AREA DRAIN PER DETAILS 3 & 4, SHEET C6.2
CLEANOUT PER DETAIL 7, SHEET C6.2
BLOCK RETAINING WALL PER DETAIL 8, SHEET C6.1
TREE TO BE REMOVED
PIPE CONTINUES ONTO SHEET C3.2
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #1
U23
723.66720.66 TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #2
V64
706.46703.46
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #3
V64
713.86710.86
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #4
V64
705.92702.92
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #5
V64
692.52689.52
C3.2
GRADING PLAN
1" = 20'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C3.3
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C3.1
PIPE CALLED OUT ON SHEET C3.1 PIPE CONTINUES ONTO SHEET C3.3
1. 37 LF OF 15"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
2. 514 LF OF 10"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
3. 50 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
4. 12 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
5. 21 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
6. 56 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
7. 32 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
8. 64 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
9. 50 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
10. 71 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
11. 110 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE12. 27 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
13. 44 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
14. 62 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
15. 57 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
16. 72 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE17. 116 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
18. 102 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE19. 64 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
20. 106 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
21. 57 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE22. 85 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
23. 81 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE24. 20 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE25. 4"∅ STORM DARIN LATERAL @ 2% MIN SLOPE (LENGTH VARIES)
AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE
B/ BOTTOM OF ...BLDG BUILDINGBS BOTTOM OF STAIRBW BACK OF WALK
CONC CONCRETE
DWY DRIVEWAYEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEL ELEVATIONFF FINISH FLOORFL FLOWLINE
G GROUND
HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT ELEVATION
LP LOW POINT
NG NATURAL GROUNDP.O.T. PATH OF TRAVELPL PROPERTY LINEPVR PERVIOUS PAVER
SD STORM DRAINSDAD STORM DRAIN AREA
DRAIN
SDDI STORM DRAIN DROP
INLET
SDMH STORM DRAIN
MANHOLE
T/ TOP OF ...TG TOP OF GRATETS TOP OF STAIRTW TOP OF WALL
UG UNDERGROUND
W/ WITH
PERFORATED PIPE
STORM DRAIN PIPE
PORTION OF (E) STORM DRAIN PIPE TO REMAIN
STORM DRAIN INLETSTORM DRAIN MANHOLE
250 GRADING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOURRETAINING WALL
BIORETENTION PER DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2
10" AREA DRAIN PER DETAILS 3 & 4, SHEET C6.2
CLEANOUT PER DETAIL 7, SHEET C6.2
BLOCK RETAINING WALL PER DETAIL 8, SHEET C6.1
TREE TO BE REMOVED
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
3 U43
676.50
XX
PIPE CALLED OUT ON SHEET C3.1 PIPE CONTINUES ONTO SHEET C3.3 TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #1
U23
682.73679.73
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #2
U23
679.10676.10
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #1
48"
673.00670.00
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #5
V64
680.79677.79
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #6
V64
673.00670.00
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #7
V64
665.91662.91
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #4
V64
666.93663.93
C3.3
GRADING PLAN
1" = 20'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C3.2
AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE
B/ BOTTOM OF ...BLDG BUILDINGBS BOTTOM OF STAIRBW BACK OF WALK
CONC CONCRETE
DWY DRIVEWAYEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEL ELEVATIONFF FINISH FLOORFL FLOWLINE
G GROUND
HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT ELEVATION
LP LOW POINT
NG NATURAL GROUNDP.O.T. PATH OF TRAVELPL PROPERTY LINEPVR PERVIOUS PAVER
SD STORM DRAINSDAD STORM DRAIN AREA
DRAIN
SDDI STORM DRAIN DROP
INLET
SDMH STORM DRAIN
MANHOLE
T/ TOP OF ...TG TOP OF GRATETS TOP OF STAIRTW TOP OF WALL
UG UNDERGROUND
W/ WITH
PERFORATED PIPE
STORM DRAIN PIPE
PORTION OF (E) STORM DRAIN PIPE TO REMAIN
STORM DRAIN INLETSTORM DRAIN MANHOLE
250 GRADING CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOURRETAINING WALL
PIPE CALLED OUT ON SHEET C3.2
1. 82 LF OF 24"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
2. 68 LF OF 24"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
3. 11 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
4. 20 LF OF 24"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
5. 49 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
6. 37 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
7. 9 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
8. 28 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
9. 8 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
10. 58 LF OF 24"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
11. 43 LF OF 24"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
12. 100 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE13. 7 LF OF 12"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
14. 103 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
15. 55 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
16. 58 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE17. 149 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
18. 96 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
19. 98 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
20. 54 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
21. 73 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
22. 53 LF OF 4"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
23. 8 LF OF 6"∅ HDPE SD PIPE @ X.XX% SLOPE
24. 4"∅ STORM DRAIN LATERAL @ 2% MIN SLOPE
(LENGTH VARIES)
BIORETENTION PER DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2
10" AREA DRAIN PER DETAILS 3 & 4, SHEET C6.2
CLEANOUT PER DETAIL 7, SHEET C6.2CHAMBER SYSTEM PER DETAIL 8, SHEET C6.2
TREE TO BE REMOVED
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #5
48"∅
652.18645.87
PIPE CALLED OUT ON SHEET C3.1
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #4
48"
654.50646.44 TYPE: RIM=
INV=
SDDI #3
V64
656.00652.83
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #2
V64
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
655.83652.83
SDMH #1
48"
658.00655.00
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #1
V64
656.23653.23
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #2
60"
654.42650.30
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #5
V64
649.83646.83
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #6
48"
651.84645.44
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDMH #3
48"
653.52650.52
TYPE:
RIM=
INV=
SDDI #4
U23
652.00646.74
C3.2
SECTIONS
1" = 60'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
Scale: 1":40' (H) & 1":20'(V)
SITE CROSS SECTION 1
EG
FG
SITE RETAINING WALL (TYP)
Scale: 1":4'
ACCESS ROAD SECTION 2
Scale: 1":2'
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS SECTION 3
Scale: 1":2'
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS SECTION 4
C4.1
1" = 50'
PRELIMINARY
UTILITY PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
1. POINT OF CONNECTION TO EXISTING SS LATERAL. CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE TO
VERIFY EXACT LOCATION, DEPTH, SIZE, & MATERIAL PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.
2. INSTALL 4" SEWER LATERAL @ 2.0% MIN.3. POINT OF CONNECTION TO BUILDING SEWER LATERAL ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO EXISTING REGULATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
1. SVWD CUSTOMER ON-SITE DESIGN MANUAL
2. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES REGULATIONS.
FIRE HYDRANT
WATER METER
STORM DRAIN/SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
WATER LINE
VALVE
SEWER
1. P.O.C. TO (E) 6" AC WATER MAIN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT LOCATION, DEPTH,
SIZE AND MATERIAL PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION
2. INSTALL DOMESTIC WATER & FIRE SUPPRESSION METER PER SVWD DETAIL 4 W/ RP DEVICE AND SERVICE TAP PER SVWD STANDARD DETAIL, SHEET C6.4
3. INSTALL GATE VALVE PER SVWD DETAIL, SHEET C6.4
4. INSTALL NEW FIRE HYDRANT PER SVWD DETAIL, SHEET C6.4
UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS
FOR RETENTION & DETENTION
(E) FH
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'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 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. JETTING OF BACKFILL MATERIALS TO ACHIEVE COMPACTION IS NOT ALLOWED.
5. ALL THE WATER PIPING SHALL BE AWWA CLASS 150 OR APPROVED EQUAL, ALL VALVES, ANGLES, AND THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CURRENT SVWD SPECIFICATIONS.
6. ALL FIRE SERVICE PIPING AND APPURTENANCES SHALL CONFORM TO NFPA STANDARDS AND
SPECIFICATIONS
7. ANY EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RELOCATED AS A PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE. (E) WHARF HYDRANT TO BE REMOVED
C5.1
1" = 40'
PRELIMINARY
STORMWATER
CONTROL PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
Scale: NTS
ONSITE DRAINAGE DIAGRAM 1
NET IMPERVIOUS AREA = 56,963PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 1 THROUGH 4 ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECTPERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 1 : SITE DESIGN AND RUNOFF REDUCTION x INSTALL PERMEABLE PAVERS (GRASS PAVERS)x DIRECT RUNOFF FROM WALKWAYS, ACCESS ROADS, DRIVEWAYS & BUILDINGS INTO
BIO-RETENTION AREAS AND/OR TREE FILTER BOX
x
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 2 : WATER QUALITY TREATMENT
x LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TREATMENT SYSTEM BY MEANS OF BIO-RETENTION.x BIO-RETENTION TREATMENT AREA REQUIREMENT IS 4% OF NET IMPERVIOUS AREAx TREE FILTER BOX IS PROPOSED FOR THE SAN AUGUSTINE WAY CUL-DE-SAC PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 3 : RUNOFF RETENTION
x DUE TO THE POOR INFILTRATING SOILS WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, TECHNICAL INFEASIBILITY HAS BEEN DETERMINED.
x RETENTION ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE CALCULATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED SHOWING THAT THE SCM AREA EXCEEDS 10% OF THE EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA. SEETABLE ON THIS SHEET.
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 4 : PEAK MANAGEMENT
x PEAK MANAGEMENT WILL BE ADDRESSED BY UNDERGROUND DETENTION LIMITING THE PRE-PROJECT PEAK FLOWS FOR THE 2- THROUGH 10-YEAR STORM EVENTS. x SEE THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FIG. SWM-17 IN THE STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN WHICH DETERMINES DETENTION STORAGE VOLUME AND 10-YEAR PRE DEVELOPMENT RELEASERATE
UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS ARE
INTENDED TO:
1. STORE STORMWATER ONSITE AND BELOW
GRADE.
2. POND WATER BEFORE OVERFLOWING TO A
DRAIN INLET.
3. INFILTRATE COMPLETELY FOLLOWING EACH
RAIN EVENT.
UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS ARE NOT
INTENDED TO:
1. ALLOW COLLECTION OF SEDIMENT.
2. BE ACCESSED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN
AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL
THE RECOMMENDED ROUTINE MAINTENANCEACTIVITIES FOR UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS ARE:ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS:
1. REMOVE ANY SEDIMENT BUILD-UP, FALLEN
LEAVES, DEBRIS, AND TRASH.
2. CHECK STORM DRAIN INLET AT OUTLET.
REMOVE SEDIMENT BUILD-UP, FALLENLEAVES, DEBRIS, AND TRASH.
ANNUALLY, PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OFTHE RAINY SEASON:
1. OPEN INSPECTION PORT AND LOOK FOR
SIGNS OF SEDIMENT, LEAVES, DEBRIS,
AND/OR TRASH COLLECTION WITHIN THE
UG CHAMBERS. IF SEDIMENT, LEAVES,
DEBRIS, AND/OR TRASH IS OBSERVED,REMOVE BY MEANS OF A VACUUM TRUCK.
IF SIGNIFICANT SEDIMENT, LEAVES,
DEBRIS, AND/OR TRASH IS OBSERVED,
CONSULT A CIVIL ENGINEER OR LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT.
2. ORIFICE SHALL BE INSPECTED AND ANY
BLOCKAGE OF ANY KIND (I.E. SEDIMENT,
TRASH, ETC.) SHALL BE REMOVED
3. PRE-TREATMENT / CONTAMINANT
SCREENING INLET SHALL BE INSPECTED
AND ALL TRASH, LEAVES, DEBRIS AND/OR
SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED
4. INSPECT CHANNEL ADJACENT TO
DRIVEWAY OUT TO COX ROAD. ALL TRASH
AND DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED.
ANNUALLY, AT THE END OF THE RAINY
SEASON:
1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, VEGETATION,
AND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT IN THE
PRE-TREATMENT / CONTAMINANT
SCREENING INLET.
2. 1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, VEGETATION,
AND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FOUND
OTHER INLETS
3. DO NOT INSTALL ANY MATERIAL INTO THE
UNDERGROUND STORM CHAMBER VOID
SPACE.
MAJOR FACILITY CHANGES OR RENOVATION:
CONTACT THE PROJECT CIVIL ENGINEER
(C2G / CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
INC.), OR OTHER QUALIFIED ENGINEER OR
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, IN THE EVENT
THAT MAJOR WORK IS CONTEMPLATED IN
OR ADJACENT TO THE FACILITY. MAJOR
WORK INCLUDES:
x REPLACING FILTER-FABRIC ABOVE THE
ROCK EMBEDMENT.
x MODIFYING THE “ENGINEERED” ELEMENTS
OF THE FACILITY, INCLUDING DRAIN
INLETS, PIPES, SUBSURFACE DRAINS,
WATER BARRIERS, AND STRUCTURAL
ELEMENTS.
x IMPROVEMENTS IN AREAS WHICH DRAIN
TO THE FACILITY; ESPECIALLY
IMPROVEMENTS WHICH WOULD INCREASE
THE AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WHICH
DRAINS TO THE FACILITY.
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE FOR UG CHAMBERS
PAVEMENTS:
1. COLLECT TRASH AND SWEEP
PAVEMENTS REGULARLY TOPREVENT ACCUMULATION OF SOIL,DEBRIS, AND TRASH.
LANDSCAPING:
1. REMOVE DEBRIS AND TRASH REGULARLY.
2. PRUNE OR CUT BACK PLANTS FOR HEALTH
AND TO ENSURE STORMWATER IS ABLE TO
FLOW INTO INLETS AND THROUGH CURB
CUTS.
3. CONTROL WEEDS BY MANUAL METHODS.
4. EXAMINE THE VEGETATION TO ENSURE
THAT IT IS HEALTHY AND DENSE ENOUGH TO
PROTECT SOILS FROM EROSION. REMOVE
AND REPLACE ALL DEAD AND DISEASED
VEGETATION.
STORM DRAIN INLETS AND PIPES
1. CLEAN STORM DRAIN INLETS AND OTHER
CONVEYANCE STRUCTURES BEFORE THE
WET SEASON TO REMOVE SEDIMENTS,
TRASH AND DEBRIS ACCUMULATED DURINGTHE SUMMER.
2. CONDUCT INSPECTIONS AND CLEAN AND
MAINTAIN STORM DRAIN INLETS AND
STORM DRAIN PIPES DURING THE RAINYSEASON ON A FREQUENCY NECESSARY TO
MAINTAIN THE SYSTEM IN PROPER
WORKING ORDER.
ANNUALLY, PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE
RAINY SEASON:
1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, DEAD VEGETATION,
AND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT.
2. VISUALLY INSPECT ALL FACILITIES TO
DETERMINE IF ANY MAINTENANCE
ACTIVITIES ARE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO BE
PREPARED FOR THE UPCOMING SEASON.
3. INSPECT DRAINAGE OUTLETS FOR SIGNS OF
EROSION OR PLUGGING. IF MINOR EROSIONIS OBSERVED, BACKFILL THE ERODED AREA.ROCK RIP RAP OR A CONCRETE SPLASH PADMAY BE NEEDED TO AVOID FUTUREEROSION. IF SIGNIFICANT EROSION IS
OBSERVED, CONSULT A CIVIL ENGINEER OR
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
4. INSPECT SOIL SLOPES FOR EVIDENCE OF
INSTABILITY OR EROSION. IF MINOREROSION IS OBSERVED, BACKFILL THEERODED AREA, AND COVER THE AREA WITHMULCH OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TOPREVENT FUTURE EROSION. IF SIGNIFICANTEROSION IS OBSERVED, OR IF THERE ISEVIDENCE OF INSTABILITY, CONSULT A CIVILENGINEER OR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
ANNUALLY, AT THE END OF THE RAINY SEASON:
1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, VEGETATION, AND
ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT.
2. DETERMINE IF ANY MAINTENANCE, REPAIR,
OR REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE
SCHEDULED, SINCE MANY OF THESE
ACTIVITIES NEED TO BE PERFORMED DURING
THE DRY SEASON.
3. MANUALLY FLUSH ALL IRRIGATION VALVES
SERVING SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION
ZONES.
