Loading...
2010081606 - 15928 UNION AVENUEowrr of :~IEETI\G ll~'I'E: 08/16/10 ;_ ~^ ;~:~;<~ COL-\CIL .-AGE\ll.-~ REPORT ~QS GAS~~ u;1TE: _an~ust ~. col o TO: \I_IYOR .-1NI) T01\~\ COli\CIL IRO\I: GRLG 1..-1RS0\. T011 \ \1:1~=1C7T~~~.~.~~ SUBJECT: CONSIDER _~~ APPEAL OF A PL_~NTNING C0~1~11SSI0\~ DECISION DE\TYING 1 REQUEST TO DE\~IOLISH ~ S1NGLE-FA'~~1IL~' RESIDENCE. ~hO SUBDI\~1DE A .93 .ACRE PARCEL I\TO TIIREE LO1S .-1\ll TO CONSTRUC~1~ T\V'O NE\\~ RESIDL-NCL-S O\ PROPERTZ' ZONED R-1:8. NO SIGNIFIC~NTEN\~'IRO\\~IENT~L IMPACTS H.~~~'E BEE\~ IDLNTIFIL-D AS a RESULT OF TIIIS PROJECT AND A >\IITIG:~TED NEGATI~~ E DECL.~IRITION 1S P.ECO\LltI=NDL-D. :1PN ~?7--I?-OOS. .~RCIIITECTL'RE AND SITE .-1PPI_IC:1"f~IO~S S-U~-~O. 5-09-~~ R 5-09-~~: SL-BDI~'ISIO_\ :1PPLICA 1-ION \1-Ub-1 : A1:G.-1~h1V'E llECL:1R.ITION\I)-09-~. PROi'ERTZ' LOCATIO\: 1928 t \10\ :1~~E\'t'E. PROP}IZ 1-~' O\\"NEP~: ? 17 O`CO\NOR I.LC.:1PPLIC_1\T'_~PPELI__-1\"f: ~I-O\~1` JE.1\S. RECO>\I\IEND:1~110\: 1. Open and hold the public hearing and recci~ z public testimom . 2. Cli~se the public hearing. ~. Uphold the Plannin~~ Commission's decision to den~~ _-1]-chitectur~ and Site applications S-08- ~~_ S-09-3 ~ and 5-09-3~ and Subdi~~ision application ~1-08-13 (motion required). -}. Adopt the resolution (Attachment 1) finalizing denial of the appeal and applications (motion required). If the To~~~n Council determines that the Plannin~~ Conllnission's decision should be re~-ersed or modified relative to the appeal: The Council needs to find one or more of the follo~~in~,: (a) \\"hers there ~~ as error i)r abuse of discretion on the part of the Planning Commission; or PP.FPARI.D B1": AO~endie R. Rooney. Director of C OIIlllllllllty~ De~~elopment ~~ . Rey ie~~-ed b~ : i ~ ~ .-lssistant To~ti-n \ lana~~er Toil n _lttorne~ Clerl: Finance C0117111L11]It~ De\'elOplIlent I<ec>>cd S 6 10 1'_'11 P\i ' `~~ Reformatted: ~ ~U 0~ PAGE 2 ~~A~"OR A\D TO~~~ i~~ COL~CIL SLB.IECT;1APPEAL FOR I ~9?8 L~IO\ AVE\liE FILE =S-08-~0, S-09-3 ~, 5-09-3=I. M-08-1 ~: \ D-09-2. .4rrgtrst ~. 2010 (b) The ne~ti~ information that ~~•as submitted to the Council during the appeal process that was not readily and reasonably available for submission to the Conunission; or (c) An issue or policy over which the Commission did not have discretion to modifi~ or address. but ~;~hich is vested in the Council for modification or decision. If the predominant reason for modifiing or reversing the decision of the Plamlin~ Commission is new information as defined in Subsection (b) above.. it is the Town's police that the application be returned to the Commission for review in light of the new information unless that information has a minimal effect on the application. If the appeal is granted, use the findings in Attaclunent ?, make the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit 3 of Attaclunent 8), adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Attachment ~) and modif~~ the conditions (Attaclunents =I and `or ~) as appropriate (motion required). ~. Adopt the resolution (Attaclunent 2) granting the appeal and approving the Subdivision and Architecture and Site applications (motion required). The Architecture and Site application for demolition of the existing house (5-08-~0) should Ue approved «•ith the Subdivision application. The Architecture and Site applications for the new residences (5-09-33 and S- 09-3-I) ma}• be acted on independentl}'. For example, one or both applications may be remanded to the Planning Conunission for redesign. one application maybe approved and one remanded. etc. BACKGROL~D: The subject property is zoned R-1:S and is currently developed with a 1,010 square foot single-stot-~~ home with a ~?8 square foot Qarage. The existing parcel is 40,79 square feet (.93 acres). If the proposed subdivision is approved the propem° o~rner will dedicate 2~ feet of fi~ontage on Union .venue and the Panorama ~~~av cul-de-sac to the Town for public right-of-~~•av. The dedications will reduce the land area to ?.936 square feet. On June 2~. ?OOS. the Plamiing Commission denied a Tentative Map application for afour-lot subdivision. The propert}~ owner subsequently ftled an application to split the property into three lots. On Februan- ? ~. ?009, the Conunission considered the three lot subdivision and continued the matter. requesting that the applicant provide an exhibit sho~~~in~ a confonnin`.: cul-de-sac for Panorama ~'~~ay, and that an.' required environmental analysis be completed. An Initial Stud}' and \~Iitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for the project. The envirotunental documents were released for public revie«~ on lulu ] 7. ?009. The ~0-day review period ended on August 17, ?009. P:LGE 3 \l:~l"OR .