Agenda packet — Scotts Valley City Council, August 20, 2025 (part 3 of 5)

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 12 ends

Exhibit A
Standard

1. Developer has agreed to and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Scotts Valley, its officers, agents and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its officers, agents or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul any action of the City in connection with approvals under the California Environmental Quality Act or with respect to approval of the project, which action is brought within the time period(s) prescribed by law. The City shall promptly notify the developer of any such claim, action or proceeding and shall fully cooperate in defense.

2. After Planning Commission approval, the property owner shall sign the Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A) agreeing to the Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance of any building permits, transfer of title, or within 30 days of approval of this application, whichever occurs first.

3. After Planning Commission approval, the property owner shall have a signed and notarized copy of the Notice of Conditions of Approval recognizing this application (provided by the City), recorded at the County Recorder’s Office prior to issuance of any building permits or operation of the use.

4. All required building permits shall be obtained, and the application shall pay all appropriate fees prior to commencement of any construction on the property.

5. Any peer review work required by the project applicant to comply with the Conditions of Approval shall be done at the project applicant’s expense.

Planning Department

6. All mitigation identified in the Addendum to the Bay Village Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration, dated June 2025, are incorporated as project conditions of approval.

7. The colors, materials, size, location, and design of the improvements shall match the approved plans titled “Ridgewood West,” revised on 10/10/24, 01/22/2025 and 05/09/2025 and prepared by Hunt Hale Jones Architects, and Roach and Campbell, Landscape Architect, and as described in writing in the technical reports, which are on file in the Planning Department. Modifications to the approved project may require approval at the discretion of the Community Development Director.

8. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a mitigation and monitoring compliance fee deposit for ten hours of staff time at the current hourly rate. Any unused deposit fee will be refunded prior to final inspection.

9. To ensure that the Mitigation and Monitoring measures are communicated and complied with, a preconstruction meeting shall be conducted prior to the start of

Page 249 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 13 ends

any construction and the following shall attend: the developer, grading contractor supervisor, project planner, Building Official, Public Works Director, project biologist and arborist, with exception of installing temporary construction fencing demarcating the disturbance area, siltation and tree protection fencing. Temporary construction protective measures and tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to the meeting and inspected at that time by the biologist and arborist.

Provide an attendance list to the project planner.

Air Quality

10. Applicant shall require the grading contractor to implement best management practices (BMPs) for dust control, including watering down exposed earth surfaces each non-rainfall day at intervals that attenuate dust problems. Any dirt tracked on to adjacent roadways shall be removed daily in a manner that does not create substantial airborne dust. The following BMPs shall be included in the construction contract for the Project and be implemented during site grading:
a. Excavation of the site shall be done in phases by grading only those areas where immediate activity will take place, leaving the remaining areas in their original condition with ground cover.
b. A water truck, using recycled water, shall be available on a repeated basis each day throughout the grading phase of the Project to spray exposed earth surfaces.
c. In addition to regular water spraying, a biodegradable chemical palliative shall be sprayed on any graded areas that will remain exposed without additional grading for three or more days in succession.
d. The site entrance shall be base rocked to avoid or minimize tracking mud on roadways by construction vehicles.
e. Roadway(s) along the Project frontage shall be mechanically swept at the end of each workday when any dirt or mud has been tracked on the street. f. No grading activities shall occur during days of high wind velocity. g. Finished graded areas that are designated as open space and landscape areas of project, shall be covered with an accepted erosion control substance such as straw mulch or hydro mulch with a tackifier.
h. Construction staff shall monitor daily all areas that have received a chemical palliative spray or application of mulch to determine if these areas remain in a dust-free condition and take corrective action as needed to maintain a dust-free environment.

11. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the Director of Public Works and the Building Official shall confirm that the grading permit and specifications stipulate that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment shall comply with the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation.

Page 250 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 14 ends

Biological Resources

12. Mitigation Measure BIO-4 Protection of Sensitive Animal Species: Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City the following:
a. The landowner shall hire a qualified biologist to search for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat nests. If any are found and impacts to the nests cannot be avoided, the applicant shall seek written approval from CDFW to implement a trapping and relocation program. Wood rat nests shall not be disturbed without prior written approval from CDFW.
b. If construction is scheduled to begin between February 1 and August 15 of any given year, the landowner shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct a search for active bird nests in the vicinity of the work site (following CDFW survey protocols). If active bird nests are observed, the work shall be postponed until the biologist determines that all chicks have fledge the nest(s).

Archaeological Resources

13. Applicant and construction contractor shall ensure that any cultural resource, including archaeological, paleontological, or human remains are not destroyed if discovered during project grading or other subsurface work.

14. Applicant shall submit a copy of a contract with a qualified/registered archaeologist to conduct monitoring of all earth disturbing activities and inspections for review and approval by the Community Development Director, before grading permit issuance. The applicant shall include this requirement in the contract for all contractors involved with grading and subsurface work. The qualified/registered archaeologist shall monitor all earthwork activity as described below. a. An archaeologist shall monitor the grading or excavation of soils at the development site in order to determine if important cultural remains are present. Such monitoring shall begin before and occur during subsurface earth moving activities.
b. The duration and period of archaeological monitoring of project development activities shall be at the discretion of the professional archaeologist. At a minimum, however, any activity that initially displaces or removes original soil from its present context shall be monitored by an archaeologist on a continuous basis.
c. Monitoring activities such as replacing soils in trenches, redistributing displaced soil elsewhere on the development site, or removing stockpiled excavated soil may not require monitoring.
d. Monitoring may include the periodic sampling and screening of soils in order

Page 251 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 15 ends

to better determine if cultural remains are present.
e. If any cultural resources are discovered, the project contractor shall immediately stop all earth disturbing work within a 150-foot radius of the discovery to allow for inspection, evaluation, and potential recovery of resources by the supervising project archaeologist, before resuming any earth-disturbing construction activities. The developer shall also contact the Planning Department and Building Official as soon as work has been stopped.

It may be necessary to resume grading or excavation activities under the direction of the supervising archaeologist in order to locate or expose cultural remains.

15. If human remains are unexpectedly encountered during project grading the actions required as identified in the previous condition shall be implemented to effectively preserve any human remains until the Santa Cruz County Coroner determines the appropriate course of action concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b).

Paleontological Resources

16. Applicant shall submit a copy of a contract with a qualified/registered paleontologist to conduct monitoring of all earth disturbing activities for review and approval by the Community Development Director, before grading permit issuance. The developer shall include this requirement in the contract for all contractors involved with grading and subsurface work.

17. Applicant and construction contractor shall ensure that paleontological resources are not destroyed during project grading by implementing the following measures:
a. Provide the Project paleontologist with a copy of the final grading plans for review prior to any project grading;
b. Provide for daily monitoring during grading activities by the Project paleontologist to determine if paleontological resources are encountered in excavated areas;
c. Allow for the recovery of any discovered paleontological resources according to a recovery plan/methods specified by the Project paleontologist, including the donation of the recovered resources to a suitable repository (museum, school, etc.);
d. If recovery occurs, ensure that the Project paleontologist prepare a recovery report that details the type of resources recovered and the repository locations where they were taken; and,
e. Specify in the construction contract with the Project grading contractor(s), that grading personnel are to cooperate with and assist the Project paleontologist during monitoring and any recovery activities, including assisting with recovery

Page 252 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 16 ends

efforts if necessary.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

18. Applicant shall have the construction contractor implement a best management practice/hazardous materials containment plan during the entire time construction activities are occurring. The hazardous materials containment plan shall contain the following elements:
a. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, welding equipment shall be placed over drip pans or other containment apparatus.
b. Construction materials shall not be stockpiled or stored where they could be accidently discharged downslope or into Scotts Valley Drive. c. Any petroleum, lubricants or other hazardous materials used during; and, construction shall be stored in a special storage location equipped with double containment and this location shall be shown on the erosion control plan and approved by the agencies that review this plan.

Hydrology and water quality

19. Applicant and construction contractor shall implement best management practices to prevent sedimentation and discharge of contaminants off-site during project construction, including hazardous materials during the entire time construction activities are occurring. The hazardous materials containment plan shall contain the following elements:
a. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, welding equipment shall be placed over drip pans or other containment apparatus.
b. Construction materials shall not be stockpiled or stored where they could be accidently discharged downslope or into Scotts Valley Drive. c. Any petroleum, lubricants or other hazardous materials used during; and, construction shall be stored in a special storage location equipped with double containment and this location shall be shown on the erosion control plan and approved by the agencies that review this plan.

Trees

20. All recommendations in the Arborist Report prepared by HMH, dated December 23, 2024, revised January 16, 2025, and March 21, 2025, are incorporated as conditions of project approval.

21. The final grading plans and improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the project Arborist prior to any grading and if deemed necessary additional tree preservation measures shall be applied to the project.

22. The project arborist shall place a monetary value on trees preserved on development sites and a surety bond in an amount equal to the value of the

Page 253 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 17 ends

preserved trees shall be deposited with the city prior to issuance of a grading/building permit for the project. If damage occurs to the preserved trees during development and/or construction, funds will be drawn from the deposited amount. Funds remaining in the account will be returned to the applicant upon final inspection of the project.

23. During the pre-construction phase of development, the project arborist shall inspect tree protection fencing and the completion of pre-construction treatments. This inspection shall be completed prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits

24. The project arborist shall routinely inspect the development site through the term of the project.

25. Upon completion of construction activities, the project arborist shall submit written documentation stating that all recommended tree preservation measures have been completed prior to Building Permit final for the project.

26. The cost of the project arborist review and implementation of conditions, site inspection and related work shall be borne by the applicant.

27. The project developer shall place a surety bond in an amount equal to the value of the preserved trees as shown in the project Arborist Report. The surety bond shall be deposited with the city prior to issuance of a grading/building permit for the project. The monetary value shall be reviewed and approved by the CDD. If damage occurs to the preserved trees during development and/or construction, funds will be drawn from the deposited amount. Funds remaining in the account will be returned to the developer upon final inspection of the project.

28. The arborists recommendations for tree protection during construction shall be printed on the demolition, grading and construction drawings including

29. The arborist shall monitor and observe hand grading and trenching near the protected trees.

30. If any protection is removed, the arborist shall verify that the fencing and other tree protection measures were correctly reinstalled. The arborist report included a sign to show the tree protection zone, this sign(s) should remain posted in a visible location during construction.

31. Provide a copy of a contract for services for the Community Development Department Director review and approval prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit.

Landscaping

32. The landscaping improvements shall be permanently maintained and irrigated.

33. Landscaping shall comply with State of California Government Code Section 65596 Water Conservation in Landscaping and associated Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for landscaping equal or greater than 2,500 square feet. If not applicable the project is required to be consistent with the City Water

Page 254 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 18 ends

Conservation Ordinance.

34. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted and shall include the name, number, size, and location for all planting materials, trees and ground covers and tree replacement locations shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of grading or building permits.

Lighting

35. All exterior lighting shall be the minimum necessary for security and all lighting shall be down shining with the light source not directly visible from adjacent properties. Where deemed necessary by the Community Development Director light cutoffs/shields shall be installed.

Geotechnical

36. All recommendations made in the Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. and dated March 4, 2024 are incorporated as project conditions of approval.

CC&R’s

37. CC&R’s for the ongoing management and maintenance of the site improvements including perimeter fencing, on-site stormwater facilities, landscaping, driveways, retaining walls, and any other shared facilities, for the project shall be approved by the City and executed by the property owner prior to the approval of the final map.

The CC&R’s shall be recorded prior to building permit final, or the sale or lease of the first unit or within 30 days of the final map recording, whichever comes first.

The property owner shall pay recording costs.

Joint Maintenance Agreement

38. If off site improvements are proposed in the public right of way, applicant shall provide a Joint Landscape Maintenance Agreement for review and approval by the Community Development Director and Public Works Director for the maintenance of off-site landscaping prior to approval of the Final Map.

39. The curbs along the private road and the emergency vehicle turnaround shall be painted red indicating no parking except for emergency vehicles and no parking signs installed pursuant to Fire Department standards. This condition shall be included in the CCRs.

Affordable Housing

40. Pursuant to Section 14 of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code the project shall comply with all applicable affordable housing requirements including the dedication of units and payment of in-lieu fees.

Page 255 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 19 ends

Public Art

41. The proposed public art will be a custom designed mural located on the face of the retaining wall at the southern property line. It will be approximately ten feet wide by four feet high and made of mosaic tile. The Community Development Director will review and approve the final design.

Public Works

42. All required documents, covenants, developer and City improvement agreements and bonds, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for approval.

Engineered Public Improvement Plans shall be submitted for all on-site and off-site work to the Public Works Department for approval. On-site and offsite (encroachment) civil engineering permits must be issued by the City prior to commencing work. Public Improvement Plans shall include any necessary grading, drainage, retaining walls, driveway, utilities, utility pole relocation, traffic signal, signing and striping, frontage public improvement and/or repair of sidewalk, curb and gutter or similar facilities required by the Public Works Department. All public improvements shall conform to the design standards contained in text and illustration in the "City of Scotts Valley Standard Details", latest revision adopted by the City Council. Signing, striping, and traffic control plans shall comply with the latest California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) requirements, as well as the latest Caltrans Standard Plans and Specifications.

43. A registered civil engineer shall provide storm (hydrologic and hydraulic) calculations for appropriate storm drain facilities to control on-site drainage and mitigate off-site impacts. The design shall follow the criteria contained in the City of Scotts Valley Standard Details and the data and analysis contained in the latest adopted City of Scotts Valley Storm Drainage Master Plan, the City’s Stormwater Management Plan, Stormwater Urban Runoff Pollution Control Chapter 12.14, Stormwater Technical Guide, and the Post Construction Requirements by the Central Coast Regional Water Board. Development shall not increase the rate of flow (cubic feet per second) or velocity (feet per second) of site run-off water to any off-site drainage areas beyond the measured or calculated pre-project rate and velocity. Impervious area must be shown on the cover sheet of the project plans.

44. Engineered temporary erosion control plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for approval for any grading occurring between October 1st and April 30th.

45. To prevent drainage problems related to the lack of proper maintenance of privately owned and operated drainage facilities on the site, an executed Operations and Maintenance (O&M) agreement between the City of Scotts Valley and the property owner(s) shall be provided to maintain the private Storm drainage facilities consistent with The City of Scotts Valley Stormwater Technical Guide. Including budgeting for maintenance and annual inspection by a qualified professional prior to October 15th of each year.

46. All improvements within the public right-of-way shall be ADA-compliant and shall be

Page 256 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 20 ends

submitted to the Public Works Department via an Encroachment Permit application.

The Encroachment Permit application shall include, but are not limited to, all civil improvements, traffic control plans, and striping plans. The traffic control plan must show how traffic will be safely controlled and how motorists will be alerted during construction work/activity, including when construction vehicles are entering and exiting the project site. Off-site improvements within the public right-of-way must be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The separate civil on-site work, and plan reviewed by the Public Works Department, will require an on-site civil engineering permit and inspection.

47. All work and/or activity in the public right-of-way will require an Encroachment Permit application to be submitted to the Public Works Department for approval. This application shall include a traffic control plan that shows how traffic will be safely controlled and motorists will be alerted during all construction activity including, but not limited to, times when construction vehicles are entering and exiting the project site.

48. All public improvements shall be guaranteed by written agreement with the City, Faithful Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond, to the Public Works Department for approval. The Faithful Performance Bond shall be an amount equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the engineer’s estimated cost of Improvements (on-site and off-site). The Labor and Materials Bond shall be an amount equal to at least fifty percent (50%) of the engineer’s estimated cost of Improvements (on-site and off-site).

49. To prevent sedimentation and discharge of contaminants off-site during project construction, the project applicant shall have the construction contractor implement an erosion control plan and implement a best management practice/hazardous materials containment plan during the entire time construction activities are occurring. The hazardous materials containment plan shall be approved by the Public Works Department prior to the commencement of land alteration and construction activities for the project. It shall contain the following elements:

A. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, and welding equipment shall be placed over drip pans or other containment apparatus.

B. Construction materials shall not be stockpiled or stored where they could be accidentally discharged downslope or onto Mount Hermon Road.

C. Any petroleum, lubricants or other hazardous materials used during construction shall be stored in a special storage location equipped with double containment and this location shall be shown on the erosion control plan roved by the agencies that review this plan. Applicant shall construct all storm drain facilities in conformance with data and analysis in the adopted City of Scotts Valley Stormwater Technical Guide, August 2017.

50. The Applicant shall repair any damage caused to the City streets by applicant or its contractors, consultants, and/or employees prior to certificate of occupancy. A video log, DVD format, clearly showing the existing condition of [the applicable street] to

Page 257 of 619 ends

Erba Lane (Ridgewood West)
June 12, 2025

Page 21 ends

the project site shall be presented to the Department of Public Works prior to the start of construction. Applicant is advised that, absent clear video evidence to the contrary, road damage must be repaired to the satisfaction of the City prior to certificate of occupancy . Applicant shall update all striping to latest standards for full frontage of project.

51. The Applicant shall provide 2” mill and Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) overlay for the full width of the road along the full parcel frontage on Erba Lane.

52. Prior to connecting to the sanitary sewer main on Erba Lane, the Applicant shall construct a diversion structure connecting the existing 10-inch diameter situated on the Scotts Valley Drive southbound direction and an existing 18-inch diameter sewer mains running along Scotts Valley Drive northbound direction. An additional study must be completed prior to design to determine the optimal location for this structure.
____________________________________________________________________________________ Name and Signature of Property Owner Date

Page 258 of 619 ends

Page 259 of 619 ends

RIDGEWOOD WEST
ARCHITECT:

HUNT HALE JONES ARCHITECTS
444 SPEAR STREET, SUITE 105
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105
CONTACT: DAN HALE
Architect
PHONE: 415.568.3833
E-MAIL: [email protected]
www.hunthalejones.com
CIVIL ENGINEER:

C2G CIVIL CONSULTANT GROUP
4444 SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE, SUITE 6
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066
CONTACT: JAMIE BUSHONG
Senior Project Manager
PHONE: 831.438.4420
E-MAIL: [email protected]
WWW.CIVILCONSULTANTSGROUP.COM
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:

ROACH AND CAMPBELL
947 ENTERPRISE DRIVE, LOFT B
SACRAMENTO, CA 95825
CONTACT: DAVID CAMPBELL

LANDSCAPE DESIGNER
PHONE: 916.342.7119
E-MAIL: [email protected]
UTILITY CONSULTANTS:

TARRAR
813 FIRST ST.

BRENTWOOD, CA 94513
CONTACT: ALFONSO REYES
Senior Project Manager
PHONE: 949.240.2595
E-MAIL: [email protected]
www.tarrar.com

LOCATION MAP
SITE

LOCATION
APPLICANT:

CITY VENTURES
1855 MASON STREET
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123
CONTACT: DARIAN DENNLER

DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATE
PHONE: 650.918.2904
E-MAIL: [email protected]
WWW.CITYVENTURES.COM

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 95066
APN: 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
2ND SUBMITTAL DATE: 10.10.2024
3RD SUBMITTAL DATE: 1.22.2025
4TH SUBMITTAL DATE: 5.9.2025

Page 260 of 619 ends

CS - COVER SHEET
PO1 - SHEET INDEX AND PROJECT OVERVIEW
PI 1.1 - NEIGHBORHOOD PHOTOS
PI 1.2 - PROJECT INFORMATION
PI 1.3 - PROJECT INFORMATION
SP 1.1 - CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
MB 1.1 - CONCEPTUAL MATERIAL BOARD

ELEVATIONS
A1.1.1 - BLDG 2 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS
(BLDG 1 SIM)
A1.1.2 - BLDG 3 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS
A1.1.3 - BLDG 4 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS
UNITS
A2.1.1 - PLAN 1A
A2.1.2 - PLAN 1B
A2.2.1 - CONCEPT SECTION

BUILDING PLANS
BLDG. PLANS 1 AND 2
A3.1.1 - BUILDINGS 1 AND 2
BLDG. 3
A3.2.1 - BUILDING 3_GROUND FLOOR AND

MAIN FLOOR
A3.2.2 - BUILDING 3_UPPER FLOOR AND ROOF
PLAN
BLDG. 4
A3.3.1 - BUILDING 4_GROUND AND MAIN
FLOOR
A3.3.2 - BUILDING 4_UPPER FLOOR AND ROOF
PLAN

DETAILS
A4.1.1 - CONCEPT DETAILS
CIVIL
C0.1 - COVER
C0.2 - TENTATIVE MAP
C1.1 - EXISTING SITE AND DEMOLITION PLAN
C2.1 - SITE IMPROVEMENTS
C3.1 - GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
C3.2 - GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
C4.1 - UTILITY PLAN
C4.2 - UTILITY PLAN
C5.1 - STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN
C6.1 - EROSION CONTROL PLAN
C6.2 - EROSION CONTROL PLAN
C7.1 - DETAILS
C7.2 - DETAILS
C7.3 - CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY DETAILS
C7.4 - SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DETAILS
C7.5 - SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DETAILS

LANDSCAPE
L1.1 - CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN
L1.2 - CONCEPTUAL FENCE AND WALL PLAN
L1.3 - CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
L1.4 - CONCEPTUAL PLANT PALETTE - TREES & SHRUBS
L1.5 - CONCEPTUAL PLANT PALETTE - SHRUBS
L1.6 - CONCEPTUAL PLANT PALETTE - SHRUBS (CONT.)
L1.7 - CONCEPTUAL FURNISHINGS & MATERIAL PALETTE
L1.8 - CONCEPTUAL IRRIGATION PLAN
L1.9 - CONCEPTUAL IRRIGATION DETAILS
L1.10 - CONCEPTUAL IRRIGATION DETAILS

JOINT TRENCH
JT1 - CONCEPTUAL JOINT TRENCH & SITE LIGHTING PLAN
P1 - LIGHTING PLAN - PHOTOMETRICS ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARCHITECTURAL

PROJECT OVERVIEW
RIDGEWOOD WEST PROJECT DESCRIPTION (ERBA LANE - SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 95066)

CITY VENTURES IS PLEASED TO SUBMIT OUR PROPOSAL FOR RIDGEWOOD WEST, LOCATED BETWEEN THE SCOTTS VALLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT AND FIRE DISTRICT ON ERBA LANE (APNS 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22) THIS 1.04-ACRE

PROJECT IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY SURFACE PARKING, AND OUR PROPOSAL AIMS TO LEVERAGE THE PROPERTY'S

UNIQUE SHAPE TO CREATE A WARM FRONTAGE THAT CONNECTS SEAMLESSLY WITH THE SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD UP ERBA LANE. THIS PROPOSED PROJECT IS A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, AS DEFINED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65589.5(H)(2), REQUESTING SPECIFIC WAIVERS. PLEASE SEE SHEET PI1.3 FOR THE

FULL LIST OF REQUESTED WAIVERS, WHICH INCLUDE MODIFICATIONS TO THE GARAGE MINIMUM SIZE

REQUIREMENT, BUILDING HEIGHT, SETBACKS, GUEST PARKING, ENTRANCE ORIENTATION, UPPER STORY SETBACKS, FAÇADE AND ROOF DESIGN, TREE SELECTION, PARKING PLACEMENT, DRIVEWAY COUNT, AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPING. THESE ADJUSTMENTS ARE AIMED AT OPTIMIZING THE SITE PLAN FOR MAXIMUM UNIT DENSITY WHILE ADHERING TO THE GOALS OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND AVOIDING BIOTIC ENCROACHMENT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 65915(A)(2) AND 65915(K), THE WAIVERS ARE DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE

IDENTIFIABLE COST REDUCTIONS, PRIMARILY BY ALLOWING FOR INCREASED SPACE FOR INCOME-GENERATING UNITS WHILE MAINTAINING ALIGNMENT WITH LOCAL OBJECTIVES.

THE SITE ALLOWS FOR A RESIDENTIAL DENSITY RANGE OF 9 - 15 UNITS PER ACRE AND IS ZONED R-H HIGH DENSITY.

UTILIZING DENSITY BONUS, CITY VENTURES PROPOSES 19 SOLAR ALL-ELECTRIC, THREE-STORY TOWNHOME-STYLE CONDOMINIUMS, RANGING FROM APPROXIMATELY 1,400 - 1,500 SQUARE FEET, EACH HOSTING 3 BEDROOMS AND A TWO-CAR PRIVATE GARAGE. THIS PROJECT WILL ALSO INCLUDE 10 GUEST SPACES.

THE ERBA LANE SITE IS GRACED WITH WELL-ESTABLISHED TREES THAT PROVIDE A SPRAWLING CANOPY, CREATING A BUILT-IN NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. TO PRESERVE THIS NATURAL BEAUTY, BUILDING STRUCTURES WILL BE

CAREFULLY POSITIONED OUTSIDE OF THE DRIPLINE OF THE OAK RIPARIAN WOODLAND, ENSURING THAT THE VIBRANT ENERGY OF THE AREA REMAINS UNDISTURBED.

CITY VENTURES RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, AND UPDATED CONCESSIONS AND WAIVERS RELATED TO OUR SUBMITTED SB330 APPLICATION. AT LEAST 15% OF THE NEW HOUSING UNITS WILL BE ALLOCATED TO MODERATE AND LOW-INCOME SALES PRICES.

WE ARE EXCITED TO COLLABORATE WITH THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY TO PURSUE A PROJECT THAT WILL BRING VIBRANCY AND HOUSING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE LOOK FORWARD TO BRINGING THIS COMMUNITY TO FRUITION.

SCALE:

SHEET INDEX AND PROJECT OVERVIEW
PO1
N.T.S.

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 261 of 619 ends

SITE
VIEW NO. 5 VIEW FROM MACDORSA PARK
VIEW NO. 1 ERBA LANE AT SOUTH WEST CORNER
VIEW NO. 3 ERBA LANE AT NW CORNER
VIEW NO. 2 ERBA LANE AT FRONT OF PROPERTY
VIEW NO. 4 SITE ACCESS FROM POLICE DEPARTMENT
3 2
4 5
1 SCALE:

NEIGHBORHOOD PHOTOS
PI 1.1
NTS

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 262 of 619 ends

BLDG. SUMMARY
BLDGS. PLANS
TOTAL

GROUND FLOOR
(LOT COVERAGE)

TOTAL BUILDING
PLAN 1A PLAN 1B PLAN 1B ADA TOTAL
BLDG. 1 - 2 2 4 2,625 SQ. FT. 8,678 SQ. FT.

BLDG. 2 - 4 - 4 2,625 SQ. FT. 8,678 SQ. FT.

BLDG. 3 5 - - 5 3,603 SQ. FT. 11,120 SQ. FT.

BLDG. 4 6 - - 6 4,314 SQ. FT. 13,377 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 11 6 2 19 13,167 SQ. FT. 41,852 SQ. FT.

UNIT SUMMARY
PLAN NO. PLAN INFO
TOTAL
UNITS
TOTAL
LIVING

GARAGE DECKS

PRIVATE
PATIO/
PORCH
SEE

SP/LDSCP
STD.

PARKING
TOTAL

PARKING
PLAN 1A 3 BD/2 1
2 BTH 11 1,509 444 82
±180 SQ.

FT. AT
BLDGS 1-3
2 22
PLAN 1B 3 BD/2 1
2 BTH 6 1,409 444 76 " " 2 12
PLAN 1B ADA 3 BD/3 BTH (2 - 1
2 BTH) 2 1,409 444 76 " " 2 4
TOTAL UNIT 19 MIN. 250 SQ. FT. AT
BUILDINGS 1-3 38

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REQUIRED PROPOSED
SITE COVERAGE -SEE SITE PLAN SHEET SP1.1 FOR CALCULATION 55% MAX. 31%

MAXIMUM HEIGHT UNLIMITED W/ SBDL
WAIVER ±43'-3"

SETBACKS
• FRONT: 20 FEET
• SIDE YARD – PERMITTED USE: 10% OF WIDTH OF THE SITE, 10 FOOT MAXIMUM AND 5 FOOT MINIMUM, EXCEPT:

I.STREET SIDE YARD: 20% OF LOT WIDTH, 20 FOOT MAXIMUM AND 8 FOOT MINIMUM II.ADD 1 FOOT FOR EACH 2 FEET OF HEIGHT ABOVE 20 FEET (MEASURED AT TOP

PLATE LINE)
III.ADD 1 FOOT FOR EACH 5 FEET BY WHICH A WALL OF A STRUCTURE WITHIN 25 FT OF THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE EXCEEDS 40 FEET IN LENGTH PARALLEL TO THE SIDE

PROPERTY LINE
IV.A SIDE YARD PROVIDING ACCESS TO MORE THAN ONE DWELLING SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 12 FEET
• REAR YARD: 20% OF LOT DEPTH, MAXIMUM OF 25 FEET AND MINIMUM OF 15 FEET EXCEPT WHEN THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS APPLY:

I.15 FOOT MINIMUM APPLIES IF SIDE YARD IS A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET II.1 FOOT SHALL BE ADDED TO SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR EACH 2 FEET OF HEIGHT ABOVE 20 FEET (MEASURE AT TOP PLATE LINE)
• FRONT: 20 FEET
• SIDE:

I. 0.20 X 400 = 80 FT=
20FT.

II. (30' PLATE) = +5 FT
III. BLDG. 4 / WALL
EXCEEDS 40 FT. BY 90FT =
90/5 = 18 FT ADDED
25FT +18FT. = 43 FT.

SETBACK
• REAR: REAR SETBACK
=0.2 X 152 =30FT.

I. NA
II. 30 FT. PLATE HEIGHT
10 FT ABOVE 20 FT. = 5FT
MAX REQUIRED 25FT. PER
PART 1
3'-0" MIN.
13'-0" MIN.

AT
BUILDING 4
11 FT. AT
BLDG 4.