GENERAL SITE AND STORM DRAINAGE FACILITY MAINTENANCE STORM WATER POST-CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 4C
8C
8A 8B
9B
9A
7C
7A
7B
6B
6A
CA1
5A
5B 4A 4B
3B
3A 2B 2A
1C
1B
CA4
CA3
1A
2C 3C
9C
9D
6C
CA2
5C
SCM #1 SCM #2
SCM #3 SCM #4
SCM #10
SCM #11
SCM #5
SCM #6
SCM #8
SCM #7
SCM #9
SCM #12
1A 1B 1C 2A 2B 2C 3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 4C 5A 5B 5C 6A 6B 6C 7A 7B 7C 8A 8B 8C 9A 9B 9C 9D CA1 CA2 CA3 CA4 TOTAL
PROPOSED
TOTAL AREA 5,590 4,821 10,626 5,555 4,470 12,828 5,784 4,087 11,635 5,942 2,972 11,380 5,723 5,256 9,500 4,445 7,196 8,189 4,611 9,018 6,612 4,616 9,175 6,100 4,823 2,635 7,074 5,547 35,862 13,319 7,940 5,496 248,827 IMPERVIOUS AREA 4,419 00 4,383 00 3,803 00 3,946 00 3,875 00 3,735 00 3,933 00 4,072 00 4,823 339 0 0 25,333 11,136 3,323 5,270 82,390 ROOF 3,110 00 2,903 00 3,154 00 2,903 00 2,903 00 3,154 00 2,903 00 3,110 00 3,154 0000000 27,294 AC 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 14,294 8,349 0 4,581 27,224 CONCRETE 1,309 00 1,480 0 0 649 0 0 1,043 0 0 972 0 0 581 0 0 1,030 0 0 962 0 0 1,669 339 0 0 7,591 2,787 3,323 689 24,424 TURF BLOCK 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 3,448 000 3,448 EQUIV. IMPERVIOUS AREA 4,419 00 4,383 00 3,803 00 3,946 00 3,875 00 3,735 00 3,933 00 4,072 00 4,823 339 0 0 22,402 11,136 3,323 5,270 79,459 *TURF BLOCK ASSUMED 15% IMPERVIOUS
LANDSCAPE/NATURAL AREAS 1,171 4,821 10,626 1,172 4,470 12,828 1,981 4,087 11,635 1,996 2,972 11,380 1,848 5,256 9,500 710 7,196 8,189 678 9,018 6,612 544 9,175 6,100 0 2,296 7,074 5,547 10,529 2,183 4,617 226 166,437 RUNOFF COEFICIENT 0.76 0.25 0.25 0.76 0.25 0.25 0.68 0.25 0.25 0.68 0.25 0.25 0.69 0.25 0.25 0.80 0.25 0.25 0.80 0.25 0.25 0.82 0.25 0.25 0.90 0.33 0.25 0.25 0.64 0.79 0.52 0.87 0.45 TIME OF CONCENTRATION 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 RAINFALL INTENSITY (10YR) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 RUNOFF RATE (CFS) 0.235 0.066 0.146 0.233 0.062 0.177 0.216 0.056 0.160 0.223 0.041 0.157 0.218 0.072 0.131 0.195 0.099 0.113 0.204 0.124 0.091 0.209 0.126 0.084 0.239 0.048 0.097 0.076 1.256 0.582 0.228 0.264 6.233 (25 YR) 0.282 0.080 0.176 0.280 0.074 0.212 0.259 0.068 0.192 0.268 0.049 0.188 0.261 0.087 0.157 0.234 0.119 0.135 0.245 0.149 0.109 0.251 0.152 0.101 0.287 0.058 0.117 0.092 1.507 0.699 0.274 0.317 7.479 (50 YR) 0.318 0.090 0.198 0.315 0.083 0.239 0.291 0.076 0.216 0.301 0.055 0.212 0.294 0.098 0.177 0.263 0.134 0.152 0.276 0.168 0.123 0.283 0.171 0.113 0.323 0.065 0.132 0.103 1.695 0.786 0.308 0.357 8.414 (100 YR) 0.353 0.100 0.220 0.350 0.092 0.265 0.324 0.084 0.240 0.335 0.061 0.235 0.326 0.109 0.196 0.292 0.149 0.169 0.307 0.186 0.137 0.314 0.190 0.126 0.359 0.073 0.146 0.115 1.884 0.873 0.343 0.397 9.349 1B
2C
3B
4C
6C
7B
8B
9C
5B
9D
5C
UG
STORAGE
VESSEL
SCM #12
TREE
FILTER
BOX
SCM #13
CA4
1C
3C
1A
2B 2A
3A5A
6B 6A4B 4A
UG
STORAGE
VESSLE
9A
9B
UG
STORAGE
VESSLE
8A
8C
UG
STORAGE
VESSLE
7A
7C
CA1
CA2
SCM #13
CA3
SCM #14
RETENTION ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE
CALCULATIONS
EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE AREA (EISA) 89,372
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES 78,601
TURF BLOCK (@0.15) 517
DISTURBED SOILS (@0.15) 10,771
SCM AREA TOTAL 9,375
BIO-RETENTION 4,653
TURF BLOCK 3,448
CHAMBERS 1,250
FILTERRA DEVICE 24
SCM AREA DIVIDED BY EISA 10.49%
C6.1
DETAILS
1" = 40'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
H
WALL HEIGHT
GEOGRID
KEYSTONE
WALL HEIGHT H TM
GEOGRIDKEYSTONE
WALL HEIGHT HTM
L L L
>
?
= 32°= 125 pcf = 125 pcf
>
?
= 32°
= 125 pcf
>
?
= 32°
q = 100 psf
1 2
BASIC GEOGRID PLACEMENT CHART *
GROOVES
The elongated tail sectionprovides additional stabilityfor straight walls as the tailpiece rests on the unitbelow it.
Remove the extended tailpieces at the grooves toreturn the block shape toits 30° sides when buildingtight convex curves.
Slope stability analysis diagram
L = L e n g t h o f s l i p p l a n e S = S h e a r s t r e n g t h o f
s o
i
l
Globalfailureplane
Surcharge q
H = height ofembankment
Center ofrotation
R
e
x
TYPICAL WALL SECTION TERMS
TOPSOIL
COMPACTEDREINFORCEDBACKFILL ZONE
> ?
RETAINED BACKFILL
> ?
L 24" e
MINIMUM AUTOMATIC SETBACK1/4" PER COURSEKEYSTONE CAP UNIT4"H x 18W x 12"D L a
CRITICALFAILURE PLANESBEING ANALYZEDGEOGRIDREINFORCEMENTATTACHED TOINTERLOCKINGFIBERGLASS PINSAT KEYSTONE UNIT
DRAINING GRANULARCOMPACTED BASEAND BACKFILL
FOUNDATION SOIL
> ?
wT
h
h
H
w
i
r > 45°-
2 He
12"
Scale: NTS
KEYSTONE BLOCK RETAINING WALL 8
Elevation
6" Crushed Rock or
Unreinforced Concrete
Leveling Pad
8" or 16"Step
Top of Wall Steps
(2) - 4" Cap Units or(1) - 8" Cap Unit
Note:
1. Secure all cap units with Keystone
Kapseal or equal.
8" Keystone
Unit
4" Cap Unit
Geogrid Installation at Corners
Note:
1. Check with manufacturer specifications
on correct direction of orientation for geogrid to obtain proper strength.
2. Corner units recommended for outside
corners. Availability May Vary.
H / 4
H / 4
H / 2
H / 2
3" of Soil Fill is Required Between
Overlapping Geogrid for Proper
Anchorage (Typ.)
Additional Drainage Fill
Extend Wall Height / 2
Additional Geogrid Overlap
Extend Wall Height / 4
Drainage Fill
Leveling Pad
Scale: NTS
CURB TRANSITION 3
2' TRANSITION
TYPE "C" VERTICAL CURB (SEE
PLANS FOR CONTINUATION)
TYPE "B" SPILL AND/OR CATCH
CURB & GUTTER (SEE PLANS
FOR CONTINUATION)
FLOW LINE AND/ORBFC WITHIN
TRANSITION AREA
SHALL ALIGN WITH
ADJACENT CURB AND
GUTTERS
0.67'
Scale: NTS
CONCRETE CURBS & GUTTERS 1
TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER (CATCH) TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER (SPILL)
BOTTOM FACE OF CURB (BFC)
Scale: NTS
TRUNCATED DOMES, OFF-SET PATTERN 7
MEDIUM BROOM FINISH
PREPARE SUBGRADE PER
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
#4 @ 18" O.C.BOTH DIRECTIONS
6"
12"
6"
NOTE:
1. TYPE OF CONCRETE: CLASS A
2. DOWEL WITH #4 BARS, 12" LONG, AT 24" ON CENTERS, EMBEDDED 4" WITH EPOXY IN EDGE OF EXISTING CONCRETE.
3. DOWELING & REINFORCING TO BE PROVIDED AT JOINTS.
4. SEE DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2 FOR CONCRETE JOINT REQUIREMENTS 6"
Scale: NTS
PEDESTRIAN ONLY CONCRETE SECTION 6
6" AB MIN. BELOW CONC.
Scale: NTS
VEHICULAR CONCRETE SECTION 5
MEDIUM BROOM FINISH #4 @ 30" O.C.
BOTH DIRECTIONS
4"
10"
NOTE:
1. TYPE OF CONCRETE: CLASS A
2. DOWEL WITH #4 BARS, 12" LONG, AT 24" ON CENTERS, EMBEDDED 4" WITH EPOXY IN EDGE OF EXISTING CONCRETE.
3. DOWELING & REINFORCING TO BE PROVIDED AT JOINTS.
4. SEE DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2 FOR CONCRETE JOINT REQUIREMENTS
5. PREPARE SUBGRADE PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
6" AB 6"
4" TYP
EDGE OF
WALK
3" MAX
THICKENED EDGE @ SWALE
6"
10"
2'
R=1"
TOP OF CURB
TOP OF PAVEMENT
CONSTRUCTION JOINT
2'
6"
Scale: NTS
CURB TAPER DETAIL 2
4 PAVEMENT SECTION 4
(N) 13" AB CLASS II
COMPACTED TO 95% R.C.
(N) 4" AC TYPE B - 1/2" MAX. MED. (2
LIFTS MIN.) LIFTS SHALL BE CONDUCTEDPER CAL TRANS SPECS SECTION 39-6.01 FG
CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EX AND
RECOMPACT 1' BELOW (N) SUB-BASE TO
95% R.C.CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EX AND
RECOMPACT 1' BELOW UPPER SUBGRADE
TO 90% R.C.
Scale: NTS
KEYSTONE BLOCK RETAINING WALL 9
C6.2
DETAILS
1" = 40'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
Scale: NTS
U23 CHRISTY BOX DROP INLET (2' X 2') 2
STRUCTURE BACKFILL
EXISTING A.C. AND COMPACTEDBASE ROCK
SAND BACKFILL COMPACTED
6" MIN. 12" MAX. ATTOP OF PIPE
OUTSIDE OF RIGHT OF WAY COMPACTION
SHALL BE 85% MIN.
95% R.C.
90% R.C.
3" MIN.
5'
12" MIN.
4" MIN.
6" MIN.
12" MAX.
CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT TOPRODUCE A STRAIGHTVERTICAL FACE AGAINSTWHICH TO BUTT TRENCHREPAIR. REPAIR SHALL BEREPLACE IN KIND.
2. 6" MIN. 6" MIN.
TRENCH WIDTH DETERMINED BY PIPE DIAMETER.SAW CUT ALL HARD SCAPE AREAS.
NOTES:
1.2. Scale: NTS
STANDARD UTILITY TRENCH 5 Scale: NTS SEWER/STORM CLEAN OUT DETAIL 7 PLUG
12"
4" MIN.
12"
CLASS "B" CONCRETE
LONG RADIUS 1/8 BEND
RISER SAME AS MAIN
6" MIN.
12" MIN.
PROVIDE RUBBER EXPANSION PLUG AS
SHOWN. (FOR SEWER ONLY)
FREE-RESTING CAP
OVER OPENING.
MATERIAL TO BE SAME
AS RISER.
PEA GRAVEL
6" MIN.
26" MIN. DIA. COLLAR
CHRISTY G5 BOX OR APPROVED EQUAL.COVER MARKED WITH "SEWER" OR "STORM". SEE SHEET C4.1
FG
WYE FITTING
Scale: NTS
BIOFILTRATION SECTION 6
GENERAL NOTE:
1. PROVIDE CLEANOUTS AT ENDS
OF PERF PIPE
DETAIL NOTES1. MAX WATER ELEVATION (BIO-RET ELEVATION)
2. INSTALL 6" PERFORATED PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOWN, CONNECT TO OVERFLOW STRUCTURE. PERF PIPE TO CONNECT TOOVERFLOW SYSTEM.
3. 75% SAND (ASTM C-33) & 25% PEAT MIX
4. 3/4" CLEAN DRAIN ROCK WRAPPED IN MIRIFFI FILTER FABRIC (OR SUBSTITUTE APPROVED BY ENGINEER) W/ 2' MIN. OVERLAP.
5. INSTALL 6" SOLID PIPE (INVERT ELEVATION VARIES)
6. INSTALL OVERFLOW INLET (BYPASS FOR LARGER STORM EVENTS)
7. MODIFIED TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER PER DETAIL 1, SHEET C4.2 1 3 3
1 TG VARIES PER PLAN
15-7/8"
15-7/8"
3/4"
6-1/4"
6" or 12"
12"
22"
9-1/2"
16" 16"
18-3/8"
18-3/8"11"
1-3/4"
Scale: NTS
V64 CHRISTY BOX 4
THIS CONCRETE DRAIN BOX HAS A CAST-IN GALVANIZED FRAMEAND IS SPECIFICALLY ENGINEERED FOR DRAINAGE IN MEDIUMAREAS SUCH AS PARKING LOTS, SCHOOL GROUNDS, WALKWAYS, ETC. ITS DESIGN PERMITS FINAL GRADING MATERIAL TO "LOCK IN" & FINISH CLEAN. KNOCK-OUTS ACCOMMODATE UP TO 8" O.D.
PIPE. APPROXIMATE DIMENSIONS SHOWN.
10"±
6-1/2"±
FINISHED
GRADE
ELEV PERPLANSGRATE10" x 6" PVC BODY10" PVC INLINENYLOPLAST ORAPP'D SUBSTITUTEWATERTIGHT ADAPTER6" DOUBLE WALLHDPE PIPE
SNAP COUPLERS (TYPICAL)
90° ELBOW
11-1/4"±
AS REQUIRED
INVERT
FLOW
"D"
NOTE:ALL GRATES IN SIDEWALKS OR OTHER CONCRETESURFACES SHALL BE STANDARD, LIGHT-DUTYBRONZE WITH LOCKING BAR (ADA APPROVED. ALL OTHER GRATESSHALL BE STANDARD LIGHT-DUTY CAST IRON WITH LOCKING BAR. 10"±
7-1/2"±
FINISHED
GRADE
ELEV PERPLANS
GRATE10" x 6" PVC BODY
10" PVC INLINENYLOPLAST ORAPP'D SUBSTITUTE
WATERTIGHT ADAPTER6" DOUBLE WALLHDPE PIPEWATER TIGHT COUPLERS 11-1/4"±
AS REQUIRED
6"±
INVERT FLOW
10" OR 12" DOUBLE WALLHDPE PIPE (SEE PLANS FOR SPECIFIC SIZE) (TYPICAL)
GRATES
1/2" MAX
IN DIRECTION
OF TRAVEL
TO PREVENT ROTATIONENCASE ELBOW IN A6" CONCRETE FOOTING D = DEPTH PER PLAN
GRATES
1/2" MAX
IN DIRECTION
OF TRAVEL
Scale: NTS
10" DIAMETER INLINE AREA DRAIN 3 Scale: NTS 10" DIAMETER TERMINAL AREA DRAIN 4 (203 g/m2) NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE SHALL BE PLACED ON BOTH SIDES OF THERMOPLASTIC TO
PROTECT AGAINST ANGULAR AGGREGATE ON THE WATER SIDE AND FROM PROTRUSION ON THE SOIL SIDE
AT ANY LOCATION IN THE SYSTEM (SEE THERMOPLASTIC LINER DETAIL) Scale: NTS
HS180 STORMWATER CHAMBER STANDARD DETAIL 8 (OR SUBSTITUTE APPROVED BY ENGINEER)
INSPECTION PORT END CAP CHAMBER LINER DETAIL
STANDARD CHAMBER SECTION
1. 4" (100 mm) INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE CONNECTED THROUGH A CORED HOLE, CENTERED ON A VALLEY BETWEEN (2) TWO CORRUGATIONS.
6" (150 mm) OR 8" (200 mm) INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE CONNECTED THROUGH A CORED HOLE, CENTERED ON A CORRUGATION.
2. TAP TEE CONNECTION CAN CONSIST OF QWICKSEAL, INSERTA TEE OR APPROVED ENGINEERING EQUIVALENT.
3. ALL PVC FITTINGS TO BE SOLVENT CEMENTED.
4. PVC MAY BE EITHER SDR 35 OR SCH 40
5. CORED HOLE SIZES AS FOLLOWS: 4" (100 mm) CUT TO 5" (125 mm); 6" (150 mm) CUT TO 7" (180 mm); 8" (200 mm) CUT TO 9" (230 mm)
C6.3
DETAILS
1" = 40'
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
Scale: NTS
BIO-TREATMENT MEDIA BOX (FILTERRA BY CONTECH OR SUBSTITUTE APPROVED BY ENGINEER) 1
LONG SIDE CURB INLET
DESIGNATION AVAIL- ABILITY MEDIA BAY SIZE VAULT SIZE (L x W) MAX. OUTLET/ BYPASS PIPE DIA. MAX. BYPASS FLOW (CFS) UNDER- DRAIN PIPE DIA. (PERF) TREE GRATE QTY. & SIZE FTIBC0604 ALL 6 x 4 6 x 4 8" SDR 35 1.89 4" SDR 35 (1) 3' x 3' FTIBC078045
DE, MD,
NJ, PA,
VA, WV
ONLY
7.83 x 4.5 7.83 x 4.5 8" SDR 35 1.89 4" SDR 35 (1) 3' x 3' FTIBC0804
N/A DE,MD, NJ,
PA, VA,
WV
8 x 4 8 x 4 8" SDR 35 1.89 4" SDR 35 (1) 3' x 3'
FTIBC0806 ALL 8 x 6 8 x 6 10" SDR 35 2.37 4" SDR 35 (1) 4' x 4'FTIBC1006 ALL 10 x 6 10 x 6 10" SDR 35 2.37 6" SDR 35 (1) 4' x 4'FTIBC1206 ALL 12 x 6 12 x 6 10" SDR 35 2.37 6" SDR 35 (2) 4' x 4' FTIBC1307 ALL 13 x 7 13 x 7 10" SDR 35 2.37 6" SDR 35 (2) 4' x 4' FTIBC1408 ALL 14 x 8 14 x 8 10" SDR 35 2.37 6" SDR 35 (2) 4' x 4' FTIBC1509 OR,WA ONLY 15 x 9 15 x 9 10" SDR 35 2.37 6" SDR 35 (2) 4' x 4' N/A = NOT AVAILABLE
Scale: NTS
TURF BLOCK (TRUE GRID PRO OR SUBSTITUTE APPROVED BY ENGINEER) 2
C6.4
NONE
SVWD DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
C6.5
1" = 40'
CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY
DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
20 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
C7.1
1" = 50'
EROSION
CONTROL PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 23 4 56 7 8
31 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
CD
E
F
A
B
CD
E
F
SILT FENCE
INLET SEDIMENT
BARRIER
FIBER ROLL
DIRECTION OF FLOW WITH
STORM DRAIN INSTALLED
STABILIZED
CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE/EXITSEDIMENT CATCHER
(SAND BAGS)
SANITARY FACILITY
CONCRETE/
WASTE WASHOUT C
MATERIALS &EQUIPMENT
STORAGE AREA
NOTE: SEE SHEET C7.2 FORBMP NOTES AND DETAILS
CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS): PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION ACTIVITIESSHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR CONSTRUCTION. SEE THE CITY WEBSITE AT: HTTP://WWW.CITYOFSANTACRUZ.COM/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=6031 EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS, SUCH AS FIBER ROLLS OR WATTLES, SHALL BE INSPECTED REGULARLYDURING CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER EACH SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENT. MAKE NEEDED REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY.