~\D TO~~"\ COL1'CIL. SUB.iECT: _-PPE.-~L FOR 1 X928 i.~TION _a~ E\L'E FILE =S-Ob-30.5-09-». 5-09-3-I. ~I-08-1 _-1 iii=arst ~. 'UI U On AuRust?6. ?009. the Plaruiina Commission considered t~~~o alternati~~es for the subdi~-ision. one ~~ ith a reduced size col-de-sac at the end of Panorama «•a~ and one ~~~ith a conforming col-de-sac. The Commission ~~oted unanimousl~~ to dem~ the applications due to cited inconsistency- ~ti-ith the surroundin~~ neighborhood. The applicant appealed the Plannin~~ Commission decision. On ~o~ ember ?. ?009, the To~cn Council denied the appeal. Prior to appro~~al of a Resolution coniirmin~ the action. the applicant requested that the Council reconsider its decision and that the applications Lic remanded to the Planning Commission for further consideration. On December 7. ?009. the Council decided to reconsider its decision. defel7•in~ the discussion to the meeting of February 1. ?010. Council ultimatel~~ decided to remand the matter to the Plar>1]in~ Commission based on subn]ission of ne~~ information. Exhibit 9 to .-attachment ~ is a ~ erbatim transcript of the Council discussion and action. On Tune 9. X010. the Plarulin« Commission considered t~~o re~~ised lot layouts for the tlu•ee-lot subdi~~ision alone ~~ith plans for t~~o ne~~~ residences. The Commission denied all applications, citing concerns about inconsistenc~° ~~~~ith the neighborhood. densit)~. intensity of land use. and the suitability- of the proposed de~~elopment for the site. The applicant appealed the Commission's decision on June 10. ~O 10. :~ ~ erbatim transcript ~~~as prepared for the June 9. ?O10 Commission llleetlllg (see _-~1taC1111]~nl 7 }. nISCL 5510\: -~. Project Summar~~ The project site is located at 1~9~8 Union :~~~enue. on the east side of the sU•eet just north of Lce~~ood Court. _~d_jacent properties arc all occupied b~~ sin~~le famil~~ rzsidences. I-Tomes to the south. east. and across the sweet (« cst) are t~~ o-stories. fhe t~~ o abutting homes to the north are one- stoi~ . Elistir]~ home sizes range from 1.630 to 3.70 square feet. The applicant is proposing to demolish the e~istin~~ residence and garage. to subdi~ ide the prol,ert)- into three parcels and to construct tlu-ee ne~1 single-family residences. .-architecture and Site (_-~cRS) applications ha~~e been ailed for nen homes proposed on Parcels ~ and ~. Should the subdi~~ision be appro~-ed. a separate :~c~ S application n ould be required air a nz« residence on Parcel 1. Rifer to the }Tanning Conlnlission report for additional information on the proposed project I .'lttaclnl]ent b ). B. I'lal]r]in~~ Commission The Planning Commission considered the stlbdi~~ision application on ,lone 9, X010. the motion for denial of the subdi~ ision passed on a ;-~ ~~ote. The Conunissiol] cited a number of issues and concerns as follo» s: P:~GL- -I \I:1~"OPT .~\D '1-O~l~ti COi~CIL SL~I3,1L-CT::~I'PE.aL FOPS 1 ~9?~ L \IO\ :~~'E\L~E FILE-S-US-~O. S-09-; ;. 5-09-~-1. \1-OS-13 .~Iugtr.rt ~, 'U10 • Subdi~ ision is not compatible Frith the existing lot and de~~elopment pattern in the nei~~hborhood • Subdi~~ision is not consistent n ith the General Plan • Site i> not ph~~sically suited I'or proposed de~~elopment • House designs are not consistent ~~~ith Residential Design Guidelines • Incomplete de~~elopmcnt package (no plans for proposed Parcel l ) • Loss of ~ ie~~ ~ isual impact • Drainaee Section 66-17 of the State Subdi~~ision \Iap :pct includes the iollo~~-in~ see en tindin~s rclati~~e to subdi~~isions of land. These criteria are in essence re~~erse findings: should the deciding bode male am~ of the findings. it is ~~rounds for denial. cr. That the proposed map is nor cott.cistettt frith crpplicahlr~ ~~~rleral cntd spe-chic plcnt.c n.c speci~ieci in .Section C~-~~ 1. b. That the design or intproretnetu of the proposed strbdii•isiun i ~~ not catsistet7l tirith applicable general and specific plans. c.lhut the site is trot phrsicalh~ strilable_for the tipe oTderelapntettt. d. That the site is trot pln~siccrlh~ suitable_>`or tl~tc proposed densin~ of de~•elopntetll. e. That the design o{ tl~te strbdh~ision or thc~ proposed itttpro~'entertts are likel~~ to cause' strbstuntia! etn~ironntentcrl ilantage or strbstatrtialh~ and ~n•oidirbh~ ittjtn~e fish or ~ti~iklli fe or Ihe71" hcrbrtat. f. Thcrt the design o~~the .c~trhdi~~isiort or tZ~~e o]''inapro~~cntents is likeh~ to cause serious public health prohlents. g. Thcrt tl~te design ofthe strhrlil•ision car the type ol~intprurentettrs gill conflict frith easemc~ttts, ac~jtrircd b~~ the public at large. 