Agenda packet — Scotts Valley City Council, October 2, 2024 (part 1 of 4)

AGENDA
Meeting of the
Scotts Valley City Council
In-Person and Remote Access
Date: October 2, 2024
Time: 6:00 PM

CONTACT

INFORMATION

MEETING LOCATION POSTING
City of Scotts Valley
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
(831) 440-5600
City Council Chambers
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
OR
Zoom Video Conference
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83295730901
Agenda posted on 9-27-
2024 at City Hall, SV
Senior Center, SV Public
Works Building, and on the
Internet
at: www.scottsvalley.gov

ELECTED OFFICIALS CITY STAFF MEMBERS
Randy Johnson, Mayor
Derek Timm, Vice Mayor
Jack Dilles, Council Member
Donna Lind, Council Member
Allan Timms, Council Member
Mali LaGoe, City Manager
Kirsten Powell, City Attorney
Taylor Bateman, Community Development
Director
Susie Pineda, Consulting Planner
Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA PACKET MATERIALS
Notice regarding City Council Meetings:

The City Council meets regularly on the 1st and 3rd Wednesday of each month at 6:00 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 1 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, CA 95066, and via Zoom Webinar remote access.

Agenda and Agenda Packet Materials:

The City Council agenda and the complete agenda packet are available for review by 5:00 PM the Friday before the Wednesday meeting on the Internet at the City’s website:
www.scottsvalley.gov and in the lobby of City Hall at 1 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, CA.

Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5, materials related to an agenda item, submitted after distribution of the agenda packet, are available for public inspection in the lobby of City Hall during normal business hours, Monday-Friday, 8am-12 pm and 1-5 pm. In accordance with AB 1344, such documents will be posted on the City’s website at www.scottsvalley.gov.

Public Participation:

The meeting will be available on Zoom and livestreamed to the City of Scotts Valley’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@cityofscottsvalley For those wishing to participate via Zoom you can join the following ways:

Zoom Webinar meeting link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83295730901

Page 1 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 2
Date: October 2, 2024
Or dial one of these numbers: (669) 900-9128 or (669) 444-9171 Webinar ID: 832 9573 0901
Whether attendance is in-person or remote, you will be given opportunities to provide public comment at the appropriate times throughout the meeting. The time limit is up to 3 minutes for an individual, or 5 minutes for someone who is representing a group of three or more, at the discretion of the Mayor. Please note that this is not a question-and-answer time, but simply a time to provide comments to the Council. At the appropriate times during the meeting for public comment, on items not on the agenda, and on specific agenda items, the Mayor will announce that public comment will be accepted.

How to comment via in-person attendance:

Please proceed to the public comment podium when the Mayor opens the item for public comment.

How to comment via Zoom Webinar:

Use the webinar attendee option to “raise hand” when the Mayor opens the item for public comment. The Clerk will unmute you when it is your turn. If you have joined via Zoom phone call, dial *9 or your phone to “raise your hand”, and the Clerk will unmute you when it is your turn.

CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE

ROLL CALL

COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council members are appointed to committees which are either City committees or committees dealing with other jurisdictions. This portion of the agenda allows the committee member to present oral or written reports to the Council regarding their committee assignments. It also allows the Council to make comments and give the committee member direction, as required.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

PUBLIC COMMENT TIME
This is the opportunity for individuals attending in person to make oral comments to the Council on any items within the purview of the Council, which are NOT part of the Agenda. No action on the item may be taken, but the Council may request the matter be placed on a future agenda. Written public comment may be emailed to the City Clerk by 5:00 PM on the day of the meeting at [email protected].

Page 2 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 3
Date: October 2, 2024

ALTERATIONS TO CONSENT AGENDA
Council can remove or add items to the Consent Agenda.

CONSENT AGENDA
The Consent Agenda is comprised of items which are intended to be non-controversial and are approved without discussion. Persons wishing to speak on any item may request the item be moved to the Regular Agenda by raising their hand to be recognized by the Mayor. An item will only be moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda if a City Council Member requests it to be moved and a majority of the Council agrees.

1. Approve City Council minutes of 09-18-2024

2. Approve check register dated 09-14-2024 through 09-27-2024

3. Beverage Container Recycling Grant Program Application Resolution

PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. Public Hearing to consider a Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Planned Development Zoning Application, Design Review Application, Use Permit Application and Cultural Resources Alteration Application to allow for the construction of a 52,250 Sf three story development on a 1.35-Acre site located at 125 Bethany Drive, on the North side of Scotts Valley Drive between Tabor Drive and Bethany Drive. Proposed land uses would include 10,000 sf of professional and administrative office space, and 42,250 sf of storage/ministorage for up to 227 users after a split decision from the Planning Commission resulting in no recommendation.

ALTERATIONS TO REGULAR AGENDA
Council can remove or add items to the Regular Agenda.

REGULAR AGENDA
Persons wishing to speak on any item may do so by raising their hand to be recognized by the Mayor.

1. Future Council Agenda Items

CONVENE TO CLOSED SESSION

CLOSED SESSION SUBJECT(S)

Page 3 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 4
Date: October 2, 2024

1. Conference with legal counsel regarding potential litigation Legal Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9
Number of Cases: 1 case
Staff Present: City Manager, City Attorney, Administrative Services Director, Labor Counsel

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

REPORT ON ACTION TAKEN DURING CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

ADA NOTICE
The City of Scotts Valley does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. The City Council Chambers is an accessible facility. If you wish to attend a City Council meeting and require assistance such as sign language, a translator, or other special assistance or devices in order to attend and participate at the meeting, please call the City Clerk's office at (831) 440-5600 five to seven days in advance of the meeting to make arrangements for assistance. If you require the agenda of a City Council meeting be available in an alternative format consistent with a specific disability, please call the City Clerk’s Office. The California State Relay Service (TTY/VCO/HCO to Voice: English 1-800-735-2929, Spanish 1-800-855-3000; or, Voice to TTY/VCO/HCO:

English 1-800-735-2922, Spanish 1-800-855-3000), provides Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf and Disabled and will provide a link between the TDD caller and users of telephone equipment.

Page 4 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 5
Date: October 2, 2024

PROCEDURAL INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC

THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROCEDURE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE IN
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION:

1. Move the Resolution number for approval.

2. Second the motion.

3. Vote by body, a roll call vote is not required.

THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROCEDURE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE IN
INTRODUCTION/ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE:

1. Move the Ordinance number for introduction (or adoption).

2. Move the Ordinance be introduced by title only and waive the reading of the text.

3. Read the Ordinance title.

4. Second the motion.

5. Vote by body, a roll call vote is not required.

THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROCEDURE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE IN
PUBLIC COMMENT/PUBLIC HEARINGS:

Unless otherwise determined by the presiding officer of the meeting:

1. Three minutes allowed per individual to speak.

2. Five minutes allowed per individual representing a group of three or more. ❖❖❖❖❖❖❖❖
The City of Scotts Valley does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. The City Council Chambers is an accessible facility. If you wish to attend a City Council meeting and require assistance such as sign language, a translator, or other special assistance or devices in order to attend and participate at the meeting, please call the City Clerk's office at (831) 440-5602 five to seven days in advance of the meeting to make arrangements for assistance. If you require the agenda of a City Council meeting be available in an alternative format consistent with a specific disability, please call the City Clerk’s Office. The California State Relay Service (TTY/VCO/HCO to Voice: English 1-800-735-2929, Spanish 1-800-855-3000; Voice to TTY/VCO/HCO: English 1- 800-735-2922, Spanish 1-800-855-3000; or, from or to Speech-to-Speech, English & Spanish 1- 800-854-7787), provides Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf and Disabled and will provide a link between the TDD caller and users of telephone equipment.

Page 5 of 500 ends

CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE

ROLL CALL
CITY STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Mali LaGoe, City Manager
Kirsten Powell, City Attorney
Steve Walpole, Police Chief
Stephanie Hill, Administrative Services Director
Rodolfo Onchi, Public Works Director
Taylor Bateman, Community Development
Director
Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

ELECTED OFFICIALS
PRESENT:

Randy Johnson, Mayor
Derek Timm, Vice Mayor
Jack Dilles, Council Member
Donna Lind, Council Member
Allan Timms, Council Member

SPECIAL SET MATTER

MINUTES
Meeting of the
Scotts Valley City Council
Date: September 18, 2024
Time: 6:00 PM

CONTACT

INFORMATION

MEETING LOCATION POSTING
City of Scotts Valley City Council Chambers The agenda was posted 1 Civic Center Drive 1 Civic Center Drive on 9-13-2024 at City Hall, Scotts Valley, CA Scotts Valley, CA 95066 SV Senior Center, SV 95066 OR Public Works Building,
(831) 440-5600 Zoom Video Conference and on the Internet https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83295730901 at www.scottsvalley.gov.

The City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM.

1. Bike study visit to the Netherlands
Matt Miller, Program Manager for Ecology Action, gave background information about Ecology Action and the bike study delegate trip to the Netherlands in June 2024.

Page 6 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 2 ends

COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council Member Dilles, Senior Planner Wikle, and Recreation Division Manager Pfefferkorn were part of this trip and each presented highlights and key takeaways from the lens of their respective positions with the City of Scotts Valley.

Public comment:
• John Lewis, a resident of Scotts Valley, spoke in favor of pedestrian and cycling safety for all, and especially for children.
• Oxo Slayer, a resident of Boulder Creek and one of the delegates on the trip, spoke about his experience on the trip.
• Travis Evans expressed that he is not in support of implementing the ideas learned from the Netherlands trip participants.

VM Timm attended a meeting of the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) where they reviewed the Metropolitan Transportation Budget Improvement Program to ensure that it complies with Title VI. They also voted to move forward with a new Rural Energy Network (REN) within Monterey County and Santa Cruz County, which will enable communities to access government funds for grants towards home improvements (electrical, solar, appliances, etc.)
VM Timm attended the Scotts Valley Chamber of Commerce business meeting where they discussed ways to boost local shopping in Scotts Valley ("shop local"). The Chamber will be doing the Halloween Treasure Hunt event for kids again this year on 10/26 and 10/31. The Chamber is also working on a survey.

CM Timms attended a meeting of the Tobacco Waste Subcommittee. At the Board of Supervisors meeting on 10/8 there will be a discussion and vote on banning single use tobacco products.

CM Lind thanked the volunteers for the Multicultural Fair, including CM Timms who handled the parking areas all day in the heat.

CM Lind attended a Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) Finance and Budget Committee meeting where they discussed the significant drop in sales tax over the last quarter. METRO will not be extending the free ride program except for students. There has been a 10% decrease in ridership on the Highway 17 route.

CM Lind attended the Housing Matters Harvey West Studios groundbreaking ceremony. This development will provide 120 units to people experiencing chronic homelessness, and the estimated completion is in 2026.

Page 7 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 3 ends

CITY MANAGER REPORT
Mayor Johnson attended a meeting of the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC).

He noted that Scotts Valley resident Sarah Christensen is the new Executive Director of the RTC.

Town Center Outreach: The outreach for the Town Center is wrapping up and the survey will close on Saturday. Please access the survey on the City's website if you would like to provide feedback on the Town Center options.

Central Coast Community Energy (3CE): City Manager LaGoe attended the 3CE meeting today. The City of Scotts Valley rotates a seat with the City of Capitola on the operations board and the policy board, and Scotts Valley is scheduled to resume a seat on both boards in 2025.

MidPen Housing: City Manager LaGoe, along with Community Development Director Bateman, met with representatives from MidPen Housing to discuss their current affordable housing projects (none currently in Scotts Valley), changes in state law and other issues.

Meeting with Assemblymember Pellerin: City Manager LaGoe, along with Vice Mayor Timm, met with Assemblymember Pellerin to discuss state housing laws, the implementation of Scotts Valley's Housing Element, how state laws are impacting our community, and they provided input on ways to amend legislation to be more balanced compared to what we have seen from the state over the last couple of years.

Letters to Governor Newsom: In accordance with the City's Legislative Platform, the City has sent three letters, signed by Mayor Johnson, to Governor Newsom: 1) A request for signature on AB 2330 which is a permitting streamlining bill which would help to speed up the permitting process for wildfire vegetation management projects; 2) A request to veto SB 1037 which covers enforcement around cities’ housing elements, thus further eroding the local control of cities. This bill gives the Attorney General the authority to take legal action against a city and seek fines up to $50K per month for failure to adopt a compliant housing element, or if cities do not follow state laws that require ministerial approval of certain housing projects. There are also no provisions for honest mistakes or genuine differences of opinion; and 3) A request to veto AB 98, which is a planning and zoning bill that gives the state authority to dictate our planning and zoning regarding truck routes. An additional letter that staff sent this week was to the Finance and Administration Committee regarding an upcoming CalPERS Board action. The letter makes the case for not further reducing the discount rate which affects our pension liability. The current rate is 6.8% Senior Center Board Meeting: At the Senior Center Board meeting, Administrative Services Director Hill presented the history of the finances of the Senior Center which looked at levels of activity/revenue pre- and post-pandemic and how they have been rebuilding.

Page 8 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 4 ends

PUBLIC COMMENT TIME

ALTERATIONS TO CONSENT AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA

ALTERATIONS TO REGULAR AGENDA
Upcoming Events:
• September 19th at 4:00 PM - The State of the City at the Performing Arts Center, and it will also be live streamed and archived on the City's YouTube channel.
• October 3rd at 8:00 AM - Police Department Annual Inspection at 8:00 AM. • September 21-22 - Family Campout at Siltanen Park this weekend (full, with waiting list).

Reminders:
• Biweekly newsletter sent out every other week (typically at the beginning of the week of a Council meeting) - sign up on the City's website • Follow the City on social media!
David Alreck, a resident of Scotts Valley, thanked the audience for attending the meeting and thanked the City Manager and the staff for the newsletter. He is unsure how many people the newsletter is reaching, and he recommends a button on the homepage of the website that links directly to the newsletter. He also feels that the City should request that it be published by our local media outlets.

M/S: Lind/Timms
To approve the Consent Agenda with no alterations.

Carried 5/0 (AYES: Johnson, Timm, Dilles, Lind, Timms)

1. Approve City Council minutes of 09-04-2024

2. Approve check register dated 08-31-2024 through 9-13-2024

3. Approve Resolution No. 1228.8 to amend Senior Center Bylaws to reflect change in meeting day

Page 9 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 5 ends

REGULAR AGENDA
M/S: Lind/Timm
To approve the Regular Agenda with no alterations.

Carried 5/0 (AYES: Johnson, Timm, Dilles, Lind, Timms)

1. Scotts Valley Drive Complete Street Improvements Presentation City Manager LaGoe introduced Derek Wu and Frederik Venter from Kimley-Horn who presented this item under the direction of Public Works Director Onchi. The Council Members asked questions and gave input.

Public comment:
• Travis Evans expressed concern that the options do not provide additional safety measures for middle school students because the project area ends at Civic Center Drive, and he also expressed concern that reducing the lane width will affect the response time for emergency vehicles.
• Andrew Cassidy, a resident of Scotts Valley, is concerned about option 3 as it affects cyclists' access to the businesses and residences on the east side of the road. He is pleased to see this project moving forward, and he would be happy with any of the options.
• Jason Holbrook, a resident of Scotts Valley and an avid cyclist, indicated that he does not feel unsafe on Scotts Valley Drive, but definitely feels unsafe on Mount Hermon Road, on any of the side streets, and on any streets not maintained by the City. He is in favor of improving biking safety but does not feel that will increase usage. He would like to see similar cities explored and he would like to see the cost implications, increase in housing, and options for improving Mount Hermon Road included.
• Tim Bennett, a resident of Scotts Valley and business owner in Scotts Valley, does not feel unsafe on Scotts Valley Drive, however Mount Hermon Road feels unsafe for cyclists. Reducing the number of lanes will create a problem for delivery trucks. He is in favor of improvements but feels that Mount Hermon Road should be the focus.
• Kate Kelsey, a resident of Scotts Valley, indicated that she cycled on Scotts Valley Drive before it became a major thoroughfare, and her children currently cycle to the middle school. Ms. Kelsey coordinates the rolling school bus, but also lets the children ride on the sidewalk for safety reasons, if necessary. She expressed that if you want people to choose the healthy choice you also have to make it the easy choice.
• Danny Reber, a resident of Scotts Valley, indicated that he has two children and has experienced first-hand the increase in traffic during school drop-off and pickup. The major difference between Scotts Valley and the Netherlands is that in Scotts Valley many people do not have the luxury of commuting by bike to

Page 10 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 6 ends

work. He does not feel unsafe on Scotts Valley Drive and lets his children ride on Scotts Valley Drive, but not on Glenwood Drive up to the high school. The new housing developments will increase traffic as well. He is in favor of Option1 but does not feel that Option 4 is practical or logical. • Lee Kauftheil, who is visiting from Scottsdale, Arizona and also serves on the Scottsdale Transportation Commission, is in favor of Option 4 because it provides trees for shade. He also agrees with the concerns that have been expressed, and he is not in favor of Option 2 because it does not have a center lane. He does not feel that the additional housing will increase congestion because, in his opinion, the traffic issues are a result of tourist traffic. • Stephen Svete, a member of the Board of Directors of Bike Santa Cruz, applauds the City for adopting the Active Transportation Plan in 2021. In Santa Cruz County there are currently four active Complete Streets projects - Green Valley Road in Watsonville, Bay Avenue in Capitola, Bay Street in Santa Cruz, and Soquel Drive in Santa Cruz County. Bike Santa Cruz County endorses Option 4. Mr. Svete requested that his document, Fourteen Reasons Why Planning for Cycling Benefits Cities, Commerce, Public Health, and the Planet, be distributed to the Council Members.
• Dustin Lopez, a resident of Scotts Valley, spoke about the equity in alternative transportation, indicating that protected bike lanes and easier pedestrian and public transport are especially important for the most disadvantaged and vulnerable groups in our community who are more likely to rely on alternative modes of transportation. He feels that we need to flesh out these plans more, while keeping in mind that a lot of the new housing will be affordable housing which makes this issue especially important.
• David Alreck, a resident of Scotts Valley, implored the Council to consider all the development that will happen and then use that as a baseline for traffic flows and other planning. He agrees with Council Member Timm regarding using a holistic approach, and he is in favor of traffic-calming and coming up with a plan.
• Susan O'Connor Fraser, a resident of Scotts Valley, is concerned about the Glenwood Drive-Scotts Valley Drive intersection since it is very congested. She also would like to see better communication with the non-cycling public in the future.
• Josh Salgato, a resident of Scotts Valley, noted that he does not feel that Scotts Valley Drive is the problem, rather Mount Hermon is unsafe. He is in favor of making Scotts Valley Drive beautiful, but concerned about removing lanes, and he is concerned about improving only the section from Civic Center Drive to Victor Square and not including the north and south ends of Scotts Valley Drive. He also expressed concerned about the time and expense that will be needed for Option 4.
• Brittany Cavaletto, a resident of Scotts Valley, local business owner, cyclist, and a parent, supports Option 1, not just because of the financial implications, but also because she does not feel that Option 4 is desirable. She is worried because the bike lanes are currently not maintained. She feels that any beautification should consider holding the businesses accountable for their landscaping and the condition of their buildings, and holding the City

Page 11 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 7 ends

CONVENE TO CLOSED SESSION

CLOSED SESSION SUBJECT(S)

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

REPORT ON ACTION TAKEN DURING CLOSED SESSION
accountable for maintaining the bike lanes.

Written public comments were received from Mark Davidson, Lauren Freeman, Francis Gramkowski, Vicki Miller, Charlotte, Carolyn DeLucia, Abe, Evan, Gabe Jones, Martin Spierings, Laurel Siroky, The Larsen family, Matt Werner, Abby Campbell Wong, Brian Harrison, Kevin Karplus, Kate, Karla A. Lopez, Christine Ingesson, Henrik Ingesson, Curt Simmons, Sean Abbey, Nels "Pete" Pearson, Zach Brown, Harry Bidleman, Stepanie Pena, Joanne Syben and Katie Bagley. These comments are attached.

The Council Members unanimously directed staff to pursue Option 1. Secondarily, Council Members Dilles and Timms requested further consideration of Option 4 in the future. The Council also requested that the project area include both the north end and the south end of Scotts Valley Drive, if possible.

2. Future Council Agenda Items
CM Lind indicated that she would like to see a discussion regarding short-term rental regulations on a future agenda.

The City Council convened to closed session at 9:03 PM to discuss the following item:

1. Conference with legal counsel regarding liability claim Legal Authority: Government Code Section 54956.95
Claimant: Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company a/s/o L. Dinos Staff Present: City Manager, City Attorney, Police Chief, Administrative Services Director
The City Council reconvened to open session at 9:21 PM.

City Attorney Powell reported that the Council voted unanimously to approve the claim filed by Nationwide Insurance Company.

Page 12 of 500 ends

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: September 18, 2024

Page 8 ends

ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned 9:22 PM.

Approved:________________________
Randy Johnson, Mayor
Attest:___________________________
Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

Page 13 of 500 ends

Greetings council members,
It has been brought to my attention that you are seeking public input on improvements to Scotts Valley Drive to make it better for biking and walking.

I've been a Scotts Valley resident since 2008 and have driven my daughter to both the middle school and the high school in that time. Despite that "rush hour" I feel that Scotts Valley drive is underutilized most of the time and doesn't really justify the width and the number of lanes for cars.

I believe that we should make the streets safer for those who choose to ride a bike to school. The increasing use of e-Bikes in this county means that kids and teens can transport themselves to school - which reduces the reliance on parents to transport them. I think we should prepare for this future by providing safer streets for bikes and eBikes.

I've been hit by a car in Scotts Valley while in a green lane while commuting and I can assure you that green paint doesn't offer much protection to cyclists. We need full separated bike lanes and I support Layout 4 in the proposal. I believe that this configuration will slow down traffic on SV drive and provide a more aesthetically interesting street that could make it more pleasant to walk and bike down that street.

Thank you very much for your consideration of this important topic. --Mark Davidson
Baja Sol Drive

Page 14 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson and Council members,
Please include Layout #4, Street Beautification, as you continue to study options for Scotts Valley Drive. This option does the most to make it safer to walk and bike on Scotts Valley Drive, offers us an opportunity to transform our street into a place where people want to be, and offers opportunity for businesses and economic development in our city.

Scotts Valley Drive could be so much more: a place for people to walk after work to their favorite restaurant and sit outside under shady trees. A place where parents feel safe letting their kids walk and bike to school, and where families can bike to the library or the park on the weekends. A place where businesses are thriving along a street that draws visitors from across the region, like Pacific Avenue in Santa Cruz.

I am a resident of Scotts Valley - I walk and bike often. It is unreasonable to think that Scotts Valley won't continue to grow over time. I urge you to not make the same mistakes that Santa Cruz did and not plan for growth while lacking infrastructure. I see children on ebikes with earbuds in that are trying to navigate Scotts Valley streets acting as though they are a motorized vehicle. I constantly cross at Kings Village Road and Mt. Hermon, wondering if cars are going to take a quick right turn and hit me when the light turns green- or even worse, when trying to walk through Kings Village Shopping Center or the shipping center across the way. These shopping centers have incredibly dangerous stop signs or traffic flow that prevent safe walking in the plazas.

They are even more dangerous because the majority of residents in Scotts Valley are SENIOR CITIZENS. Or young parents with baby brains. PLEASE FIX THIS in addition to adding more safe bike lanes that are separate from cars. As a 40 year old cyclist, professional, athlete, and soon to be parent, I do not want to raise my children in a town that doesn't prioritize pedestrian safety. Car drivers are not paying attention and if they are, they speed up while they are trying to pass, thinking this is safe. Most motorists have never biked on the road or they don't walk so they don't know how it is that they drive. With the increased amount of distracted driving, increased driving while intoxicated or high, increased MPHs in 'residential areas,' and the increased sizes of vehicles that are becoming the norm (not to mention quiet vehicles)- kids, walkers, and bikers are vulnerable. A protected path isn't much- it may not even save a life- but it's better than nothing.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach.

Page 15 of 500 ends

Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Lauren Freeman
Bean Creek Road Resident

Page 16 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor and Council members
Please include option 4 in future studies for improving Scott’s Valley Drive. I worry about the safety of my 8th grade twins ride to the MS every school day down Scotts Valley drive from Granite Creek and this option offers the greatest increase in safety for cyclist, pedestrians and drivers.

We used to live in Sky Park and participated in the rolling school bus to Vine Hill . Safety concerns limited participation in this event and the changes in option 4 will allow more kids to feel safe riding the bikes up down SV drive to the HS, MS and Vine Hill.

Regards
Francis Gramkowski

Page 17 of 500 ends

Good Morning,
I used to walk my dogs frequently along Scotts Valley Drive. I noticed that there were few improvements and it felt barren and unfriendly.

The Drive is extremely wide and the traffic is relatively sparse considering the amount of people that live in and around Scotts Valley. Reviewing the idea of condensing the traffic to 3 total lanes (1 middle turning) seems to me to be a fantastic idea that would allow the beautification of Scotts Valley Drive and allow safe travel for those wishing to traverse via bicycle into the downtown area.

I hope that the City Council votes in favor of making positive change for the safety of pedestrians and bicycle travelers by selecting option 4 which would also allow beautification along the way.

Regards,
Vicki Miller

Page 18 of 500 ends

Are You seriously thinking of removing a Car Lane to add Bicycle Lanes? What kind of Traffic Nightmare are exactly trying to create?

Page 19 of 500 ends

Looking at the proposed plans which were posted on line I have to comment on the logic.

SCOTTS VALLEY Dr. “At times” have light traffic. But think about those other times when the middle school has drop off and pick up times. Then there is the traffic on the other end from the high school. We have businesses up and down the corridor getting deliveries through out the day, (some times partially blocking the slow lane.). The bike lanes are hardly used during the week and to turn the drive emphasis into bike and walking therofare is poor planning from the city leaders. Take a look at the condo building taking place on the drive. More cars doing the commute and running erronds. Think about it.