CHECK THE SIDEWALK AND STREET DAILY DURING DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION FOR SOIL DRAG-OUT, ANDSWEEP IF NEEDED. ROUTINELY MAINTAIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT TO ENSURE IT REMAINS EFFECTIVE AT PREVENTING DRAG-OUT.
STORE OPEN BAGS OF PARTICULATE, GRANULAR OR POWDER MATERIALS (SUCH AS PLASTER OR CONCRETE) INDOORS IF POSSIBLE. IF STORED OUTSIDE, THEY MUST BE KEPT COVERED OR CLOSED, AND DURING THE RAINY SEASON KEPT WITHIN SECONDARY CONTAINMENT.
DUMPSTER LIDS MUST BE KEPT CLOSED AND SECURED WHEN NOT IN USE.
SOIL & MATERIAL STOCKPILES: SOIL AND MATERIALS STOCKPILES MUST BE PROTECTED FROM RUNOFF/RUN-ON,
WHEN NOT IN USE, BY BMPS SUCH AS SURROUNDED BY BERMS, FIBER ROLLS OR WATTLES AND COVERED WITH SHEETING OR TARPS. SOIL STOCKPILES SHOULD BE STORED ON A FLAT AREA.
DURING THE RAINY SEASON, ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES ARE IN PLACE AND EFFECTIVE ATPREVENTING SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE SITE.PERVIOUS PAVERS OR PAVEMENT: PROTECT PERVIOUS PAVERS OR PAVEMENT, ONCE INSTALLED, SO THAT ANYREMAINING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES WILL NOT DAMAGE OR CLOG THE PAVERS/PAVEMENT.
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT: INSTALL THE STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT AT THE PROJECT'S COMMENCEMENT.PORTA-POTTIES: DO NOT LOCATE PORTA-POTTIES ADJACENT TO WATERCOURSES OR STORM DRAIN INLETS.
HWY 17
SCOTTS VALLEY DR.
GLEN CANYON RD.
GRACE WAY
SAN AUGUSTINE WAY
NASHUA
DR.
YORK RD.
PROJECT
SITE
HACIENDA
DR.
HACIENDA
DR.
CASA WAY
CASA WAY
SANDRAYA HEIGHTS
Scale: 1:1
TRUCKING ROUTE 1
C7.2
1" = 50'
EROSION
CONTROL PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
01.20.23 DD
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 23 4 56 7 8
31 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
CD
E
F
A
B
CD
E
F
A A
3'
SECTION A-A
B
SECTION B-B
STAKE(TYP.)
VARIES
SECTION B-B
STRAW BALE
(TYP.)
B
10 MIL PLASTIC
LINING
STRAW BALE(TYP.)
BINDING WIRE
10' MIN
N.T.S.
WOOD POST
3" X 3" X 8"
CONCRETE
WASHOUT
3'3'
PLAN
N.T.S.
TYPE "BELOW GRADE"
Scale: NTS
CONCRETE WASHOUT 5
SANDBAG
BERM
VARIES
10 MIL PLASTIC
LINING
B
WOOD FRAME SECURELY
FASTENED AROUNDENTIRE PERIMETER WITH
TWO STAKES
10 MIL PLASTIC
LINING
10 MIL
PLASTIC LINING
PLAN
STAKE(TYP.)
B
WOOD OR METAL STAKES
(2 PER BALE)
STAPLES
(2 PER BALE)
4"
STAPLE DETAIL
2"
VARIES
SANDBAG
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 PLASTIC
LINING
10 MIL
PLASTICLINING
TWO-STACKED
2 X 12 ROUGH
WOOD FRAME
10' MIN 10' MIN
1 8 IN DIA.
STEEL WIRE
BERM
NATIVE MATERIAL
(OPTIONAL)
N.T.S.
TYPE "BELOW GRADE"
BLACK LETTERS
6" HEIGHT
0.5" LAG SCREWS
CONCRETE WASHOUT
SIGN DETAIL
(OR EQUIVALENT)
N.T.S.
TYPE "BELOW GRADE"
PLAN
TYPICAL PROTECTION FOR INLET ON GRADE
TYPICAL PROTECTION FOR INLET ON SUMP
FLOW FLOW
SPILLWAY, 1-BAG HIGH
Scale: NTS
INLET PROTECTION DETAIL 2 Scale: NTS ROCKED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1 PONDING HT.
STANDARD DETAIL
TRENCH WITH NATIVE BACKFILL
STEEL ORWOOD POST
12" MIN.
FLOW
FLOW
RUNOFF
8"
GRAVEL
FLOW
9" MAX.
STORAGE HT.
12" MIN.
(RECOMMENDED)
RUNOFF
ALTERNATE DETAIL
TRENCH WITH GRAVEL
PONDING HT.
THE HEIGHT OF A SILT FENCE SHALL NOT EXCEED 36 INCHES. STORAGE HEIGHT SHALL NEVER EXCEED 18". THE FENCE LINE SHALL FOLLOW THE CONTOUR AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE.
IF POSSIBLE, THE FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE CUT FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL TO AVOID THE USE OF JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, FILTER CLOTH SHALL BE SPLICED ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST, WITH A MINIMUM 6-INCH OVERLAP AND BOTH ENDS SECURELY FASTENED TO THE POST.
POSTS SHALL BE SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 10 FEET APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES). WHEN EXTRA STRENGTH FABRIC IS USED WITHOUT THE WIRE SUPPORT FENCE, POST SPACING SHALL NOT EXCEED 6 FEET. TURN THE ENDS OF THE FENCE UPHILL.
A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 6 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER.
WHEN STANDARD-STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC IS USED, A WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE SHALL BE FASTENED SECURELYTO THE UPSLOPE SIDE OF THE POSTS USING HEAVY DUTY WIRE STAPLES AT LEAST 1 INCH LONG, TIE WIRES OR HOG RINGS. THE WIRE SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH A MINIMUM OF 2 INCHES AND SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36 INCHES ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE.
THE STANDARD-STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE STAPLED OR WIRED TO THE FENCE, AND 6 INCHES OF THE FABRIC SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH. THE FABRIC SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36 INCHES ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EXISTING TREES.
WHEN EXTRA-STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPACING ARE USED, THE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE ELIMINATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER FABRIC IS STAPLED OR WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POSTS.
THE TRENCH SHALL BE BACKFILLED AND THE SOIL COMPACTED OVER THE TOE OF THE FILTER FABRIC.
SILT FENCES PLACED AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE SHALL BE SET AT LEAST 6 FEET FROM THE TOE IN ORDER TO INCREASE PONDING VOLUME.
SILT FENCES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFUL PURPOSE, BUT NOT BEFORE THE UPSLOPE AREA HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED, AND ANY SEDIMENT STORED BEHIND THE SILT FENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED.
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCESILT FENCES AND FILTER BARRIERS SHALL BE INSPECTED WEEKLY AND AFTER EACH SIGNIFICANT STORM (1" IN 24 HR.). ANY REQUIRED REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY. SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN IT REACHES 1/3HEIGHT OF THE FENCE OR 9 INCHES MAXIMUM.
THE REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL VEGETATE OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED.
Scale: NTS
SILT FENCE 4
FILTER FABRICEXTRA STRENGTHNEEDED MESH
SUPPORT WITHOUT
WIRE
Scale: NTS
FIBER ROLLS 3
2" MIN
4" MAX
12"
MIN
LOCATE FIBER ROLLS ON LEVEL CONTOURS SPACED AS FOLLOWS:
- SLOPE INCLINATION OF 4 :1 (H:V) OR FLATTER: FIBER ROLLS SHOULD BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL OF 20 FT.
- SLOPE INCLINATION BETWEEN 4:1 AND 2:1 (H:V) FIBER ROLLS SHOULD BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL OF 15 FT. (A CLOSER SPACING IS MORE EFFECTIVE).
- SLOPE INCLINATION OF 2:1 (H:V) OR GREATER: FIBER ROLLS SHOULD BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL OF 10 FT. (A CLOSER SPACING IS MORE EFFECTIVE).
- TURN THE ENDS OF THE FIBER ROLL UP SLOPE TO PREVENT RUNOFF FROM GOING AROUND THE ROLL. STAKE FIBER ROLLS INTO A 2 TO 4 IN. DEEP TRENCH WITH A WIDTH EQUAL TO THE DIAMETER OF THE FIBER ROLL. - DRIVE STAKES AT THE END OF EACH FIBER ROLL AND SPACED 4 FT MAXIMUM ON CENTER.- USE WOOD STAKES WITH A NOMINAL CLASSIFICATION OF 0.75 BY 0.75 IN. AND A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 24 IN.- IF MORE THAN ONE FIBER ROLL IS PLACED IN A ROW, THE ROLLS SHOULD BE OVERLAPPED, NOT ABUTTED.
REPAIR OR REPLACE SPLIT, TORN, UNRAVELING OR SLUMPING FIBER ROLLS.
IF THE FIBER ROLL IS USED AS A SEDIMENT CAPTURE DEVICE, OR AS AN EROSION CONTROL DEVICE TO MAINTAIN SHEET FLOWS, SEDIMENT THAT ACCUMULATES IN THE BMP MUST BEPERIODICALLY REMOVED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN BMP EFFECTIVENESS. SEDIMENT SHOULD BEREMOVED WHEN SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION REACHES ONE-HALF THE DESIGNATED SEDIMENT
STORAGE DEPTH, USUALLY ONE-HALF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TOP OF THE FIBER ROLL AND THE ADJACENT GROUND SURFACE. SEDIMENT REMOVED DURING THE MAINTENANCE MAY BE INCORPORATED INTO EARTHWORK ON THE SITE OR DISPOSED AT AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION.
ALL CONSTRUCTION SITES
DELINEATE CLEARING LIMITS, SENSITIVE OR CRITICAL AREAS, TREES, DRAINAGE
COURSES, AND BUFFER ZONES TO PREVENT EXCESSIVE OR UNNECESSARY DISTURBANCE AND EXPOSURE OF SOIL.
1. IDENTIFY ALL STORM DRAINS, DRAINAGE SWALES AND CREEKS LOCATED NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE AND MAKE SURE ALL SUBCONTRACTORS ARE AWARE OFTHEIR LOCATIONS TO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING THEM.
2. PRESERVE EXISTING VEGETATION, WHERE REQUIRED AND WHEN FEASIBLE, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
3. PHASE GRADING OPERATIONS, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, TO LIMIT AREAS OF
DISTURBANCE AND TIME OF EXPOSURE
4. AVOID AND/OR MINIMIZE IMPACTS OF EXCAVATION AND GRADING DURING WET WEATHER AND IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING EXPECTED WET WEATHER.
5. MINIMIZE CUTS AND FILLS.
6. IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO MINIMIZE EROSION, MANAGE STORM WATER RUNOFF,
AND PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FROM ENTERING STORM DRAINS.
7. ALIGN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT ROADS AND DRIVEWAYS ALONG SLOPE CONTOURS.
8. 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, AND PREVENT WASH WATER FROM ENTERING STORM DRAINS.
MINIMIZE SOIL MOVEMENT
1. 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 CAPITOLA.
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 • • • • • • • •• • •• • • •• • •• • • • • •• • • • • • • • •• • • •• •• • •• • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • •• • • • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••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 ANDDISPOSED OF AS TRASH. CHEMICAL PAINT STRIPPING RESIDUE AND CHIPS ANDDUST FROM MARINE PAINTS OR PAINTS CONTAINING LEAD OR TRIBUTYL TINMUST 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 BEMAINTAINED 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 DAMSAROUND 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 BYBLOCKING 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 BASESTOCKPILE, OR DISPOSE WITH TRASH.
12. RECYCLE BROKEN CONCRETE AND ASPHALT.
HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILL PREVENTION, SPILL REPORTING
AND RESPONSE
1. 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 OFTHE 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 ANDREMOVE 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 ASHAZARDOUS 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.
NOTE:
1. INSPECT AND REPAIR FENCE AFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN NECESSARY.
2. REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DEPOSITED AT AN AREA THAT WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE SEDIMENT OFF-SITE AND CAN BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED.
3. SILT FENCE SHALL BE REPLACED ON SLOPE CONTOURS TO MAXIMIZE PONDING EFFICIENCY.
FILTER FABRIC
ATTACH SECURELYTO UPSTREAM
SIDE OF POST.
WOOD POST
36" HIGH MAX
4"x6" TRENCH
WITH COMPACTED
BACKFILL
10 FT MAX SPACING WITH
WIRE SUPPORT FENCE 6
FT MAX SPACING WITHOUT
WIRE SUPPORT FENCE
VERTICAL SPACING
MEASURED ALONG
THE FACE OF THE
SLOPE VARIES
BETWEEN 10' AND
20'
NOTE: INSTALLFIBER ROLL ALONG
A LEVEL CONTOUR
INSTALL A FIBER ROLL NEAR SLOPE
WHERE IT TRANSITIONS INTO A
STEEPER SLOPE
4' MAX
4' MAX
4' MAX
4' MAX
FIBERROLLS
SLOPE
VARIES
FIBER ROLL
8" •• MIN
3/4"X3/4"
WOOD
STAKES
WHEELWASHAREA
PROPERTYLINE
STD.CURB
20'
MINIMUM
WIDTH
RAMP - FULL WIDTHOF ENTRY
DRAINAGE
50' MIN.
SILT FENCE (SEE SILT
FENCE DETAIL)
15' RADIUS (TYP)
NOTES:
1. INTENDED FOR
SHORT-TERM USE.
2. USE TO INHIBIT
NON-STORM WATER FLOW.
3. ALLOW FOR PROPER
MAINTENANCE AND CLEANUP.
4. BAGS MUST BE REMOVED
AFTER ADJACENT OPERATION
IS COMPLETED
5. NOT APPLICABLE IN AREAS
WITH HIGH SILTS AND CLAYSWITHOUT FILTER FABRIC.
EDGE OFPAVEMENT INLET
SANDBAGS
2-BAGS
HIGH
FLOW FLOW
INLET EDGE OF PAVEMENT
SPILLWAY, 1-BAG HIGH
SANDBAGS
2-BAGSHIGH
LATH & FLAGGING
ON ALL SIDES
PLYWOOD
48" X 24"
PAINTED WHITE
N.T.S. N.T.S.
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 THE ASSOCIATION 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 SECONDARYDEFENSE 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 AND IMPLEMENT THE MEASURES IMMEDIATELY. DOCUMENT ALL INSPECTION FINDINGS ANDACTIONS TAKEN.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR CONTROL OF STORM WATER RUNOFF (E.G. GRAVEL BAGS AT CATCH BASIN INLETS).
L100
1" = 40'
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:
Job:
Of Sheets
Sheet:
REVISIONS BY
05.25.22 JB/ZL
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,
2014.01
INC.
Engineers/Planners
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
831.438.4420
2 CASA WAY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
A
1 2 3 4 56 7 8
1 SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
GRANITE RIDGE PROPERTIES
1 23 4 56 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
1. LANDSCAPE SHALL COMPLY WITH SCOTT'S VALLEY'S WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE POLICY.
2. ALL UN-PAVED AREAS SHALL BE TOP-DRESSED WITH 2"-3" OF ORGANIC MULCH.
3. ALL PLANTING SHALL BE IRRIGATED BY AN AUTOMATIC, WATER CONSERVING IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
4. ALL TREES PLANTED WITHIN 4' OF BUILDINGS, WALLS, CURBS OR PAVEMENT WILL BE INSTALLED WITH ROOT BARRIERS.
5. ALL TREE SHALL BE PLANTED FROM 15 GALLON CONTAINERS, EXCEPT IF NOTED.
6. A MINIMUM OF ONE FOOT DEPTH OF NON-MECHANICALLY COMPACTED SOIL SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR WATER ABSORPTION AND ROOT GROWTH IN PLANTED AREAS. RIP AND /OR ROTOTILL AS REQUIRED.
City of Scotts Valley
Sandraya Heights Land Division Initial Study
November 2023
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Table of Contents | Page i
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Table of Contents
Initial Study 1
Background & Project Description ............................................................................................... 1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................. 2 Environmental Checklist .............................................................................................................. 3 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ............................................................................................. 4 Air Quality .................................................................................................................................... 6 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 11 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 21 Energy ................................................................................................................................ 252524 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................... 262625 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................ 292928 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................... 313130 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................ 343433 Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................... 373736 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................. 383837 Noise .................................................................................................................................. 393938 Population and Housing ..................................................................................................... 414140 Public Services .................................................................................................................... 424241 Recreation .......................................................................................................................... 434342 Transportation ................................................................................................................... 444443 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 464645 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................. 484847 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................... 505049 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................... 515150 Determination .................................................................................................................... 545453
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Table of Contents | Page ii
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
List of Figures
Figure 1: Regional Location
Figure 2: Project Vicinity
Figure 3: Site Plan
Figure 4: Grading Plan
Figure 5: Biotic Habitats
Figure 6: Scotts Valley Spineflower Critical Habitat
Figure 7: Landscape Plan
Note: All figures and appendices are inserted at the end of the document.
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Biological Evaluation Report
Appendix B: Arborist Report
Appendix C: Archeological Review and Field Inventory
Appendix D: Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix E: Stormwater Control Plan
Appendix F: Focused Transportation Study
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 1
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Initial Study
Background & Project Description
Project Title
Sandraya Heights Land Division
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Scotts Valley
One Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
Contact Person and Phone Number
Jonathan Kwan
Contract Planner
[email protected]
Project Location
As shown in Figure 1: Regional Location, and Figure 2: Project Vicinity, the project site is on one 5.88-acre parcel (APN 023-113-36) located north of the Casa Way and Sandraya Heights Road intersection.
Project Applicant
Granite Ridge Properties
225 Demeter Street
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
408-799-7395
General Plan Designation
Residential Low Density: 2 du/acre
Zoning
Residential Single-Family (R-1-20)
Project Description
As shown in Figure 3: Site Plan, the proposed Sandraya Heights Land Division (the project) is a Land Division to create nine single-family residential lots, on an existing 5.88-acre lot (the project site).
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 2
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
The project site is located within the R-1-20 Single-Family Residential Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot density of 20,000 square feet. The residential lots would range in size from 20,053 sf to 22,852 sf.
Six of the proposed lots would be accessed via a new access road that would connect to Grace Way and Casa Way and would include a cul de sac and concrete drive aprons. The remaining three lots would be accessed from a new cul de sac at the end of San Augustine Way.