1r~r uccc~ss throtr,~h nr trse o1. pro~?crh~ tirithitr the prvpnsed Strbdll'lSlOn. Staff recommended a soil appro~~al of the proposed subdi~~ision ~~hen it ~~~as returned to the Commission as it met the technical requirements to split the parcel (the densit.~ is c~~ithin the allu~~-able range, the minimum lot size can Lie pro~-idcd for each lot. frontage and lot depth requirements ha~~c been met. and them are adequate building sites) auil is compatible ~s ith the c~istin~~ des~elopment pattern in the area. The Commission exercised its discretion in determining that the project is nut consistent ~~~ith the General Pl~ul (finding b). the site is not suitable for the proposed de~~elopment (f indin~~ c ). that the proposed parcel configurations and resulting de~~elopmcnt arc not consistent ~~~ith e~istin~~ de~~elopment. and that the site is not suitable frn~ the proposed density (llndlllgs d). lZefer t0 .-~llaClllllellt 7 lOi'the Co1711]]]SSlo11~S Clelalled discussion and a]'t]CUlatloll of reasons for not supporting the subdi~~ision. .-~lthou~~h the Commission did not speciticall~~ deny the :~rchitectru~e and Site ap}?lications. there ~~ as a dcfacto denial of those companion applicatirnis based on denial of the Subdi~~ision application. P_~GE \l.~\1"OR _-1\D 1~0\t"\' COL\CIL SL~B.IrCT::-tPPE.aL 1=0R 1 ~9?b L~\IO~ _1\'E\t'E 1=1LE=S-Ub-~O. S-09-3 ~. S-09-~-1. \I-OS-I ~C \D-09-?. C. Lot Pattern and \ei~~hborhood Compatibilit~- The existing lot pattern has been a point of discussion at mane of the public hearings for the proposed subdi~ ision. There is a min of small and lame lots in the area surrounding the project site (see L-~libit ?0 to ~ttaclnnent ~). hilmediatel~~ to the north the pattern is one large lot of 18.000 to ?0.000 square feet li-ontin~ on L'nion .a~~enue «~ith a smaller lot of about 8.000 square feet fi•onting on Panorama \\~a~. Parcels to the south on Leew~ood Court are appro~imatel~ 10.000 to 1?.()00 square I~et iu sire The lots closest to Union :A~~enue are s~~uare shaped n bile the lots fronting on the cul-de-sac are pie shaped. The lot to the east is o~~er'0.000 square fi:et. Lots across Union .-\~ enue to the east are 10.000 to ] ~.UUO square feet. _-\t the Fetiruar~~ 1. '010. meetin~~ the To~~~n Council indicated that properties on Panorama \1~a~ and the east side of L•niotl :1~ emte are the most relati~~e to the project site for purposes of e~-aluating neighborhood compatibilit~•. AV~hile proposed parcels and 3 are pie shaped lots_ the~• are oriented dillerentl~- than the lots on I_e~~~~ood and Lasuen Courts. 1 he pl'lIIlal'V~ 1'i'as011 Ior lhls Conllgura11o11 15 the lotlg. Marro\1' ]latul"~ Of the pr0)eCt slle. 1 he r~SUlllll~~ location for the t~~-o homes pushes them closer together than is t`~pical for a more standard cul-de-sac. If the ncn-residences ~~ ere reiiucc:d in size and or restricted to one-stot-~- designs. they- ~~-ould be more compatible ~~ ith the Panin~ama L'nion neighborhood and less obtrusi~ e to inul~ediate nei_hbors. The Commission had some discussion on this aspect ofthe project. but ~~~~as unable to reach a consensus on the issue of house size and heiuht. D. _a > >eal The applicant appealed the Platulin~ Commission's decision based on his belief that the Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion in finding that the subdi~ ision application is not consistent ~~ith the surrounding neighborhood, and in tindin« that the site is not pht~sicalh~ :uitabl~ for the proposed density- and'or n~pe of de~~elopment. :~~ttaclunent 6 is the applicant`s appeal statement. :Attachment 1 ~ is a supplemental letter and exhibits further explaining the applicant's position. L:\\~1R0\\IL-\T_-\L _~SSESS'~1E\T: .