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073
SCALE:

PROJECT INFORMATION
PI 1.2
NTS

Page 263 of 619 ends

PROJECT PARKING
GENERAL CALIF. CODES SCOTTS VALLEY PROPOSED NOTES

PARKING
UNIT
2 SPACES/UNIT =
19 UNITS x 2 = 38 SPACES
38 SPACES PRIVATE GARAGES
GUEST 1 SPACE / 5 UNITS = 4 SPACES 8 SPACES
(7) STANDARD GUEST SPACES
+ (1) ADA GUEST SPACE
NOTE: 8 UNITS HAVE A

DRIVEWAY APRON FOR GUEST
PARKING. ACCESSIBILITY

ASSIGNED
CBC SECT. 1109A.4
2% OF ASSIGNED SPACES x 38
SPACES =0.76

0.76 = 1 SPACE
N/A 1 SPACES

LOCATION TO BE FINALIZED AT

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
PHASE

UNASSIGNED
CBC SECT. 1109A.5
5% OF SPACES x 7 SPACES =

0.35 =1 SPACE
N/A 1 SPACE SEE SITE PLAN

EV SPACE -

RESIDENTIAL

CAPABLE
CAL GRN SECT. 4.106.4.2.2
10% OF SPACES x 38
= 3.8 SPACES = 4
- 4 SPACES

LOCATION TO BE FINALIZED AT

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
PHASE
READY
CAL GRN SECT. 4.106.4.2.2
25% OF SPACES x 38
= 9.5 SPACES = 10
- 10 SPACES

LOCATION TO BE FINALIZED AT

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
PHASE

CHARGER
CAL GRN SECT. 4.106.4.2.2
5% OF SPACES x 38
= 1.9 SPACES = 2
- 2 SPACES

LOCATION TO BE FINALIZED AT

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
PHASE

BICYCLE

RESIDENTIAL

SHORT TERM
(VISITOR)
CAL GRN. A4.106.9.1
(VOLUNTARY)
5% OF GUEST PRKG
= 5% x 7 SPACES
= .35 = 1 SPACE
AOS TABLE 1
1:VISITOR SPACE/ (10)UNITS
19 UNITS/10 = 2 SPACES
6 SPACES SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS

LONG TERM
(IN UNIT)
CAL GRN. A4.106.9.3
(VOLUNTARY)
1:2 UNITS = 19 x .5
= 9.5 SPACES
SBMC TBL 12.100-3
1:1 UNITS = 19 UNITS =
19 SPACES
19 SPACES MIN. SPACE LOCATED WITHIN

GARAGE OF EACH HOME

DENSITY BONUS WAIVERS
GARAGE MINIMUM SIZE SVMC 17.44.030 (B)
BUILDING HEIGHT SVMC 17.20.040 (E)
SETBACKS - NO., SO. & EAST SVMC 17.10.040
PARKING PLACEMENT SWMC 17.44.030(J).2
UPPER STORY SETBACKS ODS V.B.2

WATER CONSERVATION OF TREE
SPECIES ODS VII.B.3.2
DRIVEWAY COUNT ODS III.B.4

PERIMETER PARKING LOT
LANDSCAPING ODS III.B.6
PARKING SCREENING ODS III.B.1.b.(3)
OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS ODS.VI.B.1.a
PARKING SCREENING ODS III.B.1.b.(3)
BALCONY DESIGN STANDARDS ODS.VI.B.1.b.2
PATIO DESIGN STANDARDS ODS.VI.B.1.b.3

DENSITY BONUS CONCESSION
*APPLICANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES AND WAIVERS AS ALLOWED UNDER SDBL*

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE

BALCONY /
DECK

GROUND FLOOR

PATIO/YARD
TOTAL
BLDG 1-3
TOTAL
BLDG 4
PLAN 1A 82.000 SQ. FT. 180 SQ. FT. AT
BLDGS 1-3
262.000
SQ. FT.

82.000 SQ.

FT.

PLAN 1B 76.000 SQ. FT. 180 SQ. FT. AT
BLDGS 1-3
256.000
SQ. FT.

76.000 SQ.

FT.

BUILDING 4 COMMON OPEN SPACE SUBSTITUTION -

SEE COMMO OPEN SPACE BELOW
+ 465 SQ.

FT. / UNIT
PER
COMMON
OPEN
SPACE

COMMON OPEN SPACE

REQUIRED PROPOSED
SEE SITE PLAN 100 SQ. FT/UNIT X 19
UNITS = 1,900 SQ. FT. 7.488 SQ. FT.

ADDED OPEN

SPACE OVER

REQUIRED

7.488 SQ. FT. - 1,900 SQ. FT. =
5,588 SQ. FT. ABOVE REQUIRED /
50% = 2,794 SQ. FT. ALLOWED

FOR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE

SUBSTITUTION
BUILDING 4

SUBSTITUTION
6 UNITS
34 SQ. FT. MIN/UNIT

REQUIRED
2,794 SQ. FT. COMMON OVER
REQUIRED/ 6 UNITS =
465 SQ. FT. /UNIT AVAILABLE
*SEE ADJACENT SITE PLAN DIAGRAM AND UNIT PLANS FOR PRIVATE AND

COMMON OPEN INFORMATION
BASE

BASE BASE

BASE BASE
BASE

FOR LV SPACE

STACK METER

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN PANEL HOUSE
BASE

BASE BASE

BASE BASE
BASE 16-UNIT CBU
BASE
BASE
BASE
BASE
2868
BASE
BASE
BASE
BASE
2868
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL
BASE

BASE BASE
BASE

SPACE FOR LV METER STACK TESTBLOCK & METER PULL/MAIN HOUSE PANEL
BASE

BASE BASE
BASE
BASE
BASE

SITE PLAN
BASE
BASE
BASE
BASE
2868
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL
BASE

BASE UP
BASE

BASE UP COMMON OPEN SPACE
20'-0"
7,488 SQ. FT.
20'-0"

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
BUILDINGS 1, 2 AND 3

TYPICAL PRIVATE FRONT PATIOS /
YARDS AT BUILDINSG 1, 2 AND 3

ACCESSED DIRECTLY FROM THE
UNIT. A MIN. 100 SQ, FT. - ACTUAL
MIN. 180 SQ. FT. / UNIT

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
BUILDING 4
ONLY BALCONIES/DECKS APPLY.

GROUND LEVEL PATIOS DO NOT

MEET STANDARDS

BUILDING
2 BUILDING
1 BUILDING
3 BUILDING
4 - OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073
SCALE:

PROJECT INFORMATION
PI 1.3
NTS

Page 264 of 619 ends

FOR LV SPACE

STACK METER
& METERTESTBLOCK

PULL/MAIN
PANEL
HOUSE 16-UNIT CBU
BLDG 4
6 UNITS
BLDG 2
4 UNITS
BLDG 1
4 UNITS
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL

SPACE FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL BLDG 3
5 UNITS
0 10 20 40 80

SITE PLAN

BLDG LEGEND

BLDG - (TYPE X)

X UNITS

BLDG NUMBER AND TYPE

TOTAL UNIT

BLDG TYPES

RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME STYLE CONDOMINIUM
* BMR - BELOW MARKET RATE CONCEPTUAL LOCATION
GENERAL NOTE:

FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE AND GARBAGE TRUCK INFO SEE CIVIL DRAWING.

FOR BIKE PARKING INFO, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWING.

ADA UNIT NOTE:
10% OF THE TOTAL UNIT WILL BE ACCESSIBLE
· 19 TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED X 10% = 2 ACCESSIBLE UNITS
· INDICATES LOCATION OF CONCEPTUAL UNIT DESIGNATED

ACCESSIBLE
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL
BASE
BASE
15'-1"
84'-10"
24'-8"
34'-2"
34'-9"
34'-2"
13'-0"
35'-1" 34'-4"
11'-0"
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 ZONING:

P: PUBLIC/QUASI PUBLIC
ZONING ACROSS ERBA LANE :

R-1-10 MEDIUM DENSITY
ZONING:

RH HIGH DENSITY
84'-10"
34'-4" 13'-0"
130'-0"
10'-10" 12'-1" 34'-3" 18'-10"
3'-0"
*
*
*
152'-1" REAR SETBACK =0.2 X 152 =30FT. 25 FT. MAX REQUIRED

ERBA LANE
399'-4" (SIDE SETBACK = 0.10 X 400 = 40 FT / 10 FT. MAX ALLOWED PLUS 5 FT. FOR PLATE HEIGHTS ABOVE 25 FT.) 20'-0" FRONT SETBACK 25'-0" REAR

SETBACK
BLDG. 4: 4314 SQ. FT.

BLDG. 3 : 3603 SQ. FT.

BLDG. 1&2 : 2625 SQ. FT. X 2 = 5250 SQ. FT.

SITE COVERAGE FROM CIVIL: 45,243.5 SQ. FT.

LOT COVERAGE:
5824+3603+4314 = 13,741
13,741: 45,243.5 = 0.303 ~ 30%
BLDG. SQ. FT. FOOTPRINTS
ZONING ADJACENT :
25'-0"
C-P: PROFESSIONAL
SETBACK 20'-0" 9'-0"

TYPICAL GUEST

PARKING STALL

DIMENSIONS
1 2 3 4 5
6 7
8 20'-0" FRONT SETBACK
33'-0" SETBACK
6'-2"
108'-10"
(5) GUEST SPACES
(3) GUEST SPACES
9'-0" 8'-0"

TYPICAL PRIVATE FRONT PATIOS /
YARDS AT BUILDINSG 1, 2 AND 3

ACCESSED DIRECTLY FROM THE
UNIT. A MIN. 100 SQ, FT. (APPROX
180 SQ. FT.) AND 8 FT. DIMENSION
SCALE:

CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
SP 1.1
1" = 20'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 265 of 619 ends

1 BODY - SHINGLE SIDING
MFR.: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS
NIGHT OUT SW9560

BODY - LAP SIDING
MFR.: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS
BEDROCK SW9563
1 2

BODY - BOARD AND BATTEN /

STUCCO / TRIM
MFR.: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS
EXTRA WHITE SW7006
3 ROOF - COMPOSTION SHINGLE
MFR.: CERTAINTEED LANDMARK

WEATHERED WOOD

ROOF TO BE CLASS A ASSEMBLY
4 6 2
WINDOW
MFR.: VPI VINYL WINDOW

WINDOW FRAMES - WHITE
(ALL WINDOWS TO BE NON MIRRORED)
5 4
6 5 NOTE:

ALL SIDING AND TRIM TO BE "HARDI" OR EQUAL
3 BODY - STUCCO
MFR.: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS
PASSIVE SW7064
3 CONCEPTUAL COLORS & MATERIALS
SCALE:

CONCEPTUAL MATERIAL BOARD
MB 1.1
NTS

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 266 of 619 ends

REAR ELEVATION

STREET FACING ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 12'-1"
PLAN 1AINT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-END 3'-4"

TOP OF ROOF DECK
PLAN 1A-END
14 87'-8" ±41'-4"

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1"

FRONT ELEVATION
PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-END 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK 38'-0" OVERALL HT.

T
F
F
F
PLAN 1A-END
F
T
F
F
3 1 8 12
11 5
4 7
9 17
87'-8"
T
F
F
F
F
T
F
F ±43'-3"

RIGHT ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1"
PLAN 1A-END 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK ±39'-8"
37'-2"
8" MIN.

LEFT ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 12'-1"
PLAN 1A-END 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK 9"
6 TRELLIS - 24" PROJECTION

METAL WALL TRELLIS -

FOR VINES
FENESTRATION CALCULATION:

FACADE / FENESTRATION = 995 SQ. FT. / 95 SQ. FT.
= 10%
995 SQ. FT.
10 SF 10 SF 10 SF 10 SF
10 SF
15 SF 15 SF 15 SF ±43'-3" 8" MIN.

FINISH SCHEDULE
1 COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF
2 NOT USED
3 CORBEL W/ KICKER
4 WOOD RAILING
5 HARDI BOARD + BATT SIDING
6 STUCCO FINISH
7 HARDI HORIZONTAL SIDING
8 HARDI SHINGLE SIDING
9 SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS
10 SLIDING GLASS DOOR
11 ENTRY DOOR
12 FRENCH DOOR
13 MASONRY VENEER
14 MTL. ROLL-UP GARAGE DOOR
15 COMMERCIAL LIGHTING
16 STOREFRONT GLAZING
17 WOOD WINDOW BOX
18 MTL. CANOPY 3'-0" PROJECTION
19 COMMERCIAL TRASH ENCLOSURE
NOTE: ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING MUST

COMPLY WITH EXTERIOR LIGHTING
REQUIREMENTS IN STANDARD IX.B.5

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073
SCALE:

BLDG 2 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS (BLDG 1 SIM)
A1.1.1
1/8" = 1'-0"

Page 267 of 619 ends

REAR ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 10'-3" 3'-4"

TOP OF ROOF DECK
14 PLAN 1A-END PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1AINT. ±39'-6" 108'-10"
MIN.
24"

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1"
FRONT ELEVATION 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK ±38'-8"
T
F
F
F
T
F
F
F
F
T
F
F
12 8 1 3
11 5
7 4
9 17
T
F
F
F
F
T
F
F
PLAN 1A-END PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-END 108'-10" ±39'-6"
MIN.
24"

LEFT ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1" 3'-4"

TOP OF ROOF DECK
PLAN 1A-END

RIGHT ELEVATION

STREET FACING ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1" 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK 9"
6 TRELLIS - 24" PROJECTION

METAL WALL TRELLIS -

FOR VINES
FENESTRATION CALCULATION:

FACADE / FENESTRATION = 995 SQ. FT. / 95 SQ. FT.
= 10%
995 SQ. FT.
10 SF 10 SF 10 SF 10 SF
10 SF
15 SF 15 SF 15 SF
PLAN 1A-END
36'-10"

COMPLY WITH EXTERIOR LIGHTING
REQUIREMENTS IN STANDARD IX.B.5

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073
SCALE:

BLDG 3 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS
A1.1.2
1/8" = 1'-0"

Page 268 of 619 ends

REAR ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1" 3'-4"

TOP OF ROOF DECK
14 PLAN 1AINT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-END 130'-0" ±38'-3"
2'-6"

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1"
FRONT ELEVATION 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK ±40'-5" OVERALL HT.

T
F
F
F
F
T
F
F
12 8 1 3
11 5
7 4
9 17
F
T
F
F
PLAN 1A-END PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-INT. PLAN 1A-END 130'-0"
T
F
F
F
T
F
F
F
T
F
F
F

RIGHT ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1" 3'-4"

TOP OF ROOF DECK
PLAN 1A-END
2 LEFT ELEVATION

STREET FACING ELEVATION

MAIN SUBFLOOR

LOWER PLATE

UPPER PLATE

UPPER SUBFLOOR

MAIN PLATE
S.O.G. 9'-1" 9'-1" 9'-1" 3'-4"
TOP OF ROOF DECK 9"
6 TRELLIS - 24" PROJECTION

METAL WALL TRELLIS -

FOR VINES
FENESTRATION CALCULATION:

FACADE / FENESTRATION = 995 SQ. FT. / 95 SQ. FT.
= 10%
995 SQ. FT.
10 SF 10 SF 10 SF 10 SF
10 SF
15 SF 15 SF 15 SF
PLAN 1A-END
36'-10" 40'-0"

COMPLY WITH EXTERIOR LIGHTING
REQUIREMENTS IN STANDARD IX.B.5

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073
SCALE:

BLDG 4 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS
A1.1.3
1/8" = 1'-0"

Page 269 of 619 ends

UPPER FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1A

MAIN FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1A - ALTENATE AT PLAN 1B

GROUND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1A W /OPTIONAL ADA POWDER
UPPER LIVING: 644 SQ. FT. MAIN LIVING: 663 SQ. FT.

TOTAL LIVING: 1,509 SQ. FT.

DECK: 82 SQ. FT.

GROUND LIVING: 202 SQ. FT.

GARAGE: 444 SQ. FT.

PORCH: 62 SQ. FT.

TRASH

TOTES, TYP
BASE
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.
2650 SH 3080
BASE
UP
DN
6050 SL TEMP 3080 FR DR
3050 SH 3050 SH
LC CPT. HS 3080 OPEN'
2640 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

FX4DNF049
BASE
3050 SH *
LC
DN
3050 SH* 3050 SH*
LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R.
2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668
BASE
LC
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC
2030 FX
O/ 2030 FX
21'-0"
10'-8" 10'-4"
6'-4" 1'-8" 34'-4" 10" 36'-10"14'-8" 10'-6" 2'-3
1 2
" 11'-10" 34'-2" 1'-0" 10'-5" 2'-4
1 2
" 7'-7
1 4
" 4'-1" 9'-10" 3'-2" 6'-4
1 2
" 1'-8" 36'-10"
21'-0"
21'-0"
10'-2" 10'-10"
6'-4" 2'-6" 34'-4" 36'-10"14'-8" 15'-3
1 2
"
7'-1" 3'-1" 6'-6" 14'-6
1 2
" 1'-0" 2'-11" 3'-2" 5'-4" 4'-1" 12'-4" 30'-10" 6'-0"
21'-0"
21'-2"
1'-10
1 2
" 16'-3" 3'-0
1 2
"
6'-4"
1'-10" 31'-10" 34'-4"10'-0"
3'-0"
21'-2" 8'-10" 4'-6" 21'-0" 34'-4" 1'-0" 1'-6"
3'-0" 2'-6"
11'-10"

ACCESSIBLE
POWDER

ROOM AT

ACCESSIBLE
UNITS
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL

METER CLOSET

PER BUILDING

AND SITE PLAN
9'-1"
CONC.

GAR.

ENT.

KIT./DIN.
9'-1"
LIV.

DECK
82 SQ. FT.

LNDY.
9'-1"
PDR.

H.S./9'-1"
BD. 1
BD. 2 BD. 3
BTH.2
BTH. 1
W.I.C.

BIKE

PARKING
PORCH
62 SQ. FT.

SCALE:

PLAN 1A
A2.1.1
1/4" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 270 of 619 ends

UPPER FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1B
UPPER LIVING: 648 SQ. FT.

MAIN FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1B - ALTERNATE AT PLAN 1A
MAIN LIVING: 613 SQ. FT.

TOTAL LIVING: 1,409 SQ. FT.

DECK: 76 SQ. FT.

GROUND FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1B
GROUND LIVING: 148 SQ. FT.

GARAGE: 444 SQ. FT.

PORCH: 43 SQ. FT.
9'-1"
CONC.

GAR. SCD

TRASH TOTES, TYP
BASE
BASE
UP
2650 SH
3050 SH 3080 FR DR
TEMP.
3050 SH
LC
2650 SH 3050 FX
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.
2640 SH
LC
DN 3080 OPEN'
????????
D.?
????? 224...

FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
3050 SH
LC
3050 SH *
LC
DN
3050 SH*
3050 SH* 3050 SH*
LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R.
2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668
21'-0"
10'-8" 10'-4"
4'-4" 1'-4" 34'-4" 1'-2" 36'-10"
16'-8" 10'-6" 2'-3
1 2
" 12'-2
1 2
" 34'-6" 1'-0" 10'-5
34 " 2'-4" 7'-7
1 4
" 4'-1" 9'-10" 3'-2" 6'-4" 1'-4" 36'-10"
21'-0"
LIV.
9'-1"
DECK
76 SQ. FT.

LNDY.
9'-1"
KIT.
9'-1"
PDR.
9'-1"
20'-0"
10'-2" 9'-10"
4'-4" 1'-4" 34'-4" 1'-2" 36'-10"
15'-8" 6'-0"
7'-4" 2'-10" 6'-6" 14'-4" 14'-2" 1'-0" 2'-11" 3'-2" 5'-4" 4'-1" 12'-4" 35'-6" 1'-4" 20'-0"
21'-0"
1'-6" 18'-0" 1'-6"
4'-4" 1'-10" 31'-10" 34'-4"
2'-10"
21'-0" 6'-10" 2'-6" 21'-0" 34'-4" 1'-0" 1'-6" 2'-6"
12'-0" 36'-10"
BASE
BASE
2868 UP
2650 SH 3080
16070 SECT. GAR. DR. 4'-0" 2'-6"
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL

METER CLOSET

PER BUILDING
AND SITE PLAN 2'-6"
ENT.

BD. 1
BD. 2 BD. 3
DIN.
9'-1"
BTH.2
BTH. 1
W.I.C.

PORCH
43 SQ. FT.

NOTE: SEE SITE PLAN AND

LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR

PRIVATE PATIOS/ YARD
SCALE:

PLAN 1B
A2.1.2
1/4" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 271 of 619 ends

9'-1" 9'-1"
ENT. 9'-1"
BD. 3 LIV.

BD. 2 W.I.C.

GAR.

ATTIC ± 39'-0" OVERALL HT.

CONCEPT SECTION - PLAN 1 42" MIN.

AC CONDENSOR

SOLAR PANELS
SCALE:

CONCEPT SECTION
A2.2.1
1/4" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 272 of 619 ends

GROUND FLOOR PLAN
BLDG. 2_ 4-PLEX (BLDG. 1 SIM.)

MAIN FLOOR PLAN
BLDG. 2_ 4-PLEX (BLDG. 1 SIM.)
BASE
LC 3080 OPEN'
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

BASE
LC 3080 OPEN'
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

BASE
BASE
UP
2650 SH
3050 SH
TEMP. 3080 FR DR
3050 SH
LC
3050 FX 2650 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.
2640 SH
LC
DN 3080 OPEN'
????????
D.?
????? 224...

BASE
BASE
UP
2650 SH
3050 SH 3080 FR DR
TEMP. 3050 SH
LC
2650 SH 3050 FX
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.
2640 SH
LC
DN 3080 OPEN'
????????
D.?
????? 224...

FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
LC
LC
LC T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R.

T.R. 30x24 CLRT.P.

FX4DNF049
BASE
LC
LC T.B. T.P.

T.R.

T.R. T.P.

BASE
LC LC
FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
LC
LC
LC T.B. 30x24 CLR T.P. T.R.

T.R. 30x24 CLRT.P.

FX4DNF049
BASE
LC
LC T.B. T.P. T.R.

T.R. T.P.

BASE
L LC C
87'-8"
87'-8"
2'-10" 21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1BB
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-2"
PLAN 1B 34'-4" 2'-6" 29'-10" 1'-0" 1'-6" 4'-6" 36'-10" 2'-0" 15'-9 1 2
" 12'-0
1 2
" 4'-6"
87'-8"
87'-8"
2'-10" 21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-2"
PLAN 1B 35'-10" 1'-0" 29'-10" 1'-0" 1'-6" 4'-6" 36'-10" 3'-6" 15'-9 1 2
" 15'-2
1 2
" 1'-4"

UPPER FLOOR PLAN
BLDG. 2_ 4-PLEX (BLDG. 1 SIM.)
84'-10"
84'-10"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-2"
PLAN 1B 36'-10" 1'-0" 34'-6" 1'-0" 1'-4" 36'-10" 34'-6" 1'-4" BASE
BASE
2868 UP
2650 SH 3080
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
BASE
2868 UP
2650 SH 3080
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL
BASE
BASE 3080 UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
BASE 3080 UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.
1'-8" 18'-0" 1'-6" 18'-0" 1'-6" 18'-0" 1'-6" 18'-0" 1'-8"

ROOF PLAN
BLDG. 2_ 4-PLEX (BLDG. 1 SIM.) 8:12 8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
84'-10"
84'-10"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1B
2" 21'-2"
PLAN 1B 35'-6" 36'-10"
1'-3"

TYPICAL EAVE
SCALE:

BUILDINGS 1 AND 2
A3.1.1
1/8" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 273 of 619 ends

GROUND FLOOR PLAN
5- PLEX BLDG.

BASE
BASE
2868
BASE
2868
BASE
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL
BASE
BASE
2868
BASE
2868
BASE
BASE
2868
BASE
BASE
LC
LC T.R.

T.P.

BASE
LC
LC T.R.

T.P.

BASE
LC
LC T.R.

T.P.

BASE
BASE
LC
LC T.R.

T.P.

LC
????????
D.?
????? 224...

BASE
BASE
LC
LC T.R.

T.P.

LC
????????
D.?
????? 224...
108'-10"
108'-10"
2'-10" 21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-2"
PLAN 1A 34'-4" 2'-6" 29'-10" 1'-0" 1'-6" 4'-6" 36'-10" 14'-0 1 2
" 15'-9
1 2
" 4'-6"
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2"

MAIN FLOOR PLAN
5- PLEX BLDG.
106'-0"
106'-0"
2'-10"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0" 2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0" 2"
PLAN 1A
21'-2" 2"
PLAN 1A 36'-10" 34'-6" 1'-0" 1'-4" 1'-4"
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2"
2" 21'-0"
21'-0" 2" 1'-0" 34'-6"
SCALE:

BUILDING 3_GROUND FLOOR AND MAIN FLOOR
A3.2.1
1/8" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 274 of 619 ends

FX4DNF049
BASE
LC
LC T.B. T.P.

T.R.

T.R. T.P.

BASE
LC LC
FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
LC
LC
LC T.B. T.P.

T.R.

T.R. T.P.

FX4DNF049
BASE
LC
LC T.B. T.P.

T.R.

T.R. T.P.

BASE
LC LC
FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
LC
LC
LC T.B. T.P. T.R.

T.R. T.P.

FX4DNF049
BASE
LC
LC T.B. T.P.

T.R.

T.R. T.P.

BASE
LC LC

UPPER FLOOR PLAN
5- PLEX BLDG.
106'-0"
105'-11"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-2"
PLAN 1A 36'-10" 1'-0" 34'-6" 1'-0" 1'-4" 36'-10" 34'-6" 1'-4" 21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2"
2" 21'-0"

ROOF PLAN
5- PLEX BLDG.
1'-3"

TYPICAL EAVE
SCALE:

BUILDING 3_UPPER FLOOR AND ROOF PLAN
A3.2.2
1/8" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 275 of 619 ends

BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH 3080
BASE
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.
2650 SH 3080
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH 3080
SPACE
FOR LV
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN
HOUSE
PANEL
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH 3080
BASE
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.
2650 SH 3080
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH 3080
BASE
UP
DN
6050 SL TEMP 3080 FR DR
3050 SH 3050 SH
LC CPT. HS 3080 OPEN'
2640 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

BASE
UP
DN
6050 SL TEMP 3080 FR DR
3050 SH 3050 SH
LC CPT. HS 3080 OPEN'
2640 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

BASE
UP
DN
6050 SL TEMP 3080 FR DR
3050 SH 3050 SH
LC CPT. HS 3080 OPEN'
2640 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

BASE
UP
DN
6050 SL TEMP 3080 FR DR
3050 SH 3050 SH
LC CPT. HS 3080 OPEN'
2640 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.

BASE
BASE
UP
2650 SH
3050 SH
TEMP. 3080 FR DR
3050 SH
LC
3050 FX 2650 SH
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.
2640 SH
LC
DN 3080 OPEN' CPT. HS
????????
D.?
????? 224...

HS CPT.

BASE
BASE
UP
2650 SH
3050 SH 3080 FR DR
TEMP. 3050 SH
LC
2650 SH 3050 FX
LC 2868 2468
2468
30x24 CLR T.R.

T.P.
2640 SH
LC
DN 3080 OPEN' CPT. HS
????????
D.?
????? 224...

CPT. HS

GROUND FLOOR PLAN
6- PLEX BLDG.
130'-0"
130'-0"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2" 2'-10"
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0" 2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0" 2"
PLAN 1A
21'-2" 2"
PLAN 1A 34'-4" 2'-6" 29'-10" 1'-0" 1'-6" 4'-6" 36'-10" 14'-0 1 2
" 15'-9
1 2
" 4'-6"
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2"

MAIN FLOOR PLAN
6- PLEX BLDG.
127'-0"
127'-0"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
2" 2" 2" 36'-10" 34'-6" 1'-4" 1'-4"2"
21'-0" 2"
21'-0" 2" 1'-0" 34'-6"
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2"
2" 21'-0"
2" 21'-0"
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
SCALE:

BUILDING 4_GROUND AND MAIN FLOOR
A3.3.1
1/8" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 276 of 619 ends

UPPER FLOOR PLAN
6- PLEX BLDG.

FX4DNF049
BASE
3050 SH * LC
DN
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R. 2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668 CPT. HS
HS CPT.

BASE
LC
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC
2030 FX O/ 2030 FX
FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
3050 SH
LC
3050 SH * LC
DN
3050 SH*
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R. 2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668 CPT. HS
HS CPT.

FX4DNF049
BASE
3050 SH * LC
DN
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R. 2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668 CPT. HS
HS CPT.

BASE
LC
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC
2030 FX O/ 2030 FX
FX4DNF049
BASE
3050 SH * LC
DN
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R. 2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668 CPT. HS
HS CPT.

BASE
LC
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC
2030 FX O/ 2030 FX
FX4DNF049
BASE
BASE
3050 SH
LC
3050 SH * LC
DN
3050 SH*
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLR T.P. T.R. 2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668 CPT. HS
CPT. HS
FX4DNF049
BASE
3050 SH * LC
DN
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC 2668
5068 BI-PASS T.B. 30x24 CLRT.P.

T.R. 2468
4068 BI-PASS
2668
T.R. 2468 OPT.
2868 OPEN'
2468
2468 30x24 CLRT.P.
2668 CPT. HS
HS CPT.

BASE
LC
3050 SH* 3050 SH* LC
2030 FX O/ 2030 FX
127'-2"
127'-2"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
2" 2" 2" 36'-10" 1'-0" 34'-6" 1'-0" 1'-4" 36'-10" 34'-6" 1'-4"2" 21'-0" 2"
21'-2" 2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-0"

ROOF PLAN
6- PLEX BLDG. 8:12 8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12
8:12 8:12
127'-2"
127'-2"
21'-2" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-0" 2" 21'-2"
2" 2" 2" 35'-6" 35'-6"2"
21'-0" 2"
21'-2" 2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-2"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
21'-0"
PLAN 1A
2" 21'-0"
1'-3"

TYPICAL EAVE
SCALE:

BUILDING 4_UPPER FLOOR AND ROOF PLAN
A3.3.2
1/8" = 1'-0"

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 277 of 619 ends

HEADER SSD.

VINYL WINDOW HEAD AT LAP SIDING
08_winhd_vin_stco3_1x8fm 3"=1'-0"
SEE ELEV.

HEAD HT.