As shown in Figure 4: Grading Plan, grading for the project would require a cut of 2,300 cubic yards of soil, and fill of 9,700 cubic yards, for a net import of 7,400 cubic yards. Stormwater would flow generally north to south across the project site.
Storm drainage from constructed impervious surfaces (e.g., roofs, driveways) would be conveyed via curbs and gutter to channelized surface flow and direct runoff into a series of collector storm drainpipes to three underground storage and infiltration chambers located under the new access road that extends from Casa and one chamber located between Lots 8 and 9.
Water and sewer services would connect to an existing six-inch sanitary sewer and eight-inch water main located on Sandraya Heights Road.
Project-Related Approvals and Permits
Approvals and permits required for the project include:
Land Division
Environmental Assessment
Other public agencies whose approval is required
None.
Environmental Setting
Background and Intent
The purpose of the project is to allow for the subdivision of the project site (Lots 1 through 9) and the construction of nine single-family residential units.
Project Site and Existing Facilities
The project site (APN 023-113-36) is currently vacant. The General Plan designation is Residential Low Density, and the zoning designation is Residential Single-Family (R-1-20).
Surrounding the project are single-family residences, a church to the northeast, and the Scotts Valley Fire Department to the northeast.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 3
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Environmental Checklist
This analysis uses the Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines as a framework to address each environmental resource.
Aesthetics
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
X
a) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
X
b) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings. (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is
in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
c) Create a new source of substantial light
or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?
X
Discussion
Scenic Vista
The project site vacant and is surrounded by residential uses. The project site is flat and would not block any scenic vista nor substantially change an important view from a scenic vantage point, and therefore there would be no impact.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 4
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Scenic Resources and Visual Character
The project site is not located along a state scenic highway or designated scenic corridor.
Although the project would represent a visual change from the existing conditions, it would be consistent with the type of residential development that currently exists in the area and is consistent with the policies related to visual resources in the General Plan.
Because there are no scenic resources and the visual character would not be substantially altered, there would be no impact.
Light and Glare
Existing ambient sources of nighttime lighting include lighting of building exteriors and architectural accents, illumination through windows, landscape lighting, street lighting, parking lot lighting, and vehicle headlights. The project would include outdoor lighting typical of a residential development.
The project design incorporates low-level lighting fixtures that would minimize lighting affects the adjacent properties. Furthermore, as a condition of approval, the project applicant would be required to use no pole lights and utilize down-directed fixtures on building exteriors with concealed light sources. Consistent with City building regulations, lighting will need to be controlled for security, aesthetics, safety, and identification without interfering with adjacent land uses. Implementation of these standard conditions of approval would reduce potential offsite light impacts to a less than significant level.
Findings
The project would not affect a scenic vista or scenic resource, would not change the visual character of the project area, and therefore there would be no impact. The project would not result in a substantial change to light and glare and therefore impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 5
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X
Discussion
The property is not located on land that is classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resource Agency. The site is zoned Residential Single-Family (R-1-20). Therefore, no agricultural impacts would occur as a result of the project.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 6
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Findings
As described above, there would be no impact on agricultural resources. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Air Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X
Discussion
Air Quality Plan and Air Quality Standards
The project site is located within the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB), which includes Monterey County, San Benito County, and Santa Cruz County, comprising an area of approximately 5,159 square miles along the central California coast. The Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) is responsible for local control and monitoring of criteria air pollutants throughout the NCCAB.
MBARD has developed the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region (2012 AQMP) The 2012 AQMP is a transitional plan shifting focus of MBARD’s efforts from achieving the 1-hour component of the State ozone AAQS to achieving the 8-hour ozone
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 7
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
requirement. The Plan includes an updated air quality trends analysis, which reflects both the 1- and 8-hour standards, as well as an updated emission inventory, which includes the latest information on stationary, area and mobile emission sources.
In March 2017, MBARD adopted the 2012-2015 Triennial Plan Revision, which assesses and updates elements of the 2012 AQMP, including the air quality trends analysis, emission inventory, and mobile source programs. The 2017 AQMP Revision only addresses attainment of the State ozone standard. In 2012, EPA designated the NCCAB as in attainment of the current national 8-hour ozone standard of 0.075 ppm1.
The following MBARD rules would limit emissions of air pollutants from construction and operation of residential development pursuant to the project:
Rule 400 (Visible Emissions) – Discharge of visible air pollutant emissions into the atmosphere from any emission source for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any one hour, as observed using an appropriate test method, is prohibited.
Rule 402 (Nuisances) - No person shall discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public; or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
Rule 425 (Use of Cutback Asphalt) – The use of cutback asphalt (asphalt cement that has been blended with petroleum solvents) is restricted.
Rule 426 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule limits the emissions of ROGs from the use of architectural coatings.
The MBARD’s 2008 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines provides criteria for determining cumulative impacts and consistency. The CEQA Air Quality Guidelines note that a project which is inconsistent with an Air Quality Plan would have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Any emissions sources that would be generated as part of the project would be subject to the MBARD rules and regulations. The proposed development (the point source) does not include any processes or activities that would emit significant air pollutants. The proposed use would not conflict with the AQMP for the Monterey Bay Region and would not make a 1 On October 1, 2015, U.S. EPA adopted a new 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm. However, U.S. EPA has not yet reviewed recent NCCAB emissions to determine attainment with the current 0.070 ppm standard. Therefore, this attainment status is based upon U.S. EPA’s prior 0.075 ppm standard.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 8
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
considerable contribution to this existing, cumulatively significant ozone impact. Impacts would be less than significant.
Construction
MBARD CEQA Guidelines state that construction activities (e.g., excavation, grading, on-site vehicles) that emit 82 pounds per day or more of PM10 would have a significant impact on local air quality when they are located nearby and upwind of sensitive receptors. Based on this emissions threshold, construction activity occurring on more than 2.2 acres per day may result in significant PM10 emissions (MBARD, 2015). Because development of the project would not result construction activity occurring on more than 2.2 acres per day, impacts would be less than significant.
Furthermore, standard conditions of approval would require that development projects reduce dust generation from project grading and construction to minimal levels. The project proponent shall require the grading contractor to implement best management practices (BMPs) for dust control, including watering down exposed earth surfaces each non-rainfall day at intervals that attenuate dust problems as part of its construction operations. Any dirt tracked on to adjacent roadways shall be removed daily in a manner that does not create substantial airborne dust.
The following BMPs shall be included in the building plans for the project and be implemented during site grading:
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). 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 stockpile areas daily as needed.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 9
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
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.
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.
Operational
The project would result in new long-term operational emissions from mobile sources (burning of fossil fuels in cars); energy sources (cooling, heating, and cooking); and area sources (landscape equipment and household products). Mobile source emissions constitute most operational emissions from this type of development project. However, based on the singlefamily residential development proposed, emissions associated with operation of the project would not exceed any applicable MBARD thresholds. Therefore, the project would not generate a significant level of operational emissions and impacts would be less than significant.
Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors in the vicinity include single-family residential uses located adjacent to the project site.
Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust which is a known toxic air containment (TAC). The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has identified diesel exhaust particulate matter as a toxic air contaminant, and assessment of toxic air contaminant cancer risks is typically based upon a 70-year exposure period. Project grading and construction activities that would utilize diesel-powered equipment would expose receptors to possible diesel exhaust for a very limited number of days (approximately 10 days). Because exposure to diesel exhaust would be well below the 70-year exposure period and given the limited and short-term duration of activities that would use diesel equipment, constructionrelated diesel emissions are not considered significant.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 10
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Furthermore, the State is implementing emission standards for different classes of on- and offroad diesel vehicles and equipment that applies to off-road diesel fleets and includes measures such as retrofits. Additionally, Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations (section 2485(c)(1)) prohibits idling of a diesel engine for more than five minutes in any location.
Therefore, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and the emissions would remain below levels of significance. Potential exposure of sensitive receptors to diesel emissions and associated risks is considered a less-thansignificant impact, and no mitigation measures are required.
Additionally, standard conditions of approval require that prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Director of Public Works and the Building Official shall confirm that the grading permit and specifications stipulate that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment comply with the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation.
Odors
During construction activities, temporary odors from vehicles exhaust and construction equipment engine would occur. However, construction-related odors would be short-term and would cease upon completion. Therefore, no objectionable odors are anticipated from construction activities associated with the project and there would be no impact.
Land uses typically producing objectionable odors include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The project does not include any uses that would be associated with objectionable odors. Odor emissions from the project would be limited to odors associated with vehicle and engine exhaust and idling cars. The project does not include any known sources of objectionable odors associated with the long-term operational use and therefore there would be no impact.
Findings
A significant air quality impact is defined as any violation of an ambient air quality standard, any substantial contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation, or any exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. As discussed above, the MBARD thresholds of significance have not been exceeded. Therefore, there would be no significant air quality impacts and no mitigation is required in addition to the City's standard conditions of approval for construction dust control at the time of development.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 11
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Biological Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or
by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 12
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
X
Discussion
A Biological Evaluation Report was prepared for the project site in February of 2023 by Live Oaks Associates (see Appendix A). Live Oak Associates also prepared an Arborist Report for the project in November 2019 (see Appendix B). The analysis below is based on a peer review and findings as described in these reports.
Sensitive Natural Communities, Special Status Species, and Wildlife Corridors and Nursery Sites
The site is currently used for multi-recreational purposes and has trails heavily used by dirt bikers, dog-walkers, and walkers. As shown in Figure 5: Biotic Habitats, habitats identified on the project site include: 1) California annual grassland, 2) coast live oak woodland, 3) Arroyo willow woodland, and 4) coyote brush scrub. These vegetation communities provide habitats small mammals, birds, and reptiles that are commonly found in the region.
Special Status Plants
The California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2021) and the California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2021) were queried for special status species occurrences in the Felton USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle in which the project site occurs and for the seven surrounding quadrangles (Big Basin, Castle Rock Ridge, Los Gatos, Davenport, Laurel, Santa Cruz, and Soquel). These species and their potential to occur on the project site are summarized in Tables 1 and 2 in Appendix A. Other factors considered in this evaluation include the capacity of the on-site habitats and microhabitats to support the species, geographical distance of the project site from known populations or occurrences of the species, and ability of the species to travel from areas of known occurrences to the project site.
Figures 3a and 3b in Appendix A display the general locations of special status species reported in the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) (CDFW 2021).
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 13
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
As explained in the Biological Evaluation Report, because serpentine and alkaline soils are absent from the site, those species that are uniquely adapted to these soil conditions are also considered to be absent including the serpentine leptosiphon (Leptosiphon ambiguus), Santa Clara valley dudleya (Dudleya ambramsii ssp. setchellii), and phlox-leaf serpentine bedstraw (Galium andrewsii ssp. gatense).
One species, Scott’s Valley polygonum (Polygonum hickmanii), share similar habitats to that of the Spineflower in that they could occur within the open, unshaded grasslands on sandstonederived soils of the site. However, tThis species is absent from the Pproject site as noted in Appendix A and it was not detected during the June 2022 survey and August 2023 site visit that was appropriately timed for this species blooming period. Furthermore, consultations with local ecologists show negative findings of these species on the project site in previous years including 2018. Extensive literature reviews and database searches do not indicate current or historical onsite presence of this species prior to 2018, indicating the unlikelihood of a viable seedbank on the site (LOA, 2023).
Appendix A explains why other special status plant species that occur in specific habitats are not present on the project site and not discussed further. Special status plant species occurring in multiple habitats found on the site, including those found in valley and foothill grassland and cismontane woodland, are listed in Tables 1a and 1b in Appendix A.
Arroyo Willow Woodland
A small grove of Arroyo willows (Salix lasiolepis) occurs at the southeastern corner of the site and is considered a rare and sensitive natural community and association (CDFW 2021, South Environmental 2021). Arroyo willows typically occur on wetlands and form dense thickets along drainages (CNPS 2021). The Arroyo woodlands on the site likely collect run-off from the adjacent residences and roads. A culvert parallel to Sandraya Heights Road collects run-off into a ditch that drains into a grassland swale (Section 2.3.1) and these willow-dominated woodlands.
The U.S. National Wetland Plant list (USACE 2018) identifies arroyo willows as a facultative wetland plant, that is, plants that usually occur in wetlands but rarely occurs (1-33% probability) in uplands. Historic aerial photos indicate no presence of wetlands and these arroyo willow woodlands prior to the onset of residential development surrounding the site. In general, these historical aerial photos show the change in vegetation composition of the site over the amount of time that development has increased in Scotts Valley. It is likely that the arroyo woodlands of the site were influenced and developed over time by hydrological changes (e.g., increased runoff) resulting from surrounding development. Mitigation for impacts to the Arroyo Woodland would be accommodated through the mitigation of tree removal, described below.
Scotts Valley Spineflower
The Scotts Valley Spineflower was observed on the site during the March, April and May 2022 rare plant surveys. Specifically, this species was observed near the confluence of trails on the
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 14
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
grasslands at the northwestern section of the site. 2 As shown in Figure 5: Biotic Habitats, two colonies consisting of approximately 185 individual species and spanning approximately 140 sf. were observed. These rare plant surveys were timed to coincide with the species blooming period when they would be evident and most identifiable.
The USFWS often designates areas of critical habitat when it lists species as threatened or endangered. Critical habitat is a specific geographic area(s) that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species which may require special management and protection. For the Scotts Valley spineflower, essential features include the presence of thin soils formed over Purisima sandstone or Santa Cruz mudstone, wildflower field habitat, stable grasslands over time, and an area to allow populations to survive catastrophic events and re-colonize suitable sites (USFWS 2002). Other features also include pollination and seed dispersal between colonies, as well as adequate watershed protection to protect spineflower habitat and maintain soil and hydrologic conditions necessary to support species growth and reproduction (USFWS 2002, WRA et al., 2017). More importantly, designated critical habitat has to be large enough to maintain ecological functions which the species depends on (USFWS 2002).
As shown in Figure 6: Scotts Valley Spineflower Critical Habitat, occurrence of Scotts Valley spineflower on the project site is located outside the critical habitat for the Scotts Valley Spineflower. The USFWS has designated critical habitat for the spineflower and the Scotts Valley polygonum in two units: Glenwood and Polo Ranch. The Glenwood unit consists of the Glenwood Preserve, Scotts Valley High School Preserve and Salvation Army property. The Polo Ranch unit consists of the Polo Ranch Open Space Preserve situated within the city limits of Scotts Valley. The designated critical habitat for both units cover 287 ac, where the Glenwood Unit covers 74.6% (214 ac) and the Polo Ranch unit covers 25.4 % (73 ac) of total critical habitat. Although the site is outside of critical habitat, on-site spineflower coverage is .001% of total known habitat for the Scotts Valley spineflower.
Development of the project would cause a significant impact to the 185 individual Scotts Valley Spineflower located on the project site. Mitigation for significant impacts to rare plants usually takes the form of avoidance, minimization, and/or compensation measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Given the project’s objectives to construct nine residential lots and associated infrastructure, avoidance for such a small population of Scotts Valley spineflower is not practical on the project site. Furthermore, the on-site vegetation communities, including the coyote brush scrub, arroyo willow woodlands, and coast live oak woodlands, do not serve as suitable habitat for the spineflower.
Considering the lack of other on-site habitat for the spineflower and the documented low success rate of transplanting rare plants (CNPS 1991), particularly for the spineflower (Kofron 2 These surveys did not detect the Scotts Valley polygonum, which often co-occurs with the spineflower (Live Oak Associates, 2023).
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 15
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
and Lyons 2014), it is not expected that on-site preservation will result in the full mitigation of replacing impacted plants at a 2:1 ratio and enhancing the value and ecological function of spineflower habitat.
Off-site mitigation would involve compensating additional conservation efforts that benefit existing off-site spineflower populations to increase habitat value, reduce threats to spineflower populations, and ensure that species will persist and thrive on managed and permanently secured spineflower habitat. As such, off-site mitigation was determined to be more practical. Implementation of mitigation measure MM BIO -1.1: Spineflower Off-site Mitigation and Plant Resource Conservation Plan would reduce this impact to less than significant.
Special Status Animals
The Biological Evaluation Report identified wildlife that would be treated as absent from the site including those species requiring specific habitats, including breeding and upland habitats, which do not exist on the site. These include the California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii), and western pond turtle (Emys marmorata). Finally, the marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) would not occur on the site due to the lack of suitable habitat, including old growth redwood forests.
Two special status species, the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and the Monarch butterfly, are present on the site. However, the Monarch butterfly overwintering habitats are absent from the site. Therefore, the project is not expected to have a substantial adverse effect on monarch overwintering habitat.
The pallid bat, a California state species of special concern, has some potential to forage and roost on the site. Although project development would result in the loss of a small amount of habitat for the San Francisco dusky footed woodrat and pallid bat, the site’s residential setting, routine mowing, and disturbance from unregulated recreational activities limits its habitat value for these species. Regardless, impacts to individual Monarch butterflies, pallid bats, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats would be significant, and mitigation would be required.
Although project development would result in the loss of a small amount of habitat for the San Francisco dusky footed woodrat and pallid bat, the site’s residential setting, routine mowing, and disturbance from unregulated recreational activities limits its habitat value for these species. Habitats of much higher quality are relatively abundant north of the site in the Glenwood Preserve as well as west of the site. These areas will remain available to these species following project implementation. Therefore, the project does not have the potential to substantially impact these species through loss of habitat and impacts would be less-thansignificant.
If individuals of any of these special status species are present at the time of construction, they may be at risk of construction-related injury or mortality. Foraging individuals would not be particularly vulnerable to construction-related injury or mortality, as they are capable of simply
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 16
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
flying away from construction disturbance. Regardless, construction-related impacts to individual pallid bats, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats, the monarch butterfly, and nesting migratory birds and raptors would be potentially significant. Mitigation measures MM BIO 1.2 through 1.5 would reduce these construction-related impacts to less than significant.
Wildlife Corridors / Nursery Site
As an urban infill site, the project would not impede the movement of native wildlife nursery sites or migratory wildlife corridors. As such, the project would have no impact on wildlife corridors or nursery site.