-\s required b.' the California Em~ironmental Quality :~\et (CEQ_A). an Initial Stud- and Mitigated \egati~~e Declaration have been prepared (see: Exhibit ~ of _-\ttachment 8). -I11e en~iromnental rep ie~~ ~~as completed b~ the To~~~n's consultant. Strelo~~ Consulting. _-\s part of this process a tiiolog~• report ~~-as prepared b~- 1=cos~ stems \V-est. an archaeological re~~ie~~ ~t-as completed b~~ Pacific Legac~~ and an arborist report ~~-as prepared bt the "I~o«n's Consulting) :~rborist. _lrbor Resotnres. The public comment period for the ?~iitit~ated'.~egati~~e Declaration ended on _~u~~ust 17. X009. Protection of ttestin~ birds is the onl~~ potentiall~~ significant impact identified. _-\ miti~~ation measure has been included in the conditions of appro~-al (_=lttaclullent -1) and in a ~'Iitigation tonitorina Plan (Attachment ). 1~hc lnitial Stud- also included se~-eral recommended conditions that hay e been included in the conditiots of appro~~al. P:~G1= 6 \I:~~`OR .~~D TO\\~ COt-\CIL SL`I3.IEC-I-::IPPE:~L FOR 1 ~9~f~ L`\1O\ .-~~'E\L-E FILL- -S-OS-~O. 5-09-~ ~. S-U9-3-I. \I-0~-13 --lir~~lr.~t ~. ~(111J CO\CLL~S1O\: The three-lot subdi~~ision ~~~hich ~~-ould allo~~" de~"elopment of tlu"ee ne~~- residences is ~~~ithin the density" ranee allo~~~ed b~ the General Plan. and complies ~~~ith minimum frontage, depth and lot size rec}uircments. Ho~~e~-er. the Plal>lling Commission determined that the proposed parcel Ia~~out and contigul ation is not consistent ~~"ith the ezistin~ lot paltern to the north and that the proposed density" Is 1]ill p11~ 51Ca11~' SLlltable Ior the silo. 11 the C'OUI]C11 LlphOldS the C'OmI111SS1on~S deClSloll and del]leS the appeal. the steps in the recommendation section on page one of the report should be follo~t~ed. If Council decides to grant the appeal. it should determine if the reduced right-of-~~~A~~ is appropriate gig en the characteristics of the propert~~ and existing impro~-ements in the area. .~dditionall~ .the Council should indicate «hich ~-ersion of the Tentatiti-e \Iap is bein~~ appror-ed, T\~1-1 orT'~i-?. "hhe applicant prefers 7-\1-'?. FISC'.-~L I\IP:~~CT: \one .~~ttaclunents: 1. Drai-t Resolution for denial of the appeal and applications (3 pa~es> ~. Draft resolution for granting appeal and appro~ in~~ Applications (~ pages] ~. IV'Iiti~ation \lonitorinQ Pro~~ram d. Recommended Conditions ol'.appro~~~ll 1`or -I~entati~~e ~1ap (10 pa~~es) ~. Recommended Conditions of :lppro~~~~11 (iu- :architecture and Site applications ~ ~ pages) 6. ,-applicant's :appeal Statement 7. June 9. ''010. Planning Commission ~~erbatim \linutes (99 transcribed pa~~es) S. June 9. ~OU9. Plannin<,~ C'ommission Report ~~~ith Tr~hibits 1-~0 p. ,tune 9..`O1 U. Plannin~~ Commission Desl: Item ~~~ith Lshibits ~~'-?3 1(1. Petition and supporting information submitted b~~ applicant ~ ~ pa~~es). recei~-ed June 9. ?010 1 1. :lpplieant~s su~~gested conditions ol'appro~~aL recci~-ed June 9. X010 l ~'. Documentation on prc~ ions subdi~ isions submitted l?~- Geoff ~litehell (6 pages]. recei~ ed JLllle ~. ~'U1C1 1 ~. Union .-~~-enue data corrections submitted h~- Thomas \lan~~ano. recei~"ed June 9. X010 1-~. Letter Isom Ors- cC Karen Buesing (~ pages). received Jule SCI. ?010 1>. .lpplicant's letter and supporting information (7 pages total). recei~~ed :1u~~ust ?. ?O10 16. Tentati~ e \laps and deg elopment plans (l ~ pales). recei~"ed ;august ~. X010 (originally submitted on \la~ ~U. ~'Ol0) Dlsh"1bLllloll: ,lel~l~ Grant. ;9 Reser~ oir Road. Los Gatos. C:~ ~~0 ~0 Tone Jeans. T.II.I.S llesi~~n. P.O- Boy l ~] S. Los Gatos. C.~\ ~~0?l \V-RR:SD:ah ~. Pi=_'. c -. ,. ~c COI'\l I!-kEPORTS FA'D TO TC.APPEALSC`\10X'159?6-OSIGIG POC RESOLL~TIO\ 2010- RESOLti~I-IOti' DE\\ I\G a\ .aPPE.-~L OF _~ PL.~\\I\G CO~IIIlSSIO\~ DECISIO\ DE\\~I\G .-~ REQC~EST TO DE\IOLISH :1 SI\GLE-F:~\IIL\" RESIllE\CE, TO StBllIVIDE _\ .93 :~CI2E PROI'ERT1- I\1'O THREE LOTS _\\D TO CO\STRI: CT "1'\\~O \E\\~ SI\GLE-F.-~\IIL\' 12ESIDF_\CF_S O\ I'ROPERT~~LO\ED R-1;8 :~P\: ,27--I2-008 TE\T.-~TI~"E ~I_aY .-~PPLIC:~TIO\: `I-08-13 aRCHITECTt~RE :~'~D SI"I'E .-~PPLIC.aTIO\S: S-08-30, S-O9-33 ~ S-09-3-I \EG DTI\'E DECL:-RATIO\: \D-09-02 I'ROPERT\• LOC:~TIO\: 1,928 t~\IO\ a\'E\L"E PROPERT\' O\\~\ER: 217 O'CO\\OR, LLC :~PPLIC.a\"T/:~PPELLE~T: TO\I' JE:\tiS \\ HERE.as: _~. This matter came before the To~~~n Council for public hearing on Au~~ust 16. 