Charlotte

Page 20 of 500 ends

Hello,
I’m very happy to hear of potential bicycle and pedestrian upgrades on Scotts Valley Drive and wanted to write to express my support of this plan, including the removal of two car lanes and wider bike lanes and sidewalks. As a volunteer crossing guard at Scotts Valley Middle School I see frequent traffic violations, including speeding and cars running red lights. These changes could make it safer for students, pedestrians and cyclists. Please note that we also need better signage and flashing lights near the crosswalks at the Middle School, at Scotts Valley Drive and Bean Creek.

Thank you for all you do!
Respectfully,
Carolyn DeLucia

Page 21 of 500 ends

We are all very excited to see what comes of the meeting on Sep 18th.

It is very sad but I won't be able to attend. I will be traveling but will watch the replay later.

As a cyclist who often rides with my kids we really need this in more places. Thank you for working with everyone to make this happen!
Regards,
Abe

Page 22 of 500 ends

To the City Council,
As a bike rider, I support layout 4.

Evan

Page 23 of 500 ends

Hello Scotts Valley City Council,
I'm writing in support of improving the bike lanes on Scotts Valley Drive. I rode from Bean Creek Rd to Vine Hill School with my 7 year old for her first Bike-To-School day and honestly the experience was terrifying.

I'm a proponent of option 2. Protected bike lanes that are separated from cars with landscaping + two car lanes in each direction with no center turn lane, but I'd be happy with any of the proposals.

Thank you.

Gabe Jones
Bluebonnet Ln

Page 24 of 500 ends

My son rides an e-bike to the High School which I believe more kids could do, reducing the grid lock at Granite Creek Road.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach.

Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Martin Spierings

Page 25 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson and Council members,
After reading through the various options, I came to my own decision that I liked #4 the best, it made the most sense in keeping everyone safe. I then continued reading the letter from Bike SC County to read that that is the one they are supporting. It makes the most sense to me and I hope to others that view the importance of bike and pedestrian safety. We are a family of bikers with two young children. Right now, my husband bikes them on his e-cargo bike to Vine Hill school every morning, but in a few years I am certain they will want to bike on their own.

Scotts Valley Drive is not safe for children (or really anyone) biking as it is currently. I truly hope there will be a protected bike lane. So many other communities have a fully protected bike lane and I believe they thrive and benefit from this option, bringing great value to their town. Keeping everyone safe, encouraging more kids and families out on the roads and lessening traffic. Please consider option #4.

Here is the rest of the letter: :)
Please include Layout #4, Street Beautification, as you continue to study options for Scotts Valley Drive. This option does the most to make it safer to walk and bike on Scotts Valley Drive, offers us an opportunity to transform our street into a place where people want to be, and offers opportunity for businesses and economic development in our city.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach.

Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Laurel Siroky

Page 26 of 500 ends

Dear council members,
We support option 4 for separated bike lanes and wider sidewalks for a safer ride to school and for cyclists commuting through Scotts Valley. Traffic goes fast and separated lanes would make us feel ok with kids riding to school by themselves.

Thanks for bringing forward thinking about this issue.

The Larsen family

Page 27 of 500 ends

I live on Glen Canyon and regularly ride my bike for exercise and local transportation. Just this summer I was almost struck by a driver on Scotts Valley Drive who was speeding and ran a red light.

I think Layout #4 has the best chance of making Scotts Valley Drive safer and more pleasant for pedestrians and cyclists.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach. Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Matt Werner

Page 28 of 500 ends

Scotts Valley Drive is currently not an enjoyable place to walk or bike.

Traffic often goes faster than the 35 mph speed limit, and Scotts Valley Drive, along with Mount Hermon, is a top location for bicycle and pedestrian collisions. Many of these collisions involve students who are walking or biking to school. There is little shade and few destinations to walk to along this main commercial corridor.

My spouse works at the Kaiser Permanente Scotts Valley location, and this is where our family does our regular medical visits. We are here often, and enjoy the restaurants and shops along Scotts Valley Drive. However, the traffic moves fast and it doesn't feel pleasant for us or safe for our children to walk on this road. It would make a huge difference to have a street that we could enjoy instead of getting into our car to drive a short distance.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach. Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Abby Campbell Wong

Page 29 of 500 ends

Dear city councilors
I’m pleased to see the city is finally taking steps to make life safer for pedestrians and cyclists in Scotts Valley. I’ve lived here for over 30 years and never understood the acres of paved car lanes on Scotts Valley Drive. I’ve frequently walked or cycled along this road and found it most unpleasant and, in parts, unsafe.

Now is a great time to develop a safer and more attractive road with well separated pedestrian, bike and car lanes plus landscaping. Option 4 of your list clearly offers the best option.

Regards
Brian Harrison.

Page 30 of 500 ends

Dear Scotts Valley City Council,
I am writing with comments on the Scotts Valley Drive Complete Streets Analysis.

Although I am not a traffic engineer, I have been a bicycle commuter for over 50 years and a bicycle activist for over 35 years. Some of the analysis presented in the report is badly flawed.

First and most important, Layout 3 with a two-way bike path on one side of the street is not "high bike safety improvement." Indeed it is probably the most dangerous to bicyclists of the 5 options (including the do-nothing option). The problem comes at the intersections with cross streets, where turning cars will not be in a position for their drivers to see bicyclists coming in both directions. The problem will be particularly acute at any commercial driveways, of which I believe there are many in the proposed project area. Your use of Beach Street as an exemplar of this design is particularly striking, as that is one of the most dangerous and unpleasant places in the County to bicycle. About the only time 2-way bike lanes make sense on a street is on the left side of a one-way street, and even then it is better to put the bike lane that is moving with traffic on the right-hand side of the traffic, rather than the left. (See, for example, the one-way block of High Street in Santa Cruz.)
All the new layouts make it extremely difficult for bicyclists to make left turns, effectively cutting them off from half the businesses on the street. The barricades also make it difficult to dodge debris in the bike lane or idiots walking or cycling in the wrong direction.

Probably the best design is one that is not presented—eliminating either the center-turn lane or one lane in each direction and widening the bike lanes to 8' without putting barricades that trap the bicyclist into the lane. Making a 3'-wide striping pattern that indicates a separation without trapping the bikes is a much safer solution.

If you are not willing to consider any layouts but the 4 presented, then Layouts 1 and 4 are probably best: Layout 1 for doing the least harm to bicyclists and Layout 4 for doing the most good for pedestrians.

Kevin Karplus

Page 31 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson and Council members,
I’m writing to ask your support for Layout #4, Street Beautification, as you continue to study options for Scotts Valley Drive. This option does the most to make it safer to walk and bike on Scotts Valley Drive, offers us an opportunity to transform our street into a place where people want to be, and offers opportunity for businesses and economic development in our city.

Scotts Valley Drive is currently not an enjoyable place to walk or bike. Traffic often goes faster than the 35 mph speed limit, and Scotts Valley Drive, along with Mount Hermon, is a top location for bicycle and pedestrian collisions. Many of these collisions involve students who are walking or biking to school. As a volunteer crossing guard at Scotts Valley Middle School I see frequent traffic violations, including speeding and cars running red lights. Many times I’ve seen students and teachers nearly hit in the crosswalk. I’m hoping the proposed changes to Scotts Valley Drive will continue the entire length of it, and not just between Civic Center and Glenwood, as reported by Santa Cruz Local. There also needs to be better signage and flashing lights near the crosswalks at the Middle School (Scotts Valley Drive and Bean Creek).

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach. Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Respectfully,
Carolyn DeLucia

Page 32 of 500 ends

Hello,
I am writing in support of improving biking conditions on Scotts Valley drive. As a family with two young children, we ride our cargo bike from our home in Manana Woods up Scotts Valley Drive to Bethany Drive for their daytime care. As our 5 year old gets bigger, he is very interested and capable of riding his own bike if it was safe enough. We need better (safer) bike access on thoroughfares through Scotts Valley.

I'm in support of Layout #2 with protected bike lanes on SV Drive.

However, my family is in support of any and all biking safety and access improvements on Scotts Valley drive, in any of the proposed layouts.

Thank you,
Kate

Page 33 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson and Council Members,
My family recently moved to Scotts Valley in search of a nature-filled, family-friendly environment for our children, ages 5 and 2. We’ve been thrilled with the schools, local businesses, and community events—it’s everything we hoped for.

However, one thing is missing: safe walkability and protected bike lanes. While distances are short, walking and biking around town often feels unsafe. We dream of giving our kids more independence, like biking to Penny’s for ice cream before heading to the park with friends, or grabbing some pastries at the brand new Adorable French Bakery without worrying about traffic or dangerous roads. Just this weekend we biked to the new bakery and had a lovely time, but the bike ride up Scotts Valley drive was definitely not enjoyable or safe.

This is why I urge you to include Layout #4, Street Beautification, in your study for Scotts Valley Drive. It would make our streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists, while also creating an inviting space that benefits local businesses and fosters community.

Right now, Scotts Valley Drive feels unsafe, with traffic exceeding speed limits and a history of bike and pedestrian accidents—many involving students. It lacks shade and walkable destinations, making it less appealing for families to enjoy.

But with Layout #4, Scotts Valley Drive could become a vibrant, walkable street—where kids bike to school safely, families stroll to restaurants, and visitors come to enjoy our town, much like Pacific Avenue in Santa Cruz.

Please include Layout #4 in the options for further study and outreach. Thank you for considering this step toward positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Karla A Lopez

Page 34 of 500 ends

My children have been biking to the local schools (Vine Hill, SVMS, and now SVHS) for many years. We felt the need to spend numerous hours coaching them how to share the streets with cars absent a protected bike lane. Unfortunately, cars don't always yield and parents don't spend the time coaching and there have been close calls. Many children feel the need to ride on the sidewalk absent a safer, designated space for them to ride. My son's friend was hit on his bike (he was riding on the sidewalk) last year on Scotts Valley Drive. Ebikes have become ever more popular. It is great that kids are getting out and exercising and socializing and these bikes offer the ability to do just that. Just a few short years ago, they were all indoors playing video games. Let's take this momentum and create a safe place for them to ebike! The community has been worried about a serious ebike accident happening in our town for months. A fully protected, designated bike lane would create the infrastructure needed for this healthy activity to remain popular with the public.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach. Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely, Christine Ingesson

Page 35 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson and Council members,

Please include Layout #4, Street Beautification, as you continue to study options for Scotts Valley Drive. This option does the most to make it safer to walk and bike on Scotts Valley Drive, offers us an opportunity to transform our street into a place where people want to be, and offers opportunity for businesses and economic development in our city.

I have personally encouraged elementary school children to bike to school by helping to start the roiling school bus to Vine Hill School. I did this in hopes of getting more students out of their parents’ cars and on to bikes to create a critical mass. This was and still is an uphill battle due to the dangerous conditions for young bikers on SV Drive. Many parents don’t feel safe letting their kids bike along SV Drive.

SV Drive is a major artery for our community, and it would be great to see more residents enjoying it and use it for active transportation. Get people out of their cars and on to bikes and sidewalks. If residents need a fast way to get from one side of town to the other, we do have 17 as a better alternative.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach.

Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Henrik Ingesson

Page 36 of 500 ends

Dear Santa Cruz City Council Members,
>
> I am not a Scotts Valley resident, but I live close by in Rolling Woods and bike regularly through town for errands and recreation.

Biking is my primary form of transportation. I am very encouraged by your “Active Transportation Plan”, which was adopted in 2021. I look forward to improvements along Scotts Valley Drive. >
> Scotts Valley is a perfect community to promote active transportation. It is a relatively small geographic area. It is relatively flat. It has great weather. There are lots of essential businesses. However, Scotts Valley is dominated by cars, wide streets, poor cycling paths and scant bike parking. So many trips could be accomplished by simply walking or biking. Yet is rare that I see any bike traveling along the road or parked in front of a store or business. It does not feel safe or pleasant to walk or cycle.
>
> My thoughts regarding improvements along Scotts Valley Drive:
>
> 1. Yes, reduce traffic lane widths (all concepts)
> 2. Yes, reduce number of traffic lanes (concept-3)
> 3. Lower the speed limit.
>
> According to the City’s Active Transportation Plan, there are three design options. Each one recommends a traffic lane width reduction from 12 to 11 feet, allowing for more space for cyclists, pedestrians and landscaping. This is great news and I am a proponent of narrowing traffic lanes when possible. A study by the John’s Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health published November 1, 2023, states among other conclusions that “decision-makers should set the standard lane width at 10’ in low speed urban settings and provide justification for wider lanes”. Any lane narrowing will be a design change for the better. It will help motivate drivers to drive more slowly.
>
> Concept-3 reduces the number of traffic lanes to one in each direction. Fewer lanes encourage slower driving speeds and I am in favor of that. Fewer lanes also means more room for active transportation infrastructure and landscaping.
>
> Currently, the speed limit is 35mph. If drivers were limiting themselves to the 35mph posted (which many do not), it is still way too fast when cyclists are in the mix. Each of the large number of driveways along the road presents a conflict point and potential for collision. There are also areas of conflict at each roadway intersection. Lowering speed limits by road design and signage will greatly lessen the crash potential. Cyclists and pedestrians have a

Page 37 of 500 ends

far better chance of surviving a crash when impact is at lower speeds.
>
> According to a study published in 2011 by the Foundation of Traffic Study “results show that the average risk of severe injury for a pedestrian struck by a vehicle reaches 10% at an impact speed of 16 mph, 25% at 23mph, 50% at 31 mph, 75% at 39 mph, and 90% at 46 mph.” I would think that collisions between cyclists and cars might be worse.
>
> I look forward to cycling in a more welcoming environment while traveling through Scotts Valley. I hope that following work on Scotts Valley Drive you will begin to make improvements on Mount Hermon.
>
> I regret that I cannot attend this Wednesday's council meeting to voice my opinion in person.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Curt Simmons

Page 38 of 500 ends

I would like to voice support for complete street design being implemented on Scotts Valley drive. I have reviewed the presentation for Agenda item 1 for your meeting on September 18th, and it confirms what has been my experience of driving and riding a bike on Scotts Valley Drive for the last 20+ years. Scotts Valley Drive is dramatically oversized for the amount of car traffic that is on it and the design is hostile to those who are outside of a vehicle.

I would strongly encourage the Council to begin considering Layout 4, which reduces the number of lanes to 1 for this segment while making the space much safer and more appealing to cyclists and walkers. As noted in the presentation, this would not dramatically affect the flow of cars in this segment. I would also argue that doing this could improve flow near the highway on ramps because it would create a safe way for student to ride to the high school, which causes the vast majority of the traffic in that area. Even if this option does reduce the flow speed on SVD, folks that would like to drive more quickly across town already have an alternative in Highway 17.

I am most supportive of Layout 4 because it brings something to this part of town that feels lacking. A sense of community. This would make the corridor, and all the businesses along it, seem more inviting and increase the FOOT traffic that passes by. It would create a place where current residents and newer arrivals can see each other outside of a car.

Thank you for taking my comment. I look forward to watching this project progress.

Sean Abbey

Page 39 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson & Council Members;

As safety and education director of the largest cycle club in Santa Cruz County, and as a retired law enforcement supervisor, I urge you to move forward with traffic calming measures on Scotts Valley drive. The current width and straight line of the roadway is conducive to speeding vehicles.

Three schools are serviced by the roadway, as well as a number of businesses and two medical centers. Traffic calming measures will not only help our children, but will also make the street safer for left and right turn movements.

The Glenwood drive intersection is particularly complicated for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians to maneuver.

I have long admired Scotts Valley for its beauty and well run management. I have a connection with Scotts Valley through law enforcement, my family and grandchildren.

This will be another opportunity to beautify the Scotts Valley drive corridor and provide a safety net for all children.

Sincerely;

Nels "Pete" Pearson
Santa Cruz County Cycle Club
Retired: Santa Clara Police Department

Page 40 of 500 ends

Dear Scotts Valley City Council,

Thank you so much for considering this project!

I ride my bike to work and back along Scotts Valley Drive daily and I have loved seeing more and more kids and parents riding bikes to work and to school. I want to keep riding my bike without fearing for my safety and the safety of others. This plans would help us!

For the safety of our cyclists and pedestrians and for the beautification of our town, I implore you to move forward with the proposed plan for improving/adding pedestrian sidewalks, landscaping and wider bike lanes.

Sincerely,
Zach Brown

Page 41 of 500 ends

Honorable Scotts Valley City Council members,
I would like to add my thoughts about the four different proposed layouts for revising Scotts Valley Drive. After reviewing them I would advocate for proposal 1 or to leave it as is. I don’t believe there is enough of a safety issue with the existing road design that would warrant the major revisions proposed in layouts 2-4. I have ridden in these bike lanes hundreds of times since they were first installed and can find nothing in need of major changes. The one exception would be to possibly add the painted barrier on the asphalt indicating the separation of the bike lane from the roadway traffic discussed in layout 1.

Raised barriers or curbs of any kind, commonly referred to as “road furniture” in Europe are despised by cyclists in general as they can often lead to crashes if unseen or by being forced into them. I’ve spent many hours cycling in Europe and can attest to the dangerousness of these unseen road hazards. Speed limits are determined by an official speed survey and are not simply set at a speed that people would like it to be. Suggesting that reducing roadway widths as a means to reduce the speed of traffic is a dangerous assumption.

Removing the center turn lane would restrict access to businesses along Scotts Valley Drive. I can recall when the original proposed improvements for Scotts Valley Drive were discussed over 20 years ago, the businesses felt very strongly about the need for the center turn lane and not just several turn pockets along the length of the street. I doubt that sentiment has changed.

The old saying of, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it might be of some use for these proposed revisions.

Harry Bidleman,
Scotts Valley resident, retired police captain and avid cyclist for 40 years

Page 42 of 500 ends

Dear Mayor Johnson and Council members,
I'm a resident of Scotts Valley off Granite Creek rd. and my name is Stephanie Peña.

Almost every Saturday morning, I walk to the farmers' market, and I think about how lifeless Scotts Valley Drive is —and how much better it could be with a road diet. The sidewalks are too narrow and the traffic drives by too fast. Cycling is dangerous. There's no one there except motor vehicles whizzing by. It seems like a place that is designed for cars, not people. I would guess that many residents currently travel to Santa Cruz for an urban environment that's more walkable and inviting.

Please include Layout #4 as one of the options for continued study and community outreach. Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Stephanie Peña

Page 43 of 500 ends

Given that we do not have a school bus, I think Layout 4 is the most beautifying and the safest option. If we do ranked voting, my second vote would be for Layout 2, followed by Layout 3. I would definitely walk more often to businesses and restaurants on SV Drive if we had trees (shade) and it were more attractive and safe.

Please include Layout #4 as one the options for continued study and community outreach. Thank you for supporting positive change for our community.

Sincerely,
Joanne Syben

Page 44 of 500 ends

After studying the four proposals I would like to add to the discussion these points; the renovation of Scotts Valley Dr. was much anticipated and debated with “new” sidewalks, lighting, etc. back in ????. I feel that our SV drive is working as well as it stands. I’m in favor of buffered bike lanes. I am in favor of Layout #1. But not layout #4.

I would like to point out that the state mandated housing units is 1220 units by 2031. As Scotts Valley Drive is just one of two major roadways in our community, I would think that reducing a lane would greatly impact traffic flow to this road. With more residents , more cars on the roadways, the number of bike and pedestrian collisions is very low to take such a radical action. Imagine reducing Mt. Hermon Dr. to one lane in each direction! What is different, besides schools, here? Citizens ride bikes along Mt.

Hermon Rd. too. Should we reduce Mt. Hermon Rd. to one lane each direction?
I agree with Ms. Lind about the housing impacts and students from the middle school who are riding their bikes on the wrong side of the road, which is dangerous.

Katie Bagley
Mr. Timms says Proposal #4 has a lot of support based on emails.

Please research who is sending these emails, do they live in our community?

Page 45 of 500 ends

apadatecr2 City of Scotts Valley llambert 09/27/2024 11:49 Page 1 A/P Check Register Checks from 09/14/2024 to 09/27/2024
Check Check Vendor Name Net Check Check CheckNumber Date Amount Status Type Cash Account: 999-10100-000-000-000000
132551 09/20/24 ABSOLUTE SOFTWARE, INC. 5,427.00 O Regular 132552 09/20/24 AT&T MOBILITY 1,510.03 O Regular132553 09/20/24 BENJAMIN NOBLE 13,035.00 O Regular132554 09/20/24 BRISHAN INC. 1,975.10 O Regular132555 09/20/24 BUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 63.07 O Regular132556 09/20/24 CAL-WEST LIGHTING & SIGNAL INC 1,375.00 O Regular132557 09/20/24 CHAD PRICE 405.00 O Regular132558 09/20/24 CIVICPLUS 5,402.04 O Payment Manager132559 09/20/24 COMCAST 757.45 O Payment Manager132560 09/20/24 COMCAST 1,050.55 O Regular132561 09/20/24 CSAA INSURANCE EXCHANGE 2,041.86 O Regular132562 09/20/24 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC 1,462.00 O Regular132563 09/20/24 DOCTORS ON DUTY 40.00 O Regular132564 09/20/24 EMERYVILLE OCCUPTIONAL 125.00 O Regular132565 09/20/24 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 63.93 O Payment Manager132566 09/20/24 FEDERAL EXPRESS 65.86 O Regular132567 09/20/24 GOOD CITY COMPANY 9,282.50 O Regular132568 09/20/24 HERWIT ENGINEERING 7,130.50 O Regular132569 09/20/24 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP 2,596.25 O Regular132570 09/20/24 K & D LANDSCAPING, INC. 1,736.00 O Regular132571 09/20/24 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 4,637.00 O Regular132572 09/20/24 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 11,966.21 O Regular132573 09/20/24 LLOYDS TIRE SERVICE INC. 1,301.54 O Regular 132574 09/20/24 LOGAN & POWELL, LLP 17,302.09 O Regular132575 09/20/24 M-GROUP 4,506.25 O Regular132576 09/20/24 MBASIA 10,863.77 O Regular132577 09/20/24 MESITI-MILLER ENGINEERING 2,975.00 O Regular132578 09/20/24 MICRONICS ENGINEERED FILTRATIO 3,040.15 O Regular132579 09/20/24 MONTEREY REGIONAL 9,016.20 O Payment Manager132580 09/20/24 PALACE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 219.09 O Regular132581 09/20/24 PHILLIP D NEUMAN 52.65 O Payment Manager132582 09/20/24 PLACEWORKS, INC. 1,782.45 O Regular132583 09/20/24 PRESS BANNER 152.20 O Regular132584 09/20/24 SANTA CRUZ OCCUPATIONAL 260.00 O Regular132585 09/20/24 SCARBOROUGH LUMBER 968.46 O Regular132586 09/20/24 STERICYCLE INC 249.88 O Regular132587 09/20/24 SUZANNE CLARK 150.00 O Regular132588 09/20/24 THE PIED PIPER INC. 155.50 O Payment Manager132589 09/20/24 TIRECHOICE AUTO SERVICE CENTER 209.50 O Regular132590 09/20/24 TRIAD ELECTRIC 254.00 O Payment Manager132591 09/20/24 URBAN FIELD STUDIO OAKLAND 25,423.96 O Regular132592 09/24/24 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL 85.00 O Regular132593 09/27/24 AFLAC-FLEX ONE 411.86 O Regular132594 09/27/24 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 127.23 O Regular

Page 46 of 500 ends

apadatecr2 City of Scotts Valley llambert 09/27/2024 11:49 Page 2 A/P Check Register Checks from 09/14/2024 to 09/27/2024
Check Check Vendor Name Net Check Check CheckNumber Date Amount Status Type132595 09/27/24 ANDREW LEE 241.04 O Regular132596 09/27/24 AT&T 150.62 O Regular132597 09/27/24 AT&T 286.21 O Regular132598 09/27/24 AUTOLIFT SERVICES, INC. 4,141.33 O Regular132599 09/27/24 BAKER TILLY US, LLP 480.94 O Regular132600 09/27/24 BUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 2.18 O Regular132601 09/27/24 CATHIE SIMONOVICH 22.78 O Regular132602 09/27/24 CHLOE GRAHAM 57.45 O Regular132603 09/27/24 COMMUNITY TREE SERVICE, INC. 2,450.00 O Payment Manager132604 09/27/24 CORIE L. ASCANI, PSY.D. 225.00 O Regular132605 09/27/24 COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ 702.00 O Regular132606 09/27/24 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER CO 51.50 O Regular132607 09/27/24 CUSHMAN CONTRACTING CORPORATIO 96,900.00 O Regular132608 09/27/24 DUNCAN AUTO TECH 464.93 O Regular132609 09/27/24 ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATIONS 2,491.60 O Regular132610 09/27/24 ERNIES AUTO CENTER 252.08 O Regular 132611 09/27/24 FEDERAL EXPRESS 318.90 O Regular132612 09/27/24 FIRST ALARM 138.90 O Regular132613 09/27/24 INTEGRITY AUTOMOTIVE 97.50 O Regular132614 09/27/24 JOANNA HAROS 135.00 O Regular132615 09/27/24 KENNEDY-JENKS CONSULTANTS 10,357.96 O Regular132616 09/27/24 LINCOLN FINANCIAL GROUP 2,204.67 O Regular132617 09/27/24 MEREDITH ROBERTS 74.65 O Regular132618 09/27/24 NATIONAL SUBROGATION SERVICES 4,821.36 O Regular132619 09/27/24 NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 4,510.11 O Regular132620 09/27/24 NORTH CENTRAL LABORATORIES 1,155.61 O Payment Manager132621 09/27/24 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES, LLC 660.00 O Regular132622 09/27/24 PALACE BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 1,900.38 O Regular132623 09/27/24 PHOENIX GROUP 395.13 O Regular132624 09/27/24 PRINICPAL LIFE INSURANCE CO 9,036.91 O Regular132625 09/27/24 ROSS RECREATION EQUIPMENT INC. 48,103.68 O Regular132626 09/27/24 S.V. WATER DISTRICT 9,688.10 O Regular132627 09/27/24 SANTA CRUZ CO ENVIRONMENTAL 4,963.00 O Regular132628 09/27/24 SCARBOROUGH LUMBER 1,030.94 O Regular132629 09/27/24 SCOTTS VALLEY SPRINKLER 52.13 O Regular132630 09/27/24 SOUTHLAND INDUSTRIES 1,801.63 O Regular132631 09/27/24 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 1,086.06 O Regular132632 09/27/24 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL 5,525.00 O Regular132633 09/27/24 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL 155.00 O Regular132634 09/27/24 SUMMIT UNIFORMS 465.94 O Regular132635 09/27/24 SUPERIOR ALARM COMPANY 96.00 O Regular132636 09/27/24 SYCAL ENGINEERING INC 97.50 O Regular132637 09/27/24 TIRECHOICE AUTO SERVICE CENTER 422.08 O Regular132638 09/27/24 TYLER HEBARD 355.82 O Regular132639 09/27/24 U.S. BANCORP OFFICE 1,300.62 O Regular

Page 47 of 500 ends

apadatecr2 City of Scotts Valley llambert 09/27/2024 11:49 Page 3 A/P Check Register Checks from 09/14/2024 to 09/27/2024
Check Check Vendor Name Net Check Check CheckNumber Date Amount Status Type132640 09/27/24 VERIZON WIRELESS 178.34 O Regular132641 09/27/24 WATSONVILLE DIESEL 16,075.03 O Payment Manager132642 09/27/24 WIZIX TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC 965.28 O Payment Managerapadatecr2 City of Scotts Valley llambert 09/27/2024 11:49 Page 3 A/P Check Register Checks from 09/14/2024 to 09/27/2024
81 Checks total: 352,395.33
0 ACH total:0 EFTPS total:0 Wire transfer total:
11 Payment Manager total: 36,347.6992 GRAND TOTALS 388,743.02

Page 48 of 500 ends

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 10/2/2024
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 10/2/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Rodolfo Onchi, Public Works Director
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Beverage Container Recycling Grant Program Application Resolution

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) offers the Beverage Container Recycling City County Payment Program pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 14581 (a)(3)(A) of the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act. In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, CalRecycle is distributing $10,500,000 to eligible cities and counties specifically for beverage container recycling and litter cleanup activities. The purpose of the beverage container recycling program is to reach and maintain an 80 percent recycling rate for all California Refund Value beverage containers – aluminum, glass, plastic, and bimetal. Projects implemented by cities and counties will assist in reaching and maintaining this goal.