State and Federal Regulated Waterways and Federal Wetlands Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act protects wetland habitats that are classified as federal “jurisdictional wetlands”. Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code also protects wetland habitats and requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement to be obtained from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) for the alteration of most wetlands. As documented in the Biological Evaluation Report by Live Oaks Associates (February August 2023, see Appendix A), there are no jurisdictional waters, or other types of wetlands on the project site. Thus, the project would have no impact and no mitigation is required.
Conflict with Local Polices, HCP or NCCP, or Other Conservation Plan Per SVMC Section 17.44.080(E)(4), tree removal request shall be included as part of the development application, including an arborist's report, and shall be approved by the planning commission or city council. The development review process shall seek to preserve healthy trees, trees that contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of an area, and to preserve significantly sized trees that are important to the overall landscape of an area.
As described in the Arborist Report (see Appendix B, a total of 105 trees representing nine different species were documented on the project site. In order of abundance these include; 71 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia); 10 box elder (Acer negundo); 10 arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis); three Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa); three Northern California black walnut (Juglans hindsii); two mayten (Maytenus boaria); two cherry plum (Prunus cerasifera); one fruiting pear (Pyrus communuis); and one blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea).
Eighty-one (81) of the 105 trees documented qualify as protected trees under the City of Scotts Valley Tree Protection Ordinance. These include: 57 coast live oaks; 10 arroyo willows; six box elders; three Monterey cypress; three Northern California black walnuts; one mayten; and one blue elderberry. No Heritage trees were identified on the project site.
As shown in Figure 7: Landscape Plan, the project would plant 26 California Redwoods, 26 Coast Love Oaks, and 26 Conifers. The Preliminary Tree Inventory recommended tree replacement to compensate for their removal at a 2:1 tree replacement using 15-gallon or 24-
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 17
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
inch box size trees. This recommendation is consistent with City regulations, as described above.
Standard conditions of project approval require the project applicant to implement all measures contained within the Preliminary Tree Inventory for the protection of existing trees to remain, including but not limited to the required procedures and sequence, required tree replacement, tree preservation and protection, and appraised value of preserved trees in the report.
Furthermore, no known habitat conservation plans are in effect for this project site. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any local policies or applicable HCP’s and there would be no impact.
Findings
The project would comply with the City’s standard conditions of approval wherein protected tree removals are compensated at a minimum of 2:1 ratio consistent with the City’s Tree Protection Regulations (17.44.080).
The project as designed would impact the Scotts Valley Spineflower, San Francisco DuskyFooted Woodrats, and pallid bats on site. These impacts to the special status species would be potentially significant. Mitigation for significant impacts to special status species below would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation
MM Bio – 1.1: Spineflower Mitigation
Off-Site Spineflower Mitigation Plan
Prior to recordation of the final map and any ground disturbance requiring issuance of a grading permit by the City of Scotts Valley associated with the project site, the project applicant shall submit documentation (an Off-Site Spineflower Mitigation Plan) to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department demonstrating acceptance by a third party (i.e., the Scotts Valley School District, the Salvation Army, Land Trust Santa Cruz County, or other appropriate entity) of off-site mitigation for the replacement of the 140 square feet of impacted spineflower on the project site at a minimum ratio of 32:1. Mitigation could include, but is not limited to; 1) restoration and/or conservation efforts that benefit existing off-site spineflower populations to increase habitat value, 2) reduce threats to spineflower populations, and 3) ensure that the species will persist and thrive on managed and permanently secure protected spineflower habitat, or 4) other suitable compensatory mitigation.
The Off-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan shall be reviewed prepared by an independently qualified third-party biologist (paid for by the project applicant) and reviewed for commentand approved by the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish & Wildlife.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 18
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
On-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan
If an Off-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan cannot be achieved, the project applicant shall prepare an On-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan prior to recordation of the final map and any ground disturbance requiring issuance of a grading permit by the City of Scotts Valley associated with the project site. The On-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan shall avoid disturbance to the 140 square feet existing spineflower habitat and include an appropriate buffer. It shall also include the consolidation of proposed Lots 1 and 2, which may be subdivided at a later date given an appropriate buffer to the spineflower habitat is provided. It shall also include measures to ensure long term protection of the spineflower habitat such as a conservation easement and the establishment of an endowment fund to manage and monitor the preserved habitat areas in perpetuity.
The On-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan shall be reviewed prepared by an independently qualified third-party biologist (paid for by the project applicant) and reviewed for commentand approved by U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish & Wildlife.
MM BIO-1.2: Focused Surveys and Relocation Plan for Roosting Bats Conduct Habitat Assessment and Preconstruction Survey
A bat habitat assessment will be conducted by an independently qualified biologist to identify all trees on the site that have the potential to support roosting bats. Trees and structures determined not to support bat roosting habitat may be removed at any time of year without harm to individual bats. However, any trees identified as providing potential bat roosting habitat will be visually surveyed during a pre-construction survey, as described below.
A pre-construction visual survey of all trees that were determined to provide potential roosting habitat will be conducted no more than seven days prior to any tree/vegetation removal activities to determine whether roosting bats are present. If the biologist determines that no bats are present, then the tree can be removed at any time of year and will not require a twostep removal process. If bats are determined to be present or if use of the tree by bats cannot be determined during the pre-construction survey, then additional measures including nighttime emergence surveys, construction-free buffers and/or a two-step tree removal will be implemented, as described below.
Two-Step Tree Removal
Two-step removal of trees may be utilized to remove trees identified as currently supporting roosting bats or to remove trees that were determined to provide potential habitat but could not be adequately visually surveyed during the pre-construction survey. However, a two-step tree removal can only be conducted outside of the maternity and over-wintering seasons, i.e., can only be conducted during the periods from March 1 to April 15 or from August 15 to October 15, and only when fair-weather nights are forecasted.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 19
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
The two-step removal process consists of two consecutive days of work. On Day 1, a qualified biologist would direct a tree trimming crew to trim the tree in such a way as to make the tree less suitable/attractive for bats. To the degree practicable, removed branches should be chipped nearby. The disturbance caused by the noise and vibration of the tree trimming and chipping during Day 1 would serve to encourage any bats using the tree to vacate their roosts.
The following day, the tree would be completely removed. A qualified biologist does not need to be present during the Day 2 tree removal activities. To the extent practicable, Day 1 activities should occur in the afternoon or early evening and Day 2 activities should occur during morning hours.
Nighttime Emergence Survey
Alternately, for any trees that could not be adequately visually surveyed during the preconstruction survey, a nighttime emergence survey can be conducted by an independently qualified biologist on a fair-weather night during the volant season (March 1-October 15) to determine if bats are present. If bats are found to be absent, the tree can be removed; if bats are found to be present, and it is within the maternity season (April 15-August 15), further investigation must occur to determine whether a maternity colony is roosting in the tree. If bats are found to be present and it is outside of the maternity season (March 1 through April 14 or August 16 through October 15), the two-step removal process could be utilized to remove the tree, as described above.
Construction-free Buffers
If a maternity colony or overwintering colony is identified on the site, then a construction-free buffer will be established around the tree(s) and remain in place until it has been determined that the colony is no longer active. Tree removal should occur between March 1 and April 14 or between August 16 and October 15, as described above, utilizing the two-step removal method to avoid interfering with an active nursery and/or overwintering bats.
MM BIO-1.3: Focused Surveys and Relocation Plan for Dusky-Footed Woodrats Pre-Construction Survey
An independently qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat nests no more than 30 days and no less than 14 days prior to the onset of construction activities. This survey timing allows for the scheduling of woodrat nest deconstruction. The survey will encompass all construction zones and surrounding lands within 50 feet. If the results of focused surveys for are negative, no further mitigation is required. If surveys do find the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat present, the applicant shall prepare a plan to avoid and minimize impacts of the project on the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, as described below.
Nest Deconstruction and Relocation
Identified nests will be avoided, where possible. If avoidance is not possible, an independently qualified biologist shall prepare and submit a nest relocation plan to the CDFW for approval
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 20
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
prior to the deconstruction and relocation of any nest(s). The project applicant shall submit documentation to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department demonstrating approval by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) of the relocation plan for the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat.
The CDFW approved plan would likely include manually deconstructing any nests that cannot be avoided. This deconstruction will be conducted by a qualified biologist (approved by CDFW) likely when helpless young are not present, typically during the non-breeding season (OctoberJanuary). If practicable, any woodrat nests that are deconstructed as per the above shall be reconstructed on the site within appropriate habitat that will not be impacted by the project.
Construction-free Buffers
If it is determined during the pre-construction survey that young may be present, a suitable buffer depending on the timing within the breeding season (ranging from 15-50 feet) will be established around the nest and maintained during construction until the young are independent and have successfully moved from the nest on their own.
MM BIO-1.4: Focused Surveys and Relocation Plan for Monarch Butterfly Pre-construction Surveys and Avoidance
While a few individual monarch butterflies were observed in October and November of 2021 foraging on coyote brush flowers, no aggregates have been observed during surveys conducted on-site in the Fall of 2021 and Spring of 2022. Additionally, while aggregates are conspicuous, no occurrences have ever been reported for this site. Nonetheless, as a prudent measure, seven days prior to any construction activities, a monarch butterfly aggregates survey, conducted in favorable weather conditions, shall be conducted by a qualified biologist over the project site, and within 100 feet where access is possible.
If an active aggregation is present on the project site, all construction, grading, and construction-related noise shall be seasonally timed to avoid impacts to aggregating monarch butterflies. Alternatively, a temporary fence may be installed along the outer boundary of an adequate buffer zone (as determined by a qualified biologist) of an aggregation prior to any grading and construction activities on the project site. With authorization of an approved biologist, construction may occur within 100 feet of aggregations under the direction of a qualified biologist monitoring conditions on the project site.
If no aggregations are observed, no further mitigation is required.
Survey Requirements and Timing
Before the City issues grading or building permits, the project applicant shall submit written documentation that construction and grading is occurring outside the winter roosting season, or that monarch surveys have been conducted, and buffer requirements specified above are in place (if applicable). The designated biologist shall prepare and submit a written report of the findings of the pre-construction survey to Scotts Valley for review prior to finalization. This
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 21
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
measure, including the fencing location, shall be incorporated into the grading plans for the Project.
Monitoring
The project applicant shall provide written compliance before the City issues any grading or building permit(s) and designate an independently qualified biological monitor to conduct recurrent site inspections to ensure compliance throughout the construction period if monarch butterflies are present.
MM BIO -1.5: Focused Survey and Buffers for Nesting Migratory Birds and Raptors The applicant shall schedule all on-site tree removal and grading to occur between August 15th and February 1st of any given year to avoid the bird nesting season. If this schedule is not practical, the applicant shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction nesting bird surveys no more than two weeks prior to removal of trees and grading. If nesting birds are observed, the biologist will establish a buffer zone where no tree removal or grading will occur until the biologist confirms that all chicks have fledged. The buffer zone may vary from 50 to 250 feet, depending upon the species of bird and exposure of the nest site.
Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to in § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
§ 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries?
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 22
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Discussion
An Archeological Review and Field Inventory was prepared for the project site by Basin Research Associates in March 2023 (see Appendix C). The analysis below is based on a peer review and findings as described in this report. See comments Cultural Resources
On May 3, 2023, the City sent notifications via email to the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan and Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. Follow-up letters to both tribes were sent via certified mail on May 10, 2023. The City received one response from the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of San Juan Bautista on May 15, 2023, stating that all construction staff be trained for culturally sensitive construction activities, and that a qualified California trained archaeological monitor and qualified native American monitor be present during any grading.
The project site and immediate area are mapped within a High And Moderate Sensitivity Zone based on information available in the early 1990s and as shown in Figure OS Archaeological Sensitivity Zones. Research over the past 30 years suggests a low or low-moderate sensitivity for the project site and vicinity based on completed and ongoing development and the lack of significant reported discoveries.
As part of their background research, Basin Research Associates initiated a prehistoric and historic site record and literature search that was completed by the California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park (CHRIS/NWIC File No. 22-1225 dated 2/24/2023 by Murazzo). Reference material from the Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley and Basin Research Associates, San Leandro was also consulted.
Research results found that there are three studies on or adjacent to the project site with negative results. Thirty-three (33) additional studies are within 0.25 mile of the project area and the majority of the studies are negative for cultural resources.
There are no historic resources (archaeological and/or built environment) within or adjacent to the project. There are two prehistoric sites, one prehistoric isolate, one historic structure, and two historic buildings within approximately 1,000 feet of the project site. A non-significant prehistoric isolated find is at least 200 feet north the project site.
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted for a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) (Busby 2023a) and the review was negative (Campagne 2023). The seven Native American tribes/individuals recommended for further outreach were contacted by Basin Research Associates on February 21, 2023 (Busby 2023b-h). No responses were received as of March 13, 2023, by Basin Research Associates (see Appendix C). No other agencies, departments or local historical societies were contacted regarding landmarks, potential historic sites or structures.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 23
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
A systematic archaeological survey of the project site was conducted by Mr. Christopher Canzonieri (MA, RPA), with Basin Research Associates on February 14, 2023. No evidence of prehistoric or historic cultural material and/or culturally modified sediments was observed during the survey.
Basin Research Associates concluded that the project could proceed as planned as it would not affect any recorded historic properties or potentially unique archaeological resources or known tribal cultural resources. Subsurface testing for buried archaeological resources was not recommended. While the discovery of subsurface archeological resources or tribal cultural resources is low, the City’s standard conditions of approval would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
Human Remains
No known human remains are located on the project site. Pursuant to section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, if human remains are discovered, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the discovery site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the project applicant has complied with the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e).
Findings
As discussed above, the project site is located within areas of moderate and high archaeological sensitivity. Implementation of the following City’s standard conditions of approval would reduce this impact to less than significant.
1. The project applicant shall ensure that notes on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources including prehistoric Native American burials.
2. The project applicant shall retain a Professional Archaeologist on an “on-call” basis during ground disturbing construction to review, identify and evaluate any potential cultural resources that may be inadvertently exposed during construction. The archaeologist shall review and evaluate any discoveries to determine if they are historical resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
3. If the Professional Archaeologist determines that any cultural resources exposed during construction constitute a historical resource and/or unique archaeological resource or tribal cultural resource under CEQA, he/she shall notify the City of Scotts Valley and other appropriate parties of the evaluation and recommend mitigation measures to mitigate to a less-than significant impact in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5. Mitigation measures may include avoidance, preservation inplace, recordation, additional archaeological testing and data recovery among other options.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 24
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
4. The completion of a formal Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) and/or Archaeological Treatment Plan (ATP) that may include data recovery may be recommended by the Professional Archaeologist if significant archaeological deposits are exposed during ground disturbing construction. Development and implementation of the AMP and ATP and treatment of significant cultural resources will be developed in consultation with any regulatory agencies and culturally affiliated Native American tribes who have expressed interest with tribal cultural resources for Scotts Valley.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 25
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Energy
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
X
Discussion
Energy consumption associated with construction of the project would be temporary and shortterm. Project design and operation would comply with State Building Energy Efficiency Standards, appliance efficiency regulations, and green building standards. Additionally, the project includes other design features including efficient low-energy lighting, and natural ventilation systems.
The project would also be required to be built according to City and State energy efficiency standards. The project would be required to comply with existing regulations, including applicable measures from the City’s General Plan. Vehicle trips and energy consumption would be less carbon intensive as compared to historic levels due to statewide compliance with future low carbon fuel standard amendments and increasingly stringent Renewable Portfolio Standards.
Findings
The project would comply with existing State energy standards and would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. There would be no impact to energy.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 26
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Geology and Soils
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
X
i) Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued
by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking?
X
iii) Seismic-related ground
failure, including liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
X
c) 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?
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 27
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X
Discussion
A geotechnical investigation was prepared for the project site by Earth Systems in March 2022 (see Appendix D). The analysis below is based on a peer review and findings as described in this report.
The approximate eastern half of the site is mapped as (Tsc) Santa Cruz Mudstone (upper Miocene) which is described as medium to thick-bedded and faintly laminated, blockyweathering, pale-yellowish-brown siliceous organic mudstone. The western half of the site is mapped as (Tp) Purisima Formation (Pliocene and upper Miocene) which is described as very thick-bedded yellowish-gray tuffaceous and diatomaceous siltstone containing thick interbeds of bluish gray, semi friable, fine-grained andesitic sandstone (Geologic Map of Santa Cruz Compiled by Earl E Brabb, 1997).
The site is located within a seismically active area but is outside an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Rupture Zone as delineated by the State of California. The site is not located within a liquefaction hazard zone as delineated by Santa Cruz County GIS.
The entire Central Coast Area is considered to be an active seismic region due to the presence of several active faults. Three northwest-trending major earthquake faults that are responsible for the majority of the movement on the San Andreas fault system extend through the San Francisco Bay Area. They include the San Andreas fault, the Calaveras fault and the Hayward fault, which are respectively located approximately 5.9 miles, 23.6 miles, and 28.3 miles to the northeast. Other faults closer to the site are the Zayante-Vergeles fault, Butano, and Sargent
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 28
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
fault which are respectively located approximately 2.5 miles, 5.3 miles, and 6.0 miles to the northeast.
As part of their investigation, Earth Systems conducted nine borings on the project site in December 2021 and February 2022. The borings drilled within the property encountered surficial soils consisting of sandy lean clay, clayey silt, and clayey sand of variable thickness.
They were underlain by very dense clayey sand which is interpreted as the Purissima Formation. Groundwater was encountered as shallow as four feet.
In general, Earth Systems concluded that the project site is geotechnically suitable for the proposed residential development provided the recommendations contained herein are incorporated in the design and implemented during site grading and foundation construction.
Earthquake Faults, Landslides, and Seismic Ground Shaking Project construction would subject the buildings and their inhabitants to periodic seismic shaking associated with the San Andreas Fault and other active faults within the Monterey Bay area. As part of the building permit application submitted to the City of Scotts Valley, the project applicant would be required to submit plans that comply with the latest California Building Code (CBC) standards consistent with Title 15 – Buildings and Construction of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code.
Prior to approval of any entitlements, City staff will review project plans and verify that the CBC Seismic requirements are printed on the plans. Building Division staff shall verify that CBC standards are met prior to issuance of Building Permits. Building inspectors shall conduct site inspections to assure that construction occurs consistent with approved plans.