SAF. O/ NAILING FLANGE SET
IN 3
8" MIN. BEAD OF SEALANT
BLD. PAPER O/ GSM DRIP

FLASHING (W/ END CAPS) O/
2x CAP TRIM SLOPED 5% TO
DRAIN O/ 5/4x6 HARDIE TRIM,
4"
1"
EXT. SIDING APPLICATION

DUAL GLAZED VINYL FRAMED

WINDOW, SET IN FULL BED OF
SEALANT BTW. FLASHING &

NAILING FIN
NOTE:

ALL WOOD TRIM TO BE

PRE-PRIMED
1" 1"
2"

SAF APPLIED FLUSH W/ OPENING

SEALANT & BACKER ROD
BLDG PAPER O/ PLYWD. & UNDER
LOWER 3" OF SAF. 3"

DUAL GLAZED VINYL FRAMED

WINDOW, SET NAILING FLANGE

IN SEALANT
08_winsill_vin_stco3_bayfm45 3"=1'-0"

JAMB BEYOND

SIDING APPLICATION
1 8" GAP
1" 1"
PRE-PRIMED 2x RS. TRIM CAP,
SLOPE 5% MIN.TO DRAIN W/ 5/4x6

HARDIE, SEALANT AT ALL JOINTS,
TYP.
2"
08_winjmb_vin_stco3_1x4fm-1 3"=1'-0"

SEALANT & BACKER ROD
2x FRAMING
EXT. SIDING APPLICATION
SAF. APPLIED FLUSH W/ OPENING

DUAL GLAZED VINYL FRAMED

WINDOW, SET NAILING FLANGE IN

SEALANT
PRE-PRIMED 5/4x4 HARDIE

TRIM, SEALANT AT ALL JOINTS
BLDG. PAPER O/ NAILING FLANGE
O/ SAF.
1 8
" GAP

W/ SEALANT
PER MFRG. 2"
SCALE:

CONCEPT DETAILS
A4.1.1

AS NOTED
CONCEPTUAL VIN. WIN SILL AT LAP SIDING (BD & BATTEN SIM.) CONCEPTUALVIN. WIN.HD. 'B'-LAP SIDING (BD & BATTEN SIM.) CONCEPT. VIN. WIN. JAMB AT LAP SIDING (BD & BATTEN SIM.) 7 NOT USED 5 3 1
NOT USED 8 NOT USED 6 4 2

NOT USED

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S
ArchitecturePlanningInteriors
444 Spear Street, Suite 105
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.hunthalejones.com
t. 415-512-1300
f. 415-288-0288
DATE:

PROJECT:

RIDGEWOOD WEST

CITY VENTURES

ERBA LANE
SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066

1.16.25 317073

Page 278 of 619 ends

UP
2868
UP
UP
UP
UP

UP BASE UP
UP UNIT 1 UNIT 2 UNIT 3 UNIT 4 UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 7 UNIT 8 UNIT 9UNIT 10 UNIT 11 UNIT 12 UNIT 13 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 19 16-UNIT CBU
COVER 1" = 20' C0.1 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
(QJLQHHUV3ODQQHUV
4444 6FRWWV 9DOOH\ 'ULYH 6XLWH 6
6FRWWV 9DOOH\ &$ 95066
8314384420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WEST IN'(; 2) 6+((T6 &01 &29(5 &02 T(NT$TI9( 0$3 &11 (;I6TIN* 6IT( $N' '(02/ITI2N 3/$N &21 I03529(0(NT 3/$N &22 /IN( 2) 6I*+T &31 *5$'IN* $N' '5$IN$*( 3/$N &41 UTI/IT< 3/$N &51 6T250 :$T(5 &2NT52/ 3/$N &61 (526I2N &2NT52/ 3/$N &71 '(T$I/6 &72 '(T$I/6 &73 &IT< 2) 6&2TT6 9$//(< '(T$I/6 &74 69:' '(T$I/6 &75 69:' '(T$I/6 &I9I/ (N*IN((5 &2*&I9I/ &2N6U/T$NT6 *52U3 IN& 4444 6&2TT6 9$//(< '5I9( 6T( 6 6&2TT6 9$//(< &$ 95066 2))I&( 8314384420 6U59(<25
$/3+$ 6U59(< 4444 6&2TT6 9$//(< '5I9( 6T( 6 6&2TT6 9$//(< &$ 95066 2))I&( 8314384453 9I&INIT< 0$3 6IT( 3/$N RIDGEWOOD WEST ERBA LANE SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22 &I9I/ (N*IN((5 &2*&I9I/ &2N6U/T$NT6 *52U3 IN& 4444 6&2TT6 9$//(< '5I9( 6T( 6 6&2TT6 9$//(< &$ 95066 2))I&( 8314384420 6U59(<25
$/3+$ 6U59(< 4444 6&2TT6 9$//(< '5I9( 6T( 6 6&2TT6 9$//(< &$ 95066 2))I&( 8314384453 9I&INIT< 0$3 6IT( 3/$N &2NT5$&T25 5(632N6I%I/IT< &2NT5$&T25 $*5((6 T+$T +( 6+2U/' $66U0( 62/( $N' &203/(T( 5(632N6I%I/IT< )25 -2% 6IT( &2N'ITI2N6 IN&/U'IN* T+( 6$)(T< 2) $// 3(562N6 $N' 3523(5T< 'U5IN* T+( &2U56( 2) &2N6T5U&TI2N 2) T+I6 352-(&T $N' T+$T 5(4UI5(0(NT 6+$// $33/< &2NTINU2U6/< $N' N2T %( /I0IT(' 'U5IN* :25.IN* +2U56 T+( &2NT5$&T25 6+$// '()(N' IN'(0NI)< $N' +2/' T+( 2:N(5 $N' T+( '(6I*N 352)(66I2N$/6 +$50/(66 )520 $N< $N' $// /I$%I/IT< 5($/ 25 $//(*(' IN &2NN(&TI2N :IT+ T+( 3(5)250$N&( 2) :25. 2N T+I6 352-(&T (;&(3TIN* )25 /I$%I/IT< $5I6IN* )520 T+( 62/( N(*/I*(N&( 2) T+( 2:N(5 25 '(6I*N 352)(66I2N$/ UN'(5*52UN' )$&I/ITI(6 $N' UTI/ITI(6 +$9( %((N 6+2:N %$6(' 2N 5(&25' '5$:IN*6 $N' 9I6I%/( (9I'(N&( )2UN' IN )I(/' N2 :$55$NT< I6 0$'( 5(*$5'IN* T+( &203/(T(N(66 25 $&&U5$&< 2) 6U&+ IN)250$TI2N 35I25 T2 &2N6T5U&TI2N '(T(50IN( T+( (;$&T /2&$TI2N 2) UN'(5*52UN' )$&I/ITI(6 $N' UTI/ITI(6 $N' 35(6(59( 6$0( )520 '$0$*( 35I25 T2 &2N6T5U&TI2N 9(5I)< /2&$TI2N $N' (/(9$TI2N 2) (;I6TIN* UN'(5*52UN' UTI/ITI(6 $T T+( &5266IN* 32INT6 :IT+ 352326(' UTI/ITI(6 T+( &2NT5$&T25 6+$// N2TI)< T+( 2:N(5 25 2:N(56 5(35(6(NT$TI9(6 I) &2N'ITI2N6 'I))(5 )520 T+26( 6+2:N 2N T+( '5$:IN*6 $N' 6+$// N2T %(*IN &2N6T5U&TI2N UNTI/ T+( &+$N*(' &2N'ITI2N +$6 %((N (9$/U$T(' &2NT$&T UN'(5*52UN' 6(59I&(6 $/(5T U6$

18002272600
T:2
2 :25.IN* '$<6 35I25 T2 'I**IN* 5(3$I5 UN'(5*52UN' UTI/ITI(6 '$0$*(' %< &2N6T5U&TI2N 23(5$TI2N6 &2NT5$&T25 6+$// %( 5(632N6I%/( )25 $N< $N' $// '$0$*(6 $662&I$T(' :IT+ &2NT5$&T25 6 )$I/U5( T2 (;$&T/< /2&$T(' $N' 35(6(59( UN'(5*52UN' )$&I/ITI(6 $N' UTI/ITI(6 I) T+(5( $5( $N< 'I6&5(3$N&I(6 %(T:((N T+( &2N6T5U&TI2N '2&U0(NT6 $N' (;I6TIN* &2N'ITI2N6 :+I&+ :I// $))(&T T+( :25. T+( &2NT5$&T25 6+$// %5IN* 6U&+ 'I6&5(3$N&I(6 T2 T+( '(6I*N 352)(66I2N$/ )25 $'-U6T0(NT %()25( 352&(('IN* :IT+ T+( :25. T+( &2NT5$&T25 6+$// %( 5(632N6I%/( )25 T+( 3523(5 )ITTIN* 2) $// :25. $N' )25 T+( &225'IN$TI2N 2) $// T5$'(6 6U%&2NT5$&T256 $N' 3(562N6 (N*$*(' U32N T+I6 &2NT5$&T &2NT5$&T25 6+$// %( 5(632N6I%/( )25 $// &225'IN$TI2N :IT+ T+( $335235I$T( UTI/IT< &203$NI(6 $N'25 $*(N&I(6 T2 9(5I)< T+( (;I6T(N&( $N'25 /2&$TI2N 2) $// UN'(5*52UN' UTI/ITI(6 35I25 T2 &200(N&(0(NT 2) :25. $N' 6+$// N2TI)< U6$ #
800
2272600 $T /($6T 48+2U56 IN $'9$N&( 2) (;&$9$TI2N &2NT5$&T25 I6 5(632N6I%/( T2 3529I'( $// 6U59(<IN* $N' 25 6T$.IN* %< $ /I&(N6(' 6U59(<25 )25 $// &2N6T5U&TI2N 3U5326(6 *$6 $N' (/(&T5I& 3$&I)I& *$6 $N' (/(&T5I& 6$NIT$5< 6(:(5
&IT< 2) 6&2TT6 9$//(< 6T250 '5$IN 6<6T(0
&IT< 2) 6&2TT6 9$//(< UTI/IT<N2TI)I&$TI2N6 *(N(5$/ N2T(6 1 N2 &+$N*( T2 T+( 3/$N6 6+$// %( 3(50ITT(' :IT+2UT 35I25 :5ITT(N $33529$/ %< T+( 2:N(5 25 2:N(56 5(35(6(NT$TI9(6 $N' T+( &IT< 2) 6&2TT 6 9$//(< 2 &2NT5$&T25 6+$// 9(5I)< /2&$TI2N6 (/(9$TI2N6 $N' IN9(5T6 2) (;I6TIN* UTI/IT< 35I25 T2 &200(N&(0(NT 2) :25. $N' 6+$// N2TI)< 2:N(5 25 2:N(56 5(35(6(NT$TI9(6 2) 9$5I$N&( )520 T+26( 6+2:N 2N T+( 3/$N6 3 I) $N< IN'I&$TI2N6 2) $5&+(2/2*I&$/ 5(0$IN6 $5( (N&2UNT(5(' 'U5IN* *5$'IN* $&TI9ITI(6 )25 $N< '(9(/230(NT :IT+IN T+( 352-(&T 6IT( $// :25. 6+$// %( +$/T(' :IT+IN 200 )22T 5$'IU6 2) T+( )IN' 2:N(5 6+$// 5(T$IN $ 4U$/I)I(' $5&+(2/2*I6T 5(T$IN(' T2 '(T(50IN( T+( N$TU5( 2) T+( 'I6&29(5< $N' 5(&200(N' $335235I$T( (9$/U$TI2N 352&('U5(6 4 T+( :IT+IN 3/$N6 $5( &23<5I*+T(' $6 $N UN3U%/I6+(' :25. %< &2*&I9I/ &2N6U/T$NT6 *52U3 IN& $// I'($6 '(6I*N6 $55$N*(0(NT6 $N' 3/$N6 IN'I&$T(' 25 5(35(6(NT(' %< T+(6( '5$:IN*6 $5( 2:N(' %< $N' T+( 3523(5T< 2) &2*&I9I/ &2N6U/T$NT6 *52U3 IN& $N' :(5( &5($T(' (92/9(' $N' '(9(/23(' )25 U6( 2N $N' IN &2NN(&TI2N :IT+ T+( 63(&I)I(' 352-(&T N2N( 2) 6U&+ I'($6 '(6I*N6 $55$N*(0(NT6 25 3/$N6 6+$// %( U6(' %< 25 'I6&/26(' T2 $N< 3(562N )I50 25 &25325$TI2N )25 $N< 3U5326( :+$T62(9(5 :IT+2UT T+( :5ITT(N 3(50I66I2N 2) &2*&I9I/ &2N6U/T$NT6 *52U3 IN& &23<5I*+T 2023 T2'' 5 &5($0(5 '%$ $6 &2*&I9I/ &2N6U/T$NT6 *52U3 IN& 5 &2NT5$&T25 6+$// %( 5(632N6I%/( )25 $// &225'IN$TI2N :IT+ T+( $335235I$T( UTI/IT< &203$NI(6 $N'25 $*(N&I(6 T2 9(5I)< T+( (;I6T(N&( $N'25 /2&$TI2N 2) $// UN'(5*52UN' UTI/ITI(6 35I25 T2 &200(N&(0(NT 2) :25. $N' 6+$// N2TI)< U6$ # 800
2272600 $T /($6T 48+2U56 IN $'9$N&( 2) (;&$9$TI2N 6 I) $N< IN'I&$TI2N6 2) $5&+(2/2*I&$/ 5(0$IN6 $5( (N&2UNT(5(' 'U5IN* *5$'IN* $&TI9ITI(6 )25 $N< '(9(/230(NT :IT+IN T+( 352-(&T 6IT( $// :25. 6+$// %( +$/T(' :IT+IN 200 )22T 5$'IU6 2) T+( )IN' 2:N(5 6+$// 5(T$IN $ 4U$/I)I(' $5&+(2/2*I6T 5(T$IN(' T2 '(T(50IN( T+( N$TU5( 2) T+( 'I6&29(5< $N' 5(&200(N' $335235I$T( (9$/U$TI2N 352&('U5(6

Page 279 of 619 ends

FOUND 1-1/2"

IRON PIPE, OPEN
PER 62-PM-7
LEGEND

VESTING TENTATIVE
MAP
1" = 20'
C0.2

PUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTEUE EXCLUSIVE USE EASEMENTEVAE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENTPAE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT

CA COMMON AREA

PSDE PRIVATE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT

ABBREVIATIONS
Start Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

10.03.2024
JB/DD
2021.01A
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420 2 A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
B
CD
E
F
AB
CD
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WESTBEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF LOT 1 AS SHOWN ON THAT MAP ENTITLED "PARCEL MAP OF THE RE-SUBDIVISION OF PART OF PARCEL A AS SHOWN ON VOLUME 13 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 32" FILED IN VOLUME 20 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 51, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY RECORDS. NORTH 61°39'50" EAST ELEVATIONS FOR THIS MAP ARE BASED ON THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY BENCHMARK NO.16, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF SCOTTS VALLEY DRIVE AND QUIEN SABE ROAD. ELEVATION = 560.40 (NO DATUM PROVIDED)

BOUNDARY LINES DELINEATED ON THIS MAP ARE BASED ON THE SURVEYOR'S

OPINION UTILIZING FOUND PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, RECORDED MAPS AND OTHER APPURTENANT RECORDS AS SHOWN IN THE REFERENCE DOCUMENTS.THIS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP REPRESENTS THE CONDITIONS OF THE SITE AT THETIME THE SURVEY FIELD WORK WAS COMPLETED AND SHOWS SURFACE OBJECTS ONLY. SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES, IF ANY, INCLUDING BUT NOT

LIMITED TO FOUNDATIONS, PILINGS, UNDERGROUND TANKS AND
UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES MAY NOT BE SHOWN.
100 MEASURED DISTANCE
(100)1 DATA PER 2015-0034997(100)2 DATA PER 20-PM-51(100)3 DATA PER 62-PM-7

REFERENCE DATA BASIS OF BEARINGS
NOTE

EVAE / PUEBOUNDARY LINELOT LINE

THE AREA DESIGNATED AS EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS
EASEMENT (EVAE) IS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS.

THE PUBLIC UTILITIES EASEMENT (PUE) IS DEDICATED FOR

PUBLIC USE OF UTILITIES, INCLUDING ACCESS,

CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF

WORKS, IMPROVEMENTS AND THEIR APPURTENANCES FOR THE

PURPOSES OF INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC
UTILITY FACILITIES.

THE SUBJECT PROJECT SITE WAS SURVEYED (BOTH

BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC) BY ALPHA LAND
SURVEYS, INC.

THE EXISTING LOT IS ZONED R-H (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) MINIMUM LOT AREAMAXIMUM LOT DENSITY: 3,000 S.F. / DWELLING UNIT (SEE SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA - CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 17.24)

EXISTING

PROPOSEDTHE PROPOSED LOT IS ZONED HIGN DENSITY R-H (NO CHANGE) TOTAL OF 19 UNITS

EASEMENT NOTES

UNIT COUNT

SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT

BASIS OF ELEVATIONS
ZONING
LOT A

1.038 ACRES
1 LOT SUBDIVISION FOR THE PURPOSE OF
SUBDIVIDING AIRSPACE FOR 19

CONDOMINUM UNITS
6,000 SQ. FT.

MINIMUM LOT WIDTH
60 FT.

MINIMUM LOT DEPTH
60 FT.

EVAE / PUE
5' PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT
PAE
6' PUE
5' PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT

Page 280 of 619 ends

EXISTING SITE AND
DEMOLITION PLAN 1" = 20' C1.1 ATTACH SIGN TO POST FENCE MATERIAL: ORANGE UV RESISTANT HIGH TENSILE STRENGTH POLYETHYLENE LAMINAR BARRICADE FABRIC

DRIP LINE
EDGE OF DISTURBED AREA Scale: NTS TREE PROTECTION 1 GRADE NOTES: 1. ALL PLANTS DESIGNATED BE SAVED SHALL BE PROTECTED FENCING CONSISTENT THE PEER REVIEW BIOLOGICAL ACCESSMENT PRODUCED FOR THIS PROJECT 2. INSTALL TREE PROTECTION FENCE AT TREE DRIP LINE AT EDGE DISTURBED AREA, AS SHOWN PLANS PRIOR START CONSTRUCTION. 3. SPACE TREE PROTECTION ZONE SIGNS AT A MINIMUM ONE EVERY 30 FEET. SIGN MUST BE A MINIMUM 2'X2' AND BE VISIBLE FROM SIDES THE FENCE. SIGN SHALL READ "TREE PROTECTION ZONE, KEEP OUT", BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH. 4. THERE SHALL BE STORAGE MATERIAL THE BOUNDARIES THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 5. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE MAINTAINED THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. TREE PROTECTION ZONE KEEP OUT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDE THE BID THE COST REMOVING ANY EXISTING SITE FEATURES AND APPURTENANCES NECESSARY ACCOMPLISH THE CONSTRUCTION THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO INCLUDE THE BID THE COST NECESSARY RESTORE SUCH ITEMS THEY ARE SCHEDULED REMAIN AS PART THE FINAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS. REFER PLANS DETERMINE EXCAVATION, DEMOLITION AND DETERMINE THE LOCATION THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE OWNER RESERVES THE REVIEW ALL MATERIALS DESIGNATED REMOVAL AND RETAIN OWNERSHIP SUCH MATERIALS. THE OWNER RETAINS ANY MATERIAL THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS THE OWNER HAVE THOSE MATERIALS REMOVED OFF SITE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED BE SAVED / STOCKPILED (R&S) REUSED / RELOCATED (R&R), ALL SITE FEATURES CALLED REMOVAL SHALL BE REMOVED THEIR FOOTINGS, ATTACHMENTS, BASE MATERIAL, ETC, TRANSPORTED FROM THE SITE BE DISPOSED A LAWFUL MANNER AT AN ACCEPTABLE DISPOSAL SITE AND AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. ALL EXISTING SITE FEATURES REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. ANY FEATURES DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED REPLACED THE SATISFACTION THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. DURING EARTHWORK OPERATIONS, CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CARE DISTURB EXISTING MATERIALS REMAIN, OUTSIDE THE LIMITS GRADING AND BACKFILL AND SHALL TAKE WHATEVER MEASURES NECESSARY, AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE, PREVENT ANY EXCAVATED MATERIAL FROM COLLAPSING. ALL BACKFILL MATERIALS SHALL BE PLACED AND COMPACTED AS SPECIFIED TO THE SUBGRADE REQUIRED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONTRACT WORK. SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S OPTION, CONCURRENCE THE OWNER, REUSE EXISTING GRAVEL MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRAVEL BORROW. ALL ITEMS CALLED REMOVAL SHALL BE REMOVED DEPTH INCLUDING ALL FOOTINGS, FOUNDATIONS, AND OTHER APPURTENANCES, EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. 'CLEAR AND VEGETATION' SHALL INCLUDE REMOVAL GRASS, SHRUBS, AND UNDERBRUSH, REMOVAL ROOTS, GRADING, INSTALLATION LOAM APPLICABLE), FINE GRADING, SEEDING AND ESTABLISHMENT THE CONTRACTOR. TREES DESIGNATED REMOVAL SHALL BE TAGGED CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. THE STORAGE MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT BE PERMITTED AT LOCATIONS DESIGNATED OWNER OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. PROTECTION STORED MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY THE CONTRACTOR. STRIP STORE EXISTING TOPSOIL LATER REUSE WHERE APPROPRIATE, AND AS NOTED ON PLAN, WITH APPROPRIATE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS. LOAM / TOP SOIL DESIGNATED REUSE AS GENERAL SHALL BE BLENDED SUITABLE BORROW MATERIAL AS SPECIFIED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING TREES REMAIN, CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TREE PROTECTION BARRIER AFTER CLEARING UNDERBRUSH AND TAKE DUE CARE TO PREVENT INJURY TO TREES DURING CLEARING OPERATIONS. SHEET NOTES: 1. REMOVE ASPHALT SECTION 2. SAWCUT AC PAVEMENT 3. REMOVE ROLLED CURB & GUTTER 4. REMOVE CURB 5. REMOVE AC BERM 6. TREE PROTECTION PER DETAIL AT RIGHT DEMOLITION AND SITE PREPARATION NOTES Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420 2 A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BCDEF ABCDEF

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WEST EXISTING TREE SCHEDULE Tree ID Trunk Size Circumfrance Description Action (inches) Diameter (inches) 1 28 9 Coast Live Oak Remain 2 58 18 Coast Live Oak Remain 3 54 17 Coast Live Oak Remain 4 107 34 Coast Live Oak Remain 5 132 42 Coast Live Oak Remain 6 29 9 Coast Live Oak Remain 7 49 16 Coast Live Oak Remain 8 141 45 Coast Live Oak Remain 9 38 12 Coast Live Oak Remain 10 85 27 Coast Live Oak Remain 11 33 11 Coast Live Oak Remain 12 33 11 Coast Live Oak Remain 13 53 17 Coast Live Oak Remain 14 28 9 Coast Live Oak Remain 15 61 19 Coast Live Oak Remain 16 88 28 Coast Live Oak Remain 17 49 16 Coast Live Oak Remain 18 86 27 Coast Live Oak Remain 19 44 14 Coast Live Oak Remain 20 42 13 Coast Live Oak Remain 21 72 23 Coast Live Oak Remain 22 27 9 Coast Live Oak Remain 23 59 19 Coast Live Oak Remain 24 34 11 Coast Live Oak Remain 25 51 16 Coast Live Oak Remain 26 61 19 Coast Live Oak Remain 27 68 22 Coast Live Oak Remain 28 104 33 Coast Live Oak Remain 29 41 13 Coast Live Oak Remain 30 45 14 Coast Live Oak Remain 31 28 9 Coast Live Oak Remain 32 33 11 Coast Live Oak Remain 33 44 14 Coast Live Oak Remain 34 35 11 Coast Live Oak Remain 35 97 31 Coast Live Oak Remain 36 47 15 Coast Live Oak Remain 37 46 15 Coast Live Oak Remain 38 68 22 Coast Live Oak Remain 39 48 15 Coast Live Oak Remain 40 47 15 Coast Live Oak Remain 41 25 6 Monterey Cypress Remain 0.00229 A S = AVERAGE SLOPE I = CONTOUR INTERVAL IN FEET L = COMB. LENGTH OF CONTOUR LINES WITHIN PARCEL A = AREA OF THE PARCEL TO BE SUBDIVIDED (IN ACRES) S = 8.84% I = 1 FOOT INTERVAL L =3,600 A = 1.038 ACRES S = 0.00229 1.038 (1) (3,600) AVERAGE SLOPE CALCULATION (PER SV HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS)

Page 281 of 619 ends

UP
2868
UP
UP
UP
UP

UP BASE UP
UP
16-UNIT CBU UNIT 9 10 UNIT 11 UNIT 12 13 14 UNIT 15 16 17 18 19 SITE IMPROVEMENTS 1" = 20' C2.1 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.
(QJLQHHUV3ODQQHUV
4444 6FRWWV 9DOOH\ 'ULYH 6XLWH 6
6FRWWV 9DOOH\ &$ 95066
8314384420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WEST T<3( $ &U5% *UTT(5 T<3( % &U5% T<3( & &U5% 3523(5T< /IN( 5(T$ININ* :$// 3$9IN* /(*(N' &U5%IN* $N' 0I6& I03529(0(NT N2T(6 IT(06 /(*(N' UNIT #1 UNIT #2 UNIT #3 UNIT #4 UNIT #5 UNIT #6 UNIT #8 NEW IMPERVIOUS AREAS DESCRIPTION AREA (SF) ROOF 14067 CONCRETE TOTAL (N) IMPERVIOUS AREA AC 29,182 3340 8140 PERVIOUS CONCRETE PAVERS 3635 T<3( $ &U5% *UTT(5 6(( '(T$I/ 1 6+((T &71 T<3( % 52//(' &U5% *UTT(5 6(( '(T$I/ 1 6+((T &71 T<3( & 9(5TI&$/ &U5% 6(( '(T$I/ 1 6+((T &71 $63+$/T &2N&5(T( 6(( '(T$I/ 4 6+((T &71 3('(6T5I$N 2N/< &2N&5(T( 6(&TI2N 6(( '(T$I/ 6 6+((T &71 9(+I&U/$5 &2N&5(T( 6(&TI2N 6(( '(T$I/ 5 6+((T &71 T5UN&$T(' '20(6 6(( '(T$I/ 7 6+((T &71 &U5% T$3(5 6(( '(T$I/ 2 6+((T &71 0$IN '5I9( $& 3$9(0(NT 6(&TI2N 3('(6T5I$N 2N/< &2N&5(T( 6(&TI2N 9(+I&U/$5 &2N&5(T( 6(&TI2N (;I6TIN* $& T2 5(0$IN 3(59I2U6 3$9(56 '(&20326(' *5$NIT( (;I6TIN* $& T2 %( 5(029(' *5IN* $N' 29(5/$< (;I6TIN* $& 3(59I2U6 3$9(5 6(&TI2N 6(( '(T$I/ 8 6+((T &72 &2N&5(T( 3$' )25 %I.( 3$5.IN* 6(( /$N'6&$3( 3/$N6 '(&20326(' *5$NIT( 6(( /$N'6&$3( 3/$N6 *5IN' $N' 29(5/$< (;I6TIN* 6T5((T 5(6T5I3( $&&25'IN*/<

Page 282 of 619 ends

UP
2868
UP
UP
UP
UP

UP BASE UP
UP
16-UNIT CBU

GRADING AND
DRAINAGE PLAN 1" = 10' C3.1 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WEST AB AGGREGATE BASE AC ASPHALT CONCRETE BLDG BUILDING BS BOTTOM OF STAIR BACK OF WALK CONC CONCRETE DWY DRIVEWAY EC EDGE OF CONCRETE EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT EL ELEVATION FINISH BFCOOR GROUND HP HIGH POINT INV INVERT ELEVATION LP LOW POINT NATURAL GROUND P.O.T. PATH OF TRAVEL PL PROPERTY LINE PVR PERVIOUS PAVER SD STORM DRAIN SDAD STORM DRAIN AREA DRAIN SDDI STORM DRAIN DROP INLET SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE TOP OF GRATE TS TOP OF STAIR TOP OF WALL UNDERGROUND ABBREVIATIONS LEGEND PERFORATED PIPE STORM DRAIN PIPE STORM DRAIN INLET STORM DRAIN MANHOLE 250 GRADING CONTOUR EXISTING CONTOUR RETAINING WALL 1. ALL AREAS RECEIVE SHALL BE STRIPPED A DEPTH BE DETERMINED THE SOILS ENGINEER. ANY (E) A.C. P.C.C. PAVING SHALL BE SCARIFIED REMOVED SUBGRADE PREPARED & COMPACTED AS SHOWN IN THESE PLANS. 2. ALL MATERIAL BE USED AS BUILDING PAD AREAS PARKING DRIVEWAY AREAS BE FREE ALL VEGETATION FOREIGN MATTER AND SHALL BE APPROVED THE SOILS ENGINEER. 3. ALL BUILDING PADS BE COMPACTED 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION; DRIVEWAY STREET AREAS TO BE COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION PER ASTM D1557-91. 4. BUILDING PADS TO BE LEVEL SIDE-TO-SIDE, FRONT-TO-REAR, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN. 5. STRIPPINGS MAY BE PLACED PLANTING AREAS; ALL EXCESS STRIPPING SHALL BE HAULED OFF. PAVING DEBRIS SHALL BE HAULED OFF TO AN APPROVED DISPOSAL SITE. 6. ALL SHOWN NOTED THESE PLANS SHALL BE STRICT ACCORDANCE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THE SOILS ENGINEER, ALL LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL MINIMUM STANDARDS AND THE LATEST ADDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE. 7. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED REMOVAL DURING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REPAIR ANY DAMAGE TO NEW CONDITION AT THEIR EXPENSE. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, SITE DIMENSIONS AND GRADES PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 9. ALL GRADING AND RELATED SHALL BE PERFORMED ACCORDANCE THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AND THE PROJECT'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. 10. GRADING SLOPES CUT AND SHALL EXCEED 2(H):1(V) UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 11. ALL SOFTSCAPE GRADES ADJACENT TO (N) BUILDINGS SHALL BE 8" (MIN.) BELOW FINISH FLOOR. 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE TO ENSURE DRAINAGE FLOWS AWAY FROM NEW BUILDINGS GENERAL GRADING NOTES MATCHLINE (SEE C3.2) UNIT 1 UNIT 2 UNIT 3 UNIT 4 UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 8

Page 283 of 619 ends

GRADING AND

DRAINAGE PLAN
1" = 10'
C3.2
Start Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

10.03.2024
JB/DD
2021.01A
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
16 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
CD
E
F
AB
CD
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST

AB AGGREGATE BASEAC ASPHALT CONCRETE

BLDG BUILDINGBFW BOTTOME FACE OF WALLBFS BOTTOM FACE OF STAIRBW BACK OF WALK

CONC CONCRETE

DWY DRIVEWAYEC EDGE OF CONCRETEEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEL ELEVATIONFF FINISH FLOOR

G GROUND

HP HIGH POINT

INV INVERT ELEVATION
LP LOW POINTNG NATURAL GROUNDP.O.T. PATH OF TRAVELPL PROPERTY LINEPVR PERVIOUS PAVER

SD STORM DRAINSDAD STORM DRAIN AREA DRAINSDDI STORM DRAIN DROP INLETSDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE

TBW TOP BACK OF WALLTG TOP OF GRATETS TOP OF STAIR

UG UNDERGROUND

ABBREVIATIONS
LEGEND

PERFORATED PIPE

STORM DRAIN PIPESTORM DRAIN INLETSTORM DRAIN MANHOLE
250 GRADING CONTOUR

EXISTING CONTOURRETAINING WALL
MATCHLINE (SEE C3.1)
UNIT 9
UNIT 10
UNIT 11
UNIT 12
UNIT 14
UNIT 15
UNIT 16
UNIT 17
UNIT 18
UNIT 13
UNIT 19

MATCHLINE (SEE ABOVE AND LEFT)

MATCHLINE (SEE BELOW AND RIGHT)

Page 284 of 619 ends

UP UP UP UP UP UP UTILITY PROVIDERS WATER: SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT GAS AND ELECTRIC: PG&E SANITARY SEWER: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY STORM DRAIN SYSTEM: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY UTILITY PLAN 1" = 10' C4.1 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420 2 A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BCDEF ABCDEF

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST
MATCHLINE (SEE C4.2) UNIT 1 UNIT 2 UNIT 3 UNIT 4 UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 8 WATER NOTES SANITARY SEWER NOTES ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO EXISTING REGULATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: 1. SVWD CUSTOMER ON-SITE DESIGN MANUAL 2. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES REGULATIONS. GENERAL WATER NOTES FIRE HYDRANT WATER METER STORM DRAIN/SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER LINE VALVE SEWER 1. STORM DRAIN PIPE SHALL BE PLASTIC PIPE, PER SECTION 64-2, "PLASTIC PIPE" CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. APPROVED SUBSTITUTE, AS NOTED PLAN;. ALL DRAINAGE PIPE SHALL BE SHIPPED AND STORED. ALL DRAINAGE PIPE SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE CALTRANS, SECTION 64-2, "PLASTIC PIPE." 2. ALL CONCRETE DRAINAGE INLETS CALLED THE PLANS SHALL BE CHRISTY BRAND PRECAST CONCRETE EQUIVALENT. ALL STRUCTURES SHALL BE STORED, HANDLED, AND INSTALLED PER THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. ALL GRATES PAVEMENT AREAS SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT. 3. ALL CONCRETE DRAINAGE INLETS CALLED THE PLANS SHALL HAVE A HEAVY RATED FRAME A ADA COMPLIANT AND BICYCLE PROOF GRATE. CATCH BASINS THAT HAVE SILT AND GREASE TRAPS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE PLAN. 4. JETTING OF BACKFILL MATERIALS TO ACHIEVE COMPACTION IS NOT ALLOWED. 5. ALL THE WATER PIPING SHALL BE AWWA CLASS 150 APPROVED EQUAL, ALL VALVES, ANGLES, AND THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CURRENT SVWD SPECIFICATIONS. 6. ALL FIRE SERVICE PIPING AND APPURTENANCES SHALL CONFORM NFPA STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS 7. ANY EXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED BE RELOCATED AS A PART THIS CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE. UNDERGROUND UTILITY NOTES LEGEND 1. P.O.C. TO (E) WATER MAIN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT LOCATION, DEPTH, SIZE AND MATERIAL PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION 2. DOMESTIC WATER METER PER SVWD DETAIL 2 SERVICE TAP PER SVWD STANDARD DETAIL, SHEET C7.4 3. GATE VALVE PER SVWD DETAIL, SHEET C7.4 4. BOLLARD, PER SVWD STD. 20, SHEET 7.5 5. FIRE HYDRANT PER DETAIL 10, SHEET C7.5 6. FIRE SERVICE, PER SVWD DETAIL 9, SHEET 7.5 7. BACKFLOW PREVENTOR PER SVWD DETAIL, SHEET C7.5 8. THRUST BLOCK PER SVWD STANDARD DETAIL 19, SHEET C7.5 1. POINT OF CONNECTION TO EXISTING SS MAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE TO VERIFY EXACT LOCATION, DEPTH, SIZE, & MATERIAL PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 2. INSTALL 4" SEWER LATERAL @ 2.0% MIN. 3. POINT OF CONNECTION TO BUILDING SEWER LATERAL 4. CLEANOUT PER DETAIL SS-04, SHEET C7.3 THRUST BLOCK

Page 285 of 619 ends

UP UP UP UP

SVC JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT

JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT
JT
UTILITY PLAN 1" = 10' C4.2 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST
MATCHLINE (SEE C4.1) UNIT 9 UNIT 10 UNIT 11 UNIT 12 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 13 UNIT 19 FIRE HYDRANT WATER METER STORM DRAIN/SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER LINE VALVE SEWER LEGEND SANITARY SEWER NOTES ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO EXISTING REGULATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: 1. SVWD CUSTOMER ON-SITE DESIGN MANUAL 2. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES REGULATIONS. GENERAL WATER NOTES UTILITY PROVIDERS WATER: SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT GAS AND ELECTRIC: PG&E SANITARY SEWER: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY STORM DRAIN SYSTEM: CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY 1. POINT OF CONNECTION TO EXISTING SS MAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE TO VERIFY EXACT LOCATION, DEPTH, SIZE, & MATERIAL PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 2. INSTALL 4" SEWER LATERAL @ 2.0% MIN. 3. POINT OF CONNECTION TO BUILDING SEWER LATERAL 4. CLEANOUT PER DETAIL SS-04, SHEET C7.3 FIRE SUPPRESSION THRUST BLOCK WATER NOTES 1. P.O.C. TO (E) WATER MAIN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT LOCATION, DEPTH, SIZE AND MATERIAL PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION 2. DOMESTIC WATER METER PER SVWD DETAIL 2 SERVICE TAP PER SVWD STANDARD DETAIL, SHEET C7.4 3. GATE VALVE PER SVWD DETAIL, SHEET C7.4 4. BACKFLOW PREVENTOR PER SVWD DETAIL, SHEET C7.4 5. IRRIGATION BACKFLOW PREVENTOR 6. THRUST BLOCK PER SVWD STD. 19, SHEET C7.5 7. FIRE SERVICE PER SVWD STD. 9, SHEET C7.5 8. BOLLARD PER SVWD STD. 20, SHEET C7.5 9. 1" BRANCHED SERVICE INSTALLATION PER SVWD STD. 3, SHEET C7.5 10. POINT OF CONNECTION TO RESIDENCE

Page 286 of 619 ends

BASE
2868
UP 16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080
BASE
BASE
2868
UP 16070 SECT. GAR. DR.
2650 SH
3080
BASE
2868
UP 16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080

FOR LV SPACE STACK METER & METER

TESTBLOCK

PULL/MAIN PANEL HOUSE
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080
BASE
BASE
2868
UP
16070 SECT. GAR. DR. 2650 SH
3080
BASE
2868
UP 16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080
BASE
UP 2868
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080
BASE
BASE
2868
UP 16070 SECT. GAR. DR.
2650 SH
3080
BASE
UP 2868
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080

SPACE FOR LV

METER STACK TESTBLOCK & METER

PULL/MAIN

HOUSE PANEL
BASE
BASE
UP 2868
16070 SECT. GAR. DR. 2650 SH
3080
BASE
UP 2868
16070 SECT. GAR. DR.

BASE
2650 SH
3080
UP
2868
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
BASE
UP
UP
16-UNIT CBU

STORM WATER

CONTROL PLAN
1" = 20'
C5.1
Start Date:Scale:Drawn:

Job:

Of Sheets
Sheet:

REVISIONS BY

10.03.2024
JB/DD
2021.01A
C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420 2 A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
B
CD
E
F
AB
CD
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST

UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS ARE
INTENDED TO:

1. STORE STORMWATER ONSITE AND BELOW
GRADE.

2. POND WATER BEFORE OVERFLOWING TO A
DRAIN INLET.

3. INFILTRATE COMPLETELY FOLLOWING EACH
RAIN EVENT.

UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS ARE NOT
INTENDED TO:

1. ALLOW COLLECTION OF SEDIMENT.

2. BE ACCESSED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN

AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL

THE RECOMMENDED ROUTINE MAINTENANCEACTIVITIES FOR UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS ARE:ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS:

1. REMOVE ANY SEDIMENT BUILD-UP, FALLEN
LEAVES, DEBRIS, AND TRASH.

2. CHECK STORM DRAIN INLET AT OUTLET.

REMOVE SEDIMENT BUILD-UP, FALLENLEAVES, DEBRIS, AND TRASH.

ANNUALLY, PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OFTHE RAINY SEASON:

1. OPEN INSPECTION PORT AND LOOK FOR

SIGNS OF SEDIMENT, LEAVES, DEBRIS,

AND/OR TRASH COLLECTION WITHIN THE
UG CHAMBERS. IF SEDIMENT, LEAVES,
DEBRIS, AND/OR TRASH IS OBSERVED,REMOVE BY MEANS OF A VACUUM TRUCK.

IF SIGNIFICANT SEDIMENT, LEAVES,

DEBRIS, AND/OR TRASH IS OBSERVED,

CONSULT A CIVIL ENGINEER OR LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT.

2. ORIFICE SHALL BE INSPECTED AND ANY
BLOCKAGE OF ANY KIND (I.E. SEDIMENT,
TRASH, ETC.) SHALL BE REMOVED

3. PRE-TREATMENT / CONTAMINANT

SCREENING INLET SHALL BE INSPECTED

AND ALL TRASH, LEAVES, DEBRIS AND/OR

SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED

4. INSPECT CHANNEL ADJACENT TO
DRIVEWAY OUT TO COX ROAD. ALL TRASH
AND DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED.

ANNUALLY, AT THE END OF THE RAINY
SEASON:

1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, VEGETATION,

AND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT IN THE

PRE-TREATMENT / CONTAMINANT
SCREENING INLET.

2. 1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, VEGETATION,

AND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FOUND

OTHER INLETS

3. DO NOT INSTALL ANY MATERIAL INTO THE

UNDERGROUND STORM CHAMBER VOID
SPACE.

MAJOR FACILITY CHANGES OR RENOVATION:

CONTACT THE PROJECT CIVIL ENGINEER
(C2G / CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP,INC.), OR OTHER QUALIFIED ENGINEER OR

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, IN THE EVENT

THAT MAJOR WORK IS CONTEMPLATED IN
OR ADJACENT TO THE FACILITY. MAJOR
WORK INCLUDES: · REPLACING FILTER-FABRIC ABOVE THE
ROCK EMBEDMENT. · MODIFYING THE “ENGINEERED” ELEMENTS

OF THE FACILITY, INCLUDING DRAININLETS, PIPES, SUBSURFACE DRAINS,

WATER BARRIERS, AND STRUCTURAL
ELEMENTS. · IMPROVEMENTS IN AREAS WHICH DRAIN
TO THE FACILITY; ESPECIALLY

IMPROVEMENTS WHICH WOULD INCREASE

THE AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WHICH
DRAINS TO THE FACILITY.

CONCEPTUAL MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE FOR UG CHAMBERS
PAVEMENTS:

1. COLLECT TRASH AND SWEEP
PAVEMENTS REGULARLY TOPREVENT ACCUMULATION OF SOIL,DEBRIS, AND TRASH.

LANDSCAPING:

1. REMOVE DEBRIS AND TRASH REGULARLY.

2. PRUNE OR CUT BACK PLANTS FOR HEALTH

AND TO ENSURE STORMWATER IS ABLE TO

FLOW INTO INLETS AND THROUGH CURB
CUTS.

3. CONTROL WEEDS BY MANUAL METHODS.

4. EXAMINE THE VEGETATION TO ENSURE

THAT IT IS HEALTHY AND DENSE ENOUGH TO
PROTECT SOILS FROM EROSION. REMOVE
AND REPLACE ALL DEAD AND DISEASEDVEGETATION.

STORM DRAIN INLETS AND PIPES

1. CLEAN STORM DRAIN INLETS AND OTHER

CONVEYANCE STRUCTURES BEFORE THE

WET SEASON TO REMOVE SEDIMENTS,
TRASH AND DEBRIS ACCUMULATED DURINGTHE SUMMER.

2. CONDUCT INSPECTIONS AND CLEAN AND

MAINTAIN STORM DRAIN INLETS AND

STORM DRAIN PIPES DURING THE RAINYSEASON ON A FREQUENCY NECESSARY TO

MAINTAIN THE SYSTEM IN PROPER
WORKING ORDER.

ANNUALLY, PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE
RAINY SEASON:

1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, DEAD VEGETATION,
AND ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT.

2. VISUALLY INSPECT ALL FACILITIES TO

DETERMINE IF ANY MAINTENANCE

ACTIVITIES ARE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO BE
PREPARED FOR THE UPCOMING SEASON.

3. INSPECT DRAINAGE OUTLETS FOR SIGNS OF
EROSION OR PLUGGING. IF MINOR EROSIONIS OBSERVED, BACKFILL THE ERODED AREA.ROCK RIP RAP OR A CONCRETE SPLASH PADMAY BE NEEDED TO AVOID FUTUREEROSION. IF SIGNIFICANT EROSION IS

OBSERVED, CONSULT A CIVIL ENGINEER OR
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.

4. INSPECT SOIL SLOPES FOR EVIDENCE OF
INSTABILITY OR EROSION. IF MINOREROSION IS OBSERVED, BACKFILL THEERODED AREA, AND COVER THE AREA WITHMULCH OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TOPREVENT FUTURE EROSION. IF SIGNIFICANTEROSION IS OBSERVED, OR IF THERE ISEVIDENCE OF INSTABILITY, CONSULT A CIVILENGINEER OR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.

ANNUALLY, AT THE END OF THE RAINY SEASON:

1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS, VEGETATION, AND
ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT.

2. DETERMINE IF ANY MAINTENANCE, REPAIR,

OR REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE

SCHEDULED, SINCE MANY OF THESE
ACTIVITIES NEED TO BE PERFORMED DURINGTHE DRY SEASON.

3. MANUALLY FLUSH ALL IRRIGATION VALVES
SERVING SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATIONZONES.

CONCEPTUAL GENERAL SITE AND

STORM DRAINAGE FACILITY MAINTENANCE

A B TOTAL

PROPOSED
TOTAL AREA 10,367 34,877 45,244
IMPERVIOUS AREA 0 26,345 26,345
ROOF 0 14,067 14,067
AC 0 3,635 3,635
CONCRETE 0 5,766 5,766
PAVERS 0 2,877 2,877
EQUIV. IMPERVIOUS AREA 0 23,900 23,900
*PAVERS ASSUMED 60% IMPERVIOUS
LANDSCAPE/NATURAL AREAS 10,367 8,531 18,898
RUNOFF COEFICIENT 0.25 0.68 0.58
TIME OF CONCENTRATION 10 10 10
RAINFALL INTENSITY (10YR) 2.4 2.4 2.4
RUNOFF RATE (CFS) 0.143 1.303 1.445
(25 YR) 0.171 1.563 1.735(50 YR) 0.193 1.759 1.951
(100 YR) 0.214 1.954 2.168
SCM #1
SCM #2
NET IMPERVIOUS AREA = 26,345 EISA = 23,900PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 1 THROUGH 4 ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECTPERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 1 : SITE DESIGN AND RUNOFF REDUCTION · MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS SURFACESPERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 2 : WATER QUALITY TREATMENT · LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TREATMENT SYSTEM BY MEANS OF GROUNDWATER INFILTRATION. · IMPLEMENTATION OF PERVIOUS PAVERS
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 3 : RUNOFF RETENTION · RETENTION ADDRESSED BY UNDERGROUND STORAGE BELOW CHAMBER RELEASE STRUCTURE.

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT 4 : PEAK MANAGEMENT · PEAK MANAGEMENT WILL BE ADDRESSED BY DECREASING ONSITE IMPERVIOUS AREA BY APPROXIMATELY 6,000 SQUARE FEET. DECREASING THE IMPERVIOUS AREA REDUCES THE ONSITE RUNOFF TO BE LESS THAN PRE-DEVELOPMENT RATES.

STORM WATER POST-CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
A
Scale: NTS
ONSITE DRAINAGE DIAGRAM 1
B
SCM #1
UG

INFILTRATION
& STORAGE
VESSEL
OUTLET
ABOVE

RETENTION
LIMIT

TO PUBLIC

RIGHT OF
WAY

SHEET FLOW

OFF PROPERTY

PERK FILTER

Page 287 of 619 ends

UP
2868
UP
UP
UP
UP

UP BASE UP
UP
16-UNIT CBU

EROSION CONTROL
PLAN 1" = 20' C6.1 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST SILT FENCE INLET SEDIMENT BARRIER FIBER ROLL DIRECTION OF FLOW WITH STORM DRAIN INSTALLED STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SEDIMENT CATCHER (SAND BAGS) SANITARY FACILITY CONCRETE/ C WASTE WASHOUT MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT STORAGE AREA NOTE: SEE SHEET C6.2 FOR BMP NOTES AND DETAILS LEGEND SWPPP MANAGER TO MARK KNOWN LOCATIONS CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS): PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES SHALL COMPLY WITH CALTRANS CONSTRUCTION SITE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (BMP) MANUAL, DATED MARCH 2024 EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS, SUCH AS FIBER ROLLS OR WATTLES, SHALL BE INSPECTED REGULARLY DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER EACH SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENT. MAKE NEEDED REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY. CHECK THE SIDEWALK AND STREET DAILY DURING DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION FOR SOIL DRAG-OUT, AND SWEEP IF NEEDED. ROUTINELY MAINTAIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT TO ENSURE IT REMAINS EFFECTIVE AT PREVENTING DRAG-OUT. STORE OPEN BAGS OF PARTICULATE, GRANULAR OR POWDER MATERIALS (SUCH AS PLASTER OR CONCRETE) INDOORS IF POSSIBLE. IF STORED OUTSIDE, THEY MUST BE KEPT COVERED OR CLOSED, AND DURING THE RAINY SEASON KEPT WITHIN SECONDARY CONTAINMENT. DUMPSTER LIDS MUST BE KEPT CLOSED AND SECURED WHEN NOT IN USE. SOIL & MATERIAL STOCKPILES: SOIL AND MATERIALS STOCKPILES MUST BE PROTECTED FROM RUNOFF/RUN-ON, WHEN NOT IN USE, BY BMPS SUCH AS SURROUNDED BY BERMS, FIBER ROLLS OR WATTLES AND COVERED WITH SHEETING OR TARPS. SOIL STOCKPILES SHOULD BE STORED ON A FLAT AREA. DURING THE RAINY SEASON, ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES ARE IN PLACE AND EFFECTIVE AT PREVENTING SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE SITE. PERVIOUS PAVERS OR PAVEMENT: PROTECT PERVIOUS PAVERS OR PAVEMENT, ONCE INSTALLED, SO THAT ANY REMAINING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES WILL NOT DAMAGE OR CLOG THE PAVERS/PAVEMENT. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT: INSTALL THE STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT AT THE PROJECT'S COMMENCEMENT. PORTA-POTTIES: DO NOT LOCATE PORTA-POTTIES ADJACENT TO WATERCOURSES OR STORM DRAIN INLETS. EROSION CONTROL NOTES

Page 288 of 619 ends

EROSION CONTROL
DETAILS 1" = 20' C6.2 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST
A
A 3' SECTION A-A SECTION B-B STAKE (TYP.)
VARIES SECTION B-B STRAW BALE (TYP.) 10 MIL PLASTIC STRAW BALE (TYP.) BINDING WIRE 10' MIN N.T.S. WOOD POST 3" X 3" X 8" CONCRETE WASHOUT 3' 3' PLAN N.T.S. TYPE "BELOW GRADE" Scale: NTS CONCRETE WASHOUT 5 SANDBAG BERM
VARIES 10 MIL PLASTIC WOOD FRAME SECURELY FASTENED AROUND ENTIRE PERIMETER WITH TWO STAKES 10 MIL PLASTIC 10 MIL PLASTIC LINING PLAN STAKE (TYP.) WOOD OR METAL STAKES (2 PER BALE) STAPLES (2 PER BALE) 4" STAPLE DETAIL 2" VARIES SANDBAG NOTES 1. ACTUAL LAYOUT DETERMINED IN FIELD. 2. THE CONCRETE WASHOUT SIGN SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 FT. OF THE TEMPORARY CONCRETE WASHOUT FACILITY. 10 MIL PLASTIC 10 MIL PLASTIC TWO-STACKED 2 X 12 ROUGH WOOD FRAME 10' MIN 10' MIN 1 8 IN DIA. STEEL WIRE BERMNATIVE MATERIAL (OPTIONAL) N.T.S. TYPE "BELOW GRADE" BLACK LETTERS 6" HEIGHT 0.5" LAG SCREWS CONCRETE WASHOUT SIGN DETAIL (OR EQUIVALENT) N.T.S. TYPE "BELOW GRADE" PLAN TYPICAL PROTECTION FOR INLET ON GRADE TYPICAL PROTECTION FOR INLET ON SUMP SPILLWAY, 1-BAG HIGH Scale: NTS INLET PROTECTION DETAIL 2 Scale: NTS ROCKED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
1 PONDING HT. STANDARD DETAIL TRENCH WITH NATIVE BACKFILL STEEL OR WOOD POST 12" MIN.

FLOW
FLOW8" GRAVEL
FLOW 9" MAX. STORAGE HT. 12" MIN. (RECOMMENDED) ALTERNATE DETAIL TRENCH WITH GRAVEL PONDING HT. THE HEIGHT OF A SILT FENCE SHALL NOT EXCEED 36 INCHES. STORAGE HEIGHT SHALL NEVER EXCEED 18". THE FENCE LINE SHALL FOLLOW THE CONTOUR AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE. IF POSSIBLE, THE FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE CUT FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL TO AVOID THE USE OF JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, FILTER CLOTH SHALL BE SPLICED ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST, WITH A MINIMUM 6-INCH OVERLAP AND BOTH ENDS SECURELY FASTENED TO THE POST. POSTS SHALL BE SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 10 FEET APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES). WHEN EXTRA STRENGTH FABRIC IS USED WITHOUT THE WIRE SUPPORT FENCE, POST SPACING SHALL NOT EXCEED 6 FEET. TURN THE ENDS OF THE FENCE UPHILL. A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 6 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER. WHEN STANDARD-STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC IS USED, A WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE SHALL BE FASTENED 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 WIRED TO THE FENCE, AND 6 INCHES OF THE FABRIC SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH. THE FABRIC SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36 INCHES ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EXISTING TREES. WHEN EXTRA-STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPACING ARE USED, THE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE ELIMINATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER FABRIC IS STAPLED OR WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POSTS. THE TRENCH SHALL BE BACKFILLED AND THE SOIL COMPACTED OVER THE TOE OF THE FILTER FABRIC. SILT FENCES PLACED AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE SHALL BE SET AT LEAST 6 FEET FROM THE TOE IN ORDER TO INCREASE PONDING VOLUME. SILT FENCES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFUL PURPOSE, BUT NOT BEFORE THE UPSLOPE AREA HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED, AND ANY SEDIMENT STORED BEHIND THE SILT FENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE SILT 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 4 FILTER FABRIC EXTRA STRENGTH NEEDED MESH SUPPORT WITHOUT WIRE Scale: NTS FIBER ROLLS3 2" MIN 4" MAX12" MIN LOCATE FIBER ROLLS ON LEVEL CONTOURS SPACED AS FOLLOWS: SLOPE INCLINATION 4 :1 (H:V) FLATTER: FIBER ROLLS SHOULD BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL 20 FT.SLOPE INCLINATION BETWEEN 4:1 AND 2:1 (H:V) FIBER ROLLS SHOULD BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL 15 FT. (A CLOSER SPACING IS MORE EFFECTIVE). SLOPE INCLINATION 2:1 (H:V) GREATER: FIBER ROLLS SHOULD BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM INTERVAL 10 FT. (A CLOSER SPACING IS MORE EFFECTIVE). THE ENDS THE FIBER UP SLOPE PREVENT FROM 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. MORE THAN ONE FIBER IS PLACED A ROW, THE ROLLS SHOULD BE OVERLAPPED, ABUTTED. REPAIR OR REPLACE SPLIT, TORN, UNRAVELING OR SLUMPING FIBER ROLLS. IF THE FIBER ROLL IS USED AS A SEDIMENT CAPTURE DEVICE, OR AS AN EROSION CONTROL DEVICE TO MAINTAIN SHEET FLOWS, SEDIMENT THAT ACCUMULATES IN THE BMP MUST 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 OF THEIR LOCATIONS TO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING THEM. 2. PRESERVE EXISTING VEGETATION, WHERE REQUIRED AND WHEN FEASIBLE, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE. 3. PHASE GRADING OPERATIONS, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, TO LIMIT AREAS OF DISTURBANCE AND TIME OF EXPOSURE 4. AVOID AND/OR MINIMIZE IMPACTS OF EXCAVATION AND GRADING DURING WET WEATHER AND IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING EXPECTED WET WEATHER. 5. MINIMIZE CUTS AND FILLS. 6. IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO MINIMIZE EROSION, MANAGE STORM WATER RUNOFF, AND PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FROM ENTERING STORM DRAINS. 7. ALIGN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT ROADS AND DRIVEWAYS ALONG SLOPE CONTOURS. 8. WASH VEHICLES AT AN APPROPRIATE OFF-SITE FACILITY. IF EQUIPMENT MUST BE WASHED ON-SITE, USE WASH DOWN AREAS DEVELOPED FOR SPECIFIC SITE REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVED BY THE CITY REPRESENTATIVE. DO NOT USE SOAPS, SOLVENTS, DEGREASERS, OR STEAM CLEANING EQUIPMENT, AND PREVENT WASH WATER FROM ENTERING STORM DRAINS. MINIMIZE SOIL MOVEMENT 1. STOCKPILED SOIL AND MATERIALS SHOULD BE COVERED AND STABILIZED WITH TARPS, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, HYDROSEEDING AND/OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS. 2. CREATE A BERM AND/OR INSTALL SILT FENCING AROUND STOCKPILED MATERIALS TO PREVENT STORM WATER RUNOFF FROM TRANSPORTING SEDIMENT OFFSITE. 3. USE STANDARD EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, PLANTING, MULCHING, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AND/OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS TO STABILIZE DISTURBED SOIL AND REDUCE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION. 4. USE OTHER SOIL STABILIZERS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CAPITOLA. STRUCTURES TO CONTROL AND CONVEY RUNOFF 1. CONVEY RUNOFF BY USE OF EARTH DIKES, DRAINAGE SWALES AND/OR DITCHES WHEN FEASIBLE. 2. USE SLOPE DRAINS TO COLLECT AND CONVEY WATER FOR DISCHARGE BELOW SLOPES WHEN FEASIBLE. 3. USE VELOCITY DISSIPATION DEVICES, FLARED CULVERT END SECTIONS AND/OR CHECK DAMS TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITY AND MITIGATE EROSION WHEN FEASIBLE. CAPTURE SEDIMENT 1. USE TERRACING, RIPRAP, SAND BAGS, ROCKS, APPROVED TEMPORARY VEGETATION AND/OR OTHER APPROVED BMP’S ON SLOPES TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITY AND TRAP SEDIMENTS. DO NOT USE ASPHALT RUBBLE OR OTHER DEMOLITION DEBRIS FOR THIS PURPOSE. 2. PROTECT STORM DRAIN INLETS FROM SEDIMENT-LADEN RUNOFF. STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION DEVICES INCLUDE GRAVEL BAGS, FILTER FABRIC FENCES AND BLOCK AND GRAVEL FILTERS. OTHER RUNOFF CONTROLS 1. TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN 2. SEDIMENT TRAP 3. 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 AND DISPOSED OF AS TRASH. CHEMICAL PAINT STRIPPING RESIDUE AND CHIPS AND DUST FROM MARINE PAINTS OR PAINTS CONTAINING LEAD OR TRIBUTYL TIN MUST BE DISPOSED OF AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE. 5. WHEN STRIPPING OR CLEANING BUILDING EXTERIORS WITH HIGH-PRESSURE WATER, COVER OR BERM STORM DRAIN INLETS. COLLECT (MOP OR VACUUM) BUILDING CLEANING WATER FOR DISPOSAL IN A PRE-AUTHORIZED MANNER. 6. RECYCLE, RETURN TO SUPPLIER OR DONATE UNWANTED WATER-BASED (LATEX) PAINT. 7. DRIED LATEX PAINT MAY BE DISPOSED OF IN THE TRASH. CEMENT AND CONCRETE WORK 1. AVOID MIXING EXCESS AMOUNTS OF FRESH CONCRETE OR CEMENT MORTAR ON-SITE. 2. STORE DRY AND WET CONCRETE AND CEMENT UNDER COVER, PROTECTED FORM RAINFALL AND RUNOFF. 3. WASH OUT CONCRETE TRANSIT MIXERS ONLY IN DESIGNATED WASH-OUT AREAS. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, RECYCLE WASHOUT BY PUMPING BACK INTO MIXERS FOR REUSE. DO NOT DISPOSE OF WASHOUT INTO THE STREET, STORM DRAINS, DRAINAGE DITCHES, OR CREEKS. DESIGNATED WASH-OUT AREAS MUST BE MAINTAINED TO PREVENT OVER FLOW. 4. WHENEVER POSSIBLE, RETURN CONTENTS OF MIXER BARREL TO THE OFF-SITE YARD FOR RECYCLING. DISPOSE OF SMALL AMOUNTS OF EXCESS CONCRETE, GROUT, AND MORTAR IN THE TRASH. ROADWORK/PAVEMENT 5. APPLY CONCRETE, ASPHALT, AND SEAL COAT DURING DRY WEATHER TO PREVENT CONTAMINANTS FROM CONTACTING STORMWATER RUNOFF. 6. COVER STORM DRAIN INLETS AND MANHOLES WHEN PAVING OR APPLYING SEAL COAT, SLURRY SEAL, FOG SEAL, AND SIMILAR MATERIALS. 7. ALWAYS PARK PAVING MACHINES OVER DRIP PANS OR ABSORBENT MATERIALS, SINCE THEY TEND TO DRIP CONTINUOUSLY. 8. WHEN MAKING SAW-CUTS IN PAVEMENT, USE AS LITTLE WATER AS POSSIBLE. COVER POTENTIALLY AFFECTED STORM DRAIN INLETS COMPLETELY WITH FILTER FABRIC DURING THE SAWING OPERATION AND CONTAIN THE SLURRY BY WET-VACUUMING, OR BY PLACING STRAW BALES, SANDBAGS, OR GRAVEL DAMS AROUND THE CATCH BASINS. AFTER THE LIQUID DRAINS OR EVAPORATES, SHOVEL OR VACUUM THE SLURRY RESIDUE FROM THE PAVEMENT OR GUTTER AND REMOVE FROM SITE. 9. WASH DOWN EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE ONLY WHEN THE WASH WATER CAN: (1) FLOW ONTO A DIRT AREA; (2) DRAIN ONTO A BERMED SURFACE FROM WHICH IT CAN BE PUMPED AND DISPOSED OF PROPERLY; OR (3) BE VACUUMED FROM THE AREA ALONG THE CURB WHERE SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED BY BLOCKING A STORM DRAIN INLET. 10. ALLOW AGGREGATE RINSE TO SETTLE, AND PUMP THE WATER TO THE SANITARY SEWER IF ALLOWED BY YOUR LOCAL WASTEWATER AUTHORITY. 11. DO NOT WASH SWEEPINGS FROM EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE INTO A STREET OR STORM DRAIN. COLLECT AND RETURN TO AGGREGATE BASE STOCKPILE, OR DISPOSE WITH TRASH. 12. RECYCLE BROKEN CONCRETE AND ASPHALT. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILL PREVENTION, SPILL REPORTING AND 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 OF THE COUNTY OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY. 10. ANY CONTAMINATED SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND REPLACED WITH ACCEPTABLE FRESH SOIL. 11. RESPONSE SHALL BE CARRIED OUT BY APPROPRIATELY TRAINED PERSONNEL UTILIZING SAFE PRACTICES. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES 1. DO NOT WASH DOWN PAVEMENT OR SURFACES WHERE SILT HAS BEEN DEPOSITED OR MATERIALS HAVE SPILLED. USE DRY CLEANUP METHODS. 2. AVOID CONTAMINATING CLEAN RUNOFF FROM AREAS ADJACENT TO YOUR SITE BY USING BERMS AND/OR TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES TO DIVERT WATER FLOW AROUND THE SITE. 3. COVER EXPOSED PILES OF SOIL, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND WASTES WITH PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS. BEFORE IT RAINS, SWEEP AND REMOVE MATERIALS FROM SURFACES THAT DRAIN TO STORM DRAINS, CREEKS, OR CHANNELS. 4. PLACE TRASH CANS AROUND THE SITE TO REDUCE POTENTIAL LITTER. DISPOSE OF NON-HAZARDOUS CONSTRUCTION WASTES IN COVERED DUMPSTERS OR RECYCLING RECEPTACLES. RECYCLE LEFTOVER MATERIALS WHENEVER POSSIBLE. 5. DISPOSE OF ALL WASTES PROPERLY. MATERIALS THAT CAN NOT BE REUSED OR RECYCLED MUST BE TAKEN TO AN APPROPRIATE LANDFILL OR DISPOSED OF AS HAZARDOUS WASTE, AS APPROPRIATE. 6. COVER OPEN DUMPSTERS WITH PLASTIC SHEETING OR A TARP DURING RAINY WEATHER. SECURE THE SHEETING OR TARP AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DUMPSTER. IF THE DUMPSTER HAS A COVER, CLOSE IT. 7. TRAIN YOUR EMPLOYEES AND INFORM CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS ABOUT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR COMPLIANCE. NOTE: 1. INSPECT AND REPAIR FENCE AFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN NECESSARY. 2. REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DEPOSITED AT AN AREA THAT WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE SEDIMENT OFF-SITE AND CAN BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. 3. SILT FENCE SHALL BE REPLACED ON SLOPE CONTOURS TO MAXIMIZE PONDING EFFICIENCY. FILTER FABRIC ATTACH SECURELY TO UPSTREAM SIDE OF POST. WOOD POST 36" HIGH MAX 4"x6" TRENCH WITH COMPACTED BACKFILL 10 FT MAX SPACING WITH WIRE SUPPORT FENCE 6 FT MAX SPACING WITHOUT WIRE SUPPORT FENCE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS VERTICAL SPACING MEASURED ALONG THE FACE OF THE SLOPE VARIES BETWEEN 10' AND 20' NOTE: INSTALL FIBER 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 FIBER ROLLS SLOPE VARIES FIBER ROLL 8"
∅ MIN 3/4"X3/4" WOOD STAKES WHEEL WASH AREA PROPERTY LINE STD. CURB 20' MINIMUM WIDTH OF ENTRY RAMP - FULL WIDTH DRAINAGE 50' MIN. SILT FENCE (SEE SILT FENCE DETAIL) 15' RADIUS (TYP) NOTES: 1. INTENDED FOR SHORT-TERM USE. 2. USE TO INHIBIT NON-STORM WATER FLOW. 3. ALLOW FOR PROPER MAINTENANCE AND CLEANUP. 4. BAGS MUST BE REMOVED AFTER ADJACENT OPERATION IS COMPLETED 5. NOT APPLICABLE IN AREAS WITH HIGH SILTS AND CLAYS WITHOUT FILTER FABRIC. EDGE OF PAVEMENT INLET SANDBAGS 2-BAGS INLET EDGE OF PAVEMENT SPILLWAY, 1-BAG HIGH SANDBAGS 2-BAGS LATH & FLAGGING ON ALL SIDES PLYWOOD 48" X 24" PAINTED WHITE N.T.S. N.T.S. EROSION CONTROL NOTE 1. IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS REQUIRED THE LIFE THE PROJECT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY AND THE ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS 2. CONTRACTOR PROVIDE BACK-UP EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES (SOIL STABILIZATION) SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS STRAW WATTLES, SILT FENCE, GRAVEL INLET FILTERS, AND/OR SEDIMENT TRAPS BASINS. ENSURE CONTROL MEASURES ARE ADEQUATE, PLACE, AND OPERABLE CONDITIONS. SEDIMENT CONTROLS, INCLUDING INLET PROTECTION, ARE NECESSARY SHOULD BE A SECONDARY DEFENSE BEHIND GOOD EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. 3. ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPAIRED 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 EXTENDED STORM EVENTS, IDENTIFY AREAS THAT CONTRIBUTE EROSION AND SEDIMENT PROBLEMS ANY OTHER POLLUTANT DISCHARGES. 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 CONTROL STORM WATER (E.G. GRAVEL BAGS AT CATCH BASIN INLETS).