2010. and ~~~as reuularl~~ noticed in conformance «ith State and To~~~n la~ti-. B. Council recei~ ed testimony and documentar~~ evidence from the appellant and all interested persons ~~~ho ~~ished to testif~~ or submit documents. Council considered all testimon~~ and materials submitted. includin~~ the record uf• the Planning Commission proceedings and the packet of material contained in the Council _-~`~enda Rzport dated :1u`ust ~. ?010. along ~~ith subsequent reports and materials prepared concerning this application. C. The applicant proposed to demolish a one-smr~ sin«le-famih~ residence. to subdi~~ide a .9 ~ acre parcel into tlu•ee lots. and to construct ne~ti- t~~ o-story sinUle-family- homes on t~t~o of the proposed lots on propert~~ zoned R-1:~ located on the cast side of t-nion .-~~~enue. just north of Lee~~~ood Court. The propcrh~ is currentl~~ de~~eloped ~~-ith a l.O]O square loot one-store residence ~~~ith attached ~~ara~~e. Adjacent properties are all de~~eloped ~~ ith single-famih hrnl~es. D. The Planning Commission considered the applications on lone 9. ?O ] 0. and ~ oted to dem~ the Subdi~ ision application based on findings that the proposed subdi~-ision is not ATTACI3MEI~T 1 consistent «-ith the goals of the General Plan. the site is not suitable for the Proposed de~~elopment. and that the site is not suitable for the proposed densit~~. The Commission also determined that the Proposed parcel configurations and resulting buildin~~ en~~elopes at1~i proposed house sizes are not consistent or compatible ~~ ith the existing lot pattern and dc~~elopmm~t in the immediate and most affected neighborhood (Panorama \V-a~~ and L-pion .~~~enue). The :Architecture and Site applications ~~~ere a defacto denial as the~~ could not be processed ~~~ithout appro~ al of the subdi~ ision. L. I-hc applicant appealed the decision of the Planning Commission based on his belief that the Planning Commission erred in its decision in finding that the subdi~~ision application is not consistent ~~~ith the surrounding neighborhood. and in Iinding that the sits is not phi sicall~ suitable for the Proposed density- and!or t~ pe of deg elopmcnt. G. 1 he decision of the Planning Commission ~~~as correct. H. Council incorporates the findings o1 the Planning Commission made on .Tu~1e 9. ~`t)10. 1tl:tiOL\~I:U: l . The appeal of the decision of the Planning? Commission on Subdi~ ision application \I-l~S-1 ~ and .architectural and Site _1p}?lications S-0~-,0. S-U9-3~ and 5-09-:-1 is denied. ~. The decision constitutes a final administrati~~e decision pursuant to Code ol- Cis it Procedure section 1O9~.C as adopted b~~ section 1.10.08 of the ~ho~~~n Code of the To~~ n of Los Gatos. .~m~ application t'or judicial relief ii•om this decision must be sought ~~~ithin the time limits and pursuant to the procedures established b~- Code of Ci~-il Procedure section 109-1.6. or such shorter time as required b~ State and Federal Last . P ~SSEll .1\ll _1llOP7'I~_ll at a regular meeting ol~the To«~n Council of the I-o~~~n of Los Gatos. California on tho I6th da~~ of _~u<iust_'U1 U. b~ the follo~~inR ~~ote. COL\CIL \IL\IBLRS; :~~~ES: NAZ'S: .-1BSL\T: .~BSI.11\: SIG\L•D: \I:~1'OR OF THE TO\~~~ OF LOS G:~-hOS LOS G.-~TOS. C.~I_IFOR'~1:~~ :~-I-f1iS l-: CLERK _-~D\Il\ISTR-TOR OF TI IF TO«~~ OF LOS G.=1TOS I.OS G.-~TOS. C.-~Lll=OR'~L1 DE\~ RESUS L'~~ienl ~U~S-appzal n1 Tllis Page 1 citeiltionall~~ Left I31ai11: RESOLUTION 2010- RESOLUTION GR-~\TL\G AN APPEAL OF A PLA\\I\G CO~I~IISSI01 DECISIO\ DENYING A REQUEST TO DE110LISH A SINGLE-F_~~IILI' RESIDE\CE, TO SUBDIVIDE A .93 ACRE PROPERTY INTO THREE LOTS AND TO CONSTRUCT T~VO NE~'~' SL\GLE-FAMILY RESIDE\CES Oti PROPERTY ZO\ED R-1:8 APN: 527-42-008 TENTATIVE i\IAP APPLICATION: i\I-08-13 ARCHITECTURE A`\D SITE APPLICATIONS: S-08-30, 5-09-33 ~. S-09-34 NEGATIVE DECLARATION: ND-09-02 PROPERTY LOCATION: 15928 UNION AVENUE PROPERTY O~V\ER: 217 O'CO\NOR, LLC APPLICANT/APPELLENT: TO\`~' JEA'~S «'HEREAS: A. This matter came before the To«~n Council for public hearing on August 16, 2010, and ~~~as regularly noticed in conformance with State and Town la~v. B. Council received testimony and documentary evidence from the appellant and all interested persons who wished to testify or submit documents. Council considered all testimony and materials submitted, including the record of the Planning Comm~ission proceedings and the packet of material contained in the Council Agenda Report dated August ~, 2010, along «~ith subsequent reports and materials prepared concei7linq this application. C. The applicant proposed to demolish a one-story single-family residence. to