The Scotts Valley 1994 General Plan, Figure S-3 ("Liquefaction Potential") indicates that the project site is not in an area for liquefaction. Figure S-4 ("Landslide Deposits") indicates that the site is not in an area containing landslide deposits. Figure S-5 ("Slopes") indicates that the project site is not located within any mapped geological hazard areas. Per the earthquake hazard zones defined by the Alquist-Priolo map, the risk of earthquake-induced ground rupture occurring across the project site is moderately low.
The geotechnical investigation determined that given the project site is generally level, and the potential for seismically induced landslides are low.
Because compliance with Title 15 – Buildings and Construction of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code is required for all future project, potential impacts associated with earthquake-related ground rupture would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Soil Erosion
The project would involve the removal of landscape vegetation and grading activities associated with the construction of buildings, infrastructure, and roads. Grading would largely be limited to the project site, which would limit the amount of exposed soil area that would be subject to
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 29
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
erosion. Measures to control erosion would be incorporated into the construction specifications pursuant to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for construction. In addition, to comply with the NPDES requirements for construction, projects involving construction on sites that are one acre or more are required to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that specifies how the discharger would protect water quality during construction activities. Compliance with the erosion control ordinances and acquisition of the NPDES General Permit for construction activities would ensure that soil erosion impacts associated with development pursuant to the project would be less than significant.
Sewage Disposal
The project would involve disposal of wastewater through the City’s existing sanitary sewer system, and there would be no septic systems constructed as part of the project. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Unique Geological Features and Paleontological Resources There are no known paleontological resources on the project site. However, development of the project could result in the discovery and disturbance of previously unknown or undiscovered paleontological resources. Should evidence of paleontological resources be encountered during grading and construction, adherence to City, State, and Federal historic preservation laws, regulations, and codes related to archaeological and paleontological resources would ensure the adequate protection of historic and pre-historic resources. This includes City standard conditions of approval requiring compliance with these laws should paleontological resources be encountered. With implementation of existing regulations, the impact would be less than significant.
Findings
Compliance with Title 15 – Buildings and Construction of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code and NPDES requirements would reduce any potential impacts associated with geological and soil resources to a less than significant impact. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 30
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Discussion
Construction
Construction of the project would result in direct emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 from the operation of construction equipment and the transport of materials. MBARD does not have a threshold for construction GHG emissions, which would be one-time, short-term emissions and therefore would not significantly contribute to long-term cumulative GHG emissions impacts of the project.
In the absence of quantitative significance thresholds in CEQA guidance, this analysis turns to other programs. For example, the CARB Mandatory Reporting program requirements are triggered for sources of GHG emissions exceeding 2,500 MTCO₂e) per year. AB 32 requires California agencies to take actions that would reduce GHG emissions by 2020 to the levels of 1990, and then substantially further reduce emissions by 2050. Most individual projects do not generate sufficient GHGs to create a project-specific impact to significantly influence climate change; therefore, this impact typically involves an analysis to determine if a project’s GHG emissions are cumulatively considerable (significant cumulative impact). Once construction is complete, the generation of construction related GHG emissions would cease. The project is not expected to exceed the CARB Mandatory Reporting applicability level of 2,500 MTCO2e per year. As a result, the short-term emission of GHG during construction would be less than significant.
Operational
Operational or long-term emissions would occur over the project’s life. GHG emissions would result from direct emissions such as project generated vehicular traffic, on-site combustion of natural gas, and operation of any landscaping equipment. Operational GHG emissions would also result from indirect sources, such as off-site generation of electrical power over the life of the project, the energy required to convey water to, and wastewater from the project site, the emissions associated with solid waste generated from the project site, and any fugitive
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 31
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
refrigerants from air conditioning or refrigerators. The project would meet CalGreen and CBC standards for energy efficiency standards including passive solar design and natural ventilation and natural lighting.
Additionally, the project includes water-efficient landscape, water-reducing features, and lowimpact development practices to reduce water use. The project is an example of “smart growth” strategies based on infill, density, and unit types. Energy use of the completed residential units would be less than similar units constructed in previous years because their construction is required to comply with the energy efficiency standards of the California Building Code. All these factors result in a project that would not significantly contribute to a cumulative GHG impact. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
Findings
While some GHGs would be generated as a result of development of the project, its contribution to GHGs would not be cumulatively considerable as the project is consistent with the General Plan and there would not be any significant impacts associated with GHGs.
Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 32
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on
a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X
Discussion
Hazardous Substances
Regarding on-site hazards, the project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No records of the project site were found pertaining to open cases of LUSTs, toxic releases, or site cleanup requirements.
It is likely that oils, lubricants, and similar materials may be used to maintain and/or fuel construction vehicles and machinery during the construction phase of the project. Standard
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 33
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
conditions of approval require the project applicant to have the construction contractor implement a best management practice/hazardous materials containment plan during the entire time construction activities are occurring. The hazardous materials containment plan shall contain the following elements:
Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, welding equipment shall be placed over drip pans or other containment apparatus.
Construction materials shall not be stockpiled or stored where they could be accidently discharged downslope or into Scotts Valley Drive.
Any petroleum, lubricants or other hazardous materials used during; and construction shall be stored in a special storage location equipped with double containment and this location shall be shown on the erosion control plan and approved by the agencies that review this plan.
The project’s residential uses may involve use and storage of some materials that are considered hazardous, although these materials are typically limited to everyday use solvents, paints, chemicals used for cleaning and building maintenance, and landscaping supplies. These materials would not be substantially different from household chemicals and solvents already in use throughout the City. Therefore, impacts associated with hazardous substances would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Release of Substances Near Schools
Scotts Valley High School is located approximately 940 feet north of the project site. However, project construction and operation would not involve the emission of hazardous materials, therefore impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Emergency Response
General Plan Safety Element Figure S-6 “Evacuation Routes” shows Scotts Valley Drive as a primary evacuation route in the City’s Emergency Response Plan. Construction of the project would not change the function of Scotts Valley Drive as a primary evacuation route. Therefore, the project would have no impact on emergency response.
Public Airport or Private Airstrip
The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Wildland Fire
Refer to the Wildfire Section below for further discussion.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 34
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Findings
The project site is not on a list of hazardous materials sites, nor would the residential use involve the use of hazardous materials that would require permitting by the Santa County Health Department and therefore impacts would be less than significant. The project would not impact the City’s primary evacuation routes, nor is it located within two miles of an airport, and therefore there would be no impacts. No mitigation is required.
Hydrology and Water Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of
a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
X
i. Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site?
X
ii. Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 35
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite?
iii. Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
X
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
Discussion
A stormwater control plan was prepared for the project site by C2G/Civil Consultants Group, Inc. in March 2023, refer to Appendix E (C2G/Civil Consultants Group, March 2023). The analysis below is based on the findings of the prepared report.
Groundwater Demand
According to the project plans, the project would use approximately 1,320 gallons per day of water. 3 The Scotts Valley Water District has reviewed the application and has determined that existing water resources would support the proposed development (SVWD Will Serve Letter, dated March 2, 2022). Therefore, there would be no impact. 3 Daily Water Use Factor for High Density Residential is 55 (gallons per capita/day). (24 residents x 55 gallons/day) = 1,320 (gallons/day)
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 36
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Groundwater Recharge
The project is not located in an area designated on the Scotts Valley General Plan Hydrological Resources Map, Figure OS-5, as a Potential Groundwater Recharge Area. According to the Stormwater Control Plan (C2G, March 2023), the project site does not contain impervious surface area as it is currently undeveloped. Redevelopment would increase the amount of impervious surface area by 56,963 sf. To offset the potential loss of groundwater infiltration, the project would include the use of curb and gutter to channelize surface flow and direct runoff into area drains and catch basins. Area Drains and catch basins would be used to collect runoff and convey it via underground pipes into four underground storage and infiltration chambers. This system would be designed to accommodate the relatively low infiltration rates found at this site. Therefore, there would be no impact and no mitigation is required.
Stormwater Runoff
The project applicant prepared a Stormwater Control Plan (SCP) (C2G/Civil Consultants Group, March 2022) to address potential impacts from stormwater runoff. The PSCP described project site-specific best management practices (BMPs) to control erosion and sedimentation and maintain water quality in accordance with the current edition of the City of Scotts Valley Stormwater Technical Guide. The BMPs address the construction and maintenance of storm drain inlets, irrigation and use of pesticides, maintenance of hardscapes, and maintenance of underground stormwater facilities.
Furthermore, standard conditions of approval require the project applicant and construction contractor to implement best management practices to prevent sedimentation and discharge of contaminants off-site during project construction, including hazardous materials containment plan during the entire time construction activities are occurring. The hazardous materials containment plan shall contain the following elements:
Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, welding equipment shall be placed over drip pans or other containment apparatus.
Construction materials shall not be stockpiled or stored where they could be accidently discharged downslope or into Scotts Valley Drive.
Any petroleum, lubricants or other hazardous materials used during; and construction shall be stored in a special storage location equipped with double containment and this location shall be shown on the erosion control plan and approved by the agencies that review this plan.
Implementation of recommendations as described in the SCP and preparation of a SWPPP for review and approval prior to construction activities would ensure that impacts from stormwater runoff would be less than significant.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 37
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Floodplains, Seiche, Tsunami and Mudflow Related Hazards The property is not located within a floodplain. There is no possibility of a seiche or tsunami occurring that could affect the project. The project is not located on or near a lake or ocean coastline. Therefore, the project would have no impacts.
Findings
Implementation of recommendations as described in the SCP and preparation of a SWPPP would reduce impacts on hydrology and water resources to a level of less than significant.
Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Land Use and Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X
Discussion
Residential land uses surround the project site on all sides. No community or neighborhood would be physically divided by the project.
The project site is zoned Residential Single-Family (R-1-20). The project site is designated in the City of Scotts Valley General Plan as Low Density Residential, which allows for 2 residential units per acre. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the existing zoning and General Plan land use designations.
Findings
The proposed future residential use of the site would be in keeping with surrounding land uses and the development pattern of the neighborhood. The project would have no impact and therefore no mitigation is required.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 38
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Mineral Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X
Discussion
The Scotts Valley 1994 General Plan, Figure OS 4, indicates that there are no significant mineral deposits on the project site. The project is not located in an area known to contain regionally significant mineral resources and would not result in the loss of the availability of a known mineral resource of regional value. Additionally, the project site is not located in an area that has been identified by the City of Scotts Valley as a locally important mineral resource recovery site.
Findings
The project would have no impact and therefore no mitigation is required.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 39
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Noise
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within the vicinity
of a private airstrip or an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
X
Discussion
Short Term Noise Levels
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. During construction, exterior noise levels could affect the residential neighborhoods surrounding the construction site. Project construction would occur adjacent from existing single-family residences; however, construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at a single point near sensitive receptors.
Project construction would comply with the City’s Municipal Code Section 17.46.160, which states that all construction activity shall be limited to the hours between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. through 5 p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity is allowed on Sunday. These permitted hours of construction are included in the code in
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 40
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
recognition that construction activities undertaken during daytime hours are a typical part of living in an urban environment and do not cause a significant disruption. Construction would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated or confined in the area directly adjacent to sensory receptors. Therefore, construction noise would be acoustically dispersed throughout the project site and impacts would be less than significant.
Long Term Noise Levels
The Noise Contour Map for the City indicates that the project site is in an area of less than 65dBA. The Noise Element of the Scotts Valley General Plan specifies that "exterior noise levels measured at the property line of proposed new residential developments shall be limited to or below an average annual day-night level of 60 dBA" (NA-454).
Implementation of the project would create new sources of noise in the project vicinity from residential sources, mechanical equipment, and landscape maintenance. These noise sources would be similar to those generated in other residential neighborhoods throughout the City.
Such noise would primarily occur during the “daytime” activity hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Furthermore, the residences would be required to comply with the noise standards set forth in the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code. Per General Plan Policies LP-38, NA-457, NO-441, and NA-444 land uses which include residential uses should not be allowed in areas with excessive noise. Therefore, there would be no impact from long-term noise levels.
Exposure to Groundborne Vibrations
Because the project would not require the use of heavy construction equipment, the residences located adjacent to the project site would not be exposed to vibrations levels exceeding the FTA’s 0.20 in/sec PPV significance threshold vibrations. Therefore, there would be no vibration impacts.
Future project residents may experience occasional groundborne vibrations from nearby traffic on Scotts Valley Drive when large trucks use the roadway. But this vibration is not expected to be frequent nor at high levels. This impact is less than significant.
Airport or Private Airstrip Noise
The project site is not located within any airport noise impact contours and not located within the vicinity of any private air strip, and therefore there would be no impact.
Findings
The project would not expose future residential uses to short-term construction nor long-term operational noise levels in excess of City standards. Noise generated during the construction phase is temporary and would be limited to Monday-Saturday daytime hours per compliance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 17.46.160. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 41
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Population and Housing
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
Discussion
The project would result in a relatively small increase in population (24 persons 4) that is well within the land use buildout capacity projections identified within the City of Scotts Valley General Plan (1994) as well as the Association of Monterey Bay Area Government’s 2022 Regional Growth Forecast for the City of Scotts Valley population of 12,010 by 2045. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Findings
There is no potential for a significant impact due to substantial growth either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the project would have a no impact and no mitigation is required. 4 . The average household size for Scotts Valley is 2.67 persons which estimates 24 persons for a project with 9 units.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 42
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Public Services
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
Discussion
Fire Services
The project is located in an existing urban area that is currently served by the Scotts Valley Fire Protection District. The closest fire station is located approximately 20 feet northeast of the project site. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Police Services
The project would add new residents to the City who would occasionally need police services.
This type of additional service would not generate a demand beyond what the police department can accommodate. The Scotts Valley Police department is located 1.30 miles south of the project site. Therefore, there would be no impact.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 43
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Schools
The project would add approximately 24 new residents to the City, some of whom will be students attending schools within the Scotts Valley Unified School District. These additional students would not generate a significant demand on the area school system and therefore there would be no impact.
Parks
The project would add approximately 24 new residents to the City who would occasionally utilize City parks and recreational programs; however, this additional use would not generate a demand beyond what the City Parks Department can accommodate, and no new additional park facilities would be required. Additionally, as a standard condition of the approval, the project would be required to pay a parks and recreation in-lieu fee as part of their building permit. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Other Public Facilities
The project does not have the potential to affect other public facilities (e.g., library, city administrative services, etc.), in excess of that previously considered by the General Plan.
Therefore, there would be no impact.
Findings
The project would have no impact on public services and therefore no mitigation is required.
Recreation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 44
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
Discussion
Scotts Valley has a total of seven parks, ranging in size from a half-acre to 7.5 acres.
Recreational facilities are also available at local schools, the Scotts Valley Senior Center, and Scotts Valley Community Center. The project would not require the construction of new or expanded recreational facilities and therefore there would be no impact. Additionally, standard conditions require the developer pay an in-lieu park fee.
Finding
No significant impacts to recreation and open space resources are expected. Thus, the thresholds of significance have not been exceeded. Payment of Park Impact fees will off-set the project’s incremental increase in the demand for recreation.
Transportation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due
to a geometric design feature
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 45
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X
Discussion
A Focused Transportation Study was prepared for the project site by W-Trans in July 2022, refer to Appendix F (W-Trans, July 2022). The analysis below is based on the findings of prepared report.
Conflict with City Policies or Programs, Increase Hazards, Impair Emergency Access Six of the proposed lots would be accessed via a new access road that would connect to Grace Way and Casa Way and would include a cul de sac and concrete drive aprons. The remaining three lots would be accessed from a new cul de sac at the end of San Augustine Way.
The design of the roadway would be consistent with City standards to ensure there is adequate emergency vehicle access. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Increase Vehicle Miles Travelled
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is a measure of total vehicular travel that accounts for the number of vehicle trips and the length of those trips. Because the City of Scotts Valley has not formally adopted VMT significance criteria, this CEQA analysis uses guidance per the City of Scotts Valley’s Draft VMT Implementation Guidelines (Kimley-Horn and Associates, July 2020).
The VMT Implementation include screening criteria to avoid unnecessary analysis and findings for non-significant transportation impacts. Small projects that generate less than 110 trips per day are exempt from VMT analysis. However, upon issuance of the building permit, the project would be required to pay City traffic impact fee.
Based on the Focused Transportation Study for the Casa Way Subdivision Project (W-Trans, July 2022, see Appendix F), the project would generate an estimated 94 daily trips. Because this is less than the 110-trip threshold for small projects, the project would qualify for the screening criteria and as such, the project is exempt from further VMT analysis.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 46
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Findings
The project would not conflict with City policies or programs regarding the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The project would not cause a hazard nor impair emergency access. The project is considered a “small project” per the City VMT Implementation Guidelines and is exempt from further analysis. Therefore, there would be no impacts to transportation and no mitigation is required.
Tribal Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and
that is:
X
i) Listed or eligible for listing in
the California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k)?
X
ii) A resource determined by the
lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 47
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and
that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in
the California
X
Discussion
An Archeological Review and Field Inventory was prepared for the project site by Basin Research Associates, in March 2023, refer to Appendix C. (Basin Research Associates, March 2023). The analysis below is based on the findings of prepared report.
Section 21080.3.1(b) of the California Public Resources Code (AB 52) requires a lead agency formally notify a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated within the geographic area of the discretionary project when formally requested.
As of this writing, no California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Santa Cruz County region have formally requested a consultation with the City of Scotts Valley (as Lead Agency under CEQA) regarding Tribal Cultural Resources. As a result, no Tribal Cultural Resources are known to occur in or near the project area.
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted for a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) (Busby 2023a) and the review was negative (Campagne 2023). The seven Native American tribes/individuals recommended for further outreach were contacted by Basin Research Associates on February 21, 2023 (Busby 2023b-h). No responses were received as of March 13, 2023, by Basin Research Associates (see Appendix C).
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 48
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Findings
No California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Santa Cruz County region have formally requested a consultation with the City of Scotts Valley. Therefore, no impact to the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource is anticipated and no mitigation is required.
Utilities and Service Systems
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which
could cause significant environmental
effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 49
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
X
Discussion
Water Treatment Facilities
The two proposed residential units would result in a daily water demand of 1,320 gallons per day or approximately 0.004-acre feet per year (AFY).5 Therefore, the proposed residential use would cause only a minimal increase on the demand for water and wastewater service and this additional demand is well within the future increase in water demand as identified in the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for the Scotts Valley Water District and San Lorenzo Water District. The Scotts Valley Water District has reviewed the application issued a Will Serve letter for the project (March 2022). Thus, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
The Wastewater Department has reviewed the proposed development and has determined that the existing wastewater treatment facilities would support the proposed development.