The City of Scotts Valley (City) seeks funding to enhance sustainability and recycling efforts through the installation of well-marked beverage container recycling bins and water bottle fill stations in City-owned public spaces. Proposed locations include seven parks and two open spaces: Siltanen Community Park, Skypark Community Park, Macdorsa Park, Shugart Park, Hocus Pocus Park, Gateway North Park, Vern Hart Park, Lodato Trail, and Glenwood Open Space Trails. The City requests a total of $85,833.89 of funding to install 32 ADA-compliant beverage container recycling bins and four ADA-compliant water bottle fill stations. The $5,000 outreach budget will support education and signage to encourage reusable bottles and proper sorting of refuse.

CalRecycle’s requires grant applications that the City Council adopt a resolution in the attached form. The resolution stipulates the established procedures developed by CalRecycle, which include a declaration of certain authorizations related to administering CalRecycle grants. These include authorizing the City to submit applications to CalRecycle, allowing the City Manager or designee to execute all documents related to the application and grant, and establishing authorization periods for the adopted resolution.

FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact is associated with the recommended actions.

Page 49 of 500 ends

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended City Council approve Resolution No. 2053 authorizing the City of Scotts Valley to submit an application to Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery (CalRecycle) for the Beverage Container Recycling Grant Program (RBC36); and Approve and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all necessary agreements and other grant-related documents thereof to CalRecycle.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Resolution No. 2053 CalRecycle Beverage Container Grant Resolution

Page 50 of 500 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2053

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SCOTTS VALLEY AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN
INDIVIDUAL GRANT APPLICATION FOR CALRECYCLE’S

BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING GRANT PROGRAM
(RBC36)
Whereas, the California Public Resources Code authorizes the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to administer various Grant Programs; and
Whereas, in furtherance of this authority, CalRecycle is required to establish procedures governing the administration of the Grant Programs; and Whereas, CalRecycle grant application procedures require, among other things, an applicant’s governing body to declare by resolution certain authorizations related to the administration of CalRecycle Grants.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the City of Scotts Valley is authorized to submit an application to CalRecycle for the Beverage Container Recycling Grant Program (RBC36)
Be it further resolved that the City Manager, or their designee, are hereby authorized as Signature Authority to execute in the name of the City of Scotts Valley all grant documents, including but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments, and requests for payment, necessary to secure grant funds and implement the approved grant project.

Be it further resolved that these authorizations are effective for five years from the date of adoption.

Date Adopted 10/02/2024
The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Scotts Valley at a regular meeting held on the 2nd day of October, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Page 51 of 500 ends

Approved:____________________________
Randy Johnson, Mayor
Attest: ___________________________
Cathie Simonovich, City

Page 52 of 500 ends

AGENDA ITEM 1.

DATE: 10/2/2024
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 10/2/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Taylor Bateman, Community Development Director
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider a Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Planned Development Zoning
Application, Design Review Application, Use Permit Application and Cultural Resources Alteration Application to allow for the construction of a 52,250 Sf three story development on a 1.35-Acre site located at 125 Bethany Drive, on the North side of Scotts Valley Drive between Tabor Drive and Bethany Drive. Proposed land uses would include 10,000 sf of professional and administrative office space, and 42,250 sf of storage/ministorage for up to 227 users after a split decision from the Planning Commission resulting in no recommendation.

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
Project Location
The project site (APN 023-102-15) is located at 125 Bethany Drive, at the intersection of Bethany Drive, Scotts Valley Drive, and Tabor Drive (Attachment 1, Location map). The subject site is approximately 1.35-acres. Current land uses include two existing one- and twostory commercial buildings, totaling 12,200 sf, and associated parking. Surrounding land uses include an elementary school to the west, residential to the south, and Highway 17 to the south and east.

The site was previously known as Bethany Park and the existing buildings were used as support offices for Bethany University. The property was sold to Heritage Real Estate Ventures, LLC when Bethany University was redeveloped as the 1440 Multiversity Campus.

The site is currently used as office space.

Project Description
The proposed project includes demolition of the existing commercial buildings and construction of a three-story development, which consists of two buildings, totaling 52,250 square feet (Attachment 2: Sheet A2.1 Site Plan) These buildings would include 10,000 square feet of professional and administrative office space, and 42,250 square feet of storage/ministorage space for up to 227 users. While some storage space may be used by office tenants, other

Page 53 of 500 ends

storage space may be used independently which qualifies a ministorage use under the Municipal Code.

The project would provide 54 parking spaces located on the north and south sides of the project site, and parallel parking and loading spaces along the drive aisle located between the two buildings. As shown on the Building Elevations (Attachment 2: Sheets A4.1 – A4.3), the exterior building materials would include vertical “board and batten” metal siding, low clear glass windows in white vinyl frames, veneer stone, single composite siding, wood soffit details, roll-up steel doors, and standing seam metal roofs.

The project would include sustainable features including energy-efficient lighting and HVAC systems, energy efficient windows, and water-conserving fixtures such as low-flow toilets and drought resistant landscaping. Access to the project site would be from three driveways on Tabor Drive and two driveways on Bethany Drive, one of which would function as an exit-only driveway, providing egress access to the internal drive aisle.

As shown on the Tree Removal Plan (Attachment 2: Sheet T1), a majority of the existing landscaping would be removed and replaced with a variety of trees, shrubs and perennials, and groundcovers and grasses. Trees along the perimeter of Bethany Drive and Tabor Drive would include Chinese pistache and Coast live oaks.

As shown on the Lighting Plan (Attachment 2: Sheet E1), 19 pole-mounted light fixtures, 15 feet in height, would be installed on the project site. These LED fixtures would be directed downward to limit lighting on the project site, with the exception of one freestanding pole adjacent to the residential units to the north of the site where light leakage is shown.

Proposed Entitlements
The project site has a current General Plan land use designation of Commercial Professional which allows administrative, business and professional offices in which merchandise is not manufactured or sold. The applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment to change from the existing Commercial Professional land use designation to Light Industrial to accommodate the large portion of the project which is storage use. Storage facilities are not allowed in the Commercial districts; therefore, the applicant is requesting a land use change to Light Industrial and a Zone Change from C-P zoning to I-L zoning. In the Light Industrial zoning district, ministorage facilities are a conditional use and the Council will need to make the findings for a conditional use permit.

The project requires the following planning permits:

1. Negative Declaration

2. General Plan Amendment to change from the existing Commercial Professional to Light Industrial

3. Zone Change from the C-P zoning designation to I-L / Planned Development

4. Planned Development in conjunction with the Zone Change request to allow for the approval of a general development plan incorporating development standards

5. Use permit

6. Design Review permit to evaluate the site design and architecture

7. Cultural Resource Alteration Application

Page 54 of 500 ends

PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
This project was heard by the Planning Commission on January 25, 2024 (Attachment 3:

Planning Commission packet and Attachment 5: Meeting Minutes). At that meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the project and discussed concerns related to the General Plan Amendment, specifically whether the proposed change from Commercial Professional to Light Industrial would be appropriate given the context of the site. The Commission also suggested minor architectural changes be made to the plans, specifically, removal of roll up doors on the rear (north) elevation of the building, adjacent to residential.

In addition, the Planning Department noted that communication had been received after the packet had been distributed, including correspondence from the Scotts Valley Unified School District (SVUSD) (Attachment 4: Post Planning Commission correspondence). The SVUSD outlined concerns related to project demolition/construction and potential impacts including dust and air quality, noise, and pedestrian safety, given its proximity to Vine Hill Elementary School. In that letter, the SVUSD suggested that construction, especially noisier tasks, be performed outside of school hours, either after 3:00 pm on weekdays, during the summer or winter school break or on Sundays.

Prior to the meeting, and in response to the SVUSD letter, the City’s environmental consultant, Kimley Horn, prepared a response to address the concerns and recommended the project could be conditioned to require that the applicant formally reach out to the SVUSD, prior to any project construction, to identify the proper point-of-contact(s) and establish a communications protocol to address potential construction-related issues and concerns (Attachment 4: Post Planning Commission correspondence).

After the public hearing closed and discussion commenced, the Planning Commission voted 2- 2-1 and no action was taken.

Since the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant has proposed changes to the floor plans and made design modifications to the rear (north) elevation. Changes consist of removing roll up doors and separating the building into two buildings. Since the Planning Commission concerns were primarily related to the change in land use and the plan revisions did not affect the overall project analysis, the revised project did not return to the Planning Commission. Proposed changes since Planning Commission review are clouded in the plan set (Attachment 2: Project Plans).

Staff identified several items for Planning Commission consideration, that were not fully addressed at the Planning Commission hearing, including the location of the trash enclosure, undersized parking spaces as well as the overall parking lot design in the rear lot, parking lot lighting, and undersized loading zones. For a complete analysis and discussion of these items, refer to pages 8-12 in the Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 3). Staff is requesting direction on these items.

CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION REVIEW
The Scotts Valley 1994 General Plan, Figure OS-2 (Archaeological Sensitivity Zones”)

Page 55 of 500 ends

indicates that the subject parcel is located within areas of moderate and high or moderate potential for cultural resources. In compliance with City Regulations, a Cultural Resource application has been submitted for the project. The Cultural Resources Preservation Commission met on September 12, 2024, and unanimously voted that all recommendations included in the Cultural Resource Evaluation dated June 14, 2021, be included as conditions of approval for the project.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REVIEW (CEQA)
The proposed project has been reviewed in accordance with the State of California Public Resources Code and the California Environmental Quality Act. With the implementation of identified standard conditions of approval, the Initial Study did not identify any potentially significant impacts on the environment. The project would not have the potential to significantly degrade the environment; would have no significant impact on long-term environmental goals; would have no significant cumulative effect upon the environment; and would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Based on this review, a proposed Negative Declaration is hereby made on this proposed project. The reason for this determination is that the project will not result in significant adverse impacts to the environment.

PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT
Public hearing notices were posted at City Hall and were mailed to surrounding property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property, pursuant to State law. The Planning Department received several letters prior to the Planning Commission hearing and those are included with the Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 3) as well as post packet Planning Commission correspondence (Attachment 4).

The Planning Department has received several public comments prior to the City Council hearing and those are included in Attachment 6: Public Comment.

FISCAL IMPACT
No significant fiscal impacts to the City as a result of the proposed development have been identified.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission took no action on the negative declaration, general plan amendment, zone change, planned development zoning application, use permit, and design review application.

The Planning Department is requesting City Council input and direction on the requested

Page 56 of 500 ends

entitlements. This report does not include a resolution or request for action. The Planning Department has identified two options for City Council consideration:

1. If it is determined that a change in the General Plan land use designation from Commercial Professional to Light Industrial is appropriate and that the issues associated with the proposed project are adequately addressed, the City Council could direct staff to prepare the necessary documents for approval at a future City Council meeting.

2. If it is determined that a change in the General Plan land use designation from Commercial Professional to Light Industrial is not appropriate, or the issues associated with the proposed project are not adequately addressed, the City Council could direct staff to prepare the documents for denial of the Project for consideration at a future City Council meeting.

All documents are available at City Hall and electronically at:
https://www.scottsvalley.org/242/Current-Projects

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Attachment 1 Location Map

2. Attachment 2 Final Plans 09.13.2024

3. Attachment 3 Planning Commission packet 01.25.2024

4. Attachment 4 Post Planning Commission Correspondence

5. Attachment 5 PC Meeting Minutes 01.25.2024

6. Attachment 6 Public Comments

Page 57 of 500 ends

VINE HILL SCHOOL RD

BORDEAUX LN

CABERNET CT

RE SI LIN
G
WY

TABOR DR

ORCHARD RUN
151
219
213
213
204
280
6500
265
235
223
217
215
255
221
209
205
21 4
245
200
214
211
206
32 207
203
23 2
6 28
29 25
212
20 33
5 26
27 8
215
210
208
24 22
3 355
350
285
345
6450
6452
380
410
7023
6506
104
100
6466
10 106
335
6468
275
7025
330
108
380
315
390
365
340
320
241
365
315
370
250
260
6465
465
295
335
270
435
300
240
395
230
240
6448
230
202
30 31
105
440
210
11 102
110
101
103
450
360
385 7027
6464
425
455
395
405
400
430
125
112
6458
220
270
290
112
415
6502
245
253
229
385
390
221
200 209
311
¯ 0 0.125 0.25
Miles
ƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚϭ͗>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶDĂƉ
125 Bethany Drive / APN 023-102-15
Project Site
HIGHWAY 17

Page 58 of 500 ends

REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR BETHANY PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY 125 BETHANY DR, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA

SHEET INDEX

ARCHITECTURAL
A1.1 COVER SHEET
A2.1 SITE PLAN
A2.2 OFFICE STORAGE RATIO
A3.1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN
A3.2 SECOND FLOOR PLAN
A3.3 THIRD FLOOR PLAN
A3.4 ROOF PLAN
A4.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A4.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A4.3 PERSPECTIVE
A5.1 BUILDING SECTIONS
A6.1 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
CIVIL
C0.1 COVER SHEET
C1.1 EXISTING SITE AND DEMOLITION PLAN
C2.1 SITE IMPROVEMENTS
C3.1 GRADING PLAN
C3.2 STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN
C4.1 UTILITY AND FIRE SUPPRESSION PLAN
C5.1 EROSION CONTROL PLAN
C5.2 EROSION CONTROL DETAILS
C6.1 DETAILS
C6.2 DETAILS
C6.3 DETAILS
C6.4 SVWD DETAILS

LANDSCAPE
CODES L1.1 LANDSCAPE PLANS
2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS

PROJECT DATA

DEMOLISH AND REMOVE EXISTING MIXED USE OFFICE STORAGE
STRUCTURES.

CONSTRUCT NEW 52,250 SF THREE STORY LIGHT GUAGE METAL
FRAME MIXED USE OFFICE - STORAGE STRUCTURE.

OWNER: HERITAGE REAL ESTATE VENTURES LLC
125 BETHANY DRIVE, SCOTTS VALLEY
DEVELOPER: BLACKCOMB PROPERTY GROUP
OCCUPANCY B - S1

CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIB FIRE SPRINKLED

SRA LRA
APN 023-102-15

ZONING CP
ADDRESS 125 BETHANY DRIVE, SCOTTS VALLEY,
CA 95066
AREAS
AREA OF PROPERTY 57499.02 SF
BUILDING FOOTPRINT 15859.00 SF
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE COVERAGE 35% 20124.66 SF
TOTAL BUILDING AREA 52,250.00 SF
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA 91875.00 SF

CONSULTANTS

HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT
838 WESTERN DR, SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
C2G CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC

TODD CREAMER
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DR, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-4420

ALPHA SURVEY

TODD CREAMER
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DR, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-4420

ROCK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

YVETTE WILSON
1100 MAIN STREET, SUITE A, WATSONVILLE, CA 95076
831-724-5868

ANIMATEHOUSE RENDERING

ALAN HYMES
831-295-2719

DEFERRED SUBMITTALS

A LICENSED DESIGNER / INSTALLER SHALL
PREPARE AND SUBMIT (2) SETS OF PLANS,

CALCULATIONS, AND CUT SHEETS FOR THE

AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO MEET
NFPA 13-D TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AGENCY
FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THE CUT SHEETS

SHALL INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, PIPING,
VALVES, GUAGES, AND SPRINKLER HEADS.

THE JOB COPIES OF THE BUILDING AND FIRE

SYSTEM PLANS AND PERMITS SHALL BE ON-SITE

DURING INSPECTIONS
A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS NOTICE TO THE FIRE

DEPARTMENT SI REQUIRED PRIOR TO

INSPECTIONS
WATER:

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
2 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-2363
FIRE

SCOTS VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
7 ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-0211
AB
ABV
ACI
ALT
APA
ARCH
ATR
CBC
BD
BLK(G)
BLW
BM
BN
BP
BRG
CL
CLG
CLR
COL
CONC
CONN
CONT
CNTR
DBL
DF
DIA
DTL
DWG
Plywood
Pounds per Square
Foot
Pounds per Square Inch
Preservative Treated
Douglas Fir
Redwood
Reinforcement
Required
Roof
Room
Retaining Wall
See Architectural
Drawings
Solid Blocking
Square Foot
Similar
Specifications
Square
Standard
Steel
Skylight
Top and Bottom
Tongue and Groove
Top of Concrete
Top of Wall
Typical
Unless Noted Otherwise
Diameter
PLY WD
PSF
PSI
PTDF
RDWD
REINF
REQD
RF
RM
RTW
SAD
SB
SF
SIM
SPEC
SQ
STD
STL
SKYLT
T&B
T&G
TOC
TOW
TYP
UNO
Ø
(E)
EA
EN
ENGR
EXT
FLR
FND
FOC
FOS
FRMG
FT
FTG
GALV
GL
GYP
HD
HDR
HORIZ
HT
INT
JST(S)
MB
MI
MIN
(N)
OC
OH
OPNG
PAF
PL
Existing
Each
Edge Nailing
Engineer
Exterior
Floor
Foundation
Face of Concrete
Face of Stud
Framing
Foot or Feet
Footing
Galvanized
Glued Laminated
Gypsum
Holdown
Header
Horizontal
Height
Interior
Joist(s)
Machine Bolt
Malleable Iron
Minimum
New
On Center
Opposite Hand
Opening
Powder Acctuated
Fastener
Plate of Property Line
Anchor Bolt
Above
American Concrete
Institute
Alternate
American Plywood
Association
Architect
All Thread Rod
California Building
CodeBoard
Block(ing)
Below
Beam
Boundary Nailing
Base Plate
Bearing
Center Line
Ceiling
Clear, Clearance
Column
Concrete
Connection
Continuous
Center
Double
Douglas Fir
Diameter
Detail
Drawing

ABBREVIATIONS

VICINITY MAP

TABOR DR
Carbonera Creek
SITE

VINE HILL

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
SCALE
200'

VINE HILL SCHOOL RD

SCOTTS VALLEY DR
SANTAS

VILLAGE
RD

BETHANY DR
SCOTTS

POLO RANCH
RD

VALLEY DR

HEIGHTS
POLO
HWY 17
C #11897
EXP. 3/25
G

T TS A OF CAL E

IA N OR IF
LIC
HI A
SED N

RC T CT
E
E

Z U H KE
H
I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED
Sheet No.

Scale
A1.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

COVER SHEET

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is a 1.35-acre parcel with two existing office and administrative buildings which contain approximately 13,500 gross square feet. The site is located at the intersection of Bethany Drive, Scotts Valley Drive, and Tabor Drive and is visible along the freeway frontage. The proposed project is a mixed-use commercial redevelopment which consists of gross 52,250 square feet, including 9,994 square feet of professional and administrative office space, and 30,889 square feet of storage and circulation of 11,367 square feet. The new project utilizes the existing footprints of the current buildings. According to Scotts Valley’s municipal code parking requirements for office use, the professional administrative use requires 40 parking spaces and the storage component only requires 12 parking spaces for a total of 54 parking spaces.

The new Bethany Business Center is a revitalization of the 65 year-old office buildings designed and used by Bethany Bible College back in the day for their needs at the time. The buildings are not only obsolete and antiquated, they are not energy and water efficient and do not comply with current ADA requirements. Perhaps more significantly, the buildings don’t meet the needs of our current and future tenants-local service and business professionals.

The proposed new building represents a comprehensive redevelopment of the site and reflects the diverse new ways people are working and doing business. The new design is responsive to today’s reduced demand for physical office space as well as the increased need for flexible storage for inventory, equipment, materials, and e-commerce operations, among other uses.

The new design is for a slightly reduced amount of office space available on-site today, but in a new energy efficient, sustainable, functional, and beautiful building. The proposed building would reduce existing impacts, while adding xx,xxx (????) (+-) square feet of low impact, flexible, office-adjacent storage. This will primarily be completed through adding floors to the current building envelopes. This concept maintains the current level of parking and will give businesses the room and flexibility they need as they grow and change.

The design and desired use of the building is for businesses that have a need for office space as well as storage space of various proportions in one convenient location. The use case and demand for this mix-use commercial service and professional space is significant and well documented - as shown via half a dozen community support letters submitted from local businesses in favor of this design.

The building will have all of the same office uses as it has now, which can be defined within the Commercial Professional and Service zoning designations. The building will not allow any industrial users.

The new design includes elevators to make the property fully accessible, and a hidden drive-through lane in the middle of the building (East to West) along with a drop off feature that makes it extremely convenient and low impact. The addition of storage is an extremely benign use when it comes to impacts, while at the same time is the single most beneficial component that can be added to the office space needs of existing businesses at the building.

However, to ensure that the maximum potential impacts are evaluated in the planning and environmental review process, it is suggested that the impacts be assessed on the maximum potential number of storage users - 227. While it’s highly unlikely there will be even a fraction of this many storage users, storage as a use is very low impact because it does not generate water or sewage use, while generating the lowest amount of traffic. Additionally, it is estimated that the office users in the aggregate, and at a minimum, will use storage at a rate of 3:1 to their office space.

The hours of operation for the building will remain the same as it currently is - Monday to Friday, 8am - 6pm. However, many office users currently come in on the weekend and the building management does not limit users’ ability to access their office(s) outside of these times. For hours of operation for the storage component, access hours will be characterized as the same as office, from 8am - 6pm. However, if a business requires access to their storage outside of these access hours, management will allow access by prior arrangement.

The property will be highly secure utilizing state-of-the-art security and surveillance systems providing 24/7 monitoring, with key-padded access to all exterior entryways. In addition, there will be a full-time on-site property manager based out of one of the ground-level office spaces. The manager will assist with property upkeep and oversight, tenant relations, maintenance requests, leasing efforts, and many other similar tasks. Hours of operation for the on-site manager will be Monday to Friday, 9am - 5pm.

Noise generation from the property will be negligible and the professional noise study performed on the site found that proposed “project-generated noise levels and noise increases in the ambient conditions will be within the standards of the Municipal Code.” The property will also be designed with sustainable practices in mind, such as energy-efficient lighting and HVAC systems, energy efficient windows, as well as water-conserving features such as low-flow toilets, faucets, and drought-resistant landscaping. In fact, overall water impacts will be significantly reduced from the current structure since the proposed project replicates the existing office space available today but in a more energy efficient manner, and the additional storage space does not add any additional water usage.

The proposed project plans to use the property’s existing monument signage. Additional signage will include directional signage around the building, a tenant directory (which now currently exists), as well as life-safety signage for elevators, electrical, fire department, etc.

By combining office space and storage space in one property, service and professional-based businesses will increase efficiency in managing their operations by being able to easily access equipment and supplies, without the need to travel to a separate facility, which will also reduce traffic trip generation.