Page 289 of 619 ends

DETAILS NONE C7.1

WALL HEIGHT GEOGRID KEYSTONE

WALL HEIGHT TM GEOGRID KEYSTONE

WALL HEIGHT TM CASE A CASE B CASE C
f
g = 32° = 125 pcf = 125 pcf
f
g = 32° = 125 pcf
f
g = 32° q = 100 psf 1
2 BASIC GEOGRID PLACEMENT CHART * GROOVES The elongated tail section provides additional stability for straight walls as the tail piece rests on the unit below it. Remove the extended tail pieces at the grooves to return the block shape to its 30° sides when building tight convex curves. Slope stability analysis diagram e n g t o s l i
l a n e
S S e a r s t r e n g t o s o i l Global failure plane Surcharge q H = height of embankment Center of rotation e TYPICAL WALL SECTION TERMS TOPSOIL COMPACTED REINFORCED BACKFILL ZONE f g RETAINED BACKFILL f g 24" e MINIMUM AUTOMATIC SETBACK 1/4" PER COURSE KEYSTONE CAP UNIT 4"H x 18W x 12"D a CRITICAL FAILURE PLANES BEING ANALYZED GEOGRID REINFORCEMENT ATTACHED TO INTERLOCKING FIBERGLASS PINS AT KEYSTONE UNIT DRAINING GRANULAR COMPACTED BASE AND BACKFILL FOUNDATION SOIL f g i
r 45°- f
2 e 12" Scale: NTS KEYSTONE BLOCK RETAINING WALL
8 Elevation 6" Crushed Rock or Unreinforced Concrete Leveling Pad 8" or 16" Step Top of Wall Steps (2) - 4" Cap Units or (1) - 8" Cap Unit Note: 1. Secure all cap units with Keystone Kapseal or equal. 8" Keystone Unit 4" Cap Unit Geogrid Installation at Corners Note: 1. Check with manufacturer specifications on correct direction of orientation for geogrid to obtain proper strength. 2. Corner units recommended for outside corners. Availability May Vary. H / 4 H / 4 H / 2
H / 2 Additional Drainage Fill Extend Wall Height / 2 3" of Soil Fill is Required Between Overlapping Geogrid for Proper Anchorage (Typ.) Additional Geogrid Overlap Extend Wall Height / 4 Drainage Fill Leveling Pad Scale: NTS CURB TRANSITION 3 2' TRANSITION TYPE "C" VERTICAL CURB (SEE PLANS FOR CONTINUATION) TYPE "B" SPILL AND/OR CATCH CURB & GUTTER (SEE PLANS FOR CONTINUATION) FLOW LINE AND/OR BFC WITHIN TRANSITION AREA SHALL ALIGN WITH ADJACENT CURB AND GUTTERS

0.67' SAND OR
AGGREGATE BASE 1. TYPE A, B & C 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. TYPE C CURB TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER (CATCH) * CROSS SLOPE OF GUTTER AT CURB CUTS SHALL BE 1" IN 20" 2" SAND OR A.B. 4" CONCRETE 6" 6" A.B. 2" A.C. 6" SCORELINE 6" 1-1/2" R = 12" 6" MIN. 12" SEE NOTE #3 REGARDING REBAR REQUIREMENTS 6" 3/4" * R = 1" R = 1 2" 31-1/2" 24" 1-1/2" 6" 6" 2" 6" TOP OF CURB FACE OF CURB R=1/2" 8" Scale: NTS CONCRETE CURBS & GUTTERS 1 TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER (CATCH) TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER (SPILL) BOTTOM FACE OF CURB (BFC) SLOPE SAND OR AGGREGATE BASE TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER (SPILL) * CROSS SLOPE OF GUTTER AT CURB CUTS SHALL BE 1" IN 20" 6" MIN. 12" SEE NOTE #3 REGARDING REBAR REQUIREMENTS 6" R = 1" R = 12" 31-1/2" 24" 1-1/2" 6" 6" 6" TOP OF CURB FACE OF CURB R=1/2" SLOPE TYPE V-VALLEY GUTTER 48" 24" 2" 6" MIN. 6" MIN.

SAND OR
AGGREGATE BASE COMPACT BASE MATERIAL TO 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION Scale: NTS TRUNCATED DOMES, OFF-SET PATTERN

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 REQUIRED BENEATH ALL TRUNCATED DOMES. INSTALLING TRUNCATED DOMES ON ASPHALT CONCRETE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. CONCRETE SECTION (PCC) REQUIRED. SEE NOTE BELOW MEDIUM BROOM FINISH PREPARE SUBGRADE PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT #4 @ 18" O.C. BOTH DIRECTIONS 6" 12" 6" NOTE 1. TYPE OF CONCRETE: CLASS A 2. DOWEL WITH #4 BARS, 12" LONG, AT 24" ON CENTERS, EMBEDDED 4" WITH EPOXY IN EDGE OF EXISTING CONCRETE. 3. DOWELING & REINFORCING TO BE PROVIDED AT JOINTS. 4. SEE DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2 FOR CONCRETE JOINT REQUIREMENTS 6" Scale: NTS PEDESTRIAN ONLY CONCRETE SECTION 6 6" AB MIN. BELOW CONC. Scale: NTS VEHICULAR CONCRETE SECTION 5 MEDIUM BROOM FINISH #4 @ 30" O.C. BOTH DIRECTIONS 4" 10" NOTE 1. TYPE OF CONCRETE: CLASS A 2. DOWEL WITH #4 BARS, 12" LONG, AT 24" ON CENTERS, EMBEDDED 4" WITH EPOXY IN EDGE OF EXISTING CONCRETE. 3. DOWELING & REINFORCING TO BE PROVIDED AT JOINTS. 4. SEE DETAIL 6, SHEET C6.2 FOR CONCRETE JOINT REQUIREMENTS 5. PREPARE SUBGRADE PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 6" 6" AB 4" TYP EDGE OF WALK 3" MAX THICKENED EDGE @ SWALE 6" 10" 2' R=1" TOP OF CURB TOP OF PAVEMENTCONSTRUCTION JOINT 2' 6" Scale: NTS CURB TAPER DETAIL 2 4 PAVEMENT SECTION
4 (N) 13" AB CLASS II COMPACTED TO 95% R.C. (N) 4" AC TYPE B - 1/2" MAX. MED. (2 LIFTS MIN.) LIFTS SHALL BE CONDUCTED PER CAL TRANS SPECS SECTION 39-6.01 CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EX AND RECOMPACT 1' BELOW (N) SUB-BASE TO 95% R.C. CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EX AND RECOMPACT 1' BELOW UPPER SUBGRADE TO 90% R.C. Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WEST Scale: NTS FIRE DEPTARTMENT CONNECTION (FDC) 9 Paint FDC: Red CATHODIC PROTECTION NOTE: THE PIPELINESWHICHARE THE SUBJECTOF THIS CATHODICPROTECTIONSYSTEMARE THE METALLICFITTINGSON THE DOMESTIC AND FIRE PROTECTIONPIPELINES. ALL METALLICFITTINGS& VALVES SHALL BE WRAPPEDWITH 8-MIL POLYETHYLENEIN ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA C-105. 2-2.5" FDC WITH BRASS CAPS 34" 4" 6" 4' SQ (MIN) ENGRAVED BRASS IDENTIFICATION PLATE STATING: F.D.C. SERVICING "(BLDG. NAME)" 4" CHECK VALVE CONCRETE WWF 150x150-W5.0xW5.0 4"∅ DIP SPOOL TO FIT (FLxPE) 4" MEGAFLANGE SERIES 2106 INSTALL NEW 4"∅ DIP 90° ELBOW UNDISTURBED EARTH

Page 290 of 619 ends

DETAILS NONE C7.2 Scale: NTS U23 CHRISTY BOX DROP INLET (2' X 2') 2 KNOCK 23" 12" 15-1/2" 19" 22-1/2" *6" EXPOSED REBAR TO ALLOW JOB SITE POURING OF FRAME AND GRATE AT FINISHED GRADE ELEV. PER PLAN. REBAR TO BE USED INSTEAD EXTENSIONS IN STREETS AND PARKING LOTS. REMAINING 18 " TOP OF BASIN WILL BE POURED IN PLACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS. GROOVED TO RECEIVE TONGUE OF GRADE RINGS, CURB INLETS, ETC. 6" PER JOB SPECIFICATION 24" 24" 24" WITHOUT 2" WEEP HOLES GRATE FRAME 6" EXTENSION* 6" PER JOB SPECIFICATION CAST-IN GALVANIZED FRAME FOR GRATES 1 1 2" X 1
1 2" ANGLE IRON WITH ANCHOR BOLTS. - KNOCK-OUTS AVAILABLE IN GRADE RINGS AND CATCH BASINS. - OPENINGS, LOCATIONS AND SIZES TO JOB SPECIFICATIONS. - WITH OR WITHOUT BOTTOM. - PROGRESSIVE WEBBED KNOCK-OUTS PROVIDE MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY, PERMITTING PIPE OF ANY SIZE TO BE NEATLY AND QUICKLY GROUTED IN AT JOB SITE - STANDARD TONGUE & GROOVE GRADE RINGS AVAILABLE IN 6" INCREMENTS UP TO 4' HIGH. - ALL REINFORCING STEEL MEETS ASTM SPECIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED. STRUCTURE BACKFILL EXISTING A.C. AND COMPACTED BASE ROCK SAND BACKFILL COMPACTED 6" MIN. 12" MAX. AT TOP OF PIPE

OUTSIDE OF RIGHT OF WAY COMPACTION
SHALL BE 85% MIN. 95% R.C. 90% R.C. 3" MIN. 5' 12" MIN. 4" MIN. 6" MIN. 12" MAX. CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT TO PRODUCE A STRAIGHT VERTICAL FACE AGAINST WHICH TO BUTT TRENCH REPAIR. REPAIR SHALL BE REPLACE IN KIND. 2. 6" MIN. 6" MIN. TRENCH WIDTH DETERMINED BY PIPE DIAMETER. SAW CUT ALL HARD SCAPE AREAS. NOTES: 1. 2. Scale: NTS STANDARD UTILITY TRENCH 5 Scale: NTS SEWER/STORM CLEAN OUT DETAIL 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 WYE FITTING Scale: NTS BIOFILTRATION SECTION 6 GENERAL NOTE: 1. PROVIDE CLEANOUTS AT ENDS OF PERF PIPE DETAIL NOTES 1. MAX WATER ELEVATION (BIO-RET ELEVATION) 2. INSTALL 6" PERFORATED PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOWN, CONNECT TO OVERFLOW STRUCTURE. PERF PIPE TO CONNECT TO OVERFLOW SYSTEM. 3. 75% SAND (ASTM C-33) & 25% PEAT MIX 4. 3/4" CLEAN DRAIN ROCK WRAPPED IN MIRIFFI FILTER FABRIC (OR SUBSTITUTE APPROVED BY ENGINEER) W/ 2' MIN. OVERLAP. 5. INSTALL 6" SOLID PIPE (INVERT ELEVATION VARIES) 6. INSTALL OVERFLOW INLET (BYPASS FOR LARGER STORM EVENTS) 7. MODIFIED TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER PER DETAIL 1, SHEET C4.2 LOWEST ADJACENT GRADE BIO-RET ELEV. B/TRENCH 1 3 T/SWALE
3 1 TG VARIES PER PLAN 15-7/8" 15-7/8" 3/4"6-1/4" 6" or 12" 12" 22" 9-1/2"6-1/2" 16" 16"18-3/8" 18-3/8"11" 1-3/4" V64-71C Grate 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. 10"± 6-1/2"± FINISHED GRADE ELEV PER PLANS GRATE 10" x 6" PVC BODY 10" PVC INLINE NYLOPLAST OR APP'D SUBSTITUTE WATERTIGHT ADAPTER 6" DOUBLE WALL HDPE PIPE SNAP COUPLERS (TYPICAL) 90° ELBOW 11-1/4"± AS REQUIRED INVERT "D" NOTE: ALL GRATES IN SIDEWALKS OR OTHER CONCRETE SURFACES SHALL BE STANDARD, LIGHT-DUTY BRONZE WITH LOCKING BAR (ADA APPROVED. ALL OTHER GRATESSHALL BE STANDARD LIGHT-DUTY CAST IRON WITH LOCKING BAR. 10"± 7-1/2"± FINISHED GRADE ELEV PER PLANS GRATE 10" x 6" PVC BODY 10" PVC INLINE NYLOPLAST OR APP'D SUBSTITUTE WATERTIGHT ADAPTER 6" DOUBLE WALL HDPE PIPE WATER TIGHT COUPLERS 11-1/4"± AS REQUIRED 6"±INVERT 10" OR 12" DOUBLE WALL HDPE PIPE (SEE PLANS FOR SPECIFIC SIZE) (TYPICAL) GRATES 1/2" MAX IN DIRECTION OF TRAVEL TO PREVENT ROTATION ENCASE ELBOW IN A 6" CONCRETE FOOTING D = DEPTH PER PLAN GRATES 1/2" MAX IN DIRECTION OF TRAVEL Scale: NTS 10" DIAMETER INLINE AREA DRAIN 3 Scale: NTS 10" DIAMETER TERMINAL AREA DRAIN
4 Chamber Specifications End Cap Specifications NOTES: 1. \G (203 g/m
2) NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE SHALL BE PLACED ON BOTH SIDES OF THERMOPLASTIC TO PROTECT AGAINST ANGULAR AGGREGATE ON THE WATER SIDE AND FROM PROTRUSION ON THE SOIL SIDE AT ANY LOCATION IN THE SYSTEM (SEE THERMOPLASTIC LINER DETAIL) \G Scale: NTS HS180 STORMWATER CHAMBER STANDARD DETAIL
9 (OR SUBSTITUTE APPROVED BY ENGINEER) LINERDETAIL INS3ECTION3ORT ENDCA3 CHA0BER STANDARDCHA0BERSECTION NOTES: 1. 4" (100 mm) INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE CONNECTED THROUGH A CORED HOLE, CENTERED ON A VALLEY BETWEEN (2) TWO CORRUGATIONS. 6" (150 mm) OR 8" (200 mm) INSPECTION PORTS MAY BE CONNECTED THROUGH A CORED HOLE, CENTERED ON A CORRUGATION. 2. TAP TEE CONNECTION CAN CONSIST OF QWICKSEAL, INSERTA TEE OR APPROVED ENGINEERING EQUIVALENT. 3. ALL PVC FITTINGS TO BE SOLVENT CEMENTED. 4. PVC MAY BE EITHER SDR 35 OR SCH 40 5. CORED HOLE SIZES AS FOLLOWS: 4" (100 mm) CUT TO 5" (125 mm); 6" (150 mm) CUT TO 7" (180 mm); 8" (200 mm) CUT TO 9" (230 mm) Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22
RIDGEWOOD WEST Scale: NTS PERVIOUS PAVEMENT SECTION
8 ∅ NOTE: SURFACE INFILTRATION SHALL BE CONDUCTED TO CONFIRM MINIMUM ALLOWABLE INFILTRATION RATE IS BEING ACHIEVE. APPROVED TEST METHODS ARE: 1. ASTM C1701 AND C1781 2. 2nd NATURE'S BMP RAM FIELD PROTOCOLS. NOTE: MINIMUM ALLOWABLE ALLOWABLE INFILTRATION RATE TO BE DEMONSTRATED PRIOR TO LAND DIVISION APPROVAL

Page 291 of 619 ends

CITY OF SCOTTS
VALLEY DETAILS NONE C7.3 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST

Page 292 of 619 ends

SCOTTS VALLEY
WATER DETAILS NONE C7.4 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST

Page 293 of 619 ends

SCOTTS VALLEY
WATER DETAILS NONE C7.5 Start Date: Scale: Drawn: Job: Of Sheets Sheet: REVISIONS BY 10.03.2024 JB/DD 2021.01A C G /CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP, INC.

Engineers/Planners
4444 Scotts Valley Drive / Suite 6
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
831.438.4420
2 A
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 16
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F

ERBA LANE

SCOTTS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
APN 022-481-18 AND 022-481-22

RIDGEWOOD WEST

Page 294 of 619 ends

BASE ERBA LANE
JT JT

JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT SVC SVC JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT 16-UNIT CBU R17'-6" R18'-0" R22'-6" BLDG 1 UNIT 1 BLDG 2 BLDG 3 BLDG 4 UNIT 2 UNIT 3 UNIT 4 UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 7 UNIT 8 UNIT 9 UNIT 10 UNIT 11 UNIT 12 UNIT 13 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 19 SYMBOL CODE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT QTY TREES ACE PAL ACER PALMATUM / JAPANESE MAPLE WUCOLS (M) 15 GAL. 2 ARB STR ARBUTUS UNEDO / STRAWBERRY TREE WUCOLS (L) 15 GAL. 6 LAG NAT LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA X FAURIEI 'NATCHEZ' / NATCHEZ CRAPE MYRTLE WUCOLS (L) 15 GAL. 17 PIT EUG PITTOSPORUM EUGENIOIDES / LEMONWOOD WUCOLS (UNK) 15 GAL. 2 QUE AGR QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA / COAST LIVE OAK WUCOLS (VL) 24" BOX 1 TRI ELE TRISTANIA LAURINA 'ELEGANT' / ELEGANT WATER GUM WUCOLS (M) 24" BOX 5 ULM PAR ULMUS PARVIFOLIA / CHINESE ELM WUCOLS (L) 24" BOX 4 TREE LEGENDEXISTING TREE TO REMAIN 3 LARGE EVERGREEN SHRUBS LARGE, EVERGREEN SHRUBS USED AS FOUNDATION PLANTING, BACKGROUND PLANTING, AND FOR SCREENING. (LOW TO MEDIUM WATER USE). SEE SHEET L1.4 FOR PLANT LIST MID-GROUND SHRUBS SMALL MID-GROUND SHRUBS SELECTED FOR INTEREST AND COLOR. PREDOMINATELY LOW WATER USE. SEE SHEET L1.4 FOR PLANT LIST SHRUBS & GROUNDCOVER SEE SHEET L1.5-1.6 FOR PLANT LIST NATIVE GRASSLAND / RESTORATION MIX NON-IRRIGATED TURF & NO MOW FESCUE C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S Architecture Planning Interiors 444 Spear Street, Suite 105 San Francisco, CA 94105 www.hunthalejones.com t. 415-512-1300 f. 415-288-0288 DATE: PROJECT: RIDGEWOOD WEST CITY VENTURES ERBA LANE SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066 1.16.25 317073 SCALE: CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN L1.1 1" = 20'-0" N23076 0' 20' 40' 1" = 20' PROJECT NARRATIVE SEE SHEET L1.4-1.6 FOR PLANT SPECIES AND IMAGES (3) BIKE RACKS (6 SHORT TERM SPACE) PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PER ODS VI.B.1, TYP. Landscape at Ridgewood West Townhomes provides a rhythmic and natural tree canopy, serving as buffer and screen to the adjacent residences, while grounding the architecture with evergreen planting. Pedestrian circulation, as well as amenity areas, are removed from the street and directly face the preserved riparian canopy. Pockets of naturalized planting abut the preserved open space, while existing natural surface trails under the existing canopy are retained. Residents have full use of private front yard areas, buffered by open rail wood fencing. Passive uses, including picnic tables set in decomposed granite, and a meadow of native and no-mow fescue, provide welcome opportunities to enjoy the view. PROPOSED NATURAL SURFACE TRAIL TO MACDORSA PARK, FINAL ALIGNMENT TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY STAFF DURING CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RIPARIAN BUFFER / EXISTING TREE DRIPLINE COMMON OPEN SPACE PER ODS VI.B.2: 421 SF AMENITY AREA (INCL. PICNIC TABLES AND SEATING) 714 SF NO-MOW TURF AREA CLUSTER MAIL BOX UNIT & TRASH RECEPTACLE EXISTING STEPS TO REMOVE TOTAL SITE AREA: 46,378 SF LANDSCAPED AREA: 7,768 SF TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA PER SVMC §17.20.040(I) LANDSCAPED AREA REQUIRED = 46,378 SF X 10% = 4,638 SF LANDSCAPED AREA PROVIDED = 7,768 SF > 4,638 SF NOTE: ALL LANDSCAPED AREA WILL BE PERMANENTLY MAINTAINED. PER ODS VI.B.1. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 1,943 SF PER ODS VI.B.2. COMMON OPEN SPACE: 962 SF PARKING AREA: 1,364 SF LANDSCAPED AREA: 332 SF > 10% OF 1,364 SF = 137 SF TRANSFORMER, SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS; TRANSFORMER SCREENING, SEE DETAIL 1/L1.11 DECOMPOSED GRANITE PATH WITHIN EXISTING TREE DRIPLINE, TYP. CONCRETE PATH OUT OF EXISTING TREE DRIPLINE ONLY, TYP. SHRUB & GROUNDCOVER LEGEND TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES (EXCL. EXISTING): 37 24" BOX TREES REQUIRED: 37 TREES X 25% = 10 TREES 24" BOX TREES PROPOSED: 10 TREES PROPERTY LINE, TYP. 1. PLANTING SPECIES WITH A “HIGH” RATING IN THE CALIFORNIA INVASIVE PLAN COUNCIL’S CAL-IPC INVENTORY OF INVASIVE PLANTS IS PROHIBITED. 2. GROUNDCOVER MUST BE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE LANDSCAPED AREA AND MUST BE SPACED TO ACHIEVE FULL COVERAGE OF THE GROUNDCOVER AREA WITHIN ONE YEAR. 3. A MAXIMUM OF 50 PERCENT OF THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREA MAY CONSIST OF MULCH, BARK CHIP, CRUSHED ROCK, PEBBLES, STONE, OR SIMILAR NON-PLANT MATERIALS. 4. LANDSCAPED AREAS MUST BE TOP DRESSED WITH BARK, CHIP, MULCH, OR OTHER SIMILAR MATERIAL TO COVER EXPOSED BARE SOIL. 5. PLANTING IN ABOVE GRADE COURTYARDS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM SOIL DEPTH OF 12 INCHES FOR GROUND COVER, 20 INCHES FOR SHRUBS, AND 36 INCHES FOR TREES. 6. TREES MUST BE A MINIMUM 15-GALLON SIZE. 7. TREES IN LANDSCAPE PLANTERS LESS THAN 10 FEET IN WIDTH OR LOCATED CLOSER THAN 5 FEET FROM A PUBLIC SIDEWALK, STREET, OR PERMANENT STRUCTURE ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY MUST BE PLANTED WITH ROOT BARRIERS OR ROOT BARRIER PANELS TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO ADJACENT STRUCTURES OR PAVEMENT. 8. ALL TREES SHALL COMPLY WITH NON-COMPACTED SOIL AND SEPARATION STANDARDS IN CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS (ODS) VIII.B.4.E TABLE 3. 9. MINIMUM VERTICAL CLEARANCE FOR TREE CANOPIES AT MATURITY SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: 9.1. 14 FEET IN AND AROUND SERVICE AND LOADING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS. 9.2. 12 FEET FOR PARKING LOTS. 9.3. 8 FEET FOR TREE CANOPIES IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO SIDEWALKS AND PATIOS. 10. LANDSCAPING MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO RECEIVING A TEMPORARY OR FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. PRELIMINARY PLANTING NOTES SIGHT DISTANCE PER AASHTO, NO SHRUBS OVER 3' WITHIN THIS AREA. TOP OF BANK PARKING AREA: 540 SF LANDSCAPED AREA: 456 SF > 10% OF 540 SF = 54 SF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION METER BOX 4.30.25