The project would not generate solid waste in excess of that typically generated by nine residential units. Thus, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Electric Power, Natural Gas, or Telecommunications
The project would require new connections to PG&E for electricity and natural gas. In addition, the project would require new telecommunication connections with the respective service providers. The project site is surrounded by commercial and residential development, which are serviced by various dry utility providers. Because these utilities would be readily extended from existing infrastructure adjacent to the project site, impacts from the project would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
5 Daily Water Use Factor for High Density Residential is 55 (gallons per capita/day). (24 residents x 55 gallons/day) = 1,320 (gallons/day)
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 50
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Solid Waste
The project would generate approximately 110 pounds of daily solid waste.6 The 110 pounds of daily solid waste generated by the project would represent less than one percent of the daily permit capacities of the Monterey Peninsula landfill7
, respectively. Thus, impacts would be less
than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Findings
Existing utilities and service systems are available to serve the project and no new facilities would be required to be constructed. Therefore, the project would have less than significant, or no impacts associated to utilities and service systems, and no mitigation is required.
Wildfire
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that
X
6 Daily Solid Waste Generation Rate for Residential Use is 12.23 pounds per day/unit (CalRecycle, 2019). (9 residential units x 12.23 pounds/day) = 110.1 pounds/day 7 The Buena Vista Sanitary Landfill is permitted to receive 838 tons of solid waste per day (CalRecycle, 2019). The Monterey Peninsula Landfill is permitted to receive 3,500 tons of solid waste per day.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 51
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Discussion
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped the relative wildfire risk in areas of large population by intersecting residential housing density with proximate fire threat according to three risk levels, namely Moderate, High, and Very High.
Wildfires are large-scale brush and grass fires in undeveloped areas. The project is within an urbanized area and not within a Very-High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as mapped by CALFIRE.
Additionally, the project would incorporate all applicable fire safety code requirements, including fire protection devices in all residential units and appropriate fire-resistant landscaping on the project site, as required by the Scotts Valley Fire District, and therefore there would be no impact.
Findings
The project would not affect emergency response/evacuation plans, would not expose residents or structures to a wildfire risk, and would not exacerbate fire risk. Therefore, the project would have no impact to wildfires, and no mitigation is required.
Mandatory Findings of Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Does the project:
a) Have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
X
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 52
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major
periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
X
Discussion
As discussed in the individual sections, the project would not degrade the quality of the environment, including effects on animals or plants, with the implementation of identified Mitigation Measures.
With respect to biological resources, the Biological Resources Section identified potentially significant impacts to special status species. Implementation of MM BIO-1.1 through MM BIO1.5 would reduce these impacts to less than significant.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 53
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
As described in the environmental resource sections of this Initial Study, the project would not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
The project would result in temporary air quality and noise impacts during construction. With the implementation of the identified standard conditions of approval, and consistency with adopted City policies, construction impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
As described above, these impacts would be temporary, and the project would not have cumulatively considerable impacts on air quality and noise impacts in the project area.
The project would have a less than significant impact or no impact on the remaining environmental resources and would not contribute to cumulative impacts to these resources.
Therefore, the project would not cause a cumulatively considerable impact and no mitigation is required.
City of Scotts Valley Sandraya Heights Land Division
Initial Study| Page 54
12/7/202312/7/202312/7/202312/7/202311/16/2023
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
X
I find that the project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the project MAY have a potentially significant or a potentially significant unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required. _________________________________ _____________________________ Jonathan Kwan
Contract Planner Date
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Bay Delta Region
2825 Cordelia Road, Suite 100
Fairfield, CA 94534
(707) 428-2002
www.wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
August 23, 2023
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
[email protected]
Subject: Sandraya Heights Land Division, Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH No. 2023070477, City of Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz County Dear Ms. Wikle:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has received and reviewed the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared by the City of Scotts Valley (City) for the Sandraya Heights Land Division (Project), located in Santa Cruz County, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.1
CDFW submits these comments on the IS/MND to inform the City, as the CEQA Lead Agency, of potentially significant impacts to biological resources associated with the Project.
CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines, § 15386, subd. (a)).
CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. (Id., § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.
CDFW is also submitting these comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority over the Project pursuant to the Fish and
1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The “CEQA Guidelines” are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW’s Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.).
Likewise, to the extent the Project may result in “take,” as defined by State law, of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G.
Code, § 2050 et seq.), related authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code will be required.
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
California Endangered Species Act
Please be advised that a CESA Incidental Take Permit (ITP) must be obtained if the Project has the potential to result in “take” of plants or animals listed under CESA, either during construction or over the life of the Project. Under CESA, “take” means “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” (Fish & G. Code, § 86). If the Project will impact CESA listed species, early consultation with CDFW is encouraged, as significant modification to the Project and mitigation measures may be required to obtain an ITP. CDFW’s issuance of an ITP is subject to CEQA and to facilitate permit issuance, any such project modifications and mitigation measures must be incorporated into the IS/MND’s analysis, discussion, and mitigation monitoring and reporting program.
CEQA requires a mandatory finding of significance if a Project is likely to substantially impact threatened or endangered species. (Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21001, subd. (c) & 21083; CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15380, 15064 & 15065). In addition, pursuant to CEQA, the Lead Agency cannot approve a project unless all impacts to the environment are avoided or mitigated to less-than-significant levels, or the Lead Agency makes and supports Findings of Overriding Consideration (FOC) for impacts that remain significant despite the implementation of all feasible mitigation. FOC under CEQA, however, do not eliminate the Project proponent’s obligation to comply with the Fish and Game Code.
Lake and Streambed Alteration
CDFW requires an LSA Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq., for Project activities affecting lakes, streams, rivers, or associated riparian habitat.
Notification is required for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank (including associated riparian or wetland resources); or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Work within ephemeral streams, drainage ditches, washes, watercourses with a subsurface flow, and floodplains is generally subject to notification requirements. In addition, infrastructure installed beneath such aquatic features, such as through hydraulic directional drilling, is also generally subject to notification requirements. Therefore, any impact to the mainstems, tributaries, or floodplains or
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
associated riparian habitat caused by the proposed Project will likely require an LSA Notification. CDFW may not execute a final LSA Agreement until it has considered the final MND and complied with its responsibilities as a responsible agency under CEQA.
Raptors and Other Nesting Birds
CDFW has authority over actions that may result in the disturbance or destruction of active bird nest sites or the unauthorized take of birds. Fish and Game Code sections protecting birds, their eggs, and nests include section 3503 (regarding unlawful take, possession, or needless destruction of the nests or eggs of any bird), section 3503.5 (regarding the take, possession, or destruction of any birds-of-prey or their nests or eggs), and section 3513 (regarding unlawful take of any migratory nongame bird). Migratory birds are also protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Proponent: Granite Ridge Properties
Objective: The Project consists of a minor subdivision to create nine single-family residential lots, on an existing 5.88-acre lot. A new access road would be created to connect Grace Way and Casa Way. The Project would require cut of 2,300-cubic yards of soil and fill of 9,700-cubic yards. Storm drainage from impervious surfaces would consist of underground storage and infiltration chambers located under the new access road.
Timeframe: No timeframe listed in the IS/MND.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND LOCATION
The Project is located on a 5.88-acre parcel, north of the Casay Way and Sandraya Heights Road intersection in the City of Scotts Valley (Assessor’s Parcel Number 023- 113-36). The Project site is currently vacant, surrounded by single-family residences, with existing dirt trails used for recreation. Vegetation communities on the property include California annual grassland, coast live oak, arroyo willow woodland, and coyote brush scrub. The site also has sandstone-derived soils and outcroppings which can provide habitat for sensitive plant species.
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.
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
COMMENT 1: Scotts Valley Polygonum (Polygonum hickmanii) and Rare Vegetation Communities
Issue: The IS/MND does not disclose the degree to which the Project could significantly impact state and federally endangered Scotts Valley polygonum (Polygonum hickmanii) through direct take and/or removal of habitat. The IS/MND also does not disclose the degree to which the Project could significantly impact other rare and endangered plant species or sensitive natural communities through removal of habitat.
Occurrences: Scotts Valley polygonum is a narrow endemic species and only two populations across three properties have ever been identified (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USWFS), 2020). The populations include the Polo Ranch population and the Glenwood population which are separated by Highway 17, approximately one mile apart (USFWS, 2020; also see California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Occurrence #1 and #2 respectively). The total area inhabited by the plant is estimated to be less than one acre (USFWS, 2020; CDFW, 2014).
Habitat for the species consists of undeveloped grasslands in Scotts Valley. The plant is commonly found on shallow soil over mudstone and sandstone outcroppings within annual grasslands (USWFS, 2020).
The Project site is within 750 feet of the Glenwood population and 0.75-mile from the Polo Ranch population. In addition, as stated in the IS/MND, suitable habitat consisting of unshaded grassland with sandstone-derived soil exists on the Project site.
Evidence the impact would be significant: Scott’s Valley polygonum is an endangered species under CESA (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.). Species listed under CESA may not be taken at any time except under the provisions of a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), (Fish & G Code § 2081.7), a Memorandum of Understanding for scientific education or management purposes (Fish & G. Code §2081, subd. (a)), or an ITP (Fish & G. Code § 2081 (b)).
The Biological Evaluation Report (Appendix A) does not provide sufficient baseline data to assess the potential for impact to Scotts Valley polygonum or other sensitive plant species. The methods for identifying and mapping vegetation communities on the Project site was not disclosed. The rare plant survey, conducted March 8, April 23, and June 7, 2022, did not visit a reference population for Scotts Valley polygonum or any other potentially occurring rare plant species in advance of surveys, expect for federally endangered Scotts Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe robusta var. hartwegii), which was found on-site. In addition, the rare plant survey was only conducted in one year (2022), which is insufficient to accurately describe rare annual plant species. Scotts Valley polygonum has been documented to not germinate every year, making the species undetectable in years without germination (USFWS, 2020). Furthermore, Santa Cruz
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
County was experiencing severe drought2 during the period surveys were conducted.
The only way to accurately detect and disclose the presence of Scotts Valley polygonum and many other rare plant species is after multiple consecutive years of appropriately timed botanical surveys to account for variances in weather and other disturbances that may impact germination. Without sufficient baseline data, the IS/MND cannot accurately determine the potential for significant impacts to Scotts Valley polygonum and/or other rare and sensitive plant species or communities.
Scotts Valley polygonum is a critically endangered species. Since 2009, the population has declined significantly at each of the properties where the species is found (USFWS, 2020). Only the Polo Ranch population had individuals observed in 2019, and individuals were last seen at the Glenwood population in 2015 (USFWS, 2020). Scotts Valley polygonum is at risk of extinction because of its small and fragmented populations, proximity to existing development, habitat alteration and removal, competition from native and non-native plant species, recreational use of habitat, and climate change (USFWS, 2020; CDFW, 2014).
For the reasons described above, any loss of habitat that supports Scotts Valley polygonum may contribute to the extinction of the species. Furthermore, loss of habitat that supported the species in the past or may support the species in the future has the potential to significantly hinder efforts to prevent the recovery of the species. The IS/MND has not provided sufficient information to disclose whether or not Scott’s Valley polygonum is present or potentially present, or the degree to which the Project will result in a cumulative impact to the species, when considered with other impacts that have already occurred to the species. This Project therefore has the potential to substantially adversely affect Scotts Valley polygonum through the removal of potential habitat and could impact efforts to recover the species. The Project may also significantly impact other rare plant species including Scotts Valley spineflower by permanently removing habitat and vegetation communities that support rare and endangered plant species.
CDFW recommends that the results of the following two measures be included in a revised IS/MND to ensure that all impacts to Scotts Valley polygonum and rare vegetation communities are disclosed and can be mitigated to a level of less-thansignificant.
Recommended Measure 1 – Multiple Focused Rare Plant Surveys: A qualified botanist, familiar with the native plant communities of Santa Cruz County shall conduct focused rare plant surveys over multiple consecutive years, targeting the specific blooming period of each rare plant species with potential to occur on the Project site. In
2 See Drought Conditions for Santa Cruz County
https://www.drought.gov/states/california/county/Santa%20Cruz
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
advance of surveys each year, the surveyor shall visit and document appropriate reference populations for each potentially occurring rare plant species on the Project site. Surveys shall occur throughout the entire area where potential habitat has been identified and the results shall be included 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.
Recommended Measure 2 – Fine Scale Vegetation Community Mapping and Biological Evaluation: The methodology for identifying and mapping vegetation communities on the Project site shall be identified. A qualified botanist shall map the potential for rare plant occurrence and vegetation communities using data collected from the surveys and other sources such as aerial imagery; historical survey data; field reconnaissance; scientific literature and reports; findings from positive occurrence databases such as the CNDDB; and sensitive natural community information available through the Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program (VegCAMP). In addition, Project biological documents shall address the potential for the presence of seeds of all potentially occurring rare plant species on the Project site. Based on the data and information collected from the surveys, mapping, and biological evaluation, the Project environmental document shall address whether Scotts Valley polygonum or other rare plant species may occur on or near the Project site, and the extent to which the Project would cumulatively significantly impact these species.
Recommended Mitigation Measure 3 – Appropriate Mitigation Based on Assessment of Impacts to Rare Plants: Using data and information collected from implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 and Mitigation Measure 2, the Project proponent shall develop a mitigation plan to fully mitigate the level of significant impact to rare native plant communities from the Project. The Project proponent shall submit the mitigation plan for review and approval by relevant regulatory agencies including the USFWS and CDFW and the plan shall be included as part of the Project environmental document. Appropriate mitigation may include the following:
1. Avoidance of existing rare plant communities, populations, and habitat on the Project site;
2. Placement of a conservation easement and creation of a management endowment to be held and implemented by a land management entity over existing Scotts Valley spineflower and Scotts Valley polygonum populations where a conservation easement and endowment fund does not exist; and
3. Establishing and funding long-term management of existing Scotts Valley spineflower, Scotts Valley polygonum, and other rare plant populations where additional management needs exist.
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
Recommended Mitigation Measure 4 – Obtain a CESA Incidental Take Permit: In addition, the Project proponent shall obtain an ITP pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 2081, subd., (b) for potential take of Scotts Valley polygonum or any other state listed plant species. More information on the ITP process is available at https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/CESA/Permitting/Incidental-Take-Permits. CDFW recommends continued coordination to develop additional measures which may include work stoppage, flagging and avoidance of occurrences, collection of propagation material, and on and off-site restoration.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e)). Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the CNDDB. The CNDDB online field survey form and other methods for submitting data can be found at the following link:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plantsand-Animals.
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, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 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.
CONCLUSION
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Project’s IS/MND. 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,
Erin Chappell
Regional Manager
Bay Delta Region
Ms. Sarah Wikle
City of Scotts Valley
August 23, 2023
ec: Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2023070477)
REFERENCES
[CDFW] California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2014. Scotts Valley Polygonum(Polygonum hickmanii). California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Accessed August 17, 2023.
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants/Endangered/Polygonum-hickmanii [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. Scotts Valley polygonum (Polygonum hickmanii) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura, California.
IN REPLY REFER TO:
2023-0116064
August 16, 2023
Jonathan Kwan, Contract Planner
City of Scotts Valley
Community Development Department
One Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, California 95006
Subject: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sandraya Heights Land Division Project, Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz County, California Dear Jonathan Kwan:
We have reviewed the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sandraya Heights Land Division Project (project) in the City of Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz County, California (NOI; City 2023a), received on August 1, 2023, and the mitigated negative declaration and initial study we obtained through your website (MND; City 2023b). Granite Ridge Properties (applicant) has submitted a proposal to the City of Scotts Valley (City) to subdivide an undeveloped 5.88-acre parcel to create nine lots for single-family residential housing and create new access roads, cul de sacs, and driveway aprons. The project site is south of Sandraya Heights Road between Casa Way and Glenwood Drive in the City of Scotts Valley.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) mission is to conserve and protect the nation’s fish and wildlife resources and their habitats. To assist in meeting this mandate, the Service provides comments on public notices issued for projects that may affect those resources, especially federally listed plants and wildlife. The Service’s responsibilities also include administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Section 9 of the Act prohibits the taking of any federally listed endangered or threatened wildlife species. “Take” is defined at section 3(19) of the Act to mean “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The Act provides for civil and criminal penalties for the unlawful taking of listed wildlife species. Such taking may be authorized by the Service in two ways: through interagency consultation for projects with Federal involvement pursuant to section 7, or through the issuance of an incidental take permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act.
Protection of listed plants is provided at section 9(a)(2) of the Act to the extent that the Act prohibits the removal and reduction to possession of federally listed plants or the malicious
Jonathan Kwan 2
damage of such plants on areas under Federal jurisdiction, or the destruction of listed plants on non-Federal areas in violation of State law or regulation or in the course of a violation of a State criminal trespass law.
The initial study notes that federally listed species occur on the project site and could be affected by the proposed project (City 2023b). We respectfully submit the comments below.
Federally listed species on the project site
The federally endangered Scotts Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe robusta var. hartwegii) occurs on the project site where it was first observed by members of the Service and local biologists in 2018. Project surveys in 2022 identified two colonies of Scotts Valley spineflower totaling approximately 185 individuals on approximately 140 square feet (City of Scotts Valley 2023b).
This small annual plant in the buckwheat family (Polygonaceae) is a narrow endemic restricted to Scotts Valley that grows in colonies on patches of exposed sedimentary bedrock overlain with a thin layer of soil in annual grasslands (Service 2019). The species’ geographic range is approximately 0.5 square mile and the total occupied area estimated as less than 1 acre, distributed among five properties including the proposed project site (Service 2009, 2019). The project site is not within designated critical habitat for Scotts Valley spineflower. Threats include potential development at unprotected sites, invasive species, stochastic extinction, and climate change. The species remains at risk of extinction (Kofron and Lyons 2014, Service 2019).