OFFICE - STORAGE AREA TABULATION

FIRST FLOOR
OFFICE 3126 SF 31% STORAGE 8,749 SF 28%

SECOND FLOOR
OFFICE 4406 SF 44% STORAGE 10,380 SF 34%

THIRD FLOOR
OFFICE 2462 SF 25% STORAGE 11,775 SF 38%
TOTAL 9,994 SF TOTAL 30,889 SF
STORAGE + CIRCULATION = 30889+11367 = 42,256 SF
TOTAL BUILDING 52,250 SF
RATIO - OFFICE : STORAGE 1 : 3.10
OFFICE PARKING RATIO 1:250 SF
9994 SF / 250 = 40 SPACES
STORAGE PARKING RATIO 1:3500 SF
42256 SF / 3500 = 12 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 52 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED = 54 SPACES
MAXIMUM POSSIBLE STORAGE AREA = 54 PARKING SPACES
x 3500 SF/SPACE = 189,000SF > 52,250 TOTAL BUILDING AREA

ELECTRICAL
E1 LIGHTING PLAN

ARBORIST
T1 TREE LOCATION PLAN
T2 TREE PROTECTION PLAN

Page 59 of 500 ends

1 A5.1
2 A5.1
3 A5.1
D YH
D YH
compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking

E XIT O N LY

E N T R Y
O N LY

E N T R Y E XIT
E XIT
E N T R Y 123456789
10 24
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 25
26 27
28 33
32 31
29 30
34 39
36 37
38 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
54 47
53 48
49 51
50 35
11 23

E N T R Y E XIT
52 T A B O R D R I V E

B E T H A N Y D R I V E

S C O T T S V A L L E Y D R I V E

V I N E H

S C H O O L

VINE HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
SITE PLAN 1 Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"
5'-6" 19'-10" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6"
9'-8" 127'-4"
5'-6" 70'-0" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6"

SET BACK LINE
147'-8"
137'-4"
13'-4"
60'-0" 5'-6"
15'-0"
15'-0"
20'-0"
15'-0"
100'-0"
55'-0"
65'-8" 56'-0" 15'-8"

SET BACK LINE
59'-4" 54'-8"
20'-0"
77'-2" +/-
VERIFY
16'-3" +/-
VERIFY
50'-2" 5'-6"
188'-0"
NOTE:

A 100 FOOT CLEARANCE (OR TO PROPERTY LINE

WHICHEVER IS GRATER) SHALL BE MAINTAINED

AROUND AND ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING OR

STRUCTURE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIRE

PROTECTION OR FIRE BREAK BY REMOVING

BRUSH, FLAMMABLE VEGESTATION OR
COMBUTIBLE GROWTH. EXCEPTION, SINGLE

SPECIMENS OF TREES, ORNAMENTAL SHRUBBERY

OR SIMILAR PLANTS USED AS GROUND COVER,

PROVIDED THEY DO NOT FORM A MEANS OF

RAPIDLY TRANSMITTING FIRE FROM NATIVE
GROWTH TO ANY STRUCTURE.
50'-0"
FF 687.00
FF 690.00 FF 690.67
FF 699.71

COVERED SECURE BICYCLE

PARKING

COVERED TRASH

ENCLOSURE

BICYCLE PARKING

COVERED SECURE

BICYCLE PARKING

BICYCLE PARKING
FF
690.00

SET BACK LINE

ADJACENT TO

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING MONUMENT

SIGN TO REMAIN
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
ENTER
EXIT
ENTER
EXIT
ENTER
EXIT

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITINAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(24.5-16)/3 = 2.83'
50+3 = 53' < 67'-10" OK

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITIONOAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(33.75 -16)/3 = 5.92'
50+6 = 56' < 68'-9" OK
83'-6" +/- VERIFY
5'-0"
78'-2 3/4"
78'-4"

APPROXIMATE

LOCATION OF

EXISTING ADJACENT

HOMES AND DRIVES

APPROXIMATE

LOCATION OF

EXISTING ADJACENT

HOMES AND DRIVES
8'x60' LOADING

AREA - FLEXIBLE

PARKING
FF 690.67
Sheet No.

Scale 1/16" = 1'-0"
A2.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

HUGH ZIKE AIA
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
Designed ByDrawn ByChecked ByReviewed BySubmitted ByProject Manager DateRevisionProject IDDrawing CodeCAD File NamePlot Date 08-02-24
Revision
Store More Scotts Valley
Drawing Code
Filename
00/00/00 No. Date Issue Notes No. Date Revision Notes Appr Zone C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 60 of 500 ends

1 A5.1
2 A5.1
3 A5.1
compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking

E XIT O N LY

E N T R Y
O N LY

E N T R Y E XIT
E XIT
E N T R Y 123456789
10 24
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 25
26 27
28 33
32 31
29 30
34 39
36 37
38 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
54 47
53 48
49 51
50 35
11 23

E N T R Y E XIT
52 FIRST FLOOR OFFICE STORAGE CORRELATION PLAN 1 Scale: 1" = 20'-0" OFFICE
X
TOILET
ELEV
ELEV
EQUIP

STORAGE

OFFICE ELEV
ELEV
EQUIP
TOILET
JAN/

STORAGE
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT

STORAGE

STORAGE STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE
OFFICE

STORAGE
Sheet No.

Scale 1"=20'
A2.2
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

OFFICE STORAGE RATIO

CORRELATION PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

SECOND FLOOR OFFICE STORAGE CORRELATION PLAN
2 Scale: 1" = 20'-0"
ELEV
ELEV
OFFICE
OFFICE
TOILET
TOILET
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT

STORAGE

STORAGE
OFFICE
TOILET
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE

STORAGE

THIRD FLOOR OFFICE STORAGE CORRELATION PLAN
3 Scale: 1" = 20'-0"
ELEV

STORAGE
OFFICE
ELEV
DECK
DECK
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE

STORAGE

STORAGE
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

OFFICE - STORAGE AREA TABULATION

FIRST FLOOR
OFFICE 3126 SF 31% STORAGE 8,749 SF 28%

SECOND FLOOR
OFFICE 4406 SF 44% STORAGE 10,380 SF 34%

Page 61 of 500 ends

1 A5.1
2 A5.1
3 A5.1
compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking

E XIT O N LY

E N T R Y
O N LY
E XIT
E XIT
24 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
25 26
27 28
33 32
31 29 30
34 39
36 37
38 45
46 47
48 49
35 23

E N T R Y
E

L L E Y D R I V E

EXIT STAIRS
OFFICE
TOILET

ELEVATOR

EQUIPMENT

FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1
OFFICE
SPACE

ELEVATOR

EQUIPMENT

EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS EXIT STAIRS
TOILET
5'-6" 25'-0" 45'-0" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6" 55'-0" 5'-0"
9'-8" 128'-0"
5'-8" 69'-10" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6" 16'-6" 13'-8"

STORAGE

SET BACK LINE
11'-6" 4'-2" 46'-0"
15'-0"
65'-8"
137'-8 1/8"
126'-4"
33'-0"
13'-4"
1'-0"
10'-0"
49'-4" 54'-8"
5'-6"

STORAGE

STORAGE
OFFICE

STORAGE

KNOX BOX, VERIFY

LOCATION WITH FIRE

DEPARTMENT

FIRE SPRINKLER RISER,

VERIFY W/ SPRINKLER

CONTRACTOR

TOILET FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS

USE AREA RATE OCC FIX LAV JAN
OFFICE 9989 250 40 2M 3W 1M 1W 1
STORAGE 30889 4000 8 1M 1W 1M 1W 1
OFFICE

STORAGE

STORAGE
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 62 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.2
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

REDEVELOPMENT FOR

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

ELEVATOR

EXIT STAIRS
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
OFFICE

ELEVATOR

EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS EXIT STAIRS
25'-2" 55'-8" 31'-0" 22'-0" 20'-6"
31'-0" 60'-6" 5'-0"
137'-8"
11'-6" 46'-0" 65'-8"
117'-0"
4'-2"
28'-6"
TOILET
5'-6"
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
30'-4" 50'-6"
OFFICE
TOILET

JANITOR

JANITOR
TOILET
TOILET
OFFICE

STORAGE

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED
45 46
54 47
53 48
49 51
50 E N T R Y E XIT
52

Page 63 of 500 ends

THIRD FLOOR PLAN
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1

ELEVATOR
EXIT STAIRS `

ELEVATOR
OFFICE

EXIT STAIRS EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS
55'-8" 31'-0" 22'-0" 20'-6"
117'-0" 9'-10"
30'-4" 66'-0" 5'-0"
11'-6" 46'-0" 65'-8"
25'-2"

MECHANICAL

ROOF DECK

ROOF DECK
OFFICE
OFFICE
28'-6"
50'-6" 31'-0"
207'-10"
10'-10"
OFFICE
137'-8"
4'-2"
TOILET
126'-4"

ROOF ACCESS

STORAGE

STORAGE
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.3
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

THIRD FLOOR PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 64 of 500 ends

ROOF PLAN
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1
PARAPET HEIGHT 4'-6"+-

FLAT ROOF RIDGE
ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT
PARAPET HEIGHT 4'-6"+-
ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT

STANDING SEAM METAL
ROOF
MINIMUM FIRE CLASS "B"

RATED SINGLE PLY ROOFING
HIGH POINT OF ROOF (723.79)
AT LOWEST GRADE BELOW STRUCTURE (689.29)
MAXIMUM HEIGHT = 34'6"
ALLOWABLE HEIGHT = 35'-0"

ELEVATOR ROOF

ELEVATOR ROOF
30"x36" ROOF HATCH

CRICKET SLOPE TO DRAIN
TYP

ROOF DRAIN AND

OVERFLOW TYP

PROBABLE LOCATION OF

MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT

PROBABLE

LOCATION

OF SOLAR

EQUIPMENT

CONTINOUS GUTTER TO

MATCH STANDING SEAM

METAL ROOFING

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF

DOWN SPOUTS SEE

EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT
30"x36" ROOF HATCH

FLAT ROOF RIDGE
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.4
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

ROOF PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 65 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A4.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

REDEVELOPMENT FOR

EXTERIOR ELEVATION
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

NORTH ELEVATION
2 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
24'-5"
33'-9"

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITIONAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(24.5-16)/3 = 2.83'
50+3 = 53' < 67'-10' OK

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITIONAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(33.75 -16)/3 = 5.92'
50+6 = 56' <68'-9" OK
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED
EAST ELEVATION 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

OPEN WALK WAY TYPICAL
34'-10" MAX 35'-0"

HOLLOW METAL

EMERGENCY EXIT DOORS
AND FRAMES - "JANUS"

DESERT SAND

Page 66 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A4.2
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

REDEVELOPMENT FOR

EXTERIOR ELEVATION
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

SOUTH ELEVATION
2 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

STANDING SEAM METAL

ROOF AEP SPAN SAGE
GREEN

METAL COPING AEP SPAN

REGAL WHITE
VERTICAL "BOARD AND BATTEN"

METAL SIDING - NAVAJO BEIGE

BRONZ ANODIZED ALUMINUM

SUN SCREENS

LOW E CLEAR GLASS IN

WHITE VINYL FRAME

VENEER ELDORADO STONE

LIMESOTNE - YORK
"2x6" TRIM - WHITE

PAINTED EXPOSED STEEL

BEAMS CHARCOAL GREY

SHINGLE HARDIE COMPOSITE

SIDING - KHAKI BROWN
"REDWOOD" SOFFIT

BRACKETS
125

BUILDING NUMBERS -
MINIMUM 6" HIGH ON A

CONTRASTING

BACKGROUND

DOWN SPOUTS TYPICAL SEE

ROOF PLAN

METAL GUTTERS TO MATCH

STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING
WEST ELEVATION 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

OPEN WALK WAY TYPICAL

BUILDING NUMBERS -
MINIMUM 6" HIGH ON A

CONTRASTING

BACKGROUND
125

BETHANY DR
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 67 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A4.3
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

DRIVE THROUGH ELEVATIONS

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

DRIVE TRHOUGH EXTERIOR ELEVATION - SECTION
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1

WHITE ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT ENTRY DOORS AND

GLASS ENTRIES
ROLL UP DOORS "JANUS"

SILHOUETTE GRAY

DRIVE THROIUGH EXTERIOR ELEVATION - SECTION
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
2

Page 68 of 500 ends

BUILDING SECTIONS 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
12'-8 1/2" 9'-8 1/2"
34'-10" (35'-0" MAX)
8'-1"
4"
3'-0" 9'-8 1/2"
8'-0 1/2" 11'-0 1/2" 1'-8 1'-8"

OPEN WEWB BAR
JOIST AT 5'o.c.

TOP OF SLAB
690.00

TOP OF SLAB
687.00
33'-9 1/2"
TOP OF

ROOF PEAK
723.79
8'-6" 14'-0" 8'-6"
9'-0 1/2"
9'-4"
8'-8"

TOP OF SLAB
690.67
9'-6"

ELEVATOR SHAFT BEYOND
34'-9"
8'-1"
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A5.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

BUILDING SECTION

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

BUILDING SECTION
2 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
8'-1" 9'-8 1/2" 9'-8 1/2"
9'-4"
4'-6"
2'-1 3/8" +-
2'-0"
10"
12 4
7'-4" 7'-4"

SECTION C-C
3 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 69 of 500 ends

STANDING SEAM

METAL ROOF

CONT GUTTER TO

MATCH STANDING

SEAM ROOFING

INSULATION

FLASHING TO

MATCH STANDING

SEAM ROOFING
COLOR
WELDED 6" HSS

BRACKET WITH

REDWOOD PAINT

COLOR - SEE

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS FOR

LOCATIONS
1/2" DIAMETER MB STEEL STUD BACKING
SIMPSON ??

EXTERIOR WALL LIGHT

GUAGE STEEL STUD
FRAMING AT 16"o.c. MAX BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

HARDIE SHINGLE SIDING OVER
BUILDING WRAP OVER 1/2"

EXTERIOR FIBERGLASS MATT

GYPSUM SHEATHING

SEALANT
5/4 HARDIE TRIM

BACKING AT

BRACKETS

FLASHING TO

MATCH SHINGLE

SIDING COLOR

METAL ROOF FRAMING BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR
4'-0"
2'-0"
1/2" +- 3"
6"
"REDWOOD" BRACKET DETAIL
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 1

TYP PARAPET

ROOF SLOPE
4 12
6" MIN
"Z" FLASHING AND SEALANT

CLOSURE PER ROOF

MANUFACTURE'S DETAILS

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONT CLEAT AND CAP

FLASHING TO MATCH

ROOFING COLOR PER ROOF

MANUFACTURER'S DETAILS

CONT FLASHING PER ROOF

MANUFACTURER'S DETAILS

METAL ROOF FRAMING BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR METAL WALL PANEL BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

FRY REGLET AND COUNTER

FLASHING

SINGLE PLY ROOFING AND

CAP FLASHING

BUILT UP RIGID INSULATION

CRICKET AND CANT SLOPE

TO ROOF DRAIN

CONT RIGID FOAM ROOF

INSULATION

METAL FRAME PARAPET

WALL FRAMING BY METAL

BUILDING FABRICATOR

METAL ROOF PANEL BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR
3/4" +- (VERIFY) METAL WALL

PANEL BACKING AT REGLET

BY METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

PARAPET WALL CAP DETAIL
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 4
4 12

INSULATION

EXTERIOR WALL LIGHT

GUAGE STEEL STUD
FRAMING AT 16"o.c. MAX

BY METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

METAL ROOF FRAMING BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR
7'-4"
WINDOW
5/4 x 5.5 HARDIE TRIM

GUTTER AND BRACKET
SEE DTL 1/A6.1

HARDIE SHINGLE PANEL

SIDING OVER BUILDING

WRAP OVER FIBER

GLASS EXTERIOR

GYPSUM SHEATHING

SEALANT
MIN 26 GA GALV STL

FLASHING
SHAPED 2x3 AND 5/4 x 5.5

HARDIE TRIM
MIN 26 GA GALV STL

FLASHING
7'-4"
9'-4" 4 1/2" 8'-1"

COMPOSITE FLOOR BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

COMPOSITE FLOOR BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

HARDIE BEADED PORCH

PANEL SOFIT

CULTURE STONE VENEER

TYPICAL WINDOW WALL SECTION
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 3
4 12

HARDIE SHINGLE SIDING OVER
BUILDING WRAP OVER 1/2"

EXTERIOR FIBERGLASS MATT

GYPSUM SHEATHING

SEALANT

EXTEND WINDOW JAMB TRIM

TO TOP OF SUN SHADE
(VERIFY HGT WITH SHADE

FABRICATOR)
MIN 26 GA GALV STL

FLASHING

KAWNEER BRONZE

ANODIZED ALUMINUM
"VERSOLEIL 1600 UT" 36"

SUN SHADE OR EQUIVALENT

SUN SHADE DETAIL
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 2

STEEL STUD BACKING
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A6.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

T TS A OF CAL E

IA N OR IF
LIC
HI A
SED N

RC T CT
E
E

Z U H KE
H
I

DOOR HEAD AND SILL
Scale: 3" = 1'-0" 5

ADA THRESHOLD
(PEMKO 158-A OR

EQUIVALENT VERIFY

W/ OWNER)
11" MIN

PER ACCESSIBILITY REQ

ANODIZED

ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT DOOR WITH

INSULATING GLASS
1/4"
1/2"
1/4"

WEATHER STRIPPING

CONC SLAB SEE

STRUCTURAL

WINDOW HEAD AND SILL
Scale: 3" = 1'-0" 6

SEALANT OVER BACKING
ROD
SHIM

ANODIZED ALUMINMU

STORE FRONT WITH

INSULATING GLASS

KAWNEER TRIFAB
VERSAGLAZE 451 OR

EQUIVALENT

CONC WALK

ANODIZED ALUMINUM

INTERMEDIATE MULLION

ANODIZED ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT HEAD

GYP BD FINISH WITH CASING

AND CORNER BEAD
SHIM

SEALANT OVER BACKING
ROD

STEEL FRAMING SEE

STRUCTRAL

WALL INSULATION
"BOARD AND BATTEN" METAL

SIDING BY METAL BUILDNG

FABRICATOR

HEAD FLASHING BY METAL

BUILDING FABRICATOR

WINDOW AND DOOR JAMB
Scale: 3" = 1'-0" 7

ANODIZED ALUMINMU

STORE FRONT WITH

INSULATING GLASS

GYP BD FINISH WITH CASING

AND CORNER BEAD

SEALANT OVER BACKING
ROD
"BOARD AND BATTEN" METAL

SIDING BY METAL BUILDNG

FABRICATOR
SHIM

ANODIZED

ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT DOOR WITH

INSULATING GLASS

Page 70 of 500 ends

CB1 SHEET

HUGH ZIKE, ARCHITECT
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA 95060
831 818-5808
BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING:

METAL
COLOR: NAVAJO BEIGE

WOOD SHINGLE SIDING
HARDIE
COLOR: KHAKI BROWN

STEEL BEAMS
COLOR: CHARCOAL GREY

AEP SPAN

HORIZONTAL WALL CAP
COLOR: REGAL WHITE

AEP SPAN

METAL ROOFING
COLOR: SAGE GREEN

STONE WAINSCOT

ELDORADO STONE
COLOR: LIMESTONE YORK

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANY DRIVE

PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
DATE: FEBRUARY 2023
2 FARMHOUSE VERTICAL
Home Style 3

AWNINGS
COLOR: BRONZED

DOOR & WDW FRAMES

ALUMINUM AND VYNIL
COLOR: WHITE
Traditionalist
You love the sophisticatio
seek an exterior that evok
harmonious feeling.

You are chic and stylish. Y
option of neutral for any h
1 KHAKI BROWN
Main Color 2 RANHom
Home > Exterior House Color Visualizer
COLO

GROUND FACE CMU

BASALITE
COLOR: 113
STEEL EXIST DOORS AND FRAMES:

COLOR: "JANUS" DESERT SAND

THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS

THE PDROPERTY OF HUGH ZIKE,
ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF

SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED,

REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT.

THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OR

DATA SHALL BE THE USER'S

RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT LIABILITY TO
THE ARCHITECT. UNAUTOORIZED USE IS

PROHIBITED

STEEL ROLL UP DOORS
COLOR: "JANUS" SILHOULETTE GRAY

Page 71 of 500 ends

CB2 SHEET

HUGH ZIKE, ARCHITECT
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA 95060
831 818-5808

BICYCLE RACK

CYCLE SAFE
COLOR: BLACK

PATIO BENCH
COLOR: ACID WASH BELSON
OUTDOORS MODEL TF160

ALLEN BLOCK

PATIO RETAINING WALL
COLOR: EUROPA BROWN

BEIG CHARCOAL

CALSTONE PAVERS

PATIO PAVING
COLOR: QUARRY STONE

VERSAILLES CHACO CANYON

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANY DRIVE

PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
DATE: OCTOBER, 2023

THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS

THE PDROPERTY OF HUGH ZIKE,
ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF

SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED,

REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE
WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT.

THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OR

DATA SHALL BE THE USER'S

RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT LIABILITY TO
THE ARCHITECT. UNAUTOORIZED USE IS

PROHIBITED
Plan Review Letter
125 Bethany Drive

Page 2 of 3 ends

August 24th,2023
C2G 4444 Scotts Valley Drive, Suite 6, Scotts Valley, CA 95066-4529 831/438-4420 • [email protected] • www.civilconsultantsgroup.com ing wall will have an appearance similar to above.
s will have an appearance similar to above.

Plan Review Letter
125 Bethany Drive

Page 3 of 3 ends

August 24th,2023
C2G 4444 Scotts Valley Drive, Suite 6, Scotts Valley, CA 95066-4529 831/438-4420 • [email protected] • www.civilconsultantsgroup.com Per Item 19….Bench will be similar to above with color similar to pavers.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding any of these comments, please feel free to contact me by phone or by email.

C2G/Civil Consultants Group, Inc.

By:

Todd Creamer
Principal Engineer
In Ground #12727
Surface #12728
Surface Mount / In Ground Mount
Plastisol {Braced} Racks

Page 72 of 500 ends

C0.1
X" = XX'

REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR

BETHANY PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTT'S VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
COVER
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2

BETHANY PROFESSIONAL
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12 125 BETHANY DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
WM
W W
LEGEND

DESCRIPTION PROPOSED EXISTING

PROPERTY LINEEASEMENT LINE

CENTERLINECURB AND GUTTERSIDEWALK

FIRE HYDRANT

STREET LIGHT

WATER METER

DOMESTIC WATER

SERVICESANITARY SEWERSTORM DRAINSANITARY MANHOLESTORM MANHOLE

DRIVEWAY

ADA CURB RAMP

IRRIGATION METER

AND BACK FLOW

PREVENTER

ABBREVIATIONSAB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE

BFC BOTTOM FACE OF CURBBFP BACK FLOW PREVENTERBFS BOTTOM FACE OF STEPBLDG BUILDING

CONC CONCRETECB CATCH BASINCL CENTERLINECONC CONCRETECOR CORNER

DCDA DOUBLE CHECK DETECTOR ASSEMBLYDI DROP INLET/DRAINAGE INLETDWY DRIVEWAYEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEG EXISTING GRADE (E) EXISTING

FF FINISH FLOORFG FINISH GRADEFH FIRE HYDRANTFL FLOW LINEFS FINISH SURFACE

GB GRADE BREAK

HP HIGH POINT

INV INVERT

LP LOW POINTMAX MAXIMUMME MATCH EXISTINGMIN MINIMUMNAP NOT A PARTNTS NOT TO SCALEP/L PROPERTY LINER/W RIGHT OF WAY

SD STORM DRAINSDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLESF SQUARE FEETSS SANITARY SEWERSTD STANDARD

TC TOP OF CURBTYP TYPICALWV WATER VALVE

CIVIL SHEET INDEX
CIVIL ENGINEER:

SURVEYOR:

C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE STE. 6
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066OFFICE: 831.438.4420
C0.1 - COVER SHEETC1.1 - EXISTING SITE AND DEMOLITION PLANC2.1 - SITE IMPROVEMENTSC3.1 - GRADING PLANC3.2 - STORM WATER CONTROL PLANC4.1 - UTILITY AND FIRE SUPPRESSION PLANC5.1 - EROSION CONTROL PLANC5.2 - EROSION CONTROL DETAILSC6.1 - DETAILSC6.2 - DETAILSC6.3 - CITY OF SV DetailsC6.4 - SVWD DETAILS L1 - LANDSCAPE PLANE1 - LIGHTING PLAN
SURVEYOR:

ALPHA SURVEY
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
OFFICE: 831.438.4420

VICINITY MAP

CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY
CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHOULD ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOBSITE CONDITIONS, INCLUDING THE SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY, DURING THECOURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, AND THAT REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLYCONTINUOUSLY 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 THEOWNER OR DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.

DISCREPANCIES

IF THERE ARE ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND EXISTINGCONDITIONS 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 WORKAND FOR THE COORDINATION OF ALL TRADES, SUBCONTRACTORS, AND PERSONS ENGAGED UPONTHIS CONTRACT.

CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING / STAKING
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE ALL SURVEYING AND OR STAKING BY A LICENSEDSURVEYOR FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.

GENERAL NOTES

1. NO CHANGE TO THE PLANS SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES AND THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY.

2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS AND INVERTS OF EXISTING UTILITY PRIOR TO

COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES OF VARIANCE FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

3. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN BASED ON RECORD DRAWINGS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE FOUND IN FIELD. NO WARRANTY IS MADE REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS ORACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES, AND PRESERVE SAME FROM DAMAGE. PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION, VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT THECROSSING POINTS WITH PROPOSED UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER OROWNERS REPRESENTATIVES IF CONDITIONS DIFFER FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ANDSHALL NOT BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE CHANGED CONDITION HAS BEEN EVALUATED.CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICES ALERT (USA) (1-800-227-2600) TWO (2) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO DIGGING. REPAIR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.

CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITHCONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATED AND PRESERVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES.

4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY

COMPANIES AND/OR AGENCIES TO VERIFY THE EXISTENCE AND/OR LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. AND SHALL NOTIFY U.S.A. @ (800) 227-2600 AT LEAST 48-HOURS IN ADVANCE OF EXCAVATION.

5. IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMAINS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, ALL WORK SHALL BE HALTED WITHIN 200 FOOTRADIUS OF THE FIND. OWNER SHALL RETAIN A QUALIFIED ARCHEOLOGIST RETAINED TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THE DISCOVERY AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE EVALUATION PROCEDURES.

NOTE:

CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS. CALL USA (800) 227-2600. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY APPARENT CONFLICTS FOR RESOLUTION PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION.

UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES AND USES
CA8TION

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 PLANSC 2016 TODD R. CREAMER, D.B.A. AS C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

UTILITY PROVIDERS

PROJECT DATUM
THE WITHIN PLANS ARE COPYRIGHTED AS AN UNPUBLISHED WORK BY C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. ALL IDEAS DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS

INDICATED OR REPRESENTED BY THESE DRAWINGS ARE OWNED BY, AND THE PROPERTY OF C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC. AND WERE CREATED,EVOLVED AND DEVELOPED FOR USE ON, AND IN CONNECTION WITH, THE SPECIFIED PROJECT. NONE OF SUCH IDEAS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS OR PLANSSHALL BE USED BY OR DISCLOSED TO ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF C2G/CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

BASED UPON GPS OBSERVED = NORTH
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

PROVIDER CONTACT NUMBER
WATER: SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (831) 438-2363
GAS AND ELECTRIC: PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 1-800-468-4743SANITARY SEWER: SCOTTS VALLEY PUBLIC WORKS (831) 438-0732STORM DRAIN SYSTEM: SCOTTS VALLEY PUBLIC WORKS (831) 438-5854 NORTH
ARCHITECT: PROJECT LOCATION HUGH ZIKES, ARCHITECT

GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEER:

ROCK SOLID ENGINEERING
1100 MAIN STREET, SUITE A
WATSONVILLE, CA 95076
OFFICE: 831.724.5868
838 WESTERN DRIVESANTA CRUZ, CA 95060OFFICE: 831.818.5808 10-06-23

Page 73 of 500 ends

C1.1
1" = 20'

EXISTING

SITE/DEMOLITION
PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420
2 BETHANY PROFESSIONAL
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
12 125 BETHANY DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

REMOVE EXISTING TREE

AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE

BLDG BUILDING

CONC CONCRETE

EC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEL ELEVATIONFL FLOWLINE

GB GRADE BRAKEG GROUND

INV INVERT ELEVATION

LP LOW POINTNAP NOT A PARTNG NATURAL GROUNDPL PROPERTY LINE

TG TOP OF GRATE

UG UNDERGROUND

ABBREVIATIONS
LEGEND

X DEMOLITION KEY NOTES
1 23
4 REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE

SAWCUT AND REMOVE EXISTING CURBSAWCUT EXISTING AC

REMOVE (E) AC DIKEREMOVE EXISTING CURB AND GUTTERREMOVE EXISTING SIDEWALK

SAW CUT EXISTING SIDEWALK
REMOVE SMALL TREES AND VEGETATIONREMOVE LARGE TREESREMOVE EXISTING ACPRUNE TREE ROOTS WHERE PAVEMENT HAS LIFTED IN THIS AREAREMOVE APPROXIMATELY 100 LF OF EXISTING 4" FIRE WATER SERVICE AND BACK FLOWPREVENTER BACK TO THE MAIN AND ABANDON PER SVWD STANDARDS.REMOVE EXISTING RETAINING WALLREMOVE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNS AND RELOCATEREMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINEREMOVE EXISTING GAS LINEREMOVE EXISTING WATER SERVICE BACK TO MAIN AND ABANDON PER SVWD

STANDARDS

REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY
5 SURVEY INFORMATION
SURVEYOR:

ALPHA SURVEY
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066OFFICE: 831.438.4420
6 789
10 11
BASIS OF BEARINGS: BEARINGS ARE BASED UPON GPS OBSERVATION = NORTH ELEVATION DATUM:ELEVATIONS ARE BASED UPON GPS OBSERVATION = NAVD88 CONTOUR INTERVAL = 1 FOOT
NOTES: 1. DATE OF SURVEY: FEBRUARY 2019.

2. SITE ADDRESS: 125 BETHANY AVENUE, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA.3. ALL DISTANCES ARE SHOWN IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF.4. ALL BEARINGS ARE SHOWN IN DEGREES, MINUTES AND SECONDS.

5. UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS FROM UTILITY LOCATING SERVICE AND SURFACE OBSERVATION ONLY AND MAY NOT BE COMPLETE.

6. IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMAINS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, ALL WORK SHALL BE HALTED WITHIN 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE FIND. ARCHEOLOGIST SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE DURING ALL EARTH MOVING ACTIVITIES.
12 13
14 EXISTING PERVIOUS PAVEMENT QUANTITIES
EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED: 12,200 SQ FT.EXISTING AC PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED: 19,600 SQ FT.EXISTING CONCRETE TO BE REMOVED: 5,110 SQ FT.

TOTAL TO BE REMOVED: 36,910 SQ FT.
15 16
1718
REMOVE EXISTING BLDG.

REMOVE EXISTING BLDG.
10-06-23

Page 74 of 500 ends

C2.1
1" = 20'
SITE

IMPROVEMENTS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23

CONCRETE SIDEWALK BIORETENTION
STORM DRAIN DROP INLET MANHOLE MATCHLINE TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER TYPE "C" CURB DIMENSION TO FACE OF CURB ADA ACCESSIBLE ROUTE

IMPERVIOUS AREA CALCULATIONS

1. MATCH AC @ SAWCUT LINE

2. MATCH CONCRETE @ SAWCUT LINE3. CONCRETE SIDEWALK

4. CONCRETE TYPE-C CURB

5. CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER6. CONCRETE CURB TAPER7. TYPE-V VALLEY GUTTER

8. RETAINING WALL9. CONCRETE FLUSH CURB

10. CONCRETE WHEEL STOP11. CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON12. LIGHT DUTY AC PAVEMENT13. TRUNCATED DOMES14. ROLLED CURB15. SLURRY 1 2 PUBLIC ROAD WAY

16. BIKE LANE STRIPING17. CENTER LINE STRIPE18. 2" AC GRIND AND OVERLAY19. TEMPORARY TRUCK LOADING/UNLOADING ZONE (8.0'X60.0')

20. MODIFIED TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER

SQ FT ACRES
NEW
BUILDING 19,253 0.442FRONT PARKING 3,760MIDDLE DRIVEWAY (outside of covered area) 3,840UPPER PARKING 6,920 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS 3,250
TOTAL NEW AND REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA 42,045 0.965
LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

OFFICE WITH
OFFICE/STORAGE - 3
OFFICE/STORAGE -6

STORAGE

PROFESSIONAL
1ST FLOOR
SPACE OFFICE - 2
STORAGE - 1

RETAINING WALL PARKING STALL COUNT XX
Site Plan Rev 7-2021 TC
Scale: 1" = 3'

STANDARD ACCESS DRIVE & PARKING
1 Scale: 1" = 3'
20'-WIDE DRIVE
2 SLURRY LIMITS
compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking
1 2
34 56
7 8
13 11
14 1516
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 12
28 27
26 25
29 32
30 24
31 33
34 35
36 37
38 39
40 45
46 47
48 49
54 41
42 43
44 50
51 52
9 10
53 SUBGRADE SHALL BE OVER-EXCAVATED
AND RECOMPACTED 1' BELOW FINISHED

SUB-BASE PER THE SOILS REPORT
CL (N) AC PAVEMENT TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER
BLDG
FF=686.50

BUILDING FOOTING (TO BE

PROVIDED BY STRUCTURAL

ENGINEER (TYP)

SUBGRADE SHALL BE OVER-EXCAVATED
AND RECOMPACTED 1' BELOW FINISHED

SUB-BASE PER THE SOILS REPORT

AC PAVEMENT
TYPE "A" CURB - FLUSH TYPE "A" CURB - Flush
3 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 9.0' 10-06-23
3 3
Planning Comments10-6-23 TC

Page 75 of 500 ends

C3.1
1" = 20'

GRADING AND

DRAINAGE PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

GENERAL GRADING NOTES

1. SURFACE VEGETATION PRESENT AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE STRIPPED TOGETHER WITH ORGANIC LADEN TOPSOIL. THE ACTUAL DEPTH SHOULD BE DETERMINED BYTHE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION. FOR PLANNIG PURPOSESTHE AVERAGE DEPTH MAY BE ASSUMED TO BE 3-INCHES IN VEGETATED AREAS.

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. THESE SOILS WILL NEED TO BE PROCESSED; MOISTURE CONDITIONED AND RECOMPACTED AS ENGINEERED FILL. AT

A MINIMUM, SUBGRADE SHOULD BE SACRIFIED TO

A DEPTH OF
8-INCHES; MOISTURE CONDITIONED AND RECOMPACTED AS RECOMMENDED IN THEGEOTECHNICAL REPORT.

4. BUILDING PAD 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 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER, ALL LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERALMINIMUM STANDARDS AND THE LATEST ADDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.

7. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS NOT IDENTIFIED FOR REMOVAL DURING CONSTRUCTION. THEY SHALL REPAIR ANY DAMAGE TO NEW CONDITION AT THEIR EXPENSE.

8. 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 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE PROJECT.

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 (N) BUILDINGS.13. IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMAINS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, ALL WORK SHALL BE HALTEDWITHIN 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE FIND. ARCHEOLOGIST SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE DURINGALL EARTH MOVING ACTIVITIES.

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 770 1980
NET VOLUME = 1210 CU.YDS. OF FILL
THE ABOVE QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY.

THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CUT AND FILL TO ACCOMPLISH FINISH GRADE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.

EARTHWORK QUANTITIES

STORM WATER POST-CONSTRUCTION

REQUIREMENTS
NET IMPERVIOUS AREA = 45,600 (REFER TO IMPERVIOUS AREA TABLE ON C2.1)PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 1 THROUGH 4 ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECTPERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 1 : SITE DESIGN AND RUNOFF REDUCTION · DIRECT ROOF RUNOFF ONTO VEGETATED AREAS· DIRECT RUNOFF FROM WALKWAYS ONTO VEGETATED AREAS· DIRECT RUNOFF FROM DRIVEWAYS ONTO VEGETATED AREAS PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 2 : WATER QUALITY TREATMENT
· BIO-RETENTION TREATMENT SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 3 : RUNOFF RETENTION
· RETENTION WITHIN ROCKED SECTION OF BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM· PERFORATED PIPE SHALL BE SET ABOVE RETENTION VOLUME IN ORDER

TO OPTIMIZE INFILTRATION
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 4 : PEAK MANAGEMENT
· PEAK MANAGEMENT WILL BE ADDRESSED BY DETAINING STORM WATER

ABOVE LIMIT OF RETENTION AND HAVE A RESTRICTOR ON THE OUTLET

STRUCTURE TO RELEASE WATER AT A PRE-DEVELOPMENT RATE
Scale: 1" = 3'

ACCESS DRIVE DRAINAGE TO BIO-RETENTION AREA
1 Scale: NTS

WALL X-SECTION
2 0.7%

1.85%

9.8%

0.25%

2.0%

0.50%
2%

1.0%

0.25%

2.25%

5.0%
18%

5.0%

2.5%

11.0%
FF = 687.00 FF = 690.00 FF = 691.00
FF = 700.04
FF = 691.00

2.0%

1.9%

14.5%

18.0%

10.0%

0.30%

4.5%

1.90%

1.8%

4.40%

0.25%

N
MODIFIED TY3E $
CU5% $ND *UTTE5
C$TC+:
:IDE O3ENIN*S

3 1

Page 76 of 500 ends

C3.2
1" = 20'

STORM WATER

CONTROL PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
IMPERV Pervious DMA DMA
SQ FT SQ FT REQ Area PROV.Area
DMA 1 20,015 4,220 800 1,200DMA 2 9,375 800 375 509DMA 3 9,579 6,343 383 444DMA 4 --- self treating area --- ____ ______ Total: 1,558 2,153 NET IMPERVIOUS AREA = 42,045 Total Site = 57,499PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 1 THROUGH 4 ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECTPERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 1 : SITE DESIGN AND RUNOFF REDUCTION · DIRECT ROOF RUNOFF ONTO VEGETATED AREAS· DIRECT RUNOFF FROM WALKWAYS ONTO VEGETATED AREAS· DIRECT RUNOFF FROM DRIVEWAYS ONTO VEGETATED AREAS PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 2 : WATER QUALITY TREATMENT
· BIO-RETENTION TREATMENT SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 3 : RUNOFF RETENTION
· RETENTION WITHIN ROCKED SECTION OF BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM· PERFORATED PIPE SHALL BE SET ABOVE RETENTION VOLUME IN ORDER

TO OPTIMIZE INFILTRATION
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 4 : PEAK MANAGEMENT
· PEAK MANAGEMENT WILL BE ADDRESSED BY DETAINING STORM WATER

ABOVE LIMIT OF RETENTION AND HAVE A RESTRICTOR ON THE OUTLET

STRUCTURE TO RELEASE WATER AT A PRE-DEVELOPMENT RATE
DMA 1
DMA 3
DMA 4
DMA 2
Planning Comments10-6-23
3 TC
3 10-06-23

Page 77 of 500 ends

C4.1
1" = 20'

UTILITY AND

FIRE SUPPRESSION
PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

POINT OF CONNECTION (POC) TO OFFSITE
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM. PER CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY

SANITARY SEWER CLEAN-OUT PER CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY

SANITARY SEWER NOTES

POINT OF CONNECTION TO EXISTING WATER MAINPOTABLE METER AND BOXPOST INDICATOR VALVEDOUBLE DETECTOR BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE PER SVWDREQUIREMENTS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION ON FIRE LINENEW VALVE ON MAINLINE WITH CUT IN TEE WATER NOTES:

GENERAL UTILITY NOTES

1. NO CHANGE TO THE PLANS SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES AND THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY.

2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS AND INVERTS OF EXISTING UTILITY PRIOR TO

COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER OR OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES OF VARIANCE FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

3. UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN BASED ON RECORD DRAWINGS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE FOUND IN FIELD. NO WARRANTY IS MADE REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS ORACCURACY OF SUCH INFORMATION. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES, AND PRESERVE SAME FROM DAMAGE. PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION, VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT THECROSSING POINTS WITH PROPOSED UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER OROWNERS REPRESENTATIVES IF CONDITIONS DIFFER FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND SHALL NOT BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE CHANGED CONDITION HAS BEEN EVALUATED.

CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICES ALERT (USA) (1-800-227-2600) TWO (2) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO DIGGING. REPAIR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.

CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITHCONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATED AND PRESERVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND UTILITIES.

4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY

5. IF ANY INDICATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL REMAINS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, ALL WORK SHALL BE HALTEDWITHIN 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE FIND. OWNER SHALL RETAIN A QUALIFIED ARCHEOLOGIST RETAINED TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THE DISCOVERY AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATEEVALUATION PROCEDURES PER ARCHEOLOGICAL REPORT. ARCHEOLOGIST SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE DURING ALL EARTH MOVING ACTIVITIES.

UNDERGROUND NOTES

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 SHALLBE 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. SANITARY SEWER TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL CONFORM TO CITY OF SANTA CRUZ SEWER PIPE TRENCH DETAIL.

5. JETTING OF BACKFILL MATERIALS TO ACHIEVE COMPACTION IS NOT ALLOWED.

6. ALL THE WATER PIPING SHALL BE AWWA CLASS 150 OR APPROVED EQUAL, ALL VALVES , ANGLES, AND THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CURRENT CPC SPECIFICATIONS.

7. ALL FIRE SERVICE PIPING AND APPURTENANCES SHALL CONFORM TO NFPA STANDARDS AND

SPECIFICATIONS

8. ANY EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RELOCATED AS A PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE. 2 2
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SSMH #4
48 ∅
700.2
688.0
INV=685.0
INV=684.0
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #5
2 x 3
700.1698.0
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #4
2 x 3
690.30688.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #3
2 x 2
685.5682.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #3
2x3
685.9684.2
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #2
2 x 2
684.5681.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SDMH #3
48 ∅
685.5680.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #1
2 x 2
684.0679.0
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SDMH #1
48 ∅
685.25677.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=

EX DI
2x3
681.35676.31
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=

EX SSMH
48 ∅
683.54675.61
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=

EX SSMH
48 ∅
690.6683.4
INV=677.5
INV=682.0
INV=685.0
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SDMH #2
48 ∅
685.00675.5
INV=685.0

Page 78 of 500 ends

C5.1
1" = 20'

EROSION

CONTROL
PLAN
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

SILT FENCE
· PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY, FOR THE FOLLOWING INSPECTIONS:· INSPECTIONS DURING INSTALLATION OF ANY REQUIRED STORM WATER LID (LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT) FEATURES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) SUCH AS INSTALLATION OFPERMEABLE PAVERS, PERMEABLE PAVEMENT, BIO-SWALES, BIO-RETENTION AREAS ANDRETENTION/INFILTRATION FACILITIES. · INSPECTIONS DURING INSTALLATION OF ANY REQUIRED STORM WATER QUALITY TREATMENT UNITS SUCH
BIO-PLANTERS, BIO-FILTRATION TREE UNITS, PERK FILTERS, CUDOS, STORM WATER FILTER UNITS,ETC. · FINAL INSPECTION FOR STORM WATER ONCE THE WORK IS COMPLETED AS PART OF THE PERMIT “SIGN-OFF” PROCESS.

INSPECTIONS
LEGEND

STRAW WADDLE/FIBER
ROLL

DIRECTION OF FLOW WITH

STORM DRAIN INSTALLED

STABILIZED

CONSTRUCTION

ENTRANCE/EXIT

SANITARY FACILITY

CONCRETE/WASTE WASHOUT
C

MATERIALS &EQUIPMENT

STORAGE AREA
NOTE: SEE SHEET C5.2 FOR

BMP NOTES AND DETAILS

SWPPP MANAGER TO MARK

KNOWN LOCATIONS
FILTREXX 8" SOXX W/MIRAFI 140N FABRIC

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 SANTA CRUZ AND ASSOCIATED BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS.

2. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE BACK-UP EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES (SOIL STABILIZATION) WITH SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS STRAW WATTLES, SILT FENCE, FILTREX 8" SOXX AND MIRAFI 140N, AND/OR SEDIMENT TRAPS OR BASINS. ENSURE CONTROL MEASURES ARE ADEQUATE, IN PLACE, AND IN OPERABLE CONDITIONS. SEDIMENT CONTROLS, INCLUDING INLET PROTECTION, ARE NECESSARY BUT SHOULD BE A SECONDARY DEFENSE BEHIND GOOD EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.

3. ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPAIRED THROUGHOUT THE SEASON. REPLACEMENT SUPPLIES SHOULD BE KEPT ON SITE.

4. SITE INSPECTIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED BEFORE AND AFTER EACH STORM EVENT, AND EVERY 24

HOURS FOR EXTENDED STORM EVENTS, TO IDENTIFY AREAS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO EROSION AND SEDIMENT PROBLEMS OR ANY OTHER POLLUTANT DISCHARGES. IF ADDITIONAL MEASURES ARE NEEDED, REVISE THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENT THE MEASURES IMMEDIATELY. DOCUMENT ALL INSPECTION FINDINGS AND ACTIONS TAKEN.

5. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR CONTROL OF STORM WATER RUNOFF.

6. BETWEEN OCTOBER 15 AND APRIL 15, EXPOSED SOIL SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION AT ALL TIMES. HAY BALES, FILTER BERMS, OR OTHER MEANS SHALL BE EMPLOYED TO PREVENT TURBID RUNOFFTO ADJOINING PROPERTIES.

7. UNNECESSARY GRADING AND DISTURBING OR SOIL SHALL BE AVOIDED.

8. ANY EXCESS MATERIAL SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE OR STOCKPILED IN

A MANNER TO AVOID
RUNOFF ONTO ADJOINING PROPERTIES.

9. ANY MATERIAL STOCKPILED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE COVERED WITH PLASTIC.

10. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ 48 HOURS BEFORE ANY EARTHWORK BEGINS.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE FILTER FABRIC AND ALL SEDIMENT BARRIERS FROM STORM DRAIN INLET UPON COMPLETION OF PROJECT.

GENERAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES
C
C
C
10-06-23

Page 79 of 500 ends

C5.2
1" = 20'

EROSION

CONTROL

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
PONDING HT.

STANDARD DETAIL

TRENCH WITH NATIVE BACKFILL
12" MIN.

FLOW
FLOW
RUNOFF
8"
GRAVEL
FLOW
12" MIN.

RUNOFF

ALTERNATE DETAIL

TRENCH WITH GRAVEL
PONDING HT.

CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONSTHE 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 AMINIMUM 6-INCH OVERLAP AND BOTH ENDS SECURELY FASTENED TO THEPOST.POSTS SHALL BE SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 10 FEET APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES). WHEN EXTRASTRENGTH FABRIC IS USED WITHOUT THE WIRE SUPPORT FENCE, POSTSPACING 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 SECURELY TO 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 WIREDTO THE FENCE, AND 6 INCHES OF THE FABRIC SHALL EXTEND INTO THETRENCH. THE FABRIC SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36 INCHES ABOVETHE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLEDTO 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 THETOE 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 BEENPERMANENTLY 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 1/3 HEIGHT OF THE FENCE OR 9 INCHES MAXIMUM.

THE REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL VEGETATE OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED.

Scale: NTS

SILT FENCE
2 FILTER FABRIC EXTRA STRENGTH NEEDED

MESH SUPPORT WITHOUT WIRE
STREET

WHEEL WASH AREA

PROPERTY LINE
15' RADIUS (TYP)
STD. CURB
20' MINIMUM WIDTH

RAMP - FULL WIDTH

OF ENTRY

DRAINAGE

SILT FENCE (SEE SILT

FENCE DETAIL)
50' MIN.

Scale: NTS

ROCKED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
1 NOTE:

1. INSPECT AND REPAIR FENCE AFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN NECESSARY.

2. REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DEPOSITED TO AN AREA THAT WILL

NOT CONTRIBUTE SEDIMENT OFF-SITE AND CAN BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED.

3. SILT FENCE SHALL BE PLACED ON SLOPE CONTOURS TO MAXIMIZE PONDING EFFICIENCY.

STEEL OR

WOOD POST
10 FT MAX SPACING WITH

WIRE SUPPORT FENCE
6 FT MAX SPACING WITHOUT

WIRE SUPPORT FENCE
WOOD
POST 36"

HIGH MAX

FILTER FABRIC ATTACH
SECURELY TO UPSTREAMSIDE OF POST.
9" MAX.
(RECOMMENDED)
STORAGE HT.
4"x6" TRENCHWITH COMPACTED

BACKFILL
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 MOREEFFECTIVE). - 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 MOREEFFECTIVE). - 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, UNRAVELINGOR SLUMPING FIBER ROLLS.

IF THE FIBER ROLL IS USED AS A SEDIMENT CAPTURE

DEVICE, OR AS AN EROSION CONTROL DEVICE TOMAINTAIN SHEET FLOWS, SEDIMENT THAT

ACCUMULATES IN THE BMP MUST BE PERIODICALLY
REMOVED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN BMP EFFECTIVENESS.

SEDIMENT SHOULD BE REMOVED 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.

EROSION CONTROL BMP'S

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 SCHOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE. DO NOTUSE SOAPS, SOLVENTS, DEGREASERS, OR STEAM CLEANING EQUIPMENT, ANDPREVENT 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 SCHOOL DISTRICT.

STRUCTURES TO CONTROL AND CONVEY RUNOFF

1. CONVEY RUNOFF BY USE OF EARTH DIKES, DRAINAGE SWALES AND/OR DITCHES WHEN FEASIBLE.

2. USE SLOPE DRAINS TO COLLECT AND CONVEY WATER FOR DISCHARGE BELOW SLOPES WHEN FEASIBLE.

3. USE VELOCITY DISSIPATION DEVICES, FLARED CULVERT END SECTIONS AND/OR

CHECK DAMS TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITY AND MITIGATE EROSION WHEN FEASIBLE.

CAPTURE SEDIMENT

1. USE TERRACING, RIPRAP, SAND BAGS, ROCKS, APPROVED TEMPORARY VEGETATION AND/OR OTHER APPROVED BMP’S ON SLOPES TO REDUCE RUNOFFVELOCITY 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 WORK

1. 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 TODIVERT 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.

CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

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
FILTREXX® 8" SOXX™
CURB
SECURE SOXX™ TO GRATE WITH

RUBBER TIE DOWNS

DRAIN INLET PLAN DRAIN INLET SECTION
NOTES:

1. ALL MATERIAL TO MEET FILTREXX® SPECIFICATIONS.

2. FILTER MEDIA™ FILL TO MEET APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.

3. COMPOST MATERIAL TO BE DISPERSED ON SITE, AS DETERMINED BY ENGINEER.

4. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXTEND MIRAFI 140N FABRIC 6" BEYOND CATCH BASIN AFTER PLACEMENT OF GRATE

5. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL FILTER FABRIC FROM ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS UPON COMPLETION OF PROJECT EXCESS SOXX™ MATERIAL TO BE
DRAWN IN AND TIED OFF TO 2x2

WOODEN STAKE
FILTREXX® 8" SOXX™
CATCH
BASIN
CATCH
BASIN

CURBSIDE SECTION
MIRAFI 140N FILTER FABRIC
MIRAFI 140N FILTER FABRIC
WIRE TIES, (TYP.) STORM GRATE
EXCESS SOXX™ MATERIAL TO BE
DRAWN IN AND TIED OFF TO 2x2
WOODEN STAKE, (TYP.)
CURB
FILTREXX® 8" SOXX™
CURBSIDE OPTION "B" PLAN
CURB

STORM GRATE
CURBSIDE OPTION "A" PLAN
MIRAFI 140N FILTER FABRIC
Scale: NTS
FILTREX® INLET PROTECTION
4 10-06-23

Page 80 of 500 ends

C6.1
1" = 20'

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Scale: NTS
MODIFIED TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER
5 FLOW LINE OF BIO-RETENTION

3.0'
3' OPENINGS IN 6" VERTICAL CURB AT

BIORETENTION AREAS (TYP)
6" VERTICAL CURB

CONCRETE MOWBAND
NOTES:

1. OUTSIDE OF PARKING STALL CONTRACTOR MAY
ADJUST OPENINGS ±1 FT IN LENGTH AS NEEDED

1.33' GUTTER PAN

2.5' DEEPENED EDGE W/ #4 @24" O.C.