subdivide a .9 ~ acre parcel into three lots, and to construct new t«~o-store single-family homes on t«-o of the proposed lots on property zoned R-1:8 located on the east side of Lnion Avenue, just north of Lee«~ood Court. The property is cun-ently developed with a 1.010 square foot one-story residence ~~~ith attached garage. Adjacent properties are all developed with single-family homes. D. The Plamling Commission considered the applications on June 9, 2010, and voted to deny the Subdivision application based on findings that the proposed subdi~aion is not ATTA%}~Tir•t~ i `L consistent with the goals of the General Plan, the site is not suitable for the proposed development, and that the site is not suitable for the proposed density. The Commission also determined that the proposed parcel config~I.Irations and resulting buildin<~ envelopes and proposed house sizes are Ilot consistent or compatible «~ith the existing lot pattern and development in the inunediate and most affected neighborhood (Panorama ~~'ay and Union Avenue). The Arclitecture and Site applications were a defacto denial as they could not be processed without approval of the subdivision. E. The applicant appealed the decision of the Planning Commission based on his belief that the Plaluing Commission elred in its decision in finding that the subdivision application is not consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, and in finding that the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density and-~or t}~pe of development. G. The Planning Conunission erI-ed in its decision H. Council incorporates the findings for approval attached at Exhibit A. RESOD"ED: 1. The appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission on Subdivision application i\~I-08-13 and Architectural and Site Applications S-0~-30, 5-09-33 and 5-09-,4 is denied. ?. The decision constitutes a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Proccdure section 109.1•.6 as adopted by section 1.1 O.OS~ of the Town Codc of the Town of Los Gatos. Any application for judicial relief from this decision must be sou;~ht ~~~ithin the time limits and pursuant to the procedures established by Code of Civil Procedure section 109.6, or such shorter time as required by State and Federal Lati~~. PASSED A\D ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos. Califoi7ua on the 16th day of August ?010, by the following ~-ote. COL~tiCIL 'MEMBERS: AWES: DAYS: ABSE\~T: ABST.aI\: SIG'~ED: ~4A~"OR OF THE TO«~ OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFOR~ILA ATTEST: CLERK ADS-II~ISTRATOR OF THE TO« ~ OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS. CALLFOR~IA \: DE\-RESOS Lnionl~9'_3-grantappeaLrtf This P~~e Illt('.I1t10I1c1~~~ Lett I31~lIlI~ TOR'\ COtiI~CIL -:~LGLST 16, 2010 REQL"IRED FI\DI\GS FOR: l X928 Union Avenue Subdivision Application ~1-08-13 Architecture and Site Application S-08- ~0 Requesting approval to demolish an existing single family residence and to subdivide a .93 acre parcel into three lots on property zoned R-1~:8. \o significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and a Mitigated ?negative Declaration is recorrunended. APB X27-42-008. PROPERTY' O~S~~TER: 217 O°Comlor LLC APPLICA\~T: Tony Jeans, T.H.I.S. Design FI\DI~GS: De~r~olitiorr of a si~rgle fa~nilti• reside~tce: As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the To~~~n Code for the demolition of a single family residence: y 1. The Town's housing stock will be maintained as the house will be replaced and hvo additional homes will be built. 2. The existing structure has no architectural or historical significance. 3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structure as it exists: and 4. The economic utility of the structure is poor and would not be cost effective to repair and remodel. State Subdii~isio~i :llap.9et: ~1one of the follo~~-ing findings for denial specified in Section 6674 of the State Subdivision Map Act can be made. a. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 654> 1. b. The design or impro~-ement of the subdivision is consistent ~~•ith applicable general and specific plans. c. The site is physically suitable for the t~-pe of development. d. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e. The design of the subdivision or the proposed impro~-ements will not cause substantial enviromnental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. £ The desi~l of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems. g The design of the subdi~~ision or the type of improvements will not conflict ~~•ith easements. acquired by the public at large. for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. :~: ~~. F~~:ui•<c;, _ :: ~. ~~rnx:: ~_~-T>;~ :roc F~IBIT A TO«'1 COL'\CIL - AL;GtiST 16, 2010 REQUIRED FI\DI\GS FOR: 1 X928 L'nion A~~enue -Parcels 2 and Architecture and Site Applications 5-09-3 ~ ~~ 5-09- ~4 Requesting approval to construct two neu- single-family residences on vacant parcels created by a three-lot subdivision on propem zoned R-1:8. APN X27--12-008. PROPERTY O~~~ER: ? 17 O'Connor LLC APPLICA'~T: Tony Jeans. T.H.LS. Design FI\DI\GS: Required fr~idiug for CEO.-I: An hiitial Study and Mitigated \ey~ative Declaration (~J'~D) tivere prepared for the Tentative Map. No further environmental analysis is required for the individual site development. Required Conipl~afice fnitli Resrdeutial Design Gridelines: The project vas reviewed by the Town's Consulting Architect and is in compliance ~~•ith the Residential Desig~i Guidelines. CO~SIDER.aTIO\S: Required considerations i~t 1•eview of applications: As required by Section 29.20.1 ~0 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an architecture and site application were all made in revie~~•ing this project. \~. D[\" FI\D1~G~ _~"0 C\'IO\ I i9_3-:1 CS.IXJC EXHIBIT B cr ~_ r U ~, ~~. -p ..r J J ~ ~ ~ ~ 'f~ =~ O7 J J 7 =r 'l. !J C _ `' _ c ~ J N O o~ C z ~; Y ;/_ r^, r_ i C ~~ ~J U J v C N ~ N z ~: x C c-a ~ i ~: f : •~ . . ~ !~ ..J i . ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ 'l. x J .^~-. f ~t~- C ~i. ~' U ;' C .-. r^ s ~ • C ~_ J ~ C. J U ~ C `~ ~ p U C~ U 0 ,~~ 4-. ;~ O O ^' r J :~ r rr-~. r~--• U .J .~ ,^ ^ _ ~ . _ ~'"~ _ r '~ U ~' ice.. `~ C ~.. s `~ ~ y ~--' ~_ .- /; U -J C r J ~ ..~ ~ .:r U r ~ _ :J ~ ~ r- ~ .., :J U .j ~n C G s U ter) U U J U '~ f ~' ~ M~ ;J .- 3 .. U ~ ~ r U U J J ::. C ;r .~ ~J U ~. C :J C. r J >_ r >, U U ATTACH~xiEn'T 3 THIS P_~GL- I~TL~TIO~-~LL~~ LEFT SL.a~h TO~V7 COL;ACIL -:~UGtiST I6, ?010 CO\DITIO\S OF APPRO~'aL 1 X928 Union Avenue Subdivision Application M-08-13 Architecture and Site Application S-08-30 Requesting approval to demolish an existing single family residence and to subdivide a .93 acre parcel into three lots on property zoned R-1:8. No significant enviromnental impacts hate been identified as a result of this project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. APN X27--I3-008. PROPERTZ" O«~'NER: 317 O'Connor LLC APPLICANT: Tony Jeans. T.H.I.S. Desi~ni TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMML1iITY DEVELOPMENT: PlallTtlllg ~Il'151011 1. APPROVAL. This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval listed belo«- and in substantial compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 3010, and noted as received by the To«-n on May 30. 2010. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director, the Planning Commission or To«•n Council depending on the scope of the change(s). 3. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL. The Subdivision application and related Architecture R. Site application ~yill expire t«'o years from the date of the approval pursuant to Section 29.20.330 of the Town Code unless vested through recordation of a Final Map. 3. TO«~1~ INDE\~INITZ'. Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10,11 ~ requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the To«-n shall defend, indemnify. and hold harmless the To« n and its officials in any action brought by a third party to overturn, set aside. or void the permit or entitlement. Tlus requirement is a condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements «-nether or not expressly set forth in the appro~~al, and maybe secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney. 4. ARCHITECTL;RE AND SITE APPROVAL. Separate Architecture and Site applications and approvals are required for each ne~z~ residence. ~. REC~'CLING. All wood, metal. Mass and aluminum materials generated from the demolished structure shall be deposited to a company which will recycle the materials. Receipts from the company(s) accepting these materials. noting type and tiveight of material. shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Towns demolition inspection. 