The federally endangered Scotts Valley polygonum (Polygonum hickmanii) has not been observed on the project site. However, this species has been found to co-occur with Scotts Valley spineflower at three of the five known properties where spineflower occurs, and habitat on the project site appears to be suitable based on observations by the Service. Like Scotts Valley spineflower, this diminutive annual in the buckwheat family is a narrow endemic restricted to thin soils over sedimentary rock outcrops in Scotts Valley (Service 2020). The total area occupied by Scotts Valley polygonum at present may be only 0.10 acre to 0.14 acre, which represents an approximate 85 to 90 percent reduction in occupied area since the species was listed in 2003. The project site is not within critical habitat for Scotts Valley polygonum. Threats include potential development at one unprotected site, invasive species, stochastic extinction, and climate change. This species is extremely susceptible to extinction (Service 2020).
Both Scotts Valley spineflower and Scotts Valley polygonum are annuals, meaning they germinate, flower, set seed, and die, each year. Population numbers in any year and locations of individuals are greatly influenced by annual weather patterns including, total precipitation, timing of precipitation, and temperature. As a result, population sizes may fluctuate annually, and this should be considered when determining impacts to species.
The federally endangered Ohlone tiger beetle (Cincindela ohlone) has not been observed on the project site, though the species occurs nearby on the eastern portion of the Glenwood Open Space Preserve managed by the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County. The initial study assumes absence of the Ohlone tiger beetle: “The site does not support habitat for this species. No
Jonathan Kwan 3
potential OTB larval burrows were observed in any portion of the site during Arnold’s August 2021 habitat assessment for the OTB (Arnold 2021)” (City 2023b, Appendix A, Table 2A, p. 21). This conclusion may be valid, however, given the species’ presence in the project vicinity more support should be provided, including: discussion of habitat suitability on the project site and whether soils used by Ohlone tiger beetles for oviposition and larval rearing are present; potential to create or restore suitable habitat on the site; and more detail from the referenced study (Arnold 2021) including the author’s conclusions regarding the potential for the site to support or have previously supported the Ohlone tiger beetle.
Assessment of project impacts
Scotts Valley spineflower: The initial study notes that development of the project would cause a significant impact to Scotts Valley spineflower, given that avoidance would not be practical and the absence of other areas of suitable habitat on the project site. While the Sandraya population is small in number and areal extent, its loss may nonetheless represent a significant impact to the survival and recovery of species as a whole due to its limited distribution and numbers, specialized habitat, and vulnerability to threats. The Service uses an approach called the Species Status Assessment Framework (SSAF; Service 2016) to evaluate the status of a species and guide future recovery efforts. The SSAF considers three interrelated factors: resiliency, the ability of individual populations to withstand disturbance; redundancy, the ability of a species to withstand catastrophic events by spreading risk across multiple populations or across a large area; and representation, the ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions as characterized by the breadth of the species’ genetic and environmental diversity (Service 2016, Smith et al. 2018).
These considerations are of particular relevance for narrow endemic species like the Scotts Valley spineflower, especially given the lack of unoccupied suitable habitat and difficulty (if not impossibility) of creating new rock outcrop habitat to support reintroduction or population enhancement efforts. Within the SSAF framework, even the small population at the project site may be important to the survival and recovery of Scotts Valley spineflower by providing a buffer against future decline or loss of other populations (redundancy), and by harboring unique genetic variation and adaptive capacity that could help the species withstand environmental changes and support future reintroduction or population enhancement efforts (representation).
Scotts Valley polygonum: The initial study does not adequately address the potential for Scotts Valley polygonum to occur on the project site or evaluate project effects on this species. The biological evaluation report appended to the initial study states: “Although this species may occur within the open, unshaded grasslands on sandstone-derived soils of the site, this species was not detected during the June survey that was appropriately timed for this species blooming period.” (City 2023b, Appendix A, Table 1B, p. 15). The initial study suggests that suitable Scotts Valley polygonum habitat is present, though individuals were not observed in 2022. The absence of the species during 2022 surveys does not preclude its historical presence before 2018 when the site was first visited, or that a viable seedbank may still be present. Based on the species’ reappearance at some colonies after being absent for multiple years (Service 2020) and
Jonathan Kwan 4
the germination of banked seed during greenhouse experiments (Forbes 2020, pers. comm.), it is possible that seeds may remain viable for 5-7 years or more in the wild.
Based on similar considerations of redundancy and representation described above for Scotts Valley spineflower, loss of even the small amount of suitable habitat for Scotts Valley polygonum present on the project site, and of any viable seedbank that may be present, could represent a significant impact to the species’ future survival and recovery. The known areas of suitable and currently occupied habitat for this species are even more limited than those of Scotts Valley spineflower, and the total number of Scotts Valley polygonum plants observed in recent years are extremely low and limited to a few colonies at the Polo Ranch property (Service 2020).
Loss of habitat at the project site would also preclude future outplanting of the species there to facilitate recovery as recommended by the Service (2020).
Unless further information can be provided to demonstrate that suitable habitat for Scotts Valley polygonum is absent from the project site in consultation with experts who have studied the species in the wild, project effects to Scotts Valley polygonum via habitat loss and potential loss of seedbank should be assumed and mitigation provided for unavoidable impacts.
Mitigation of unavoidable impacts
The initial study indicates that avoidance of Scotts Valley spineflower (and thus of suitable habitat for Scotts Valley polygonum) and on-site mitigation are not practical in the context of the proposed project (City 2023b, p. 14). We agree with this conclusion. Small populations left in place but surrounded by development are vulnerable to a range of potential adverse effects, such as introduction of invasive non-native plants, changes in hydrology, damage by pedestrians and pets, and loss of pollinators and seed dispersers, and are unlikely to be viable long-term. Thus, we recommend that the “On-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan” option included under mitigation measure MM BIO-1.1 (City 2023b, p. 17) be removed. We concur with the recommendation that the applicant provide off-site mitigation for project impacts to federally listed plants (City 2023b, p. 15) and generally support the approach described under mitigation measure MM BIO-1.1, with caveats and additional recommendations described below.
We support the intent and potential activities proposed for the “Off-Site Spineflower Mitigation Plan” option of MM BIO-1.1 and the provision for Service review and comment on the Plan.
That said, we believe that more specificity regarding potential off-site mitigation actions could be provided, and the various options prioritized. As described in Service documents, permanent protection of habitat via conservation easements and adequately funded management and enhancement of protected habitat are among the highest priority recovery actions for both Scotts Valley spineflower and Scotts Valley polygonum (Service 2009, 2019, 2020). Given the conservation value to these species of even small populations, habitat protection and management funding also represent appropriate mitigation measures for the loss of individuals and habitat expected to result from the project.
Jonathan Kwan 5
Based on these considerations, the Service recommends the following mitigation options, listed in order of descending priority. The Service does not presume that the respective parties who own and manage the properties listed below would be amenable to the mitigation approaches we have suggested; these options are based solely on an assessment of the recovery needs of Scotts Valley spineflower and Scotts Valley polygonum. If none of our recommended options prove feasible, the Service would work with the City and applicant to identify a suitable alternative.
Most options would mitigate for impacts to both species, though Scotts Valley polygonum has not been previously observed at the Glenwood Open Space Preserve.
Priorities for compensatory mitigation
1. Salvation Army Redwood Glen Camp: Place a permanent conservation easement on the portion of the Salvation Army’s property that supports Scotts Valley spineflower, with the easement ideally held by the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County (LTSCC) who manages the adjacent Glenwood Preserve. Fund a stand-alone management endowment or contribute to the existing Glenwood endowment. This would provide opportunities to expand existing Scotts Valley spineflower colonies, introduce Scotts Valley spineflower to suitable new areas, and reintroduce Scotts Valley polygonum.
2. Scotts Valley High School Preserve: Place a permanent conservation easement on the High School Preserve, which is owned and managed by the Scotts Valley Unified School District.
Fund a long-term management endowment to be held and implemented by a land management entity, ideally LTSCC. This would provide opportunities to expand existing Scotts Valley spineflower colonies, introduce Scotts Valley spineflower to new areas, and reintroduce Scotts Valley polygonum. Funding would also support the greater level of invasive plant control that has become necessary since the management plan was written in 1999.
3. Scotts Valley High School Preserve: Establish a long-term management endowment for the High School Preserve to be held by third party such as LTSCC without placing an easement on the Preserve. Like Option #2, this would ensure guaranteed long-term funding for all management and monitoring needs, including the greater level of invasive plant control that has become necessary since the 1999 management plan was implemented.
4. Glenwood Open Space Preserve: Install new infrastructure to facilitate expansion of the existing cattle grazing program at Glenwood to the western portion that is currently not managed but which supports Scotts Valley spineflower. Contribute money to the existing Glenwood endowment specifically for monitoring and management of Scotts Valley spineflower colonies on the western portion. This would provide an opportunity to expand spineflower colonies and possibly introduce Scotts Valley polygonum, which has not been previously observed at Glenwood.
Ideally, we believe that a specific mitigation option should be identified before project approval, rather than after approval but prior to any ground disturbance requiring issuance of a grading permit by the City of Scotts Valley. However, we understand that this may not be possible. We
Jonathan Kwan 6
recognize the challenge of identifying suitable mitigation given the limited distribution of both species and the existing protections and management plans that are already in place at most sites.
The Service has been providing technical assistance to the applicant and City to help identify suitable compensatory mitigation for unavoidable project impacts to federally listed plants, including direct outreach to landowners and managers at potential offsite mitigation properties, and we will continue providing such assistance as desired.
We request that mitigation measure MM BIO-1.1 be revised to specify that the Off-site Spineflower Mitigation Plan shall be reviewed for comment and approval by the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service as a condition of acceptance by the City of Scotts Valley Community Development Department. We believe that the Service in consultation with species experts with whom we collaborate on ongoing monitoring and recovery efforts is best positioned to evaluate the merits of mitigation proposals for these rare and poorly understood species.
The mitigation ratio of 2:1 specified in MM BIO-1.1 is not consistent with our standard requirement for permanent loss of habitat, which is generally 3:1. Furthermore, for species with limited distributions that face a high degree of threat such as Scotts Valley polygonum and Scotts Valley spineflower, a higher ratio may be appropriate. We request that MM BIO-1.1 specify a minimum mitigation ratio of 3:1.
Lastly, we request that a requirement be added to MM BIO-1.1 that the applicant will collect seeds from all Scotts Valley spineflower plants onsite at the end of the last growing season that precedes initiation of construction and ground disturbance. Seed maturation should be determined through population monitoring prior to the period when seeds typically mature. A portion of the seed should be given to one of the entities listed above for redistribution in suitable Scotts Valley spineflower habitat and the remainder to an established seed banking organization such as a botanical garden to support future conservation efforts.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide our comments to the City of Scotts Valley in support of its evaluation of the Sandraya Heights Land Division Project. If you have any questions, please contact Mark Ogonowski of my staff by electronic mail at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Stephen P. Henry
Field Supervisor
cc: Serena Stumpf, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
LITERATURE CITED
[City] City of Scotts Valley. 2023a. Notice of intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration.
Sandraya Heights Land Division. July 24, 2023.
[City] City of Scotts Valley. 2023b. Mitigated negative declaration and initial study. Sandraya Heights Land Division. July 24, 2023.
Kofron, C.P. and K. Lyons. 2014. Status of the endangered Scotts Valley spineflower (Polygonaceae) in coastal Central California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 113(2):47–57.
Smith, D.R., N.L. Allan, C.P. McGowan, J.A. Szymanski, S.R. Oetker, H.M. Bell. 2018.
Development of a species status assessment process for decisions under the U.S.
Endangered Species Act. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 9(1):1–19. [Service] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Chorizanthe robusta var. hartwegii (Scotts Valley Spineflower) 5-year review: Summary and evaluation. Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California. November 2009. 26 pp.
[Service] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016. USFWS species status assessment framework.
Version 3.4. August 2016. 21 pp.
[Service] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2019. Scotts Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe robusta var. hartwegii) 5-year review. Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California.
June 2019. 9 pp.
[Service] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. Scotts Valley polygonum (Polygonum hickmanii) 5-year review: Summary and evaluation. Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California. May 2020. 13 pp.
PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS
Forbes, H. 2020. Results of Scotts Valley polygonum seed germination trials. Email from Holly Forbes, University of California Botanical Garden to Mark Ogonowski, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and others. December 18, 2020.
-RQDWKDQ.ZDQ
)URP
%RE(YDQV EREHYDQV
#JPDLOFRP!RQEHKDOIRI%RE(YDQV UREHUWHYDQV#DFPRUJ! 6HQW
7KXUVGD\$XJXVW
30
7R
-RQDWKDQ.ZDQ
&F
.ULVWLQ(YDQV
6XEMHFW
6DQGUD\D+HLJKWV/DQG'LYLVLRQFRQFHUQV
ĞĂƌDƌ<ǁĂŶ͕
tĞŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŶƚůLJďĞĞŶŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚďLJŽƵƌŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐŽŶ'ƌĂĐĞtĂLJŽĨŵĂŝůĞĚŶŽƟĐĞƐƚŚĞLJƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚǁŝƚŚƵƉĚĂƚĞƐŽŶƚŚĞ ^ĂŶĚƌĂLJĂ,ĞŝŐŚƚƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉůĂŶ͘ŌĞƌƌĞĂĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƉůĂŶƐƉŽƐƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞ^ĐŽƩƐsĂůůĞLJǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚ ŚƩƉƐ͗ͬͬǁǁǁ͘ƐĐŽƩƐǀĂůůĞLJ͘ŐŽǀͬϱϬϲͬ^ĂŶĚƌĂLJĂͲ,ĞŝŐŚƚƐͲ>ĂŶĚͲŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͕ǁĞĂƌĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĞĚĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞŝŵƉĂĐƚƚŚŝƐ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚǁŝůůŚĂǀĞŽŶŽƵƌƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘
tĞǁĞƌĞĂůƐŽƐƵƌƉƌŝƐĞĚƚŚĂƚǁĞĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞŵĂŝůĞĚŶŽƟĐĞƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞƉůĂŶƐ͘WĞƌŚĂƉƐŝƚŝƐďĞĐĂƵƐĞǁĞǁĞƌĞƵŶĂďůĞƚŽ ĂƩĞŶĚƚŚĞŝŶŝƟĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌŵĞĞƟŶŐ͘WůĞĂƐĞĚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞƵƐŽŶĂŶLJĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶŶŽƵŶĐĞŵĞŶƚƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ KƵƌƉƌŝŵĂƌLJĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝƐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƉůĂŶƐŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞ'ƌĂĐĞtĂLJǁŝůůďĞƚŚĞĂĐĐĞƐƐĨŽƌĞŝƚŚĞƌĨŽƵƌŽƌƐŝdžŽĨƚŚĞŶĞǁ ŚŽŵĞƐĂŶĚ͕ŝŶŽŶĞƉůĂŶ͕ǁŝůůŚĂǀĞĂƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƌŽĂĚǀŝĂĂƐĂtĂLJ͘dŚĞƉůĂŶĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŵĞŶƟŽŶŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶƐĨŽƌƚŚĞŝŵƉĂĐƚƐŽŶ ƚŚĞƋƵŝĞƚŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨŽƵƌƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶĂĐƟǀŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞŝŶƚƌĂĸĐǁŝůůŚĂƐƚĞŶƚŚĞĚĞƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶŽĨ ŽƵƌĂůƌĞĂĚLJĐƌƵŵďůŝŶŐƉƌŝǀĂƚĞƌŽĂĚĂŶĚŵĂŬĞŝƚůĞƐƐƐĂĨĞĨŽƌŽƵƌĐŚŝůĚĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌƐ͛ĐŚŝůĚƌĞŶ͘dŚŝƐǁŽƵůĚŶŽƚŽŶůLJƌĞĚƵĐĞ ŽƵƌƋƵĂůŝƚLJŽĨůŝĨĞďƵƚǁŽƵůĚĂůƐŽŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞŽƵƌĐŽƐƚƐƚŽŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶƚŚĞƌŽĂĚ͘dŚŝƐŝƐĂŶƵŶƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůĞďƵƌĚĞŶĨŽƌ ŚŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐŽŶŽƵƌƐƚƌĞĞƚƚŽďĞĂƌ͘
ŌĞƌƐƉĞĂŬŝŶŐƚŽƌƚDƵŶŽnjĂŶĚ:ŽŚŶ^ƚĞǁĂƌĚ͕/ůĞĂƌŶĞĚŽĨLJŽƵƌƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƐƚŽƚŚĞŵŝŶĚŝĐĂƟŶŐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂƐďĞĞŶ ƵƉĚĂƚĞĚƐƵĐŚƚŚĂƚ'ƌĂĐĞtĂLJǁŝůůŶĞŝƚŚĞƌďĞƵƐĞĚĨŽƌĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶŶŽƌĨŽƌƉĞƌŵĂŶĞŶƚĂĐĐĞƐƐďƵƚŝŶƐƚĞĂĚǁŝůůŚĂǀĞ ƌĞŵŽǀĂďůĞďŽůůĂƌĚƐĨŽƌĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐLJǀĞŚŝĐůĞĂĐĐĞƐƐŽŶůLJƚŽĂŶŽŶͲƉĂǀĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂLJŝŶƐŝĚĞƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘dŚŝƐƐŽƵŶĚƐ ƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůĞ͘WůĞĂƐĞůĞƚŵĞŬŶŽǁǁŚĞƌĞ/ĐĂŶŐĞƚĂĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞƵƉĚĂƚĞĚƉůĂŶ͘ tŝůůƚŚĞƌĞƐƟůůďĞƟŵĞĨŽƌƉƵďůŝĐƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞŶĞǁƉůĂŶƐ͍ /ĨLJŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌƋƵĞƐƟŽŶƐĨŽƌƵƐ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĨĞĞůĨƌĞĞƚŽĐĂůůŽƌĞŵĂŝů͘ dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵĨŽƌLJŽƵƌƟŵĞĂŶĚĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƟŽŶ͘
ĞƐƚƌĞŐĂƌĚƐ͕
ŽďĂŶĚ<ƌŝƐƟŶ
ǀĂŶƐ
ϲϭϬ'ƌĂĐĞtĂLJ
^ĐŽƩƐsĂůůĞLJ͕ϵϱϬϲϬ
ϲϱϬͲϲϰϲͲϰϮϲϮ
ƌŽďĞƌƚ͘ĞǀĂŶƐΛĂĐŵ͘ŽƌŐ