Page 295 of 619 ends

BASE ERBA LANE JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT

JT JT JT
16-UNIT CBU BLDG 1 UNIT 1 BLDG 2 BLDG 3 BLDG 4 UNIT 2 UNIT 3 UNIT 4 UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 7 UNIT 8 UNIT 9 UNIT 10 UNIT 11 UNIT 12 UNIT 13 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 19 C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S Architecture Planning Interiors 444 Spear Street, Suite 105 San Francisco, CA 94105 www.hunthalejones.com t. 415-512-1300 f. 415-288-0288 DATE: PROJECT: RIDGEWOOD WEST CITY VENTURES ERBA LANE SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066 1.16.25 317073 SCALE: CONCEPTUAL FENCE & WALL PLAN L1.2 1" = 20'-0" N23076 0' 20' 40' 1" = 20' NOTE: MATERIAL & PRODUCT SHOWN ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STYLE, FEATURES AND DESIGN INTENT ONLY. MANUFACTURER AND/OR MODEL OF FINAL PRODUCTS MAY VARY BASED ON AVAILABILITY AND OTHER FACTORS. SELECTIONS TO BE CONFIRMED DURING FINAL DESIGN. PRIVATE YARD FENCE AND GATE (OR EQUAL) HEIGHT: 3'-0" PER SVMC 17.46.110 TOTAL LENGTH: ±372 LINEAR FEET STUCCO RETAINING WALL (OR EQUAL) HEIGHT: SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS TOTAL LENGTH: ±145 LINEAR FEET HORIZONTAL SLAT FENCE WITH GATE 3/4" = 1'-0" ELEVATION FINISH GRADE, TYP A. ILLUSTRATION FOR DESIGN INTENT ONLY. FENCING CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT ALL HARDWARE AND SHOP DRAWINGS FOR APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. B. MATERIAL: REDWOOD, CEDAR, OR "AZEK" CELLULAR PVC (PAINT GRADE) C. FASTENERS TO BE GALVANIZED U.N.O. D. INSTALL PER ALL LOCAL CODES, EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS AND GUIDELINES. NOTES: WOOD BOARDS 4 X 4 POSTS, 5' O.C. SPACING MAX, REFER TO NOTES FOR ATTACHMENT TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS 2" CLR. 5-1/2"
TYP
2" GAP,
TYP
2'-9", VIF 4'-0" CLR. WHEN OPEN 5'-0" O.C. MAX.
3'-0"
2" 1 (3) BIKE RACKS (6 SHORT TERM SPACE) PRIVATE FRONT YARD, TYP. PROPOSED NATURAL SURFACE TRAIL TO MACDORSA PARK, FINAL ALIGNMENT TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY STAFF DURING CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS RIPARIAN BUFFER / EXISTING TREE DRIPLINE COMMON OPEN SPACE: 421 SF AMENITY AREA (INCL. PICNIC TABLES AND SEATING) 714 SF NO-MOW TURF AREA CLUSTER MAIL BOX UNIT & TRASH RECEPTACLE EXISTING STEPS TO REMOVE TOTAL SITE AREA: 46,378 SF LANDSCAPED AREA: 7,401 SF PARKING AREA: 1,364 SF LANDSCAPED AREA: 332 SF > 10% OF 1,364 SF = 137 SF NEW IRRIGATION WATER METER TRANSFORMER, SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS DECOMPOSED GRANITE PATH WITHIN EXISTING TREE DRIPLINE, TYP. CONCRETE PATH OUT OF EXISTING TREE DRIPLINE ONLY, TYP. SIGHT DISTANCE, NO SHRUBS OVER 3' WITHIN THIS AREA. PROPERTY LINE, TYP. TOP OF BANK

Page 296 of 619 ends

CLR. CONCRETE SHALL ACHIEVE 3,000PSI WITHIN 28 DAYS, AND BE PLACED WITH 3.5" TO 4.5" MAXIMUM SLUMP. WELDED WIRE MESH, 6"X 6" (W2.9 X W2.9), CENTERED IN SLAB 4" MIN. ENGLARGED SECTION AT FOOTING NOTES 6", VIF ELEVATIONS (1570-16 PEDESTAL) A. INSTALL CBU'S PLUMB AND LEVEL. B. CONCRETE PAD SHOWN SHALL BE INSTALLED AT 2% MAX. SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXAMINE SITE CONDITIONS AND IF REQUIRED, REPORT ANY OBSTRUCTIONS OR ADDITIONAL WORK, INCLUDING REQUIRED RETAINING CONDITIONS, TO BUILDER PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A BID. C. VERIFY USPS APPROVED NUMBER, QUANTITY AND LOCATION OF CBU'S PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. D. APPROVED MANUFACTURER/UNIT: CUSTOM HOME ACCESSORIES MODEL #1570-XX (XX= 8, 12, OR 16 UNIT MODELS), COLOR: DARK BRONZE. E. MAILBOXES MUST NOT INTERFERE WITH REQUIRED VISIBILITY CLEARANCES. F. WHERE ACCESSIBLE UNITS OCCUR, ACCESSIBLE MAILBOX SLOTS SHALL FALL WITHIN ACCESSIBLE REACH AREA. Ø1/2" (8 PLACES) PLAN AT CBU 1/2" = 1'-0" CL FLUSH TRANSITION 60" MIN. DIA. ACCESSIBLE TURNING CIRCLE OUTLINE OF SINGLE CBU EXISTING SIDEWALK 5" TYP. INCREASE TO
2'-0" WHERE REAR

ACCESS IS REQUIRED BY
LOCAL POSTMASTER 4'-0" FOR SINGLE CBU INSTALLATION 6'-10" FOR DOUBLE CBU INSTALLATION ALIGN CL OF SINGLE CLUSTER BOX, OR CL OF GROUP, AT PL U.N.O. OUTLINE OF DOUBLE CBU LIMIT OF CONCRETE PAD FOR SINGLE CBU 60" MIN. DIA. ACCESSIBLE TURNING CIRCLE EXTENDED AT DOUBLE CBU FACE OF UNIT 3'-2" TYP: VIF
1'-3",
VIF
4'-0" TYP.: VIF 3 BICYCLE RACK(S) 1" = 1'-0" AS NOTED A. "RADIUS" BIKE RACK AS MANUFACTURED BY GROUND CONTROL SYSTEMS, CONTACT: 800.630.7225. B. SURFACE MOUNT USING 'WAK' WEDGE ANCHOR KIT BY MFR. C. INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. D. QUANTITY SIZE, COLOR, AND OTHER OPTIONS AS SPECIFIED ON PLANS. NOTES PLAN 8'-6" CLEAR FOR PARKING 4'-0" MIN. CLEAR FOR LOADING 2'-0" CLR. AT WALLS OR

OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS
2'-6" CLR. TO CL OF
NEXT RACK ELEVATION 2 A. ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (IF PROVIDED). B. "SURROUND" APPLICATION PROHIBITED. C. INSTALL ROOT BARRIERS PER LOCAL JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS, AND ALL TREES 5'-0" OR LESS FROM HARDSCAPE. NOTES ROOT BARRIER (LINEAR APPLICATION) NO SCALE AS NOTED VARIES 10'-0" 10'-0" PLAN VIEW
1'-6" SECTION VIEW SEE NOTE 'C' 3" MAX. FINISH GRADE TOP OF ROOT BARIER 1" TO 1/2" ABOVE FINISH GRADE IN PLANTER AREAS, 1/2" BELOW FINISH GRADE IN TURF ADJ. CURB OR HARDSCAPE 18" DEEP LINEAR ROOT BARRIER EXISTING SOIL PAVEMENT 18" DEEP LINEAR ROOT BARRIER TREE ROOTBALL 3

Page 297 of 619 ends

Page 298 of 619 ends

Page 299 of 619 ends

Page 300 of 619 ends

Page 301 of 619 ends

BASE ERBA LANE JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT

JT JT JT
16-UNIT CBU BLDG 1 UNIT 1 BLDG 2 BLDG 3 BLDG 4 UNIT 2 UNIT 3 UNIT 4 UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 7 UNIT 8 UNIT 9 UNIT 10 UNIT 11 UNIT 12 UNIT 13 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 19 N23076 ANNUAL WATER USE CALCULATIONS 0' 20' 40' 1" = 20' MAWA CALCULATIONS C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S Architecture Planning Interiors 444 Spear Street, Suite 105 San Francisco, CA 94105 www.hunthalejones.com t. 415-512-1300 f. 415-288-0288 DATE: PROJECT: RIDGEWOOD WEST CITY VENTURES ERBA LANE SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066 1.16.25 317073 SCALE: CONCEPTUAL IRRIGATION PLAN L1.8 1" = 20'-0" NOTES: 1. FINAL LANDSCAPE DESIGNS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT RECYCLED WATER STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 2. ALL APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CALIFORNIA MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE (WELO) AS REQUIRED BY CALIFORNIA WATER CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPING ACT (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65591 ET SEQ.). 3. THE FOLLOWING LANDSCAPE PROJECTS MUST COMPLY WITH THE WELO REQUIREMENTS: 3.1. TOTAL COMBINED LANDSCAPED AREA OF 2,500 SQUARE FEET OR MORE INSTALLED BY A PUBLIC AGENCY OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER. 4. IF CONFLICTS OCCUR BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT CODE OR WELO AND CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY COMMENTS, THE MORE RESTRICTIVE WILL CONTROL. I HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE CRITERIA OF THE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE (MWELO) AND APPLIED THEM FOR THE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER IN THE LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION DESIGN PLANS. SIGNED DATE 01/22/25 SYMBOL DESCRIPTION QTY PRECIP PSI GPM DRIPLINE HUNTER PLD-06-18. INLINE PRESSURE COMPENSATING POLYETHELENE DRIP TUBING SPACED AT 18" O.C., BURIED 4" MIN., WITH 0.6 GPH EMITTERS AND BUILT-IN CHECK VALVE (UP TO 5` OF HEAD). OFFSET EMITTERS FOR TRIANGULAR PATTERN. PLD-LOC FITTINGS REQUIRED. 7,052 S.F. 0.43 in/h 30 32 OVERHEAD, GRASSES, ROTARY NOZZLES ROTARY NOZZLES (HUNTER MP SERIES) ON PRO-SERIES POP-UP BODIES, AND 6" FOR NO-MOW GRASSES, WITH INTEGRAL PRESSURE REGULATION AND CHECK VALVES. 712.9 S.F. 0.43 in/h 30 3 IRRIGATION SCHEDULE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL CONFORM TO THE CITY'S WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE. IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO INCLUDE A SEPARATE IRRIGATION CONNECTION, WATER METER, AND REDUCED-PRESSURE PRINCIPLE BACKFLOW PREVENTOR (1"). CONTROLLER WILL BE "SMART" WITH SELF-ADJUSTING PROGRAMS BASED ON LOCAL WEATHER CONDITIONS. A EVAOPTRANSPIRATION/WEATHER SENSOR, RAIN SENSOR, FLOW SENSOR, AND MASTER VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED. HYDROZONES WILL BE BASED ON EXPOSURE, PLANT WATER REQUIREMENTS AND EMISSION TYPE. IRRIGATION EMISSION SYSTEM WILL GENERALLY CONSIST OF: · HARD PIPED DRIP OR BUBBLERS TO LARGE SHRUBS IN LINEAR ARRANGEMENTS, · INLINE DRIP IRRIGATION FOR SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER AREAS LESS THAN 10' IN WIDTH, · DRIP OR MICROSPRAY TO NATURALIZED SHRUBS AND TREES IN NATIVE AND BUFFER AREAS WITH POLYETHELENE SUPPLY LINE. · SEPARATE IRRIGATION FOR TREES AS REQURIED. IRRIGATION DESIGN STATEMENT

Page 302 of 619 ends

C H U N T H A L E J O N E S A R C H I T E C T S Architecture Planning Interiors 444 Spear Street, Suite 105 San Francisco, CA 94105 www.hunthalejones.com t. 415-512-1300 f. 415-288-0288 DATE: PROJECT: RIDGEWOOD WEST CITY VENTURES ERBA LANE SCOTTS VALLEY, CA 95066 1.16.25 317073 SCALE: CONCEPTUAL IRRIGATION DETAILS L1.9 1" = 20'-0" A. LOCATE SENSOR IN FULL SUN, PER MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. B. ENSURE WIRELESS CONNECTION, COMMUNICATION, AND OPERATION WITH CONTROLLER. C. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRAMMING CONTROLLER TO AUTOMATICALLY ADJUST IRRIGATION SCHEDULING BASED ON SENSOR INPUT. D. PROVIDE PRODUCT LITERATURE AND MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY TO OWNER AS DIRECTED BY BUILDER. NOTES WEATHER SENSOR (WIRELESS) NO SCALE AS NOTED WIRELESS RECEIVER FOR SENSOR COMPATIBLE IRRIGATION CONTROLLER: SEE PLANS AND OTHER DETAILS. CONNECT WIRE FROM RECEIVER TO CONTROLLER PER MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS EXISTING ARCHITECTURE WIRELESS SENSOR 3 IRRIGATION TRENCHING NO SCALE AS NOTED 1. INSTALL 24-VOLT CONTROL WIRING ADJACENT TO PRESSURE MAINLINE, MAX. 3-INCHES ABOVE AND TO THE SIDE OF MAINLINE. 2. PROVIDE EXPANSION LOOP IN WIRE BUNDLES AT ALL CHANGES IN DIRECTION (45°, 90°, CORNERS, ETC.) 3. PVC PIPE SHALL NOT BE BENT INSIDE TRENCH TO A POINT WHERE THERE IS STRESS ON GLUED FITTINGS. 4. NO STACKING OF PIPES ALLOWED, OR MORE THAN THREE PIPES IN CONJOINED TRENCHES. 5. COMPACT TRENCHES TO 85% IN PLANTED AREAS, 95% IN PAVED AREAS. SETTLEMENT SHALL BE EVIDENCE OF INSUFFICIENT COMPACTION AND SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER. 6. EXTEND SLEEVING MIN. 12" BEYOND PAVING 7. ONE LINE/PIPE PER SLEEVE, SEP. SLEEVE FOR WIRING 10' NOTES SECTION IN PLANTED AREAS SECTION IN PAVED AREAS 12" 6" MAINLINE 2" DEPTH CLEAN BACKFILL ON AN EVEN, ROCK AND CLOD FREE SURFACE LATERAL WIDTH AS REQ'D. FINISH GRADE DIRECT BURIAL CONTROL WIRING (AND/OR CONDUIT), AS SPECIFIED 24" FINISH GRADE SLEEVE FOR DIRECT BURIAL CONTROL WIRING (AND/OR CONDUIT), AS SPECIFIED PLAN TAPE AND BUNDLE CONTROL WIRING AT 10' MAX. INTERVALS AND AT JOINTS SNAKE PIPE IN TRENCHES LATERAL IN SLEEVE 2" MIN. SAND BEDDING EXTENDING AT LEAST 2" BELOW AND 4" ABOVE SLEEVES MAINLINE IN SLEEVE 1 SHUTOFF VALVE: THREADED END NO SCALE VALVE BOX, 10" ROUND AMENDED SOIL IN PLANTER AREAS FINISH GRADE 6" MIN. DEPTH 3/4" CRUSHED GRAVEL 6" DIA. SCH. 40 PVC RISER SECURELY BLOCK OPENINGS VALVE: PER LEGEND STANDARD BRICK, TYPICAL (MIN. 2) MAINLINE DEPTH AS SPECIFIED 1" IN PLANTER AREAS, FLUSH IN TURF SCH. 80 NIPPLE (X2) PURPLE POLYURETHANE RECYCLED WATER WARNING TAG FEMALE ADAPTOR (X2) 2 POP-UP HEAD NO SCALE A. APPLY THREE WRAPS TEFLON TAPE TO ALL THREADED CONNECTIONS EXCEPT MARLEX. B. SWING JOINTS SHALL PVC STREET ELS AND SCHEDULE 80 NIPPLES AS SHOWN, OR PRE-MANUFACTURED SCH. 40 3-AXIS SWING JOINTS WITH O-RING SEALS. C. ALWAYS USE BOTTOM INLET. LATERAL LINE PER IRRIGATION LEGEND AND PLANS POP-UP BODY AND NOZZLE PER IRRIGATION LEGEND SET HEAD FLUSH IN TURF, 1" ABOVE FINISH GRADE IN PLANTER AREAS. ADJACENT PAVING, CURB, OR EDGE NOTES: SCH 40 PVC STREET EL (3 LOCATIONS) SCH. 80 NIPPLE MIN. 2", MAX 3" CLR. OF EDGES WHERE ADJACENT TO PAVING THAT DRAINS BACK INTO LANDSCAPE AREA, OR PLANTING AREA. MIN 24" CLR. IN ALL OTHER CONDITIONS. 4 DRIP SYSTEM INDICATOR NO SCALE MIN. 2", MAX. 3" CLR. OF EDGES A. APPLY THREE WRAPS TEFLON TAPE TO ALL THREADED CONNECTIONS EXCEPT MARLEX. B. SWING JOINTS SHALL PVC STREET ELS AND SCHEDULE 80 NIPPLES AS SHOWN, OR PRE-MANUFACTURED SCH. 40 3-AXIS SWING JOINTS WITH O-RING SEALS. C. ALWAYS USE BOTTOM INLET. LATERAL LINE PER IRRIGATION LEGEND AND PLANS DRIP SYSTEM INDICATOR SET HEAD 0.5" ABOVE FINISH GRADE IN PLANTER AREAS. ADJACENT PAVING, CURB, OR EDGE NOTES: SCH 40 PVC STREET EL (3 LOCATIONS) SCH. 80 NIPPLE 5 DRIPLINE: FLUSH VALVE NO SCALE STANDARD BRICK, TYPICAL (MIN. 2) VALVE BOX PER SPECIFICATIONS, 8" ROUND U.N.O. AMENDED SOIL IN PLANTER AREAS FINISH GRADE 1" IN PLANTER AREAS, FLUSH IN TURF ADAPTER, BARB X FEMALE THREAD, OR AS REQUIRED. FLUSH VALVE PER LEGEND BLANK DRIPLINE, LEAVE 18" MIN. COIL FOR ACCESS. A. LOCATE FLUSH VALVE AT END OF EACH DISTRIBUTION TUBING RUN, WHETHER SHOWN ON PLAN OR NOT. 6" MIN. DEPTH 3/4" CRUSHED GRAVEL NOTES SECURELY BLOCK OPENINGS 6 1'-4" MIN. CLEAR. FOR DOOR CONTROLLER PER IRRIGATION LEGEND, IN PLASTIC EXTERIOR CABINET. ANCHOR TO WALL PER MANUFACTURER. SCH. 40 PVC ELECTRICAL CONDUIT FOR IRRIGATION CONTROL WIRES, SECURE TO WALL PER N.E.C.. SIZING: CONDUIT DIA. MAX WIRES 3/4" (5) #14 AWG 1" (9) #14 AWG 1-1/4" (14) #14 AWG 1-1/2" (20) #14 AWG 2" (32) #14 AWG 2-1/2" (48) #14 AWG SCH. 40 PVC ELECTRICAL CONDUIT FOR 120 VAC POWER, PER N.E.C.. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AVAILABLE POWER AND COORDINATE INSTALLATION. A. VERIFY CONTROLLER LOCATION (INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR) PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE POWER AND ROUTING OF IRRIGATION CONTROL WIRES WITH SUPERINTENDENT AND LOCAL INSPECTOR. B. ALL WIRING PER N.E.C. AND APPLICABLE LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. C. PAINT ALL CONDUIT AND CABINET WALL COLOR OR AS DIRECTED BY OWNER. D. TYPE OR NEATLY HAND-WRITE CONTROLLER STATION ASSIGNMENTS AND SCHEDULE ON MANUFACTURER-PROVIDED INFORMATION CARD OR ON SEPARATE SHEET ATTACHED TO CONTROLLER MANUAL. LEAVE ALL PRODUCT LITERATURE WITH CONTROLLER. 30" MIN. CLEAR FOR CONTROLLER ACCESS, V.I.F. ADJACENT WALL OR OBSTRUCTION NOTES IRRIGATION CONTROLLER: EXTERIOR WALL MOUNT NO SCALE ELEVATION

IF THE CONTROLLER IS USED BY OCCUPANT(S), INSTALL
AS HIGH AS FEASIBLE, MAX. 48" PER CRC R327.1.2, CBC
1136A.2, OR CBC 11B-809.12, AS APPLICABLE FINISH GRADE, TYP. 7 REMOTE CONTROL VALVE NO SCALE AT GRADE IN TURF, 1" IN PLANTER AREAS A. LOCATE VALVES IN PLANTING AREAS, ADJACENT WALLS OR VERTICAL WORK. ALIGN ALL VALVES, LEAVING ROOM FOR SERVICE INCLUDING VALVE REMOVAL. B. ALL THREADED CONNECTIONS SHALL RECEIVE 3 WRAPS TEFLON TAPE. ALL THREADED NIPPLES SHALL BE PVC SCHEDULE 80. C. MINIMUM MAINLINE AND RISER SIZE SHALL BE 1" DIA. D. OMIT INDIVIDUAL SHUTOFF VALVE IF SEPARATE SHUTOFF VALVE IS PROVIDED ON SUB-MAIN. NOTES REMOTE CONTROL VALVE (RCV) PER LEGEND IRRIGATION MAINLINE 3/4" CRUSHED GRAVEL, 6" MIN. DEPTH BRICK SUPPORTS AT CORNERS, TYP. LATERAL LINE PVC SLIP X MPT EL, TYP. SHUT-OFF VALVE UPSTREAM OF RCV (SEE NOTES) NIPPLE, TYP. CONTROL WIRES WITH EXPANSION PIGTAILS RECTANGULAR VALVE BOX UNION NIPPLE, TYPICAL 8

Page 303 of 619 ends

MIN. NOTES 3-AXIS SWING JOINT, PVC SCH 40 THREADED ELBOWS AND SCH. 80 NIPPLES BRASS RISER, THREADED 6" MIN. DEPTH 3/4" CRUSHED GRAVEL SS SCREW CLAMP, TYP. OF 2 STABILIZER,DUCTILE IRON EPOXY COATED OR RED BRASS 2 INLINE DRIP AT SHRUBS NO SCALE NOTES ROOTBALL IRRIGATED PLANT 1/2" DISTRIBUTION TUBING INSTALL MINIMUM TWO RINGS AT ALL TREES/SHRUBS. 36" BOX AND GREATER TO RECEIVE 3 RINGS 6" GALVANIZED WIRE STAKES INLINE DRIP AT GRADE TUBING EMITTERS SPACED 18"O.C. A. DETAIL APPLIES WHEN SEPARATE TREE/SHRUB VALVES ARE REQUIRED. B. PLACE TIE DOWN STAKES AT MAXIMUM ON CENTER SPACING OF THREE FEET IN SAND, FOUR FEET IN LOAM, AND FIVE FEET IN CLAY. 1 A. DISTANCE BETWEEN LATERAL ROWS AND EMITTER SPACING PER IRRIGATION LEGEND OR SCHEDULE. B. LENGTH OF LONGEST DRIPLINE SHALL NOT EXCEED THE MANUFACTURER'S MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED LENGTH. C. FLUSH VALVE TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH LOCALIZED LOW POINT. VERIFY LOCATIONS IN FIELD AND INSTALL ADDITIONAL VALVES AS REQUIRED. D. DO NOT ALLOW THE INLET PRESSURE TO EXCEED 50 PSI. INSTALL PRESSURE REDUCERS AT THE CONTROL VALVE IF REQUIRED. E. INSTALL DRIPLINE BELOW GRADE. AREAS LESS THAN TEN (10) FEET IN WIDTH IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUBSURFACE IRRIGATION (DMC 8.88 .080.A.1.U) TEE TO CONNECT ADJACENT LINES. STAKE MIN. TWO SIDES. ENSURE TOTAL LENGTH OF ATTACHED LINES DOES NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURER'S MAXIMUM LENGTH. FLUSH VALVE AT LOW 1/2 LINE SPACING POINT ON HEADER, VERIFY LOCATION IN FIELD. PERIMETER OF IRRIGATED AREA NOTES FV SUBSURFACE DRIPLINE: IRREGULAR ENDS NO SCALE DRIPLINE CONNECTION TO LATERAL BELOW GRADE, TYP. DI DRIP INDICATOR AT FAR END OF VALVE 6 SUBSURFACE DRIPLINE: SLOPED LAYOUT NO SCALE A. DISTANCE BETWEEN LATERAL ROWS AND EMITTER SPACING PER IRRIGATION LEGEND OR SCHEDULE. DISTANCE BETWEEN LATERAL ROWS FOR BOTTOM 1/3 OF SLOPE TO BE SPACED 1.5X GREATER THAN REGULAR SPACING. B. LENGTH OF LONGEST DRIPLINE SHALL NOT EXCEED THE MANUFACTURER'S MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED LENGTH. AIR RELIEF VALVE TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH LOCALIZED HIGH POINT. VERIFY LOCATIONS IN FIELD AND INSTALL ADDITIONAL AIR RELIEF VALVES AS REQUIRED TO AVOID TRAPPED AIR POCKETS. C. DO NOT ALLOW THE INLET PRESSURE TO EXCEED 50 PSI. INSTALL PRESSURE REDUCER(S) AT THE REMOTE CONTROL VALVE IF REQUIRED. D. INSTALL DRIPLINE BELOW GRADE. AREAS LESS THAN TEN (10) FEET IN WIDTH IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUBSURFACE IRRIGATION (DMC 8.88 .080.A.1.U) BOTTOM 1/3 OF SLOPE TOP 2/3 OF SLOPE SUPPLY HEADER FROM REMOTE CONTROL VALVE FLUSH VALVE AT LOW POINT OF EXHAUST HEADER PVC HEADER, TYPICAL (SHOWN AT SAME ELEVATION AS DRIPLINE FOR GRAPHIC CLARITY ONLY) NOTES DRIP INDICATOR AT FAR END OF VALVE 7 NOTES A. DISTANCE BETWEEN LATERAL ROWS AND EMITTER SPACING PER IRRIGATION LEGEND OR SCHEDULE. B. LENGTH OF LONGEST DRIPLINE LATERAL, INCLUDING ALL ATTACHED LINES, SHOULD NOT EXCEED THE MANUFACTURER'S MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED LENGTH C. FLUSH VALVE TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH LOCALIZED LOW POINT. VERIFY LOCATIONS IN FIELD AND INSTALL ADDITIONAL VALVES AS REQUIRED. D. DO NOT ALLOW THE INLET PRESSURE TO EXCEED 50 PSI. INSTALL PRESSURE REDUCERS AT THE CONTROL VALVE IF REQUIRED. E. INSTALL DRIPLINE BELOW GRADE. AREAS LESS THAN TEN (10) FEET IN WIDTH IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUBSURFACE IRRIGATION (DMC 8.88 .080.A.1.U) ENSURE TOTAL LENGTH OF ATTACHED LINES DOES NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURER'S MAXIMUM LENGTH. 1/2 LINE SPACING FLUSH VALVE, SEE NOTES TEE TO CONNECT ADJACENT LINES. STAKE MIN. TWO SIDES. PERIMETER OF IRRIGATED AREA FV DRIPLINE CONNECTION TO LATERAL BELOW GRADE, TYP. SUBSURFACE DRIPLINE: IRREGULAR EDGES NO SCALE BLANK DRIPLINE HEADER FOR AIR RELIEF VALVE DRIP INDICATOR AT FAR END OF VALVE DI 5 SUBSURFACE DRIPLINE: CENTER FEED NO SCALE NOTES A. DISTANCE BETWEEN LATERAL ROWS AND EMITTER SPACING PER IRRIGATION LEGEND OR SCHEDULE. B. LENGTH OF LONGEST DRIPLINE LATERAL SHALL NOT EXCEED THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM. C. FLUSH VALVE TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH LOCALIZED LOW POINT. VERIFY LOCATIONS IN FIELD AND INSTALL ADDITIONAL VALVES AS REQUIRED. D. DO NOT ALLOW THE INLET PRESSURE TO EXCEED 50 PSI. INSTALL PRESSURE REDUCERS AT THE CONTROL VALVE IF REQUIRED. E. INSTALL DRIPLINE BELOW GRADE. AREAS LESS THAN TEN (10) FEET IN WIDTH IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUBSURFACE IRRIGATION (DMC 8.88 .080.A.1.U) PVC EXHAUST HEADER, 1/2 LINE SPACING TYP. AT ENDS PVC SUPPLY MANIFOLD (LATERAL FROM VALVE) DRIPLINE CONNECTIONS TO LATERAL BELOW GRADE, TYP. BLANK DRIPLINE HEADER FOR AIR RELIEF VALVE. PERIMETER OF IRRIGATED AREA FLUSH VALVE AT LOW POINT OF HEADER(S) FV FVDI DRIP INDICATOR AT FAR END(S) OF VALVE. 3 SUBSURFACE DRIPLINE: END FEED NO SCALE NOTES A. DISTANCE BETWEEN LATERAL ROWS AND EMITTER SPACING PER IRRIGATION LEGEND OR SCHEDULE. B. LENGTH OF LONGEST DRIPLINE SHALL NOT EXCEED THE MANUFACTURER'S MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED LENGTH. C. FLUSH VALVE TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH LOCALIZED LOW POINT(S). VERIFY LOCATIONS IN FIELD AND INSTALL ADDITIONAL VALVES AS REQUIRED. D. DO NOT ALLOW THE INLET PRESSURE TO EXCEED 50 PSI. INSTALL PRESSURE REDUCERS AT THE CONTROL VALVE IF REQUIRED. E. INSTALL DRIPLINE BELOW GRADE. AREAS LESS THAN TEN (10) FEET IN WIDTH IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH SUBSURFACE IRRIGATION (DMC 8.88 .080.A.1.U) 1/2 LINE SPACING BLANK DRIPLINE HEADER FOR AIR RELIEF VALVE. PERIMETER OF IRRIGATED AREA FLUSH VALVE AT LOW POINT OF HEADER FV PVC SUPPLY MANIFOLD (LATERAL FROM VALVE) DRIPLINE CONNECTION TO LATERAL BELOW GRADE, TYP. PVC EXHAUST HEADER, TYP. AT ENDS DI DRIP INDICATOR AT FAR END OF VALVE 4

Page 304 of 619 ends

BASE
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT WT

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD

SD SD SD
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT

EX SS EX SS EX SS

EX SD

EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS EX SS 16-UNIT CBU JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT
JT

JT JT JT

JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT JT
SHEETS
SHEET
OF

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

PRELIMINARY
1" = 20'
JOB NO.:

SCALE: DRAWN:

DATE:

CHECKED:

INTENT TO CONSTRUCT
NO. DATE
KT
January 2024
223169
AR

REVISIONS BY
DATE LAST WORKED ON: 3/20/2025
813 First Street
Brentwood, CA 94513
(925) 240-2595
(925) 240-7013 fax
www.tarrar.com
·Planning
·Design
·Estimating
·Joint Trench
·Street Lighting
·Fiber Optic
·T-24
·PG&E Gas Design
·PG&E Elec Design
·M.E.P. Design
·Cost Analysis
·Due Diligence
U
GROUN
NDE R
AL

D SE RV I CE
E
R
EF B
CAL L
D
O
U
RE YO
T
I G

Page 305 of 619 ends

Luminaire Schedule Symbol Qty Label Arrangement Description LLF Lum. Lumens Lum. Watts Tot. Watts Data Source Filename 3 AA1 Single STERNBERG PT-1740LED-1L40T3-MDL04-CA-HSS - 14' M.H. 0.900 2305 25.8 77.4 1740LED-1L-40-T3-MDL04-CA-HSS.ies 1 AA2 Single STERNBERG PT-1740LED-1L40T4-MDL04-CA-HSS - 14' M.H. 0.900 2349 25.9 25.9 1740LED-1L-40-T4-MDL04-CA-HSS.ies1 AA3 Single STERNBERG PT-1740LED-1L40T5-MDL04-CA - 14' M.H. 0.900 3119 25.9 25.9 1740LED-1L-40-T5-MDL04-CA.ies 7 BB Single LUMEC VBR-15L100NW-G1-3 0.900 401 7 49 vbr-15l100nw-g1-3_-crt1508171449-007-009a-.ies 48 CC Single WALL SCONCE BY OTHERS - 7'/8' M.H. 0.900 866 8.2 393.6 12076.ies Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min GARAGE ALLEY Illuminance Fc 0.34 1.21 0.12 2.83 10.08 OPEN PICNIC AREA Illuminance Fc 0.58 1.45 0.20 2.90 7.25 WEST PARKING Illuminance Fc 0.85 2.05 0.21 4.05 9.76 BASE
AA3
.035
.07 BB .07.035 BB .07.035
BB .07.035
BB .07.035
BB .07
.035
BB .07.035
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
AA1
.07
.035 AA1
.07
.035
BB .07.035
AA1
.07
.035
AA2 .07
.035

0.31 0.21

0.35 0.12

0.43 0.21

0.23 0.32

0.21 0.26

0.39 0.19

0.44 0.21

0.22 0.29

0.18 0.29

0.31 0.20

0.48 0.22

0.46 0.33

1.21 0.72

0.31 0.33

0.80 0.39

0.23 0.28

0.63 0.30

0.17 0.16

0.20 0.43

0.38 0.34

0.38 0.48

0.49 0.42

0.38 0.32

0.28 0.21

0.76 0.60

0.50 0.43

0.36 0.30

0.26 1.20

1.18 0.96

0.72 0.58

0.48 0.38

0.29 0.23

0.54 1.37

1.15 0.83

0.62 0.48

0.37 0.27

0.21 0.22

1.45 1.26

0.88 0.62

0.45 0.32

0.23 1.43

1.23 0.86

0.60 0.42

0.29 0.76

0.54 0.38

1.451.37

2.352.432.06

1.04 0.74

0.47 1.83

2.22 2.35

2.50 2.51

2.30 1.88

1.13 0.78

0.61 0.54

0.53 0.56

0.64 0.79

0.97 1.09

1.08 0.99

0.91 0.85

0.83 0.75

0.67 0.57

0.47 0.38

0.53 1.02

1.54 1.60

1.58 1.60

1.45 1.10

0.73 0.47

0.28 0.29

0.50 0.43

0.36 0.32

0.30 0.31

0.35 0.40

0.51 0.80

1.27 3.74

4.06 2.29

0.18 0.30

0.46 0.43

0.66 0.61

0.42 0.38

0.56 0.86

0.81 0.57

0.58 0.82

0.82 0.48

0.25 0.15

0.14 0.18

0.32 0.63

0.91 0.78

0.69 0.87

0.86 0.58

1.09 2.86

1.48 2.20

1.691.08

1.20 2.03

2.56 1.94

2.33 2.14

1.74 1.70

2.01 1.76

1.10 0.61

1.30 2.532.89

1.123.233.023.943.213.332.651.661.383.002.57 0.21 0.37 0.48 0.51 0.52 0.55 0.62 0.23 0.52 1.17 2.05 2.05 1.26 1.29

PHOTOMETRIC DATA USED AS INPUT FOR THESE CALCULATIONS IS

BASED ON ESTABLISHED IESNA TESTING PROCEDURES AND
PUBLISHED LAMP RATINGS. FIELD PERFORMANCE WILL DEPEND ON ACTUAL LAMP, BALLAST, ELECTRICAL, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS.