INSTALL 6" WIDE STRIP OF
RIP-RAP @ CURB & GUTTER
OPENINGS. ENSURE THAT
THERE IS A 1" CLEAR FROMTOP OF RIP-RAP TO CURB
OPENING.

3.0'

3.0'
(N) 4" THICK CONCRETE SLAB(3,000 PSI)
FG
SUBGRADE @ 95%

RELATIVE COMPACTION
4" THICK CLASS II

AGGREGATE BASE ROCK
Scale: NTS

CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION
2 #4 REBAR @ 24" OC EW
Scale: NTS

CONCRETE CURB & CURB TAPER
3 Scale: NTS

AC PAVEMENT SECTION
1 (N) 9" AB CLASS II COMPACTED
TO 95% R.C.

CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY AND
RECOMPACT 12" BELOW (N) BASE
TO 95% R.C.
(N) 4" AC TYPE A - 1/2" MAX. MED. LIFTS SHALL

BE CONDUCTED PER CAL TRANS SPECS SECTION
39-6.01
Scale: NTS

ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL DETAIL
8 Scale: NTS TRUNCATED DOME DETAIL
9 Scale: NTS ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNAGE DETAIL 10

ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL
4" WIDE BLUE STRIPE

PAINT ALL CONCRETE CURBSBLUE WITHIN ACCESSIBLEPARKING SPACES 3" WIDE BLUE STRIPES AT
PERIMETER AND 2" WIDE AT
INTERIOR, AND 36" O.C. TYP.3'-0" X 3'-0" PAINTEDSYMBOL TYP OF 2 WITHIN PATH PAINT THEWORDS "NO PARKING" IN
12" HIGH LETTERS MIN.

VAN

ACCESSIBLE
SPACE
18'-0" MIN.
9'-0"
MIN
8'-0" (OR 5'-0" SEE PLAN) 9'-0"
45°
2'-0" PRECAST CONCRETE BUMPER. TYP OF 2
1'-0"

ADA PARKING SIGN
(TYP FOR 2)

1.67" APPROX.

2.35" APART

2.35" APART
A
A
.9" AT BASE
.45" AT TOP
.2 HT.

TYPICAL SECTION A - A

TYPICAL PLAN

TAPERED EDGES

WHERE EXPOSED

AFFIX TO

CONCRETE WITH

THICKENED EPOXY
NOTE: AT MINIMUM, 4" CONC. OVER 2" SAND IS REQUIREDBENEATH ALL TRUNCATED DOMES. INSTALLING TRUNCATEDDOMES ON ASPHALT CONCRETE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.

CONCRETESECTION (PCC)
REQUIRED. SEENOTE BELOW
12W X 18"H REFLECTOR.

SIGN PANEL MINIMUM OF
16 GA. GALV. STEEL W/
PORCLEAIN ENAMELFINISH. WHITE FIGURE ON
A BLUE BACKGROUND. THE
BLUE COLOR SHALL BE EQ.

TO COLOR NO. 15090 IN
FEDEREAL STANDARD595a. ALL LETTERS TO BE PARKING MIN. OF 1" IN HIGH.

ONLY

FOR STANDARD

ACCESSIBLE STALLS ISA

SYMBOL ONLY IS
REQUIRED. FOR VAN

ACCESSIBLE STALLS ISA

SYMBOL AND LETTERING
"VAN ACCESSIBLE" ISREQUIRED. (CBC 1129B.5)
VAN

ACCESSIBLE

MINIMUM
FINE $250
PER IR 11B-7 6" MIN
6'-8"
1'-2" MIN.
3"
2'-6"
(4) #3 REBAR, ONE @ EA.

CORNER
1/4" TYP.

FINISH SURFACE
CONC. FOOTING
2" x 2" GALV. STEEL TUBE

BOTTOM OF SIGN
Scale: NTS
POST INDICATOR VALVE 11
KENNEDY/CLOW INDICATOR POST TYPE 2945A
TELESCOPING BARREL SIZE "B" (Paint: Red)

TAMPER SWITCH (POTTER
PCVS-1 OR SIMILAR APPROVEDBY ENGINEER)

SEE FIRE ALARM PLANS FORCONTINUATION

CONNECTION TO FIRESUPPRESSION SYSTEM

PADDLE LOCK PER

HARDWARE

SPECIFICATIONS

POST INDICATOR VALVE SEEELEVATION BELOW

KENNEDY/CLOW INDICATOR POST
VALVE TO MATE WITH 2945A
POST
Scale: NTS

CONCRETE CURBS & GUTTER TYPES
7 SAND OR AGGREGATE BASE TYPE C CURB

TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER
2" SAND OR A.B.
4" CONCRETE
6"
6" A.B.
2" A.C.
6"
SCORELINE 6" 1-1/2"
R = 1
2" 6" MIN. 12" SEE NOTE #3 REGARDING REBAR

REQUIREMENTS
6"
3/4" *
R = 1"
R = 1
2" 31-1/2" 16" 1-1/2" 6"
6"
1-1/2"
6"

TOP OF CURB

FACE OF CURB
R=1/2"
8"

FLUSH CURB
2" SAND OR A.B.
4" CONCRETE
6"
6" A.B.2" A.C.
8"

SCORELINE
R = 1
2" 8"

1. TYPE A, B, C, & FLUSH CURB, GUTTER & SIDEWALK ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF CLASS B CONCRETE, 6 SACK MINIMUM.

2. WEAKENED PLANE JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT 20° INTERVALS, AND AT THE ENDS OF RETURNS. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE AT MAXIMUM 60 FEET SPACING.

3. IF SIDEWALK IS NOT INSTALLED MONOLITHICALLY WITH CURB & GUTTER, PLACE #4 DOWELS 18" LONG AT 4' O.C. IN BACK OF CURB 2" DOWN FROM TOP OF CURB, 6" IN CONCRETE. * COUNTER SLOPE OF ADJOINING GUTTERS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO AND WITHIN 24" OF THE CURB RAMP SHALL NOTBE STEEPER 1"V IN 20"H (CBC 11B-406.5.8) ** SLOPE OF GUTTER PAN SHALL NOT EXCEED 2.0% MAX WITHIN CURB RAMPS, ACCESSIBLE DROP-OFF LOCATIONS, OR

WITHIN ANY OTHER ACCESSIBLE PATHS OF TRAVEL
6"MIN.
11"
30"
14" 16"
6"
3-1/2"

SAND OR AGGREGATE BASE

TOP OF CURB
R=6" R=1/2"

TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER (SPILL)
SLOPE

BOTTOM FACE

OF CURB (BFC)
(BFC)
(BFC)
6"MIN.
9-1/2"
30"
14" 16"
6"
6"
3-1/2"

TOP OF CURB
R=8" R=1/2"

TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER (CATCH)

BOTTOM FACE OF CURB (BFC)
1-1/2"

COMPACT BASE
MATERIAL TO 95%RELATIVE COMPACTION
6"MIN.
9-1/2"
16"
6"
3-1/2"

TOP OF CURB
R=8"
R=1/2"

TYPE B CURB (MODIFIED)

BOTTOM FACE

OF CURB (BFC)

COMPACT BASE MATERIAL
TO 95% RELATIVE

COMPACTION

TYPE V-VALLEY GUTTER
36"
18"
1-1/2" OR (3/8")**
6" MIN.6" MIN.

SAND OR
AGGREGATE BASE COMPACT BASE MATERIAL TO 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION SEE NOTE ** BELOW FOR SLOPE OF GUTTER

PAN WITHIN ACCESSIBLE DROP-OFF LOCATIONS
R=9"
R=9"
R=9"
#4 BARS CONTINUOUS
AND 3" CLEAR TYPICAL
R=1/2"
#4 BARS CONTINUOUS
AND 3" CLEAR TYPICAL
#4 BARS CONTINUOUS
AND 3" CLEAR TYPICAL
R=1/2"
R=1/2"
TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER (SEE

PLANS FOR CONTINUATION)
TYPE "B" SPILL AND/OR

CATCH CURB & GUTTER
(SEE PLANS FOR CONTINUATION)

FLOW LINE AND/OR BFC WITHIN

TRANSITION AREA SHALL ALIGN

WITH ADJACENT CURB AND GUTTERS
2'
R=1"

TOP OF CURB

TOP OF PAVEMENT

CONSTRUCTION JOINT
2'
6"
2' TRANSITION

0.67'

CONSTRUCTION JOINT
6"

CONSTRUCTION JOINTCONSTRUCTION JOINT

TYPE A & C CURB AND GUTTER TAPER

TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER TAPER
Scale: NTS

WHEEL STOP
6 2-3/4"
5-1/4"

ELEVATION
PLAN
A
6' 3-1/4"
4-1/2"
9"
#4 x 24" LONG REBAR AT THIRD POINTS, DRIVE
TOP OF REBAR 1/2" TO 3/4" BELOW SURFACE OF

BUMPER & GROUT FLUSHPRECAST CONCRETE BUMPERMASTIC

ASPHALT PAVING OVER AGGREGATE BASE PER
SITE PLAN.

Scale: 1" = 2'

CALSTONE RETAINING WALL SECTION
4 10-06-23

Page 81 of 500 ends

C6.2
1" = 20'

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
T (831) 438-4420 F (831) 438-4420 2

BETHANY PROFESSIONAL
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12 125 BETHANY DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Scale: NTS
SEWER/STORM CLEAN OUT DETAIL 1
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
STANDARD UTILITY TRENCH 6

PAVING WIDTH
NOTES:

1. TRENCH WIDTH DETERMINED BY PIPE DIAMETER.

2. PAVING WIDTH MAY HAVE TO BE SAW CUT.

3. MAINTAIN 6" VERTICAL CLEARANCE WHEN CROSSING OTHER UTILITIES (EXCEPT SEWER, SEE SEC 15.)
EXIST. PAVING
A.C. PAVING AS REQ'D
1 3
2 TRENCH WIDTH
6" MIN.

IMPORTED SAND BACKFILL
MATERIAL 95%RELATIVE COMPACTION

NATIVE MATERIAL

TRACING WIRE

BASE ROCK
COMPACTED TO 95% R.C.
36"
GENERAL DETAIL NOTES:

1. PAVEMENT SHALL BE REPLACED IN KIND, HOWEVER, MIN. REQUIREMENTS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
a. PAVED ROADS - 3" A.C. TYPE B OVER 12" PRIME COATED CLASS 2 A.B.

2. UNLESS CONCRETE BEDDING IS REQUIRED AROUND UTILITY PIPES, FREE-DRAINING CLEAN SAND SHOULD BE USED AS BEDDING. SAND BEDDING SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 95% R.C.

3. APPROVED IMPORTED CLEAN SAND SHALL BE USED AS UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL. BACKFILL IN TRENCHES LOCATED

IN TRENCHES LOCATED UNDER AND ADJACENT TO STRUCTURAL FILL, FOUNDATIONS, CONCRETE SLABS AND PAVEMENTS SHOULD BE PLACED IN HORIZONTAL LAYERS NO MORE THAN 8 INCHES THICK (FOR ALL HARDSCAPE SURFACES). EACH LAYER OF TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE WATER CONDITIONED AND COMPACTED TO 95% R.C.

Scale: nts
ANGLED STORM DRAIN OUTLET 9

SECTIONPLAN
15-7/8"
15-7/8"
3/4"
6-1/4"
3/4"
6" or 12"
12"
22"
9-1/2"
6-1/2"
16" 16"
18-3/8"
18-3/8"11"
1-3/4"
V64-71CGrate
Scale: NTS
V64 CHRISTY BOX 4

THIS CONCRETE DRAIN BOX HAS A CAST-IN GALVANIZED FRAME AND IS SPECIFICALLY

ENGINEERED FOR DRAINAGE IN MEDIUM AREAS 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.

Scale: NTS
BIORETENTION AREA 3
22"

1. HYDROSTOR HS180 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM D2418. HS180 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S LATEST INSTALLATION GUIDELINES.

2. SUBGRADE: TRENCH BOTTOMS WITH UNSTABLE OR UNYIELDING MATERIAL SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO A DEPTH DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AND REPLACED WITH SUITABLE MATERIAL. FOR UNSTABLE MATERIALS, THE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING SUBGRADE SUITABILITY.

3. FOUNDATION STONE: SUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE A 3/4 - 2 INCH (19 - 51 mm), WASHED, CRUSHED ANGULAR STONE, OR AASHTO M43 SIZES (3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57) WITH WASHED, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE ADDED TO THE GRADATION, e.g., WASHED, CRUSHED, ANGULAR #3(AASHTO M43) STONE. MINIMUM FOUNDATION STONE THICKNESS TO BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN ENGINEER. MINIMUM OF 6" (150 mm) RECOMMENDED. REFER TO PRINSCO DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE.

4. EMBEDMENT BACKFILL: SUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE A 3/4 - 2 INCH (19 - 51 mm), WASHED, CRUSHED ANGULAR STONE, OR AASHTO M43 SIZES (3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57) WITH WASHED, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE ADDED TO THE GRADATION, e.g., WASHED, CRUSHED, ANGULAR #3(AASHTO M43) STONE. EMBEDMENT BACKFILL SHALL EXTEND FROM TOP OF BEDDING TO NOT LESS THAN 6" (150 mm) INCHES ABOVE THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER. NO COMPACTION IS REQUIRED BUT AN EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO HAND KNIFE STONE IN BETWEEN ALL CORRUGATIONS.

5. INITIAL BACKFILL: SUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE A GRANULAR, WELL GRADED SOIL WITH LESS THAN 35% FINES OR AASHTO M43 SIZES (3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89, 9, 10). MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS FALL WITHIN THIS GRADING CRITERIA. INITIAL BACKFILLSHALL EXTEND FROM TOP OF EMBEDMENT BACKFILL TO NOT LESS THAN 18 INCHES (450 mm) ABOVE THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER. COMPACT TO A MINIMUM OF 95% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY.

6. FINAL BACKFILL: SUITABLE MATERIALS SHALL BE ANY SOIL DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. FINAL BACKFILL SHALL EXTEND FROM TOP OF INITIAL BACKFILL TO NO MORE THAN 8 FEET (2.44 m) ABOVE THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER. COMPACTION LEVELS SHOULD FOLLOW ENGINEERSRECOMMENDATIONS.

7. MINIMUM COVER: FOR TRAFFIC APPLICATIONS A MINIMUM COVER OF 18 INCHES (450 mm) IS REQUIRED, MEASURED FROM THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVED INSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING MAY OCCUR, INCREASE COVER TO 24 INCHES (600 mm). ADDITIONAL COVER MAY BE REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION LOADS.

8. MAXIMUM COVER: A COVER HEIGHT OF OVER 8 FEET (2.44 m) IS NOT RECOMMENDED. COVER HEIGHT IS MEASURED FROM THE TOP OF THE

CHAMBER TO THE TOP OF THE PAVEMENT

9. LOAD RATING: HS180 CHAMBERS ARE TRAFFIC RATED FOR H-20 VEHICLES WITH ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION FOR LANE LOADING, COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS HL-93 LOAD RATING (AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK).

10. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE: INSPECTION OF THE SYSTEM SHOULD OCCUR BIANNUALLY TO ENSURE LARGE AMOUNTS OF SEDIMENT OR DEBRIS HAVE NOT BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE SEDIMENT ROW. DURING THE FIRST YEAR, INSPECTION SHOULD OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY DUE TO CONSTRUCTION SEDIMENT LOADING. TO CLEAN THE SYSTEM, A JET/VAC PROCESS CAN BE USED TO REMOVE SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROMTHE SEDIMENT ROW. FOR MORE INFORMATION, REFER TO PRINSCO'S "RETENTION/DETENTION CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE" TECHNICAL NOTE.

11. ACCESS PIPE: PRINSCO RECOMMENDS A 24 INCH (600 mm) DIAMETER ACCESS PIPE TO THE SEDIMENT ROW. A 24 INCH (600 mm) INTERNAL SLEEVE ADAPTER (PART # HS180A-24) WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONNECT TO HS180 END CAPS. CONTACT YOUR LOCAL SALES REPRESENTATIVE WITH ANY QUESTIONS.

1. 4" (100 mm) INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE CONNECTED

THROUGH ANY CHAMBER CIRCULAR CUT OUT POINT,
LOCATED AT THE CENTER OF EACH HS180 CHAMBER.
6" (150 mm) OR 8" (200 mm) INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE
CONNECTED THROUGH A CORED HOLE, CENTERED ON ACORRUGATION.

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)
Scale: nts
UNDERGROUND STORM WATER CHAMBERS 6
Scale: NTS
UG CHAMBER SECTION - IN 5A Scale: NTS UG CHAMBER SECTION - OUT 5B Scale: NTS
RESTRICTOR DETAIL 5C

PLAN VIEW

SIDE VIEWSECTION B

FRONT VIEW

SECTION A
Scale: NTS
48"∅ MANHOLE 2
NOTES:

1. PRECAST CONCRETE PIPE SECTIONS, ADJUSTMENT RINGS

AND TAPERED SECTIONS SHALL CONFORM TO CLASS II
REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE (ASTM C 76).

2. ALL RAMNECK JOINTS SHALL BE SMOOTHLY FINISHED WITH
WATER PROOF MORTAR.

3. THE USE OF MORE THAN 12" OF ADJUSTING RINGS TO
CONFORM TO GRADE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.4. CONCENTRIC MANHOLES MAY BE USED WHEN A UTILITYCONFLICT OCCURS OR WHEN APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

5. ALL INCOMING LINES TO BE SET TO MATCH CROWNS WITH

OTHER PIPES IN MANHOLE, OR AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY
ENGINEER.

6. APPROVED IMPORTED CLEAN SAND SHALL BE USED AS
UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL. BACKFILL IN TRENCHES LOCATED

IN TRENCHES LOCATED UNDER AND ADJACENT TO

STRUCTURAL FILL, FOUNDATIONS, CONCRETE SLABS AND
PAVEMENTS SHOULD BE PLACED IN HORIZONTAL LAYERS NOMORE THAN 8 INCHES THICK (FOR ALL HARDSCAPE SURFACES). EACH LAYER OF TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE
WATER CONDITIONED AND COMPACTED TO 95% R.C.

CAST-IN-PLACE CLASS "B" CONCRETE BASE
SLOPE=1" PER FOOT
MIN. GROUT & SHAPE
TO A SMOOTH FINISH.

MORTAR ALL

JOINTS SEE
NOTE 2
12"x10" CLASS "B" CONCRETE

COLLAR (CONTRACTOR TO AVOID

EXCAVATING INTO SUBGRADE

WHEN INSTALLING COLLAR)

PAVEMENT GRADE STANDARD FRAME &
COVER, STAMPED "SD" OR
"SS"
SEE NOTE 3
12"
MIN.
2" MIN. ASPHALT CAP
12"
2'-0"
4'-0" STD.
4" MIN.

VARIESVARIES
3" MIN.
10"
15" TO
30" D1
6" MIN.
4"∅ PERF. PIPE

NO INFILTRATION

FOR BIORETENTIION

ADJACENT TO BUILDING
NOTES:

1. INSTALL OVERFLOW DRAIN
PIPE CONNECTED TO STORMDRAINAGE SYSTEM.
1 3
1 3
GENERAL NOTE: · SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR

PLANTING REQUIREMENTS

BIO-TREATMENT MEDIA
CLASS 2 PERMEABLE
15 MIL. IMPERMEABLE LINER.

LINER SHALL EXTEND UP TO

THE PONDING HEIGHT
(STEGO WRAP OR APPROVED

SUBSTITUTE BY ENGINEER)

FILTER FABRIC
(MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED

SUBSTITUTE BY ENGINEER)

PONDING HEIGHT
PRINSCO HS180

CHAMBER
3 4" ANGULAR ROCK
2 LF OF 8"∅ HDPE
@ S=2.0%
(N) PERK
FILTER

FINISH GRADE
9 LF OF 8"∅ HDPE
@ S=0.5%

RETENTION VOLUME

DETENTION VOLUME

RESTRICTOR

OVERFLOW
BYPASS

RESTRICTED
FLOW

CORE DRILL & DOWEL INTO SDMH
(TYP 2 PER SIDE)
2-1/3" DRILLED HOLE
1"∅ HOLE FOR PULL

ROPE (FORMAINTENANCE)

SDMH BTM

CONCRETE
1-1/2" x 1-1/2" x 1/4"
STAINLESS STEEL CHANNEL24" LONG (TYP OF 2)
2'-10"(L) x 1/2"(W) x 21" (H)STAINLESS STEEL PLATE W/ ORIFICE

INNER WALL
OF MANHOLE4'∅
1-1/2" x 1-1/2" x 1/4"
STAINLESS STEEL CHANNEL24" LONG (TYP OF 2)

CONCRETE
10-06-23

Page 82 of 500 ends

C6.3
NONE

DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
10-06-23

Page 83 of 500 ends

C6.4
1" = 20'

SVWD DETAILS
Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.13.20 TC/JB
338-40
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
1 TC CITY COMMENTS DATED 11/19/21

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2 TC FIRE COMMENTS DATED 08/24/23
10-06-23

Page 84 of 500 ends

L1
1" = 20'

LANDSCAPE PLAN
Date:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

02.20.19 TC/JB
338-40
A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
1 1 TC City COMMENTS DATED 9/8/23
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!

BETHANY PROFESSIONAL
125 BETHANY DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
1 1
1 1

WUCOLS WATER USE CLASSIFICATION

TREE COUNTS

ZONE ZONE AREA WATER FLOW PLANT TYPE
1 compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking
10-06-23
Planning Comments10-6-23
3 TC
3

Page 85 of 500 ends

E1
1" = 20'

LIGHTING PLAN
Date:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

11.20.21 TC/JB
338-40
BETHANY PROFESSIONAL PROP.

A
B
CD
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10
1 125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTT'S VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
Call Two Working Days Before You Dig!
compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking
10-06-23
Planning Comments
3 10-6-23 TC

Page 86 of 500 ends

1 DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW

ABBREVIATIONS
LEGEND

DEMOLITION KEY NOTES

SURVEY INFORMATION
SURVEYOR:

REMOVE EXISTING BLDG.

EXISTING PERVIOUS PAVEMENT QUANTITIES

S C O T T S V A L L E Y D R I V
Tree Location & Removal Plan
125 Bethany Drive, Scotts Valley, California
Sheet T1
of 2 sheets
K.F.
5/27/2021
APN: 023-
102-15
.
. .
.
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

T1 WHITE BIRCHDBH 15"
.

T2 LIQUIDAMBAR11"
T3 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 11"
T8 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 12"
.
.

T4-T7 XYLOSMADBH 9",10",10",10"
T9 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 13"
T10 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 14"
T11-T13 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 16",16", 14"
.

T14 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 13"
T16 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 10"T15 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 12"
T17 LONDON PLANE TREEDBH 23"T18 LONDON PLANE TREEDBH 24" T19 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 20"
T20 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 15"
T21-T24 EVERGREEN PEARDBH 10",10",10",9"
T25 JAPANESE MAPLEDBH 5",4",4",4"
T1-A JAPANESE MAPLEDBH 6",5",5",4"
T2-A PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 8"
T26 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 7"
T27 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 8"
T28 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 6"
T29 JAPANESE MAPLEDBH 9"
T30 OLIVEDBH 8",8",5",4"
T31 OLIVEDBH 6",6"
T32 OLIVEDBH 6",6"
T33 OLIVE6",5",5",4"
T34 OLIVEDBH 6",6",5"
T35 CALLERY PEARDBH 8"
T37 CALLERY PEARDBH 9"
T36 OLIVEDBH 9",5",4"
T38 OLIVEDBH 9",9",7",7"
T39 CRAPE MYRTLEDBH 10"
T42 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 23"
T40 JAPANESE MAPLEDBH 6",4"
T43 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 20"
T41 JAPANESE MAPLEDBH 5"
x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x x x x x
xx
x
x
x
x x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x x
------- -------- -----
------- -- -------------- ---- ---
Base map provided by C2G Civil Consultants, Scotts Valley, CA

Page 87 of 500 ends

DON'T TAKE THE MONEY SOMEBODY BROKE ME ONCE LOVE WAS A CURRENCY A SHIMMERING BALANCE ACT I THINK THAT I LAUGHED AT THAT AND I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COLOURED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY I SLEPT ON MY OWN THOSE NIGHTS WAS STILL IN MY PARENTS HOUSE AND I CUT OFF MY T-SHIRT SLEEVES AND CLAIM A NEW CONTINENT 'TIL I SAW YOUR FACE AND HANDS COVERED IN SUN AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND WILL I UNDERSTAND? WILL WE FIGHT, STAY UP LATE? IN MY DREAMS I'M TO BLAME DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE BED ROLL YOUR EYES, SHAKE MY HEAD NOW WE'RE STUCK IN THE STORM WE WERE BORN TO IGNORE AND ALL I GOT IS A CHANCE TO JUST SIT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SHADOW STANDING ON THE EDGE OF YOURSELF PRAYING ON THE DARKNESS JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY DREAMING OF AN EASY WAKING UP WITHOUT WEIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HEARTLESS YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY WELL, DON'T TAKE THE MONEY (I'M IN LOVE AND YOU'VE GOT ME, RUNAWAY) YOU STEAL THE AIR OUT OF MY LUNGS, YOU MAKE ME FEEL IT I PRAY FOR EVERYTHING WE LOST, BUY BACK THE SECRETS YOUR HAND FOREVER'S ALL I WANT DON'T TAKE THE MONEY JUST DON'T TAKE THE MONEY HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=PO2AHZUZIEW&INDEX=4&LIST=RDEMTZWQ9PH1A_JFG1KY9ULMNW TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SSMH #4
48 700.2688.0
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #5
2 x 3
700.1698.0
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #4
2 x 3
690.5687.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #3
2 x 2
685.5682.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #3
2x3
685.9683.2
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #2
2 x 2
684.5681.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SDMH #3
48 685.5680.5
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
DI #1
2 x 2
684.0679.0
SAN. SEWER NOTES
WATER NOTES:

GENERAL UTILITY NOTES

UNDERGROUND NOTES
TYPE:

RIM=
INV=
SDMH #2
48 683.75675.5
INV=684.0
INV=683.0
INV=677.5
INV=683.0
INV=682.0
INV=685.0
Tree Protection Plan
125 Bethany Drive, Scotts Valley, California
Sheet T2
of 2 sheets
K.F
5/27/2021
APN:023-
102-15
--- ----- ----- -------- ------- >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>
------ --- --------
---
>>>
>>>>>>
.
.
.
.