Calculations have been performed according to IESNA standards and good practice.

Some differences between measured values and calculated results may occur due to tolerances in calculation methods, testing procedures, component performance, measurement techniques and field conditions such as voltage and temperature variations. Input data used to generate the attached calculations such as room dimensions, reflectances, furniture and architectural elements significantly affect the lighting calculations. If the real environment conditions do not match the input data, differences will occur between measured values and calculated values. SCALE OF

SHEET DATE

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DRAWING NO. / INPUT FILE
REV
REPORT FOR :

SALES REPRESENTATIVE : ASSOCIATED LIGHTING REPRESENTATIVES, INC. APPLICATION ENGINEERING : HUNTER SIMMERS Associated Lighting Representatives, Inc. ISOLINE VALUE 0.07 Fc ISOLINE VALUE 0.035 Fc ERBA LN.

SCOTTS VALLEY, CA
23528REY-R1.DWG/.A32
1 1 1 03-24-2025 1" = 16'-0"
TARRAR ULTILITY CONSULTANTS, INC.

KRISTIAN REYES PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ( ALL VALUES SHOWN ARE MAINTAINED HORIZONTAL FOOTCANDLES AT FINISHED GRADE, U.O.N. ) SCALE: 1" = 16'-0" LIGHTING PLAN - PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS - LAYOUT VERIFICATION Note: Unless otherwise specified - the lamp lumen depreciation (LLD) for legacy sources used in these calculations is based on published mean lumen ratings by major lamp manufacturers; 0.80 LLD for pulse start metal halide; 0.90 LLD for high pressure sodium; 0.95 LLD for linear T8 and T5 fluorescent; 0.86 LLD for compact fluorescent and induction; 0.88 LLD for Cosmo and Elite lamps. 0.94 LLD for all LED sources. Unless otherwise noted - 0.90 luminaire dirt depreciation (LDD) is commonly applied. In cases where appropriate - ballast factor (BF) is applied. Additional user defind factors (UDF) may be applied if necessary to represent luminaire performance to a higher degree of accruracy. Total light loss factor (LLF) is the product of all multiplied loss factors. PLAN VIEW ASSOCIATED LIGHTING REPRESENTATIVES, INC. NOT FOR QUOTING PURPOSES D-5.88(0.6917) 8800 BAYMEADOWS WAY WEST, SUITE 500, JACKSONVILLE, FL 32256 AGi32 VERSION 21.0
AGi (C) 2025 LIGHTING ANALYSTS, INC. From REVALIZE SOFTWARE Oakland, CA
7777 Pardee Lane
94621
510-638-3800
Fresno, CA
2720 North Grove
93727
559-453-0444
Sacramento, CA
1912 Del Paso Rd. 95834
916-383-4545
Reno, NV
9070 Double Diamond Pkwy. 89521
775-849-9770
Oregon / SW Washington
800 C Street Vancouver, WA
98660
503-894-7500

Page 306 of 619 ends

Ridgewood West (Erba Lane) – Stat e Density Bonus Law ( SDBL) Request Project Units, Total: 19 DU
Project Units, BMR: 2 low income, 1 moderate income
Density Bonus Calculation:
1) Bonus Density: 24.5% increase
2) Waivers (Please see description for waivers below)
REQUESTED WAIVERS:
a. Garage Minimum Size (SVMC 17.44.030(B))
b. Building Height (SVMC 17.20.040(E))
c. Front Setbacks (SVMC 17.10.040(C)(1))
d. Parking Placement (SVMC 17.44.030(J))
e. Upper Story Setbacks (ODS IV.B.2)
f. Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping (ODS III.B.6)
g. Number of Driveways (ODS.III.B.4.)
h. Parking Screening (ODS III.B.1.b. (3))
i. Rear Setbacks (SVMC 17.10.040(C)(3))
j. Side Setbacks (SVMC 17.10.040(C)(2))
k. Open Space Requirement (ODS.VI.B.1.a)
l. Balcony Design Standards (ODS.VI.B.1.b.2)
m. Patio Design Standards (ODS.VI.B.1.b.3)
3) Concession: None (the project reserves the right to request its allowed concession). 4) Parking: None (the project reserves the right to request its allowed parking ratio).

Page 307 of 619 ends

Ridgewood West - Description of Requested Waivers
The Ridgewood West project is requesting these waivers to objective design standards that would physically prevent the project from being built, while still respecting the broader goals of the General Plan. The site presents a few unique challenges, like its proximity to the riparian area and unique shape, that make strict adherence to some of the standards difficult. These waivers would allow the project to use land efficiently and deliver the density allowed under SDBL. While flexibility is requested in some areas, we still intend to meet the core vision of the community and ensure a highquality design.

Site Planning Waivers (C, D, I, J, K, H)
These waivers address site-specific challenges and optimize the land's residential development potential. The Front Setbacks (C), Rear Setbacks (I), and Side Setbacks (J) waivers help maximize buildable space around the riparian area. The Parking Placement (D) and Parking Screening (H) waiver ensures parking is efficiently located, prioritizing space for housing. The Open Space Requirement (K) waiver reduces open space allocation, providing more land for residential units. Additionally, the proximity to the riparian area offers a natural, green living experience by proximity.

Vertical Constraints Waivers (B, E)
The Building Height (B) waiver allows us to add a third floor, maximizing vertical space and increasing the number of units without expanding the project's footprint, while still blending with the neighborhood aesthetic. The Upper Story Setbacks (E) waiver allows more usable space on upper floors, increasing marketable square footage.

Miscellaneous Waivers (A, L, M, F, G)
The Garage Minimum Size (A) waiver allows for slightly smaller garages while still providing enough room for two cars. The Balcony Design Standards (L) and Patio Design Standards (M) waivers offer flexibility in the size of outdoor spaces, ensuring they remain functional and site-plan efficient. The Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping (F) waiver reduces the area allocated to landscaping, allowing more space for housing while keeping the site visually appealing. The Number of Driveways (G) waiver is being requested to allow multiple driveways on Erba Lane.

Page 308 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley
Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
June 2025
Wiseman Planning Services

Page 309 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Table of Contents | Page i
June 2025
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Statutory Authority and Requirements...................................................................................... 1 Purpose of an Initial Study ......................................................................................................... 3 Responsible and Trustee Agencies ............................................................................................ 4 Incorporation By Reference ....................................................................................................... 4 Initial Study ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Background & Project Description ............................................................................................. 7 Environmental Checklist .........................................................................................................................11 Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................. 15 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ......................................................................................... 17 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................ 18 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................ 23 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................... 29 Energy Consumption ................................................................................................................ 31 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 33 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................................................... 36 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................... 38 Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................................................. 41 Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................. 44 Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................... 45 Noise ........................................................................................................................................ 46 Population and Housing ........................................................................................................... 49 Public Services .......................................................................................................................... 50 Recreation ................................................................................................................................ 52 Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 53 Tribal Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................... 55 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................................... 57 Wildfire ..................................................................................................................................... 59 Mandatory Findings of Significance ......................................................................................... 61

Page 310 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Table of Contents | Page ii
June 2025
List of Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location
Figure 2 Project Vicinity
Figure 3 Site Plan
Figure 4 Color Rendering
Figure 5 Front Elevation
Figure 6 Rear Elevation
Figure 7 Site Improvements
Figure 8 Stormwater Control Plan
Figure 9 Conceptual Landscape Plan
Figure 10 Existing Tree Map
Figure 11 Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones Note: All figures are inserted at the end of the document.

List of Tables
None.

Appendix
Appendix A: Bay Village Planned Development Negative Declaration and Initial Study (KimleyHorn & Associates, May 2021)

Page 311 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Introduction| Page 1
June 2025
Introduction
Ridgewood West is a development project (the Project) proposed by City Ventures (Project Applicant) to construct 19 three-story townhome-style condominium residential units. Each unit will be solar, all electric, and range in size from approximately 1,400 to 1,500 square feet (sf). The units will have three bedrooms and two-car garages. The Project will also include eight guest parking spaces.

The City of Scotts Valley has determined that the Project is subject to the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has prepared this Addendum to the previously submitted Bay Village Planned Development project (described below).

Statutory Authority and Requirements
This environmental document has been prepared in conformance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.); CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementation of CEQA, as adopted by the City of Scotts Valley.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15051 and 15367, the City of Scotts Valley (City) is identified as the Lead Agency for the Project. This document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) to explain the rationale for determining that the proposed Project would not create any new or substantially more severe significant effects on the environment that were not previously analyzed in the Bay Village Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration and supporting Initial Study (Kimley-Horn & Associates, May 2021, see Appendix A) (the Bay Village Project).

In determining whether an Addendum is the appropriate document to analyze modifications to the Project, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states:
a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. b) An addendum to an adopted Negative Declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration have occurred.
c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted Negative Declaration. d) The decision-making body shall considerthe addendum with the final EIR or adopted Negative Declaration prior to making a decision on the Project.

Page 312 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Introduction| Page 2
June 2025
e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration, the lead agency’s required findings on the Project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

Since the Bay Village Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study has been adopted (June 16, 2021), the environmental impacts of subsequent activities proposed underthe Bay Village Project must be examined in light of the impact analysisin the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration to determine if additional CEQA documentation must be prepared. One of the standards that applies is whether, under Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project. Under these guidelines, a subsequent Negative Declaration shall be prepared if any of the following criteria are met:
a) When an EIR has been certified or Negative Declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and count not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

A. The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration;
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration would substantially reduce

Page 313 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Introduction| Page 3
June 2025
one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

As demonstrated in the environmental analysis contained herein in the Addendum, none of the conditions that had been analyzed in the Bay Village Project would change with adoption of the proposed Project. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance meeting the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 has been identified in the environmental analysis.

The environmental documentation (supported by the Initial Study, below), which is ultimately selected by the City in accordance with CEQA, is intended as an informational document undertaken to provide an environmental basisforsubsequent discretionary actions relevant to the Project. The resulting documentation is not, however, a policy document and its approval and/or certification neither presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of those agencies from whom permits and other discretionary approvals would be required.

Purpose of an Initial Study
The purposes of an Initial Study are to:

1. Identify environmental impacts;

2. Provide the lead agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or a Negative Declaration;

3. Enable an applicant or lead agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is required to be prepared;

4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of the Project;

5. Document the factual basis of the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project would not have a significant environmental effect;

6. Eliminate needless EIRs;

7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used for the Project; and

8. Assist in the preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, if required, by focusing the effects determined to be significant, identifying the effects determined not to be significant, and explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15063 identifiesspecific disclosure requirementsfor inclusion in an Initial Study. Pursuant to those requirements, an Initial Study shall include:
 A description of the Project, including the location of the Project  Identification of the environmental setting
 Identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other

Page 314 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Introduction| Page 4
June 2025
method, provided that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries  Discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any  Examination of whether the Project is compatible with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls
 The name(s) of the person(s) who prepared or participated in the preparation of the Initial Study

9. With regardsto the context of an Addendum, the Initial Study serves as the basis for substantial evidence that none of the elements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration are triggered.

Responsible and Trustee Agencies
Certain projects or actions undertaken by a Lead Agency require subsequent oversight, approvals, or permitsfrom other public agencies in order to be implemented. Such other agencies are referred to as Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15381 and 15386, as amended, Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies are respectively defined as follows:
“Responsible Agency” means a public agency, which proposesto carry out or approve a project, for which [a] Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or Negative Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term “responsible agency” includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency, which have discretionary approval power over the Project. (Section 15381) “Trustee Agency” means a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project, which are held in trust for the people of the State of California. Trustee Agencies include; The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, The State Lands Commission; The State Department of Parks and Recreation and The University of California with regard to sites within the Natural Land and Water Reserves System. (Section 15386) For this Project, the City of Scotts Valley isthe Lead Agency and hasthe sole responsibility of processing and approving the Project. There are no Responsible or Trustee Agencies that have oversight, approval, or permit responsibility associated with the Project, or require consultation with the City of Scotts Valley.

Incorporation By Reference
Pertinent documents relating to this Initial Study have been cited in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, which encourages incorporation by reference as a means of reducing redundancy and length of environmental reports. The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. Information contained within these documents

Page 315 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Introduction| Page 5
June 2025
has been utilized for this Initial Study. These documents are available for review at the City of Scotts Valley Community Development Department, and online.

Bay Village Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study An application for the Bay Village Project was submitted and reviewed by the City in 2021. The Bay Village Project proposed to construct 10 residential units comprised of six single-family homes on a 45,245 sf parcel. The Project site’s two existing lots were proposed to be subdivided into ten lots and two common lots. The lots would range in size from 2,750 to 3,691 square feet (sf), with a common area for the riparian setback (Lot B – 10,681 sf) and a new lane (Lot A – 3,557 sf).

The Project included nine 3-bedroom homes, which range in size from 1,766 sf to 2,108 sf, and one 2,236 sf 4-bedroom unit. Each unit was proposed to include a two-car garage and a 20-foot deep driveway.

The Bay Village Project Site Plan would have required the construction of a 42-inch high guardrail on top of a retaining wall within the 25-foot setback from the top of bank.

Additionally, up to six oak trees would have been affected. As a result, significant impacts were identified related to Sensitive Natural Communities (coast live oak riparian woodland) and Special Status Species, Wildlife Corridors, and Nursery Sites (SF dusky footed woodrat and nesting birds). Impacts were determined to be less than significant with mitigation.

Fronting Erba Lane, the Bay Village Project included a five-foot sidewalk and six-foot landscaped planting strip and construction of a new 24 foot-wide private roadway, extending from Erba Lane, providing access to seven of the residential units (Lots 4 through 10).

Water and sewer services would connect to an existing six-inch sanitary sewer and eight-inch water main located on Erba Lane.

A Mitigated Negative Declaration and supporting Initial Study was adopted by the Scotts Valley City Council on June 16, 2021 and is incorporated by reference and can be found in Appendix A.

The application was subsequently withdrawn and the Project was not constructed.

Page 316 of 619 ends

Page 317 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 7
June 2025
Initial Study
Background & Project Description
Project Title
Ridgewood West
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Scotts Valley
One Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
Contact Person and Phone Number
Susie Pineda
Contract Planner
[email protected]
Project Location
As shown in Figure 1 Regional Location, and Figure 2 Project Vicinity, the Project site is on two parcels (APN 22-481-18 and 22) on Erba Lane in the City of Scotts Valley.

Project Applicant/Sponsor
City Ventures
General Plan Designation
Residential High Density (R-H)
Zoning
Residential High Density (R-H)
Project Description
Existing Project Area Conditions
West of the Project site is MacDorsa Park and the Scotts Valley City Hall. To the south is an electronics company office building and large parking lot. To the east across Erba Lane is a fire station (Scott Vally Fire District) and residential townhomes. To the north is an open lot and Ridgecrest Lane. Along the easterly boundary of the Project site is an existing oak riparian woodland habitat.

The total Project area is 1.04 acres (45,244 sf). The westerly side of the Project Site consists of an existing rolled curb that collect stormwater from Erba Lane, as well as the on-site asphalt parking area.

Page 318 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 8
June 2025
The northern three-quarters of the site is raised higher than the southern paved area, and an approximately 5-10 foot hill between the paved areas. The Project site elevation ranges from approximately 581-620 feet in sea level.

Site Plan and Building
As shown in Figure 3 Site Plan, the proposed the Project would construct 19 three-story townhome-style condominium residential units in four separate buildings. Each unit will be solar, all electric, and range in size from approximately 1,400 to 1,500 square feet (sf). The units will have three bedrooms and two-car garages with driveways for two additional parking spaces. The Project will also include 10 guest parking spaces. A color rendering of a typical building is shown in Figure 4 Color Rendering. Typical building elevations are shown in Figure 5 Front Elevation and Figure 6 Rear Elevation.

Building design represent contemporary traditional architecture incorporating peaked roofs, wood siding (board and batten, lap, and shingle) and stucco, with balconies, window trellises, and various other architectural details.

The Project site’s two existing parcels that would be subdivided into a one lot subdivision for the purpose of subdividing airspace for the 19 condominium units.

State Density Bonus
The current zoning is Residential High Density has a maximum allowed base density of 15 dwelling units per acre. With a Project site of 1.04 acres, 16 units are allowed. Per State Density Bonus Law (SDBL), the Project Applicant is requesting a 23% density bonus to construct three additional deed restricted for sale units comprised of two (2) Low-Income and one (1) Moderate-Income units for a total of 19 units.

Bonus Density. Gov Code Section 65915(f) allows for a 23% Density Bonus when 12% of base units are dedicated to low income households. Per SB 330, the Project is eligible for waivers and reductions to development standards that have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development (per Govt. Code Section 65915(b)(1) and incentives or concessions (per Govt. Code Section 65915(d)(1) pursuant to SDBL. The Project Applicant has applied for various development standards waivers related to site and building design, parking, and open space as described in the Project plans (Sheet PI 1.3, dated January 16, 2025).

Riparian Woodland Protection
To protect the riparian woodland habitat, all structures (excluding decks) and impervious surfaces would be located outside of the riparian drip line (i.e., outside the tree canopy), as shown in Figure 7 Site Improvements (Sheet C2.1, dated 10/3/24).

A concrete path is proposed adjacent to the drip line. Within the drip line, a decomposed granite path is proposed which will replace existing asphalt and provide a pervious surface that will directly benefit the riparian tree root zone.

Page 319 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 9
June 2025
Site Improvements
Fronting Erba Lane, the Project includes a five-foot sidewalk, parking aprons, and landscaping. A new private cul-de-sac will be constructed from the southwestern half of the Project site, providing resident and emergency vehicle access.

Grading for the Project would require a cut of 1,770 cubic yards of soil, and fill of 925 cubic yards, for a net export of 845 cubic yards. Consistent with current conditions, stormwater would flow generally north to south across the Project site.

The total new impervious area of 26,345 sf would replace the existing impervious area with an equivalent impervious area of 23,900 sf. The total pervious and landscape areas would be approximately 18,898 sf (Stormwater Control Plan for Ridgewood West – Residential Development, CHC/Civil Consultants Group, 10/8/24).

The Stormwater Control Plan identifies two drainage management areas (DMAs). DMA A (10,367 sf) consists of landscaping and will be self-treating. DMA B (34,876 sf) will include roofs, driveways (i.e., pavers), and other impervious areas and some landscaping. As shown in Figure 8 Stormwater Control Plan (Sheet C5.1, dated 10/3/24), storm drainage from DMA B would be conveyed via collector storm drainpipes to a series of underground infiltration chambers (HydroStor) located under the new private cul-de-sac, where it would be treated and released underground. During high stormwater flows, excess stormwater would be directed to the existing storm drain on Erba Lane. Peak stormwater management will be addressed by decreasing the total on-site impervious area by approximately 6,000 sf and thereby decreasing the onsite runoff to less than pre-development rates.

Water and sewer services would connect to an existing six-inch sanitary sewer and eight-inch water main located on Erba Lane.

Landscaping
There are 41 trees located on the Project site. Forty (40) of these trees are classified as ordinance-sized trees under the City of Scotts Valley Municipal Code Section 17.44.080 (Tree Protection Ordinance) and would remain (Arborist Report, HMH, Revised 3/21/25).

As shown in Figure 9 Conceptual Landscape Plan (Sheet L1.1,Conceptual Landscape Plan, dated 1/16/25), landscaping on the Project site would total approximately 7,768 sf and would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association (HOA). Private pedestrian circulation and amenity areas would generally be away from Erba Lane and oriented toward the preserved riparian woodland and include pockets of informal plantings. A common open space area would be constructed adjacent to the tree canopy and include picnic tables, seating, and a “no-mow” turf (Fescue) area. The exiting informal trails within the woodland area would be preserved and a new private path consisting of concrete outside of the tree canopy, and decomposed granite within the tree canopy would also be constructed.

Page 320 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 10
June 2025
A total of 37 trees would be installed (10 of which will be 24-inch boxed size) with a variety of species including Crape myrtle, Strawberry tree, Water gum, and Chinese Elm. Additional landscaping would include a variety of large evergreen shrubs, and smaller accent shrubs and groundcover.

Project-Related Approvals, Agreements and Permits
 Vesting Tentative Tract Map
 SB330 (State Density Bonus) Waivers and Concessions
 Design Review
 Environmental Review
 Cultural Resources Alteration Application CR24-002
Other public agencies whose approval is required
None.

Page 321 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 11
June 2025
Environmental Checklist
In accordance with CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21178.1, this Initial Study has been prepared to analyze whether any new or more significant environmental impacts could occur from implementation of the Project. The purpose of this Initial Study is to inform the decision makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project. This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the Project.

As demonstrated in Environmental Analysis Sections below, none of the conditions that had been analyzed in the Bay Village Planned Development Mitigated Negative Declaration and supporting Initial Study (Kimley-Horn & Associates, May 2021, see Appendix A) (the Bay Village Project) would change with adoption of the proposed Project. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance meeting the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 has been identified.

The Project (Ridgewood West) would result in a minor increase in density (10 to 19 units) in context to the City’s General Plan buildout of residential development, while also providing affordable housing to be integrated and constructed on the Project site.

Criteria used to analyze potential impacts associated with the Project including the following:
1) A finding of “New Potentially Significant Impact” means that the project may have a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document that cannot be mitigated to below a level ofsignificance or be avoided. 2) A finding of “New Mitigation is Required” means that the project may have a new potentially significant impact on the environment or a substantially more severe impact than analyzed in the previously approved or certified CEQA document and that new mitigation is required to address the impact.
3) A finding of “No New Impact/No Impact” means that the potential impact was fully analyzed and/or mitigated in the prior CEQA document and no new or different impacts will result from the proposed activity. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No New Impact/No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No New Impact/No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sourcesshow that the impactsimply does not apply to projectslike the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No New Impact/No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 4) A finding of “Reduced Impact” means that a previously infeasible mitigation measure is now available, or a previously infeasible alternative is now available that will

Page 322 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 12
June 2025
reduce a significant impact identified in the previously prepared environmental document.
5) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
6) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. a) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

Describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the proposed action.
b) Infeasible Mitigation Measures. Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND or MND was adopted, discuss any mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible that would in fact be feasible or that are considerably different from those previously analyzed and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. c) Changes in Circumstances. Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND or MND was adopted, discuss any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause a change in conclusion regarding one or more effects discussed in the original document. 7) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances).

Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 8) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 9) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 10) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; b) differences between the proposed activity and the previously approved project described in the approved ND or MND or certified EIR; and c) the previously approved mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the

Page 323 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 13
June 2025
impact to less than significance.

New Significant Environmental Effects or Substantially More Severe Environmental Effects Compared to Those Identified in the Previous CEQA Document
The subject areas checked below were determined to be new significant environmental effects or to be previously identified effects that have a substantial increase in severity either due to a change in project, change in circumstances or new information of substantial importance, as indicated by the checklist and discussed below.

Aesthetics Land Use and Planning
Agriculture and Forestry Resources Mineral Resources
Air Quality Noise
Biological Resources Population and Housing
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Public Services
Energy Recreation
Geology and Soils Transportation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Utilities and Service Systems
Hazards and Hazardous Materials Wildfire
Hydrology and Water Quality

Page 324 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 14
June 2025
Lead Agency Determination
On the basis of this evaluation:

No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, there is no "new information of substantial importance" as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3).

Therefore, the previously adopted ND or MND or previously certified EIR is adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project without modification.

X No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also, there is no "new information of substantial importance" as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3).

Therefore, the previously adopted ND, MND or previously certified EIR adequately discussesthe potential impacts of the project; however, minor changes require the preparation of an ADDENDUM.

Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous ND, MND or EIR due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is "new information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). However, all new potentially significant environmental effects or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant effects are clearly reduced to below a level of significance through the incorporation of mitigation measures agreed to by the project applicant. Therefore, a SUBSEQUENT MND is required.

Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that willrequire majorrevisionsto the previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is "new information ofsubstantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). However, only minor changes or additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project in the changed situation. Therefore, a SUPPLEMENTAL EIR is required.

Page 325 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 15
June 2025
Aesthetics

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
X
a) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
X
b) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the Project is
in an urbanized area, would the Project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
c) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that scenic vistas, scenic resources, and visual character would not be affected therefore concluded there would be no impact. The Initial Study also concluded that impacts to light and glare would be less than significant.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to aesthetic conditions which remain unchanged with the proposed Project.

Scenic Vista
The Project site is relatively flat and is currently used as a partially paved parking lot and is surrounded by a combination of commercial, industrial, office, and residential uses. There are no scenic vistas in the vicinity of the Project site.

Page 326 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 16
June 2025
Therefore, there would be no new impact to scenic vistas.

Scenic Resources and Visual Character
The Project site is not located along a state scenic highway or designated scenic corridor.

Although the Project would represent a visual change from the existing conditions, it would be consistent with the type of development planned for this area in the General Plan. Additionally, the Project is subject to design review, which would provide an opportunity for further evaluation that the Project would not adversely impact the visual character of the area.

Therefore, there would be no new impact to scenic resources or visual character.

Light and Glare
Existing ambient sources of nighttime lighting include neon and fluorescent signs, lighting of building exteriors and architectural accents, illumination through windows, landscape lighting, street lighting, parking lot lighting, and vehicle headlights. The Project would include outdoor lighting typical to a residential development. All lighting fixtures would be directed downward and shielded or recessed so that the lighting source is not directly visible from the public rightof-way or adjoining properties. All fixtures would utilize light-emitting diode (LED) lighting with glare cutoffs and be dark sky-friendly certified by the International Dark-Sky Association.

Site and architectural lighting is subject to the City design review process which would provide an opportunity for further evaluation so that levels of luminance do not adversely affect the adjacent properties. To further minimize lighting effects on the surrounding area, a projectspecific conditions would require the Project applicant to use no pole lights and utilize downdirected fixtures on building exteriors with concealed light sources, consistent with City policies and design guidelines for lighting to be at the lowest level and carefully controlled for security, aesthetics, safety, and identification without interfering with nearby land uses.

Therefore, there would be no new impact to light and glare.

Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to Aesthetics. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Page 327 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 17
June 2025
Agriculture and Forestry Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the Project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X

Page 328 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 18
June 2025
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that there would be no impact to agriculture and forestry resources.

The Project site is not located on land that is classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resource Agency.

These conditions remain unchanged with the proposed Project and therefore there would be no new impact.

Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to agriculture and forestry resources. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Air Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
X

Page 329 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 19
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that air quality impacts would be less than significant, with the exception of odors which was determined to have no impact.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to air quality conditions which remain unchanged with the proposed Project.

Air Quality Plan and Air Quality Standards
The Project site is located within the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB), which includes Monterey County, San Benito County, and Santa Cruz County, comprising an area of approximately 5,159 square miles along the central California coast. The Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) is responsible for local control and monitoring of criteria air pollutants throughout the NCCAB.

MBARD has developed the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region (2012 AQMP) The 2012 AQMP is a transitional plan shifting focus of MBARD’s efforts from achieving the 1-hour component of the State ozone AAQS to achieving the 8-hour ozone requirement. The Plan includes an updated air quality trends analysis, which reflects both the 1- and 8-hour standards, as well as an updated emission inventory, which includes the latest information on stationary, area and mobile emission sources.

In March 2017, MBARD adopted the 2012-2015 Triennial Plan Revision, which assesses and updates elements of the 2012 AQMP, including the air quality trends analysis, emission inventory, and mobile source programs. The 2017 AQMP Revision only addresses attainment of the State ozone standard. In 2012, EPA designated the NCCAB as in attainment of the current national 8-hour ozone standard of 0.075 ppm1.

The following MBARD rules would limit emissions of air pollutants from construction and operation of residential development pursuant to the Project:
1 On October 1, 2015, U.S. EPA adopted a new 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm. However, U.S. EPA has not yet reviewed recent NCCAB emissions to determine attainment with the current 0.070 ppm standard. Therefore, this attainment status is based upon U.S. EPA’s prior 0.075 ppm standard.

Page 330 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 20
June 2025
 Rule 400 (Visible Emissions) – Discharge of visible air pollutant emissions into the atmosphere from any emission source for a period or periods aggregating more than 3minutes in any 1 hour, as observed using an appropriate test method, is prohibited.  Rule 402 (Nuisances) - No person shall discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public; or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public; or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
 Rule 425 (Use of Cutback Asphalt) – The use of cutback asphalt (asphalt cement that has been blended with petroleum solvents) is restricted.
 Rule 426 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule limits the emissions of ROGs from the use of architectural coatings.

The MBARD’s 2008 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines provides criteria for determining cumulative impacts and consistency. The CEQA Air Quality Guidelines note that a project which is inconsistent with an Air Quality Plan would have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Any emissions sources that would be generated as part of the Project would be subject to the MBARD rules and regulations. The Project (the point source) does not include any processes or activities that would emit air pollutants and therefore does not have the potential for significant impacts that would conflict with the AQMP. The Project would be consistent with the AQMP for the Monterey Bay Region and would not make a considerable contribution to this existing, cumulatively significant impact.

Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Construction
MBARD CEQA Guidelines state that construction activities (e.g., excavation, grading, on-site vehicles) that emit 82 pounds per day or more of PM10 would have a significant impact on local air quality when they are located nearby and upwind of sensitive receptors. Based on this emissions threshold, construction activity occurring on more than 2.2 acres per day may result in significant PM10 emissions (MBARD, 2015). Because development of the Project would not result construction activity occurring on more than 2.2 acres per day, impacts would remain less than significant.

However, grading activities during construction could cause dust accumulation in the Project area. Implementation of standard conditions of approval (described below) would be required to ensure potential impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level for all construction activities on the Project site.

Furthermore, standard conditions of approval require that development projects reduce dust generation from project grading and construction to minimal levels, the Project proponent shall

Page 331 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 21
June 2025
require the grading contractor to implement best management practices (BMPs) for dust control, including watering down exposed earth surfaces each non-rainfall day at intervals that attenuate dust problems. Any dirt tracked on to adjacent roadways shall be removed daily in a manner that does not create substantial airborne dust. The following BMPs shall be included in the construction contract for the Project and be implemented during site grading:
 Excavation of the site shall be done in phases by grading only those areas where immediate activity will take place, leaving the remaining areas in their original condition with ground cover.
 A water truck, using recycled water, shall be available on a repeated basis each day throughout the grading phase of the Project to spray exposed earth surfaces.  In addition to regular water spraying, a biodegradable chemical palliative shall be sprayed on any graded areas that will remain exposed without additional grading for three or more days in succession.
 The site entrance shall be base rocked to avoid or minimize tracking mud on roadways by construction vehicles.
 Roadway(s) along the Project frontage shall be mechanically swept at the end of each workday when any dirt or mud has been tracked on the street.  No grading activities shall occur during days of high wind velocity.  Finished graded areas that are designated as open space and landscape areas of project, shall be covered with an accepted erosion control substance such as straw mulch or hydro mulch with a tackifier.
 Construction staff shall monitor daily all areas that have received a chemical palliative spray or application of mulch to determine if these areas remain in a dust-free condition and take corrective action as needed to maintain a dust-free environment.

Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Operational
The Project would result in new long-term operational emissions from mobile sources (burning of fossil fuels in cars); energy sources (cooling, heating, and cooking); and area sources (landscape equipment and household products). Mobile source emissions constitute most operational emissions from this type of land use development project. However, emissions associated with Project buildout is not expected to exceed any applicable MBARD thresholds.

No stationary sources would be constructed that would be long-term permanent sources of emissions.

Therefore, the Project would not generate a significant level of operational emissions and there would be no new impact.

Page 332 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 22
June 2025
Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors in the vicinity include residents and patrons of nearby commercial/office establishments, located approximately 30 feet from the property boundaries of the proposed development.

Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust which is a known toxic air containment (TAC). The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has identified diesel exhaust particulate matter as a toxic air contaminant, and assessment of toxic air contaminant cancer risks is typically based upon a 70‐year exposure period. Project grading and construction activities that would utilize diesel‐powered equipment would expose receptors to possible diesel exhaust for a very limited number of days (approximately 10 days). Because exposure to diesel exhaust would be well below the 70‐year exposure period and given the limited and short‐term duration of activities that would use diesel equipment, construction‐ related diesel emissions are not considered significant. Furthermore, the State is implementing emission standards for different classes of on‐ and off‐road diesel vehicles and equipment that applies to off‐road diesel fleets and includes measures such as retrofits. Additionally, Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations (section 2485(c)(1)) prohibits idling of a diesel engine for more than five minutes in any location. Therefore, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Furthermore, standard conditions of approval require that prior to issuance of any grading permit, the Director of Public Works and the Building Official shall confirm that the grading permit and specifications stipulate that all off‐road construction vehicles/equipment shall comply with the California Air Resources Board’s In‐Use Off‐Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation.

Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Odors
During construction activities, temporary odors from vehicles exhaust and construction equipment engine would occur. However, construction-related odors would be short-term and would cease upon completion. Therefore, no objectionable odors are anticipated from construction activities associated with the Project and there would be no new impact.

Land uses typically producing objectionable odors include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Project does not include any uses that would be associated with objectionable odors. Odor emissions from the Project would be limited to odors associated with vehicle and engine exhaust and idling cars. The Project does not include any known sources of objectionable odors associated with the long-term operational use and therefore there would be no new impact.

Page 333 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 23
June 2025
Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to air quality. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Biological Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
X

Page 334 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 24
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Site Plan would have required the construction of a 42-inch high guardrail on top of a retaining wall within the 25-foot setback from the top of bank.

No impacts were identified for wetlands or biologically-related policies and plans.

Monk & Associates (M&A) conducted peer review (dated 8/6/2024) of the Biological Assessment of the Bay Village Project prepared by Biotic Resources Group (dated 5/31/19). An Arborist Report for the Project was prepared by HMH (dated 3/21/25). The analysis below is based on the findings of these assessments.

A discussion of the impacts follows describing the changes to the Project and its effect in creating reduced impacts and eliminating the mitigation measures associated with impacts to coast live oak riparian woodland.

Special Status Species
Special-status species are those plants and animals that are legally protected under the California and Federal Endangered Species Acts (CESA and FESA, respectively) or other regulations, and species that are considered rare by the scientific community (for example, the California Native Plant Society [CNPS]). Special-status species also include plants and animals

Page 335 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 25
June 2025
that meet the definition of endangered, rare, or threatened under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (14 CCR §15380) that may include species not found on either CESA or FESA lists.

The Biological Assessment includes lists of special-status plant and wildlife species known from the area and if there is suitable habitat on site for each of them. This was compared to an updated list created by M&A in 2024.

Sensitive Natural Communities
Bay Village Project Initial Study
The Bay Village Project Initial Study (see Appendix A) identified two significant impacts to sensitive the oak riparian woodland, both during construction and after construction. To reduce these impacts to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures were identified:
 MM BIO-1: Oak Riparian Woodland -Project Construction  MM BIO-2: Oak Riparian Woodland Post-Construction
These mitigation measures were identified due to the fact that the Bay Village Project included limited improvements (a 42-inch high guardrail on top of a retaining wall) within the 25-foot setback from the top of bank. Additionally, up to six oak trees would have been affected. As noted in the Preliminary Arborists Report, Preliminary Tree Inventory and Assessment (Kurt Fouts, revised March 2020) (the Revised Arborists Report), some oak trees would have required targeted clearance pruning for grading equipment (T29 and T30) and hand grading near them.

Impacts to two oak trees (T35 and T38), adjacent to Lot 6 would have been greater, and would likely needed to be removed. The Revised Arborists Report recommended tree replacement to compensate for the removal and limbing of the identified trees at a 2:1 tree replacement using 15-gallon or 24-inch box size trees and identified an open area east of Lot 7 be used for the tree replacement plantings.

As described below, the proposed Project no longer includes these impacts.

Proposed Project
According to the Arborist Report (HMH, 3/21/25) and as shown on Figure 10 Existing Tree Map, there are 40 coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and one Monterey cypress (Hespercyparis macrocarpa) on the Project site.

The dense coast live oak riparian woodland surrounds the unnamed creek to the east of the Project site. The mature coast live oak trees are both growing within the Project site, on the creek bank, and on the City’s property on the opposite side of the creek. Many of the trees growing on the opposite side of the bank lean onto the Project site.

Page 336 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 26
June 2025
Within the woodland understory, though leaf litter was a dominant cover, the dominant plant species present are invasive French broom (Genista monspessulana), native poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobium) and California blackberry (Rubus ursinus). Other plant species present in the understory include dogtail grass (Cynosurus echinatus), rattlesnake grass (Briza maxima), sock destroyer (Torilis arvensis), slender wild oat, petty spurge (Euphorbia peplus), Italian thistle, ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus) and cranesbill (Geranium purpureum).

The coast live oak riparian woodland provides high value habitat for a variety of wildlife species, as described in the Biological Assessment prepared by Biotic Resource Group. Some of the wildlife observed in the riparian habitat during M&A’s 2024 site visit included Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus), Acorn Woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), Western Flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis), California Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma californica), Chestnut-backed Chickadee (Poecile rufescens), Oak Titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), Bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus) and California Towhee (Melozone crissalis).

The Biological Assessment provided an extensive search of special-status plants known within the vicinity of the Project site and determined that the potential for special-status plants on the project site is very low due to the lack of suitable habitat and the conditions of the site. As such, no measures related to special-status plants were recommended in the Biological Assessment.

M&A determined that most all the special-status plants in the area require more specialized habitats than the Project site supports, such as serpentine soil, chaparral habitat, mesic conditions, coniferous forests, bogs, or marshes.

There is very little suitable habitat for one species, bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris) on the Project site in the form of some suitable grassland and woodland habitat on site. Bentflowered fiddleneck is a CNPS Rank 1B.2 species (rare, threatened or endangered in California) but has no state or federal status. This annual member of the borage family is found in in open woods, coastal bluff scrub, and grassland habitats at elevations of 3 to 500 meters. Bentflowered fiddleneck blooms between March and June.

The Biotic Resources Group conducted a survey of the project site in May 2019 and M&A conducted a site visit in June 2024. Bent-flowered fiddleneck was not observed during either of these surveys when the plant would have been identifiable. As such, this species is not expected to be on the Project site and no impacts are expected.

M&A concurs with the Biological Assessment and no mitigation measures for sensitive natural communities are recommended pursuant to CEQA. Because the Project will no longer require construction (i.e., retaining walls and tree removal/pruning) resulting in a reduced impact.

State and Federal Regulated Waterways and Federal Wetlands Development of the Project would occur adjacent to a regulated waterway. The Project is located near California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) and Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (RWQCD) regulatory jurisdiction; however, the Project is located outside of the oak riparian woodland dripline. As shown in Figure 3: Site Plan, construction would not require

Page 337 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 27
June 2025
the removal of vegetation in the streambank, nor on the top of the bank of the dry creek, within regulated areas by the CDFW and RWQCD.

Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Special Status Species, Wildlife Corridors, and Nursery Sites Bay Village Project Initial Study
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that the Project site provides suitable habitat for the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and nesting birds. To protect these sensitive animal species, mitigation measure MM BIO-4: Protection of Sensitive Animal Species was identified to reduce these impacts to a less than significant level:

Proposed Project
The Biological Assessment provides a list of special-status wildlife species known in the Project area and determined the only special-status species that may occur onsite is the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens). There are no California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) occurrences of this species within three miles of the project site and M&A did not observe any of this rodent’s distinctive stick nests onsite.

M&A concurred with the Biological Assessment that there is some suitable habitat on the Project site for the woodrat. Although they were not observed during the Biotic Resources Group survey in 2019 or M&A’s survey in 2024, M&A recommends that preconstruction survey should be conducted prior to the start of any work within the riparian zone, should work in this area be proposed, to ensure that this special-status species has not moved onsite and could be impacted by site work/grading.

M&A also concurred with the Biological Assessment that there are no other special-status species likely to occur on the Project site due to the absence of suitable habitats. Many specialstatus wildlife species known from the area live in specialized habitats that are not present on the Project site.

M&A concluded that the recommended measures are sufficient for both the woodrat and nesting birds; however, M&A recommends nesting bird surveys be conducted earlier (February 1) than the Biological Assessment recommended as many bird species may begin nesting then.

Based on this recommendation, MM BIO4 is amended as follows:

MM BIO-4: Protection of Sensitive Animal Species
Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City the following:

1. The landowner shall hire a qualified biologist to search for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat nests. If any are found and impacts to the nests cannot be avoided, the

Page 338 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 28
June 2025
applicant shall seek written approval from CDFW to implement a trapping and relocation program. Wood rat nests shall not be disturbed without prior written approval from CDFW.

2. If construction is scheduled to begin between March 1 February 1 and August 15 of any given year, the landowner shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct a search for active bird nests in the vicinity of the work site (following CDFW survey protocols). If active bird nests are observed, the work shall be postponed until the biologist determines that all chicks have fledge the nest(s).

Implementation of this revised MM BIO-4 would result in a reduced impact.

Conflict with Local Polices, HCP or NCCP, or Other Conservation Plan The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that there would be no conflicts with any local policies or applicable HCP’s and there would be no impact.

As shown in Figure 3: Site Plan, the Project would preserve all of the oak riparian woodland on the Project site and the footprint of the buildings and associated site improvements (e.g. pathways) are located outside of the dripline of the oak riparian woodland.

As described in the Bay Village Project Initial Study, a habitat survey report for the endangered Mount Hermon June Beetle and Zayante Band Wing grasshopper was prepared by Entomological Consulting Services, Ltd., dated July 14, 2005. Due to the absence of indigenous sand parkland vegetation and sunlight, barren Zayante sandy soils, and habitat conditions, the report concluded that the Project site was not suitable for the Zayante Band Wing grasshopper.

Similarly, due to the absence of Ponderosa pines and Zayante sands, habitat conditions are not suitable for the Mount Hermon June Beetle.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with any local policies or applicable HCP’s and there would be no new impact.

Findings
Different from the Bay Village Project, the Project will remain outside of the City-required riparian setback and site development plans will conform to the requirements presented in the Biological Assessment prepared by Biotic Resources Group and peer reviewed by M&A, thereby avoiding impacts to the coast live oak riparian woodland. MM BIO-4 will extend the timeline by one month (from March 1 to February 1) to conduct a search for active bird nests in the vicinity of the work site should construction occur during this time period.

Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact on biological resources.

Page 339 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 29
June 2025
Cultural Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact / No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the Project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to in § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
§ 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined there would be no impacts to cultural resources.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to cultural resource conditions which remain unchanged with the proposed Project.

Cultural Resources
The Scotts Valley General Plan (2023) Figure OSC-6 Cultural Resource Areas indicates that the Project site is located within areas of moderate and high archaeological sensitivity.

An Extended Phase I Archeological Assessment (Albion Environmental, Inc., March 2020) was prepared for the Project site in 2020 (Albion Environmental, Inc., March 2020). After reviewing the record search results, Albion conducted an intensive pedestrian survey and limited trenching and auguring of the Project area. Visual inspection surface and small-scale subsurface excavations revealed no evidence of intact prehistoric or historic-era archaeological deposits.

However, due to the proximity of archeological site SCR-177/H, it was recommended that archeological and Native American monitoring occur during all ground-disturbing activities.

Albion prepared a subsequent technical letter report (dated 1/7/25) to analyze potential impacts associated with the proposed Project. The report concurred with their previous

Page 340 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 30
June 2025
assessment (March 2020) that there are no potentially significant cultural materials present in the Project area, and that monitoring should still occur during all ground-disturbing activities.

Standard conditions of approval for development require that the Project applicant and construction contractor ensure that any cultural resource, including archaeological, paleontological, or human remains are not destroyed if discovered during project grading or other subsurface work.

As part of the standard conditions of approval, the Project applicant shall submit a copy of a contract with a qualified/registered archaeologist to conduct monitoring of all earth disturbing activities for review and approval by the Community Development Director, before grading permit issuance. The Project applicant shall include this requirement in the contract for all contractors involved with grading and subsurface work. The qualified/registered archaeologist shall monitor all earthwork activity as described below:

1. An archaeologist shall monitor the grading or excavation of soils at the development site in order to determine if important cultural remains are present. Such monitoring shall begin before and occur during subsurface earth moving activities;

2. The duration and period of archaeological monitoring of project development activities shall be at the discretion of the professional archaeologist. At a minimum, however, any activity that initially displaces or removes original soil from its present context shall be monitored by an archaeologist on a continuous basis;

3. Monitoring activities such as replacing soils in trenches, redistributing displaced soil elsewhere on the development site, or removing stockpiled excavated soil may not require monitoring;

4. Monitoring may include the periodic sampling and screening of soils in order to better determine if cultural remains are present; and,

5. If any cultural resources are discovered, the Project contractor shall immediately stop all earth disturbing work within a 50-foot radius of the discovery to allow for inspection, evaluation, and potential recovery of resources by the supervising project archaeologist, before resuming any earth-disturbing construction activities. The Project applicant shall also contact the Planning Department and Building Official as soon as work has been stopped. It may be necessary to resume grading or excavation activities under the direction of the supervising archaeologist in order to locate or expose cultural remains.

Standard conditions of approval require that the Project applicant and construction contractor ensure that paleontological resources are not destroyed during project grading by implementing following measures:
1) Provide the Project paleontologist with a copy of the final grading plans for review prior to any project grading;

Page 341 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 31
June 2025
2) Provide for daily monitoring during grading activities by the Project paleontologist to determine if paleontological resources are encountered in excavated areas; 3) Allow for the recovery of any discovered paleontological resources according to a recovery plan/methods specified by the Project paleontologist, including the donation of the recovered resources to a suitable repository (museum, school, etc.); 4) If recovery occurs, ensure that the Project paleontologist prepare a recovery report that details the type of resources recovered and the repository locations where they were taken; and,
5) Specify in the construction contract with the Project grading contractor(s), that grading personnel are to cooperate with and assist the Project paleontologist during monitoring and any recovery activities, including assisting with recovery efforts if necessary.

Therefore, there would be no new impacts.

Human Remains
No known human remains are located on the Project site. Pursuant to section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, if human remains are discovered, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the discovery site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the Project applicant has complied with the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e).

Therefore, there would be no new impacts.

Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to cultural resources. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Energy Consumption

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the Project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
X

Page 342 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 32
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that there would be no impact on energy consumption.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to energy consumption conditions which remain unchanged with the Project.

Energy consumption associated with construction of the Project would be temporary and shortterm. Project design and operation would comply with State Building Energy Efficiency Standards, appliance efficiency regulations, and green building standards. Additionally, the Project includes other design features including efficient low-energy lighting, and natural ventilation systems.

The Project would also be required to be built according to City and State energy efficiency standards. The Project would be required to comply with existing regulations, including applicable measures from the City’s General Plan. Vehicle trips and energy consumption would be less carbon intensive as compared to historic levels due to statewide compliance with future low carbon fuel standard amendments and increasingly stringent Renewable Portfolio Standards.

Therefore, there would be no new impacts.

Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to energy consumption. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Page 343 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 33
June 2025
Geology and Soils

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

X
i) Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking?
X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the Project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
X

Page 344 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 34
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that impacts to geology and soils would be less than significant, with the exception of soils being suitable for septic tanks, which was found to have no impact.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to geology and soil conditions which remain unchanged with the proposed Project.

Earthquake Faults, Landslides, and Seismic Ground Shaking Project construction would subject the buildings and their inhabitants to periodic seismic shaking associated with the San Andreas Fault and other active faults within the Monterey Bay area. As part of any future Planned Development application submitted to the City of Scotts Valley, the Project applicant would be required to submit plans that are in compliance with the latest California Building Code (CBC) standards consistent with Title 15 – Buildings and Construction of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code.

Prior to approval of any entitlements, City staff is required to review project plans and verify that the CBC Seismic requirements are printed on the plans. Building Division staff shall verify that CBC standards are met prior to issuance of Building Permits. Building inspectors shall conduct site inspections to ensure that construction occurs consistent with approved plans.

The Scotts Valley General Plan (2023), Figure SN-4: Liquefaction Potential indicates that the Project site is not in an area for liquefaction. Figure SN-5: Landslide Deposits indicates that the site is in an area containing landslide deposits. Figure OSC-1 Slopes, indicate that the Project site is not located within any mapped geological hazard areas. Per the earthquake hazard zones defined by the Alquist-Priolo map, the risk of earthquake-induced ground rupture occurring across the Project site is moderately low.

Page 345 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 35
June 2025
A geotechnical investigation was prepared by Haro, Kasunich and Associates, Inc. (Haro, Kasunich & Associates, November 2005) determined that given the Project site is generally level, the potential for seismically induced landslides are low. As a standard condition of approval, an updated geotechnical report would be required for review and approval by the City prior to issuance of a building permit.

A subsequent geotechnical investigation was prepared by Quantum Geotechnical (Quantum Geotechnical, Inc., in March 2024. The investigation determined that the site is suitable for the construction of the proposed Project provided the recommendations presented in their report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.

Because compliance with Title 15 – Buildings and Construction of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code is required for all future project, potential impacts associated with earthquake-related ground rupture there would be no new impact.

Soil Erosion
The Project would involve the removal of landscape vegetation and grading activities associated with the construction of buildings, infrastructure, and roads. Grading would largely be limited to the Project site, which would limit the amount of exposed soil area that would be subject to erosion. Measures to control erosion would be incorporated into the construction specifications pursuant to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for construction. In addition, to comply with the NPDES requirements for construction, projects involving construction on sites that are one acre or more are required to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that specifies how the discharger would protect water quality during construction activities.

Compliance with the erosion control ordinances and acquisition of the NPDES General Permit for construction activities would ensure that there would be no new impact to soil erosion.

Sewage Disposal
The Project would involve disposal of wastewater through the City’s existing sanitary sewer system, and there would be no septic systems constructed as part of the Project. Therefore, no new impact would occur.

Unique Geological Features and Paleontological Resources There are no known paleontological resources on the Project site. However, development of the Project could result in the discovery and disturbance of previously unknown or undiscovered paleontological resources. Should evidence of paleontological resources be encountered during grading and construction, adherence to City, State, and Federal historic preservation laws, regulations, and codes related to archaeological and paleontological resources ensure the adequate protection of historic and pre-historic resources. With implementation of existing regulations, there would be no new impact.

Page 346 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 36
June 2025
Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to geology and soils. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the Project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that impacts to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be less than significant.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to GHG emissions which remain unchanged with the proposed Project.

Construction
Construction of the Project would result in direct emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 from the operation of construction equipment and the transport of materials. MBARD does not have a threshold for construction GHG emissions, which would be one-time, short-term emissions and therefore would not significantly contribute to long-term cumulative GHG emissions impacts of the Project. In the absence of quantitative significance thresholds in CEQA guidance, this analysis turns to other programs. For example, the CARB Mandatory Reporting program requirements are triggered for sources of GHG emissions exceeding 2,500 MTCO₂e) per year.

Page 347 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 37
June 2025
AB 32 requires California agencies to take actions that reduce GHG emissions by 2020 to the levels of 1990, and then substantially further reduce emissions by 2050.

Most individual projects do not generate sufficient GHGs to create a project-specific impact to significantly influence climate change; therefore this impact typically involves an analysis to determine if a project’s GHG emissions are cumulatively considerable (significant cumulative impact). Once construction is complete, the generation of construction-related GHG emissions would cease. The Project is not expected to exceed the CARB Mandatory Reporting applicability level of 2,500 MTCO2e per year.

As a result, there would be no new impact associated with short‐term GHG emissions during construction.

Operational
Operational or long-term emissions would occur over the Project’s life. GHG emissions would result from direct emissions such as project generated vehicular traffic, on-site combustion of natural gas, and operation of any landscaping equipment. Operational GHG emissions would also result from indirect sources, such as off-site generation of electrical power over the life of the Project, the energy required to convey water to, and wastewater from the Project site, the emissions associated with solid waste generated from the Project site, and any fugitive refrigerants from air conditioning or refrigerators. The Project would meet CalGreen and CBC standards for energy efficiency standards including passive solar design and natural ventilation and natural lighting.

Additionally, the Project includes water-efficient landscape, water-reducing features, and lowimpact development practices to reduce water use. The Project is an example of “smart growth” strategies based on infill, density, and unit types. Energy use of the completed residential units would be less than similar units constructed in previous years because their construction is required to comply with the energy efficiency standards of the California Building Code.

All these factors result in a project that would not significantly contribute to a cumulative GHG impact and there would be no new impact.

Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to GHG emissions. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, there are no new significant effects or other grounds that require preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration in support of further agency action on the Project and there would be no new impact.

Page 348 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 38
June 2025
Hazards and Hazardous Materials

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the Project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on
a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the Project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the Project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
X

Page 349 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 39
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that impacts from hazardous substances would be less than significant.

No impacts were identified for emergency response or aviation facilities.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to hazards and hazardous materials which remain unchanged with the Project.

Hazardous Substances
Regarding on-site hazards, the Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No records of the Project site were found pertaining to open cases of LUSTs, toxic releases, or site cleanup requirements. The Project site is located adjacent to a known hazardous materials site at 7 Erba Lane (southwest of the Project site) due to diesel contamination2. Given the distance from the Project site and the propensity for diesel to migrate downward and not laterally in sandy soils, impacts from the known hazardous site to the subject parcel and the proposed use are unlikely.

It is likely that oils, lubricants, and similar materials may be used to maintain and/or fuel construction vehicles and machinery during the construction phase of the Project. Standard conditions of approval require the Project applicant to have the construction contractor implement a best management practice/hazardous materials containment plan during the entire time construction activities are occurring. The hazardous materials containment plan shall contain the following elements:
2 County of Santa Cruz, Environmental Health Department. Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Service files:

Search by Address. Accessed at
https://sccdocs.santacruzcounty.us/ENV/CustomSearch.aspx?SearchName=AllPrograms&repo=EnvironmentalHeal th. Accessed on February 9, 2021.

Page 350 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 40
June 2025
 Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, welding equipment shall be placed over drip pans or other containment apparatus.
 Construction materials shall not be stockpiled or stored where they could be accidently discharged downslope or into Scotts Valley Drive.
 Any petroleum, lubricants or other hazardous materials used during; and, construction shall be stored in a special storage location equipped with double containment and this location shall be shown on the erosion control plan and approved by the agencies that review this plan.

The Project’s residential uses may involve use and storage of some materials that are considered hazardous, although these materials are typically limited to everyday use solvents, paints, chemicals used for cleaning and building maintenance, and landscaping supplies. These materials would not be substantially different from household chemicals and solvents already in use throughout the City. Therefore, there would be no new impacts.

Release of Substances Near Schools
The Project is located within one-quarter mile of the Scotts Valley Unified School, approximately 700 feet south of the Project site. However, project construction and operation would not involve the emission of hazardous materials, therefore there would be no new impacts.

Emergency Response
General Plan Safety Element Figure SN-6 Evacuation Routes shows Scotts Valley Drive as a primary evacuation route in the City’s Emergency Response Plan. Construction of the Project would not change the function of Scotts Valley Drive as a primary evacuation route. Therefore, there would be no new impacts.

Public Airport or Private Airstrip
The Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Wildland Fire
Refer to the Wildfire Section below.

Findings
The Project is similar to the Bay Village Project with respect to hazards and hazardous materials.

Page 351 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 41
June 2025
Hydrology and Water Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
Would the Project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
Project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition
of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:

X
i. Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site?
X
ii. Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite?
X
iii. Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
X

Page 352 of 619 ends

City of Scotts Valley Ridgewood West CEQA Addendum
Initial Study | Page 42
June 2025

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Impact
Requiring
Mitigation
No New
Impact /
No
Impact
Reduced
Impact
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
Discussion
The Bay Village Project Initial Study determined that there would be no impact to groundwater, flood hazards or conflicts with water quality plans. Impacts associated with drainage were determined to be less than significant.

Following is a brief discussion of the impacts to hydrology and water quality which remain unchanged with the Project. Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Groundwater Demand
Based upon the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for SLVWD and SVWD (Montgomery & Associated, 2021), SLVWD has adequate supply to meet water demand during normal, dry, and multiple-dry years through 2040. 3 The project-generated increase in potable water demand would not exceed the supply capacity nor the capacity of the water delivery system.

Based upon preliminary review of the project, the San Lorenzo Valley Water District issued a “Will Serve” letter to the project applicant dated February 7, 2024 for potable water supply.

This water would be delivered to the project site an existing service line on Erba Lane.

Therefore, there would be no new impact.

Groundwater Recharge and Stormwater Runoff
As shown in Figure OSC-2: Watersheds of the City’s General Plan (2023), the Project site is located in the Carbonera watershed as part of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin. 3 Refer to Tables 12-2, 12-4, and 12-6 of the SVWD 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for normal, dry, and multiple dry-years supply and demand comparison.

Page 353 of 619 ends

Scotts Valley City CouncilAugust 20, 2025

Scotts Valley City Council
August 20, 2025