T11 LIQUIDAMBARDBH 16"
T12 LIQUIDAMBARDBH16"
T17 LONDON PLANE TREEDBH 23"
T18 LONDON PLANE TREEDBH 24"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Use Ditch Witch first 24" depth or hand dig.

Base map provided by C2G Civil Consultants, Scotts Valley, CA Additional tree protectioin information can be found in Appendix G of Arborist Report dated 5/28/2021. .
.
.
.
.

T34 OLIVEDBH 6",6",5" T29 JAPANESE MAPLE
DBH 9"
T28 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 6"
T27 PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 8"
T2-A PURPLE-LEAF PLUMDBH 8"
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
.
.
.

Replacement Tree .

Page 88 of 500 ends

Planning Commission
Agenda Item No. 1
1/25/2024
City of Scotts Valley

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Date: January 25, 2024
Applicant/
Property Owner: Heritage Real Estate Ventures, LLC
Applications: Environmental Assessment EA 20-001
General Plan Amendment GPA 20-001
Zone Change ZC 20-001
Planned Development PD 23-001
Use Permit UP 20-002
Design Review DR 20-005
Cultural Resource Alteration Application CR23-001
Location: 125 Bethany/APN 023-102-15
General Plan/Zoning: Commercial Professional/C-P
Environmental Status: Negative Declaration
Request: Consideration of a Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Planned Development Zoning
and Planned Development Permit, Use Permit, Design
Review application and Cultural Resources Alteration
application to allow for the construction of a 52,822 sf three story commercial development on a 1.35-acre site located at 125 Bethany Drive, on the north side of Scotts Valley Drive between Tabor Drive and Bethany Drive. Proposed land
uses would include 10,465 sf of professional and
administrative office space, and 42,357 sf of storage for up to 227 users.

Staff Planner: Susie Pineda, Consulting Planner, (408) 331-7987 [email protected]

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and provide input and direction on the proposed project.

Page 89 of 500 ends

2 BACKGROUND
The project site (APN 023-102-15) is located at 125 Bethany Drive, at the intersection of Bethany Drive, Scotts Valley Drive, and Tabor Drive (Attachment 1: Location map). The subject site is approximately 1.35-acres. Current land uses include two existing oneand two-story commercial buildings, totaling 12,200 sf, and associated parking.

Surrounding land uses include an elementary school to the west, residential to the south, and Highway 17 to the south and east.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project includes demolition of the existing commercial buildings and construction of a three-story commercial redevelopment which consists of one 52,822 square feet (sf) building (Attachment 2: Sheet A2.1 Site Plan). This building would include 10,465 square feet of professional and administrative office space, and 42,357 square feet of storage for up to 227 user spaces. The first and second floors of the building will be bifurcated by an internal drive aisle that allows vehicles to park for loading and unloading. The third floor will be continuous over the internal drive aisle.

There will be three office spaces on the first floor, six office spaces on the second floor and six office spaces on the third floor, although it is important to note that while Sheet A2.2 of the plan set shows a total of 13 office/storage spaces, the project, as proposed, would allow the applicant to demise the interior space into 227 individual storage spaces, if desired. The project would provide 54 parking spaces located on the north and south extents of the project site, and along a central corridor which would also include loading spaces.

As shown on the Building Elevations (Attachment 2: Sheets A4.1 – A4.3), the exterior building materials would include vertical “board and batten” metal siding, low clear glass windows in white vinyl frames, veneer stone, single composite siding, wood soffit details, roll-up steel doors, and standing seam metal roofs. The project would include sustainable features including energy-efficient lighting and HVAC systems, energy efficient windows, and water-conserving fixtures such as low-flow toilets and droughtresistant landscaping.

Access to the project site would be from three driveways on Tabor Drive and two driveways on Bethany Drive, one of which would function as an exit-only driveway, providing egress access to the internal drive aisle.

Page 10 of 541 ends

3 As shown on the Lighting Plan (Attachment 2: Sheet E1), 19 pole-mounted light fixtures, 15 feet in height, would be installed on the project site. These LED fixtures would be directed downward to limit lighting on the project site, with the exception of one freestanding pole adjacent to the residential units to the north of the site where light leakage is shown.

PROPOSED ENTITLEMENTS
The project requires the following planning permits:

1. Negative Declaration

2. General Plan Amendment to change from the existing Commercial Service to Light Industrial

3. Zone Change from the C-P zoning designation to I-L / Planned Development

4. Planned Development in conjunction with the Zone Change request to allow for the approval of a general development plan incorporating alternative development standards

5. Use permit

6. Design Review permit to evaluate the site design and architecture

7. Cultural Resource Alteration Application
The following sections provide a discussion of the relevant planning, entitlement and environmental issues associated with the proposed project.

General Plan
General Plan Amendment
The project site has a current General Plan land use designation of Commercial Professional which allows administrative, business and professional offices in which merchandise is not manufactured or sold. Examples of uses in this category include insurance offices, tax consulting services, real estate agencies, banks and other financial and investment services, architects and other design professionals, doctors and dentists, attorneys, and similar business and professional offices.

The applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment to change from the existing Commercial Professional land use designation to Light Industrial (see Attachment 3:

General Plan Amendment Map) to accommodate a large portion of the project which is comprised of storage use. Storage facilities are not allowed in the Commercial districts; therefore, the applicant is requesting a land use change to Light Industrial. The General Plan defines the Light Industrial designation as “industrial and industrial related land uses that are neither commercial/retail, nor residential, but may create noise, odor, dust, glare, traffic, or impacts on the aquifer and/or air quality. In addition, the General Plan states that planning review shall ensure that activities conducted on the property do not unreasonably interfere with the character of adjoining land uses.” When considering a General Plan Amendment, the City must find that the project is in the public interest. The Planning Department has concerns that the Light Industrial land use designation may not be compatible with surrounding land uses and development

Page 11 of 541 ends

4 patterns in the area given the adjacent residential and the elementary school located across the street. This proposed change in land use may negatively impact the existing adjacent land uses and create unnecessary nuisance. For example, while the site is currently used for office purposes, the proposed project allows for up to 227 separate storage units which would generate trips that are industrial in nature and may be incompatible with pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the elementary school. The operation of the roll up doors on the northern elevation of the proposed building may create unwanted noise for nearby residents, and the trash enclosure, located within 50’ of the residential to the north may also create noise during pick up, and potentially emit odor.

In addition to the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, this project also would also require a Planned Development permit and a Use permit which would serve to limit land use to those specifically included in this application (discussed in further detail below). While these permits would serve as useful mechanisms for restricting land use for this project, it is important to note that General Plan designations lay the groundwork for long-term planning in the City. Changing the designation from Commercial Professional to Light Industrial may create land use compatibility issues with the adjacent residential and school.

General Plan – Housing Element
The Housing Element includes an inventory of available housing sites to enable the City to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). During the Housing Element update process, the project site was included on the inventory of available sites. While it had the potential to accommodate a portion of the required residential units, it was removed from the list by the City Council, per the owner’s request.

General Plan Consistency
Concurrent with City Council approval, the project would be consistent with the amended Light Industrial General Plan land use category.

Zone Change
The proposed project includes a Zone Change from the C-P Professional Commercial zoning designation to I-L Light Industrial/Planned Development (Attachment 4: Zone Change Map). Per SVMC Section 17.26.010, the I-L district is intended to apply to all lands designated in the General Plan as “light industrial.” This land use classification is designed to accommodate industrial and industrially related land uses and provide a location for businesses that are inappropriate in commercial or residential zones because of their operations or sizes and because they may create noise, odor, dust or glare and create impacts to traffic, the aquifer or air quality. Uses in this classification shall not encroach upon the character of adjoining land uses and will not expose adjoining uses to hazardous conditions. Permitted uses in the I-L industrial zoning district include warehousing of non-toxic materials, automobile repairs, manufacturing, assembling, processing and packaging of components and finished materials where

Page 12 of 541 ends

5 significant amounts of hazardous materials are not being used. Storage facilities are a conditionally permitted use which may be appropriate with conditions to mitigate any potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.

As proposed, the project requires a Planned Development permit and a Use permit which would serve to restrict and limit land use to those specifically included in this application and serve to make the project consistent with surrounding neighborhood.

Planned Development Zoning
The proposed project includes a request for a Planned Development Zoning. The purpose of Planned Development Zoning is to provide the means to tailor zoning regulations and to apply specific standards for the development of a particular site. This process enables the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the unique characteristics of a site and its surroundings to better implement the citywide objectives, goals and policies of the General Plan and to provide site-specific development standards. Whenever Planned Development zoning is utilized, the standards established for the zoning district, which reflects the General Plan designation, are tailored as part of a planned development. Tailored zoning regulations include, but are not limited to, lot size and shape, intensity, coverage, and appearance of structures.

In addition to several development exceptions that will be discussed in the analysis below, the Planned Development zoning would also be used to limit land uses on site to administrative/professional office and storage only, as specifically requested in this application. Any other land uses identified in the zoning code as permitted or conditionally permitted in the I-L zoning district would not be allowed on site with approval of this application.

Use Permit
In addition to the previous applications, this project would also require a Use Permit.

SVMC Section 17.50.020, states that “due to their unusual characteristics, conditional uses require special consideration so that they may be located properly with respect to the objectives of the zoning ordinance and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties.”
The use permit is intended to protect the existing adjacent residential and school from all permitted uses in the Light Industrial Zoning district by restricting land uses allowed on the property to professional/administrative office use and associated storage only. In addition, the Use Permit would limit the number of storage spaces allowed on site to a maximum of 227, which is directly related to the amount of parking provided on site.

To approve a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission must find that:

1. The proposed location of the conditional use is in accordance with the objectives of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located.

Page 13 of 541 ends

6 2. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the use or building will not, under the circumstances of the case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the city.

As mentioned previously, the Planning Department has concerns that the Light Industrial General Plan land use designation may not be compatible with surrounding land uses, and development patterns in the area, given the adjacent residential and the elementary school located across the street.

Planned Development Permit/Design Review
The proposed project is required to obtain both Design Review and Planned Development Permit approvals.

The design review process includes project review by City Staff, Planning Commission, and City Council. This review serves as a basis for evaluating proposals for quality of design. The City’s review process is designed to encourage the highest level of design quality, while at the same time providing the flexibility necessary to encourage creativity on the part of the project designers.

Per Chapter 17.38 of the City’s Municipal Code, Planned Development (PD) districts must be combined with a base zoning district, which in this case, is I-L Industrial. The development regulations in the zoning code provide the framework for evaluating the proposed project. The following development standards, as defined in the zoning code, apply to the project:

Zoning Compliance Table
Light Industrial
Standard Proposed Compliance Comment
Minimum Lot
Area
40,000 sf Approx.. 57,500
sf
Yes
Minimum Lot
Width
100’ Not less than
100’
Yes
Minimum Lot
Depth
100’ Not less than
100’
Yes
Minimum Lot
Frontage
100’ Not less than
100’
Yes
Maximum
Building
Coverage
50% 20,124 sf = 35% Yes
Front Setback 15’ 20’ Yes
Side Setback 0’ 10’ Yes
Rear Setback* 0’ 67’-10”’ Yes
Height 35’ 34’-10” Yes

Page 14 of 541 ends

7 Solid wall, fence
or shrub abutting
residential
6’ in height on
property line
Maintaining
original fence
Yes
Landscaping
(permanently
maintained)
abutting
residential
Minimum of 5’ 5’ Yes
Landscaping
(permanently
maintained, not
within the ROW)
adjoining a street
Not less than 10’ Not less than 10’ Yes
Landscaping
(permanently
maintained)
Not less than
10%
No Exception requested
Parking spaces See parking data table below
Parking space
dimensions
No Exception requested
Parking lot drive
aisle width
Not less than 26’ 26’ Yes
Shade trees in
parking lot
1 shade tree/4
parking stalls
No Exception requested
Loading
Spaces**
Max of 2 loading
spaces permitted
on the street side
of any building
within 65’ of the
street right of way
No Exception requested
Trash Disposal Adequate and
accessible in
accordance with
Section 17.44.020
Designed to city
standards
Yes
Outdoor
Storage***
Prohibited next to
housing
None proposed
*Minimum yard setback abutting residential/open space: 1’ shall be added to each setback requirement for each 3’ of building height above 16’
** Loading spaces shall not interfere with required parking, access or circulation. *** Outdoor storage requires design approval and a use permit.

As shown in the table above, this project would require exceptions to zoning code requirements. These exceptions, as well as additional site design issues are discussed in further detail in the discussion and analysis below.

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Page 15 of 541 ends

8 The discussion and analysis below provides additional details about the proposed exceptions and site design issues related to the project.

Site Design
Trash enclosure
The trash enclosure is located to the rear of the site, within the parking lot, and adjacent to the residential, as shown on Attachment 1: Site Plan, Sheet A2.1.

The Planning Department is concerned that the trash enclosure may interfere with parking spaces numbers 39 and 44, as shown on the site plan. Vehicles will have limited space to maneuver out of the stalls. In addition, the trash enclosure is located within 50 feet of residential land uses, which may be a nuisance to neighbors, creating noise on trash pick-up days, and, though it is required to be covered, could potentially create odors.

The Planning Department discussed relocation of the trash enclosure with the applicant, possibly locating the trash enclosure within the access drive that runs through the building, but that, in turn created impacts to required parking on site.

Retaining Walls
Due to the design of the stormwater treatment areas and the overall topography of the site, the proposed project would require several retaining walls. Please refer to the Manufacturers Detail in the plan set, Attachment 2: Sheet CB2, for color and design details.

The parking lot located to the rear of the building, at the northern end of the project site, would require retaining walls within the parking lot, along Bethany Drive (Attachment 1:

Building Sections, Sheet A5.1and Exterior Elevations, Sheet 4.1). To soften the appearance and provide screening for the retaining walls, the project includes a planter strip at the base to soften and provide screening for the retaining walls in the lower parking lot, visible from Bethany Drive.

In addition to the retaining wall in the parking lot, the project would also require four retaining walls along Bethany Drive, to achieve storm water treatment on site. None of these proposed retaining walls would exceed 3’ in height. Stormwater treatment features are typically specific landscape-based items such as rain gardens, swales or infiltration basins that capture pollutants and prevent them from reaching the storm drain. While there are a variety of methods that can be used to achieve stormwater treatment, as designed for this project, several retaining walls would be required along Bethany Drive.

Parking and Parking Lot Design
The proposed project requires 54 parking spaces, as shown in the table below.

Page 16 of 541 ends

9 Parking Requirements*
Land Use Required Proposed
Business and professional use one (1) space per 250 square feet gross floor area
10,465 sf/250 sf = 42 spaces
required
Self Storage four (4) spaces plus additional
space as required by the
Planning Commission
4 spaces required
For storage, applicant used
1/3500 sf
42,357 sf/3500 = 12 spaces
Bicycle spaces 4 short term
4 long term
Loading spaces Two (2) required loading spaces
(SVMC section 17.44.030(L) (3))
Loading zone is included as an
8’ x 60’ space located inside the
internal drive aisle
Future EV parking 6 spaces
Accessible parking 6 spaces
The parking table provided on Attachment 1: Sheet A2.2 of the plan set appears to demonstrate compliance, however, many of the parking spaces are not dimensioned and previous plans reviews indicated that approximately 30% were undersized and do not comply with the requirements of SVMC Section 17.44.030(G). As proposed, the project would require an exception.

The Zoning Code requires that the proposed project comply with the standards for Off Street Parking facilities, including parking space dimensions. Each full-sized space shall be 9’x20,’ each compact sized space shall be 9’x16,’ and no more than 20% of the parking spaces may be compact.

The Planning Department has concerns about the size of some of the parking spaces as well as the overall parking lot design in the rear lot. As shown on Attachment 1:

Sheet C2.1 of the plan set, many of the proposed parking spaces do not meet these requirements and many of the parking spaces do not include dimensions to demonstrate compliance. In addition, all of the spaces along the access drive that runs through the building are undersized, measuring only 8’ in width.

In addition to the undersized parking spaces, the Planning Department also has concerns about the parking lot design. As shown on Attachment 1: Sheet C2.1 of the plan set, and mentioned previously, parking spaces 39 and 44 would be difficult to maneuver in and out of as the trash enclosure does not allow for adequate turning movements or back up space.

Parking Lot Lighting

Page 17 of 541 ends

10 The Planning Department has concerns about one of the free-standing light fixtures located at the rear of the project site, adjacent to the residential uses where the photometric plan shows light leak to the adjacent property (Attachment 1: Sheet E1). If approved, the project would include a condition of approval that would require all lighting footprints to be fully contained on site.

Loading Zone
The SVMC Section 17.44.030(L)(3), requires each loading space to be at least 45’ long and 12’ wide. The Zoning Code also requires that the loading spaces should not interfere with required parking, access or circulation. As proposed, the project does not comply with the Zoning Code and would require an exception.

As shown on Attachment 1: Sheet C2.1 of the plan set, the proposed project includes a loading zone located within the internal drive aisle. The drive aisle is 13.6’ wide and includes eleven 8’ x 20’ parking spaces on both sides.

The applicant has designed the loading space to be flex space, functioning as either three parking stalls or one loading zone. They anticipate the largest trucks to be the size of a UPS truck that would come and go, and employees would park in the parking lots.

In addition, the applicants propose to install signage to restrict parking in the loading spaces to 20 minutes only. The applicant believes this is sufficient space and would meet the needs of the project.

The Planning Department has several concerns about the loading zone. First, Attachment 1: Sheet C2.1 Site Improvements, shows the proposed loading space to be 8’x60’, which does not satisfy the Zoning Code requirement of two 12’x45’ spaces.

Second, when the loading zone is in use, it blocks parking spaces limiting the amount of required parking on site. Third, if the parking spaces were in use when a truck needed to use the loading space, the truck could potentially park in the drive aisle, and this could create queuing problems on and potentially off site. Finally, if a large truck were parked in the loading zone, and the parking spaces on the opposite side were in use, the drive aisle could potentially be blocked, which could also create a queuing problem.

Landscaping
As shown in the Landscape Plan (Attachment 1: Sheets L1, TR-1 and TR-2), the project proposes to remove a majority of the existing landscaping on site and replace it with a variety of trees, shrubs and perennials, and groundcovers and grasses. Trees along the perimeter of Bethany Drive and Tabor Drive would include Chinese pistache and Coast live oaks.

The Zoning Code includes several provisions regarding landscaping, and as proposed, the project would require two exceptions, discussed below. • SVMC Section 17.44.030(G)(6), requires that 10% of the required parking area shall be landscaped; the landscaping shall be evenly distributed throughout the area and adjacent to buildings. The minimum planter width shall be five feet.

Page 18 of 541 ends

11 • Per SVMC Section 17.44.030(G)(7), landscaped areas within or adjacent to the parking area shall provide for a minimum of one shade tree for every four parking stalls. This is a Zoning Code requirement, and there is also a shade requirement in the California Green Building Standards that will apply to this project. While trees are included around the perimeter of the parking lots, shade trees are not provided within the parking lot, therefore, the proposed project would require an exception.

Since compliance with these sections of the Code would result in the loss of additional on-site parking spaces, the applicant is requesting exceptions to these requirements.

Trees
As described in the Arborist Report (Attachment 5), a total of 45 trees were surveyed on the project site. Of these 18 are protected and 27 are not protected.

The dominant species and most of the “protected” trees were liquidambar, (Liquidambar styraciflua). Other frequently planted species include olive (Olea europaea) and purple-leaf plum, (Prunus cerasifera). Two London plane trees, (Platanus x hispanica), are the largest specimens on the property. Two trees on an adjacent property, one Japanese maple, (Acer palmatum), and one purpleleaf plum were also surveyed.

Most of the trees were identified as being in good or fair condition. Only one tree was found in poor condition, a severe drought stressed European white birch (Betula pendula). The management of trees on the property was good except for the purple-leaf plums and a group of evergreen pear (Pyrus kawakamii) trees.

These trees had been topped at 10 feet above grade and the resulting re-growth was identified as being poorly attached.

The project would remove 13 protected trees (10 liquidambar and three olive).

As shown on Sheet L1: Landscape Plan, new trees will be installed at a recommended tree replacement to compensate for their removal at a minimum 2:1 tree replacement using 15-gallon or 24-inch box size trees. This recommendation is consistent with City regulations, as described above.

If the project were approved, standard conditions of approval would be included to require the project applicant to implement all measures contained within the Arborist Report 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.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
The proposed project has been reviewed in accordance with the State of California Public Resources Code and the California Environmental Quality Act. With the

Page 19 of 541 ends

12 implementation of identified standard conditions of approval, the Initial Study did not identify any potentially significant impacts on the environment. The project would not have the potential to significantly degrade the environment; would have no significant impact on long-term environmental goals; would have no significant cumulative effect upon the environment; and would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Based on this review, a proposed Negative Declaration is hereby made on this proposed project. The reason for this determination is that the project will not result in significant adverse impacts to the environment.

The proposed Negative Declaration, including the Initial Study, was made available at the Community Development Department, as well as posted online. Neighbors within 300 feet were notified by mail. The Public Review Period for the proposed Negative Declaration began on July 24, 2023 and closed on August 24, 2023. Public comments were received and attached, for your reference (Attachment 6: Negative Declaration Public Comment). In response to concerns regarding traffic in general, as well as the Vehicles Miles Travelled analysis in the traffic study, the City hired the environmental consultant, Kimley Horn, to prepare a memo to provide further clarification (Attachment 7).

PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENT
On January 12, 2024, public hearing notices were posted at City Hall and were mailed to surrounding property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property, pursuant to State law. In August 2023, a notice of proposed development was posted on site.

The Planning Department has received public comments from neighbors and interested parties expressing concern regarding the proposed project and the applicant has forwarded letters in support. All comments are attached, for reference (Attachment 8).

CONCLUSION
In summary, the Planning Department is requesting Planning Commission input and direction on the requested entitlements. This report does not include a resolution or request for action. The Planning Department has identified two options for Planning Commission consideration:

1. If it is determined that a change in the General Plan land use designation from Commercial Professional to Light Industrial is appropriate and that the issues associated with the proposed project are adequately addressed, the Planning Commission could direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending approval for consideration at a future Planning Commission meeting. The final recommendation would then be forwarded to the City Council for consideration.

2. If it is determined that a change in the General Plan land use designation from Commercial Professional to Light Industrial is not appropriate, or the issues associated with the proposed project are not adequately addressed, the Planning Commission could direct staff to prepare a recommendation of denial for

Page 100 of 500 ends

13 consideration at a future Planning Commission meeting. The final recommendation would then be forwarded to the City Council for consideration.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Location Map

2. Project Plans

3. General Plan Amendment Map

4. Zone Change Map

5. Negative Declaration

6. Negative Declaration Public Comment

7. Response to Negative Declaration Public Comment re: Traffic

8. Public Comment

Page 101 of 500 ends

VINE HILL SCHOOL RD

BORDEAUX LN

CABERNET CT

RE SI LIN
G
WY

TABOR DR

Page 102 of 500 ends

REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR BETHANY PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY 125 BETHANY DR, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA

SHEET INDEX

LANDSCAPE
L1.1 LANDSCAPE PLANS

ELECTRICAL
E1 LIGHTING PLAN
CODES
2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS

PROJECT DATA

DEMOLISH AND REMOVE EXISTING MIXED USE OFFICE STORAGE
STRUCTURES.

CONSTRUCT NEW 52,822 SF THREE STORY LIGHT GUAGE METAL
FRAME MIXED USE OFFICE - STORAGE STRUCTURE.

OWNER: HERITAGE REAL ESTATE VENTURES LLC
125 BETHANY DRIVE, SCOTTS VALLEY
DEVELOPER: BLACKCOMB PROPERTY GROUP
OCCUPANCY B - S1

CONSTRUCTION TYPE IIB FIRE SPRINKLED

SRA LRA
APN 023-102-15

ZONING CP
ADDRESS 125 BETHANY DRIVE, SCOTTS VALLEY,
CA 95066
AREAS
AREA OF PROPERTY 57499.02 SF
BUILDING FOOTPRINT 18501.00 SF
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE COVERAGE 35% 20124.66 SF
TOTAL BUILDING AREA 52,822.00 SF
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA 91875.00 SF

CONSULTANTS

HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT
838 WESTERN DR, SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
C2G CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC

TODD CREAMER
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DR, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-4420

ALPHA SURVEY

TODD CREAMER
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DR, SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-4420

ROCK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

YVETTE WILSON
1100 MAIN STREET, SUITE A, WATSONVILLE, CA 95076
831-724-5868

ANIMATEHOUSE RENDERING

ALAN HYMES
831-295-2719

DEFERRED SUBMITTALS

A LICENSED DESIGNER / INSTALLER SHALL
PREPARE AND SUBMIT (2) SETS OF PLANS,

CALCULATIONS, AND CUT SHEETS FOR THE

AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO MEET
NFPA 13-D TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AGENCY
FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THE CUT SHEETS

SHALL INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, PIPING,
VALVES, GUAGES, AND SPRINKLER HEADS.

THE JOB COPIES OF THE BUILDING AND FIRE

SYSTEM PLANS AND PERMITS SHALL BE ON-SITE

DURING INSPECTIONS
A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS NOTICE TO THE FIRE

DEPARTMENT SI REQUIRED PRIOR TO

INSPECTIONS
WATER:

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
2 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
831-438-2363
FIRE

ABBREVIATIONS

VICINITY MAP

TABOR DR
Carbonera Creek
SITE

VINE HILL

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
SCALE
200'

VINE HILL SCHOOL RD

SCOTTS VALLEY DR
SANTAS

VILLAGE
RD

BETHANY DR
SCOTTS

POLO RANCH
RD

VALLEY DR

HEIGHTS
POLO
HWY 17
C #11897
EXP. 3/25
G

T TS A OF CAL E

IA N OR IF
LIC
HI A
SED N

RC T CT
E
E

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED
Sheet No.

Scale
A1.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

COVER SHEET

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is a 1.35-acre parcel with two existing office and administrative buildings which contain approximately 13,500 gross square feet. The site is located at the intersection of Bethany Drive, Scotts Valley Drive, and Tabor Drive and is visible along the freeway frontage. The proposed project is a mixed-use commercial redevelopment which consists of gross 52,822 square feet, including 10,465 net square feet of professional and administrative office space, and 42,357 net square feet of storage. The new project utilizes the existing footprints of the current buildings. According to Scotts Valley’s municipal code parking requirements for office use, the professional administrative use requires 42 parking spaces and the storage component only requires 12 parking spaces for a total of 54 parking spaces.

The new design is for a slightly reduced amount of office space available on-site today, but in a new energy efficient, sustainable, functional, and beautiful building. The proposed building would reduce existing impacts, while adding 39,000 (+-) square feet of low impact, flexible, office-adjacent storage. This will primarily be completed through adding floors to the current building envelopes. This concept maintains the current level of parking and will give businesses the room and flexibility they need as they grow and change.

OFFICE - STORAGE AREA TABULATION

FIRST FLOOR
OFFICE 1 2163 SF 20.7% STORAGE 1 2128 SF 5.7%
OFFICE 2 188 1.8% STORAGE 2 188 0.5%
OFFICE 3 184 1.8% STORAGE 3 161 0.4%

SECOND FLOOR
OFFICE 1 2935 SF 28.0% STORAGE 1 NONE
OFFICE 4 271 2.6% STORAGE 4 338 SF 0.9%
OFFICE 5 344 3.3% STORAGE 5 265 0.7%
OFFICE 6 216 2.1% STORAGE 6 186 0.5%
OFFICE 7 481 4.6% STORAGE 7 336 0.9%
OFFICE 8 301 2.9% STORAGE 8 337 0.9%

THIRD FLOOR
OFFICE 1 1678 SF 16.1% STORAGE 1 772 SF 2.1%
OFFICE 9 334 3.3% STORAGE 9 265 0.7%
OFFICE 10 298 2.8% STORAGE 10 338 0.9%
OFFICE 11 481 4.6% STORAGE 11 336 0.9%
OFFICE 12 301 2.9% STORAGE 12 337 0.9%
OFFICE 13 271 2.6% STORAGE 13 338 0.9%
TOTAL 10465 TOTAL 6695

GENERAL STORAGE
1st FLR 11599 - 15% CIRCULATION = 9859 SF 24.4%
2nd FLR 15360 - 15% CIRCULATION = 13056 29.7%
3rd FLR 15398 - 15% CIRCULATION = 13088 29.1%
TOTAL 42357 36003
TOTAL GROSS STORAGE = 6695+35662= 42357 SF
TOTAL OFFICE 10465 SF STORAGE - CIR = 36003 SF
RATIO - OFFICE : STORAGE 1 : 3.44
OFFICE PARKING RATIO 1:250 SF
10465 SF / 250 = 42 SPACES
STORAGE PARKING RATIO 1:3500 SF
42357 SF / 3500 = 12 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 54 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED = 54 SPACES
MAXIMUM POSSIBLE STORAGE AREA = 54 PARKING SPACES x
3500 SF/SPACE = 189,000SF > 62,469 TOTAL BUILDING AREA

LANDSCAPE
L1.1 LANDSCAPE PLANS

ELECTRICAL
E1 LIGHTING PLAN

ARBORIST
T1 TREE LOCATION
T2 TREE PROTECTION PLAN Page 103 of 500 Page 23 of 541
D YH
D YH
compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking

E XIT O N LY

E N T R Y
O N LY

E N T R Y E XIT
E XIT
E N T R Y 123456789
10 24
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 25
26 27
28 33
32 31
29 30
34 39
36 37
38 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
54 47
53 48
49 51
50 35
11 23

E N T R Y E XIT
52 SITE PLAN 1 Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"
5'-6" 19'-10" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6"
9'-8" 127'-4"
5'-6" 70'-0" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6"

SET BACK LINE
147'-8"
137'-4"
13'-4"
70'-0" 5'-6"
15'-0"
15'-0"
20'-0"
15'-0"
100'-0"
65'-0"
66'-4" 55'-4" 15'-8"

SET BACK LINE
59'-4" 54'-8"
20'-0"
67'-3" +/-
VERIFY
16'-3" +/-
VERIFY
10'-0"
50'-2" 5'-6"
188'-0"

T A B O R D R

B E T H T A N Y D R

S C O T T S V A L L E Y D R
NOTE:

A 100 FOOT CLEARANCE (OR TO PROPERTY LINE

WHICHEVER IS GRATER) SHALL BE MAINTAINED

AROUND AND ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING OR

STRUCTURE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIRE

PROTECTION OR FIRE BREAK BY REMOVING

BRUSH, FLAMMABLE VEGESTATION OR
COMBUTIBLE GROWTH. EXCEPTION, SINGLE

SPECIMENS OF TREES, ORNAMENTAL SHRUBBERY

OR SIMILAR PLANTS USED AS GROUND COVER,

PROVIDED THEY DO NOT FORM A MEANS OF

RAPIDLY TRANSMITTING FIRE FROM NATIVE
GROWTH TO ANY STRUCTURE.
50'-0"
FF 687.00
FF 690.00 FF 690.67
FF 699.71

BICYCLE PARKING

COVERED SECURE BICYCLE

PARKING

COVERED TRASH

ENCLOSURE

COVERED SECURE

BICYCLE PARKING

BICYCLE PARKING
FF
690.00

SET BACK LINE

ADJACENT TO

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING MONUMENT

SIGN TO REMAIN
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
ENTER
EXIT
ENTER
EXIT
ENTER
EXIT

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITINAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(24.5-16)/3 = 2.83'
50+3 = 53' < 67'-10" OK

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITIONOAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(33.75 -16)/3 = 5.92'
50+6 = 56' < 68'-9" OK
73'-6" +/- VERIFY
5'-0"
67'-10"
68'-9"

APPROXIMATE

LOCATION OF

EXISTING ADJACENT

HOMES AND DRIVES

APPROXIMATE

LOCATION OF

EXISTING ADJACENT

HOMES AND DRIVES
8'x60' LOADING

AREA - FLEXIBLE

PARKING
Sheet No.

Scale 1/16" = 1'-0"
A2.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

HUGH ZIKE AIA
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
Designed ByDrawn ByChecked ByReviewed BySubmitted ByProject Manager DateRevisionProject IDDrawing CodeCAD File NamePlot Date 10-06-23
Revision
Store More Scotts Valley
Drawing Code
Filename
00/00/00 No. Date Issue Notes No. Date Revision Notes Appr Zone C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 104 of 500 ends

compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking E.V. Parking

E XIT O N LY

E N T R Y
O N LY

E N T R Y E XIT
E XIT
E N T R Y 123456789
10 24
22 21
20 19
18 17
16 15
14 13
12 25
26 27
28 33
32 31
29 30
34 39
36 37
38 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
54 47
53 48
49 51
50 35
11 23

E N T R Y E XIT
52 FIRST FLOOR OFFICE STORAGE CORRELATION PLAN 1 Scale: 1" = 20'-0" OFFICE 1
X
TOILET
ELEV
ELEV
EQUIP
STORAGE 1
OFFICE 2 ELEV
ELEV
EQUIP
TOILET
JAN/

GENERAL STORAGE
STORAGE 2
OFFICE 3
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT

GENERAL STORAGE

GENERAL

STORAGE

GENERAL

STORAGE
STORAGE 1
STORAGE 1
STORAGE 3
Sheet No.

Scale 1"=20'
A2.2
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

OFFICE STORAGE RATIO

CORRELATION PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

SECOND FLOOR OFFICE STORAGE CORRELATION PLAN
2 Scale: 1" = 20'-0"
ELEV
STORAGE 4
OFFICE 4
ELEV
STORAGE 5
OFFICE 1
OFFICE 5
OFFICE 7
OFFICE 6
STORAGE 7
STORAGE 8
STORAGE 6
TOILET
OFFICE 8
TOILET
EXIT
ENTRY
EXIT

GENERAL GENERAL STORAGE

STORAGE

GENERAL

STORAGE

GENERAL STORAGE

THIRD FLOOR OFFICE STORAGE CORRELATION PLAN
3 Scale: 1" = 20'-0"
ELEV
STORAGE 13
STORAGE 9
STORAGE 1
OFFICE 13
OFFICE 1
OFFICE 9
OFFICE 11
OFFICE 10
STORAGE 12
STORAGE 11
STORAGE 10
OFFICE 12

GENERAL STORAGE ELEV GENERAL STORAGE
DECK
DECK

GENERAL

STORAGE

GENERAL

OPEN STORAGE
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

OFFICE - STORAGE AREA TABULATION

FIRST FLOOR
OFFICE 1 2163 SF 20.7% STORAGE 1 2128 SF 5.7%
OFFICE 2 188 1.8% STORAGE 2 188 0.5%
OFFICE 3 184 1.8% STORAGE 3 161 0.4%

Page 105 of 500 ends

compact compact compact compact compact compact E.V. Parking E.V. Parking

E XIT O N LY

E N T R Y
O N LY
E XIT
E XIT
24 22
21 20
19 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
25 26
27 28
33 32
31 29 30
34 39
36 37
38 45
46 47
48 49
35 23

E N T R Y

EXIT STAIRS
OFFICE
TOILET

ELEVATOR

EQUIPMENT

FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1
OFFICE
SPACE
OFFICE
SPACE

ELEVATOR

EQUIPMENT

EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS
TOILET
5'-6" 19'-10" 50'-2" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6" 65'-0" 5'-0"
9'-8" 127'-4"
5'-8" 69'-10" 5'-6" 31'-0" 5'-6" 16'-6" 20'-7"
OFFICE

STORAGE

SET BACK LINE
11'-8" 4'-0" 56'-4"
15'-0"
65'-8"
147'-8 1/8"
136'-4"
33'-0"
13'-4"
1'-0"
10'-0"
59'-4" 54'-8"
OFFICE
5'-6"

OFFICE STORAGE

OFFICE STORAGE
OFFICE

STORAGE
OFFICE

STORAGE

KNOX BOX, VERIFY

LOCATION WITH FIRE

DEPARTMENT

FIRE SPRINKLER RISER,

VERIFY W/ SPRINKLER

CONTRACTOR

TOILET FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS

USE AREA RATE OCC FIX LAV JAN
OFFICE 10465 250 70 2M 3W 1M 1W 1
STORAGE 42357 4000 11 1M 1W 1M 1W 1
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

HUGH ZIKE AIA
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
Designed ByDrawn ByChecked ByReviewed BySubmitted ByProject Manager DateRevisionProject IDDrawing CodeCAD File NamePlot Date 10-06-23
Revision
Store More Scotts Valley
Drawing Code
Filename
00/00/00 No. Date Issue Notes No. Date Revision Notes Appr Zone C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 106 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.2
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

REDEVELOPMENT FOR

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

EXIT STAIRS
SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR

EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS
25'-2" 55'-8" 31'-0" 22'-0" 20'-6"
31'-0" 75'-6" 5'-0"
147'-8"
10'-0" 56'-0" 65'-8"
127'-0"
5'-8"
38'-6"
TOILET
5'-6"
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
25'-2" 55'-8"
OFFICE
TOILET

OFFICE STORAGE

JANITOR

JANITOR
TOILET
TOILET
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED
45 46
54 47
53 48
49 51
50 E N T R Y E XIT
52

Page 107 of 500 ends

THIRD FLOOR PLAN
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1

ELEVATOR
EXIT STAIRS `

ELEVATOR
OFFICE

EXIT STAIRS

EXIT STAIRS
55'-8" 31'-0" 22'-0" 20'-6"
127'-0" 9'-10"
25'-2" 76'-0" 5'-0" 10'-4" 16'-10"
5'-8" 56'-0" 65'-8"
25'-2"

MECHANICAL

ROOF DECK

ROOF DECK
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
38'-6"
55'-8" 31'-0"
207'-10"
10'-10"
OFFICE

OFFICE STORAGE

OFFICE STORAGE
120'-6"
10'-0"

SCREEN WALL

OPEN TO ROOF

SCREEN WALL
TOILET
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.3
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

THIRD FLOOR PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

HUGH ZIKE AIA
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
Designed ByDrawn ByChecked ByReviewed BySubmitted ByProject Manager DateRevisionProject IDDrawing CodeCAD File NamePlot Date 10-06-23
Revision
Store More Scotts Valley
Drawing Code
Filename
00/00/00 No. Date Issue Notes No. Date Revision Notes Appr Zone C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 108 of 500 ends

ROOF PLAN
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1
PARAPET HEIGHT 4'-6"+-

FLAT ROOF RIDGE
ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT
PARAPET HEIGHT 4'-6"+-
ROOF SLOPE 4:12 TYP
ROOF SLOPE 1/4" / FT

STANDING SEAM METAL
ROOF
MINIMUM FIRE CLASS "B"

RATED SINGLE PLY ROOFING
HIGH POINT OF ROOF (723.79)
AT LOWEST GRADE BELOW STRUCTURE (689.29)
MAXIMUM HEIGHT = 34'6"
ALLOWABLE HEIGHT = 35'-0"

ELEVATOR ROOF

ELEVATOR ROOF
30"x36" ROOF HATCH

CRICKET SLOPE TO DRAIN
TYP

ROOF DRAIN AND

OVERFLOW TYP

PROBABLE LOCATION OF

MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT

PROBABLE LOCATION OF

SOLAR EQUIPMENT

CONTINOUS GUTTER TO

MATCH STANDING SEAM

METAL ROOFING

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF

DOWN SPOUTS SEE

EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.4
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

ROOF PLAN

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

HUGH ZIKE AIA
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
Designed ByDrawn ByChecked ByReviewed BySubmitted ByProject Manager DateRevisionProject IDDrawing CodeCAD File NamePlot Date 10-06-23
Revision
Store More Scotts Valley
Drawing Code
Filename
00/00/00 No. Date Issue Notes No. Date Revision Notes Appr Zone C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 109 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A4.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

REDEVELOPMENT FOR

EXTERIOR ELEVATION
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

NORTH ELEVATION
2 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
24'-5"
33'-9"

SET BACK REQUIREMENTS
50' + 1' FOR ADDITIONAL 3' HEIGHTS OVER 16'
(24.5-16)/3 = 2.83'
50+3 = 53' < 67'-10' OK

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED
EAST ELEVATION 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

OPEN DRIVE THROUGH

OPEN WALK WAY TYPICAL
34'-10" MAX 35'-0"

HOLLOW METAL

EMERGENCY EXIT DOORS
AND FRAMES - "JANUS"

DESERT SAND

Page 110 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A4.2
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

REDEVELOPMENT FOR

EXTERIOR ELEVATION
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

SOUTH ELEVATION
2 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

STANDING SEAM METAL

ROOF AEP SPAN SAGE
GREEN

METAL COPING AEP SPAN

REGAL WHITE
VERTICAL "BOARD AND BATTEN"

METAL SIDING - NAVAJO BEIGE

BRONZ ANODIZED ALUMINUM

SUN SCREENS

LOW E CLEAR GLASS IN

WHITE VINYL FRAME

VENEER ELDORADO STONE

LIMESOTNE - YORK
"2x6" TRIM - WHITE

PAINTED EXPOSED STEEL

BEAMS CHARCOAL GREY

SHINGLE HARDIE COMPOSITE

SIDING - KHAKI BROWN
"REDWOOD" SOFFIT

BRACKETS
125

BUILDING NUMBERS -
MINIMUM 6" HIGH ON A

CONTRASTING

BACKGROUND

DOWN SPOUTS TYPICAL SEE

ROOF PLAN

METAL GUTTERS TO MATCH

STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING
WEST ELEVATION 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

OPEN WALK WAY TYPICAL

OPEN DRIVE THROUGH

OPEN WALK WAY TYPICAL

BUILDING NUMBERS -
MINIMUM 6" HIGH ON A

CONTRASTING

BACKGROUND
125 BETHANY DR
C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 111 of 500 ends

Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A4.3
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

DRIVE THROUGH ELEVATIONS

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

HUGH ZIKE AIA
838 WESTERN DR
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
831-818-5808
Designed ByDrawn ByChecked ByReviewed BySubmitted ByProject Manager DateRevisionProject IDDrawing CodeCAD File NamePlot Date 10-06-23
Revision
Store More Scotts Valley
Drawing Code
Filename
00/00/00 No. Date Issue Notes No. Date Revision Notes Appr Zone C #11897
EXP. 3/25 G
T TS A
OF
CAL
E
IA N
OR IF
LIC
HI
A
SED N
RC
T CT
E
E
Z
U
H
KE
H I THE DATA SET FORTH ON THIS SHEET IS THE PROPERLY OF HUGH ZIKE ARCHITECT. IT IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE AND MAY NOT BE ALTERED, REPRODUCED, OR USED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. THE PROPER ELECTRONIC TRANSFER OF DATA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USER WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE ARCHITECT.

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

DRIVE TRHOUGH EXTERIOR ELEVATION - SECTION
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1

WHITE ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT ENTRY DOORS AND

GLASS ENTRIES
ROLL UP DOORS "JANUS"

SILHOUETTE GRAY

STEEL BEAM AND SCREEN
WALL

ROOF BRIDGE

DRIVE THROIUGH EXTERIOR ELEVATION - SECTION
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
2

Page 112 of 500 ends

BUILDING SECTIONS 1 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
12'-8 1/2" 9'-8 1/2"
34'-10" (35'-0" MAX)
8'-1"
4"
3'-0" 9'-8 1/2"
8'-0 1/2" 11'-0 1/2" 1'-8 1'-8"

OPEN WEWB BAR
JOIST AT 5'o.c.

TOP OF SLAB
690.00

TOP OF SLAB
687.00
33'-9 1/2"
TOP OF

ROOF PEAK
723.79
8'-6" 14'-0" 8'-6"
9'-0 1/2"
9'-4"
8'-8"

TOP OF SLAB
690.67
9'-6"

ELEVATOR SHAFT BEYOND
34'-9"
8'-1"

LOWEST EXISTING

GRADE AT HIGH POINT OF
ROOF 689.64

LOWEST PROPOSED

GRADE AT HIGH POINT OF
ROOF 688.90
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A5.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

BUILDING SECTION

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

BUILDING SECTION
2 Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
8'-1" 9'-8 1/2" 9'-8 1/2"
9'-6"
4'-6"
2'-1 3/8" +-
2'-0"
10"
12 4
7'-4" 7'-4"

UNAUTHORIZED USE IS PROHIBITED

Page 113 of 500 ends

STANDING SEAM

METAL ROOF

CONT GUTTER TO

MATCH STANDING

SEAM ROOFING

INSULATION

FLASHING TO

MATCH STANDING

SEAM ROOFING
COLOR
WELDED 6" HSS

BRACKET WITH

REDWOOD PAINT

COLOR - SEE

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS FOR

LOCATIONS
1/2" DIAMETER MB STEEL STUD BACKING
SIMPSON ??

EXTERIOR WALL LIGHT

GUAGE STEEL STUD
FRAMING AT 16"o.c. MAX BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

HARDIE SHINGLE SIDING OVER
BUILDING WRAP OVER 1/2"

EXTERIOR FIBERGLASS MATT

GYPSUM SHEATHING

SEALANT
5/4 HARDIE TRIM

BACKING AT

BRACKETS

FLASHING TO

MATCH SHINGLE

SIDING COLOR

METAL ROOF FRAMING BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR
4'-0"
2'-0"
1/2" +- 3"
6"
"REDWOOD" BRACKET DETAIL
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 1

TYP PARAPET

ROOF SLOPE
4 12
6" MIN
"Z" FLASHING AND SEALANT

CLOSURE PER ROOF

MANUFACTURE'S DETAILS

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONT CLEAT AND CAP

FLASHING TO MATCH

ROOFING COLOR PER ROOF

MANUFACTURER'S DETAILS

CONT FLASHING PER ROOF

MANUFACTURER'S DETAILS

METAL ROOF FRAMING BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR METAL WALL PANEL BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

FRY REGLET AND COUNTER

FLASHING

SINGLE PLY ROOFING AND

CAP FLASHING

BUILT UP RIGID INSULATION

CRICKET AND CANT SLOPE

TO ROOF DRAIN

CONT RIGID FOAM ROOF

INSULATION

METAL FRAME PARAPET

WALL FRAMING BY METAL

BUILDING FABRICATOR

METAL ROOF PANEL BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR
3/4" +- (VERIFY) METAL WALL

PANEL BACKING AT REGLET

BY METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

PARAPET WALL CAP DETAIL
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 4
4 12

INSULATION

EXTERIOR WALL LIGHT

GUAGE STEEL STUD
FRAMING AT 16"o.c. MAX

BY METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

METAL ROOF FRAMING BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR
7'-4"
WINDOW
5/4 x 5.5 HARDIE TRIM

GUTTER AND BRACKET
SEE DTL 1/A6.1

HARDIE SHINGLE PANEL

SIDING OVER BUILDING

WRAP OVER FIBER

GLASS EXTERIOR

GYPSUM SHEATHING

SEALANT
MIN 26 GA GALV STL

FLASHING
SHAPED 2x3 AND 5/4 x 5.5

HARDIE TRIM
MIN 26 GA GALV STL

FLASHING
7'-4"
9'-4" 4 1/2" 8'-1"

COMPOSITE FLOOR BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

COMPOSITE FLOOR BY

METAL BUILDING

FABRICATOR

HARDIE BEADED PORCH

PANEL SOFIT

CULTURE STONE VENEER

TYPICAL WINDOW WALL SECTION
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 3
4 12

HARDIE SHINGLE SIDING OVER
BUILDING WRAP OVER 1/2"

EXTERIOR FIBERGLASS MATT

GYPSUM SHEATHING

SEALANT

EXTEND WINDOW JAMB TRIM

TO TOP OF SUN SHADE
(VERIFY HGT WITH SHADE

FABRICATOR)
MIN 26 GA GALV STL

FLASHING

KAWNEER BRONZE

ANODIZED ALUMINUM
"VERSOLEIL 1600 UT" 36"

SUN SHADE OR EQUIVALENT

SUN SHADE DETAIL
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'-0" 2
Sheet No.

Scale 1/8" = 1'-0"
A6.1
Total Sheets
of
Project TitleSheet Title

ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS

REDEVELOPMENT FOR
125 BETHANT DRIVE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
APN 023-102-15
Design FirmConsultant

T TS A OF CAL E

IA N OR IF
LIC
HI A
SED N

RC T CT
E
E

Z U H KE
H
I

DOOR HEAD AND SILL
Scale: 3" = 1'-0" 5

ADA THRESHOLD
(PEMKO 158-A OR

EQUIVALENT VERIFY

W/ OWNER)
11" MIN

PER ACCESSIBILITY REQ

ANODIZED

ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT DOOR WITH

INSULATING GLASS
1/4"
1/2"
1/4"

WEATHER STRIPPING

CONC SLAB SEE

STRUCTURAL

WINDOW HEAD AND SILL
Scale: 3" = 1'-0" 6

SEALANT OVER BACKING
ROD
SHIM

ANODIZED ALUMINMU

STORE FRONT WITH

INSULATING GLASS

KAWNEER TRIFAB
VERSAGLAZE 451 OR

EQUIVALENT

CONC WALK

ANODIZED ALUMINUM

INTERMEDIATE MULLION

ANODIZED ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT HEAD

GYP BD FINISH WITH CASING

AND CORNER BEAD
SHIM

SEALANT OVER BACKING
ROD

STEEL FRAMING SEE

STRUCTRAL

WALL INSULATION
"BOARD AND BATTEN" METAL

SIDING BY METAL BUILDNG

FABRICATOR

HEAD FLASHING BY METAL

BUILDING FABRICATOR

WINDOW AND DOOR JAMB
Scale: 3" = 1'-0" 7

ANODIZED ALUMINMU

STORE FRONT WITH

INSULATING GLASS

GYP BD FINISH WITH CASING

AND CORNER BEAD

SEALANT OVER BACKING
ROD
"BOARD AND BATTEN" METAL

SIDING BY METAL BUILDNG

FABRICATOR
SHIM

ANODIZED

ALUMINUM STORE

FRONT DOOR WITH

INSULATING GLASS

Page 114 of 500 ends

Scotts Valley City CouncilOctober 2, 2024

Scotts Valley City Council
October 2, 2024