6. OUTDOOR LIGHTING. House exterior and landscape lighting shall be kept to a minimum. and shall be down directed fixtures that «•ill not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. 7. TREE REMOVAL PER\~1IT. A Tree Removal Pernit shall be obtained for trees to be removed, prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. 8. REPLACEMENT TREES. Replacement trees shall be planted for trees being removed. The number and size of new trees shall be determined using the canop} replacement table in the Town's Tree Protection Ordinance. Required trees shall be planted prior to final inspection. Page 1 o f ~ 10 AT'T~sC~~,~\T 4 9. TREE STAKI\G. All ne~yly planted trees shall be double-staked using nibber tree ties. 10. TREE PRESER~'ATIO\. The Consulting Arborist shall revie~y any revisions to the site plans and modify recommendations as appropriate as part of the Architecture and Site revie~y for the ne«- residences. The applicant shall comply ~yith all reconunendations included in the Arbor Resources report dated tioti~ember ?OOS and as may be amended follo~t-ing revie~y of the revised plans. Tree protection specifications shall be printed on construction plans. l 1. TREE FE~CItiG. Protective tree fencing shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees prior to issuance of demolition and building permits and shall remain through all phases of construction. Fencing shall be six foot high cyclone attached to ttyo-inch diameter steel posts drive 18 inches into the Gt•ound and spaced no fiu•ther than 10 feet apart. Include a tree protection fencing plan «~ith the construction plans. 1?. IRRIGATION SYSTEti~I. All ne~yly planted landscaping shall be irrigated by an in- ground irrigation system. Special care shall be takenyto avoid irrigation that ~yill endanger existing native trees and ~ egetation. 13, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 'v1ITIGATIOti YIEASURE. Tree vegetation removal activities shall be avoided during the breeding bird and bat season (January 1 to August 31 j. if tree,'yegetation removal camlot take place after August and before January, a qualified biologist shall conduct breeding bird sun=eys and roosting bat sun~eys no more than 1 ~ days prior to project activities to determine ~yhether nesting or roosting activity is takinG place on the property. If nesting'roostinG activity is obsen-ed, active nest roost trees and structtu-es shall be avoided until a qualified biologist has determined that any ti-oung birds have fledged or young bats are able to fly fi•om roost sites. CDFG representatives shall be contacted to assist in the establishment of an appropriate buffer zone around active nest:'roosting trees andior structures if ti~~ork catu~ot be postponed until young birds and, or bats are able to fly. If nesting,'roostinG activity is not observed during the bird and bat breeding seasons, tree; vegetation removal activities shall be conducted as soon as possible after surveys have been completed. 14. ~VOODRAT GE\ETIC SAMPLE. In consultation «•ith a representative of CDFG, a qualified biolo~Tist shall collect a Genetic sample froth the ~yoodrat colony. 1 ~. ~VOODRAT HABITAT. «oodrat nest~house stntctures shall be avoided as much as possible and as much woodrat habitat and resources (blackberries, seed-bearin~T plants. fruit and oak trees) ~yithin the project site shall be retained as is feasible. Install a temporary exclusion zone and buffer (10 feet minimum is preferable) bet«~een the area of disturbance and the «•oodrat nest house stntctures. Retain ve~.*_etation ~t~ithin the buffer area. and upon completion of construction. enhance the buffer bet~~•een Parcel 3 and the southern property boundary and any additional available adjacent open space «~ith native and fruit-baring ve`gctation that the ~~~oodrats may utilize for additional coyer, nest constniction. and'or foraging (e.g. Pacific blackberry and coast live oak). 16. ~~'OODRAT RELOCATIO`. If avoidance and buffering of the ~~=oodrat colony is not feasible. the applicant shall coordinate ~i~ith a CDFG representative to arrange for a qualified biologist to capture and relocate the ~yoodrats to a ~yildlife rescue or living natural history museum facility for educational purposes. Pane ? of 1 Q 17. CULTURAL RESOURCES-1. In the event that archaeological resources or human remains are accidentally encountered during construction. all construction «•ithin a ~0- meter radius of the find shall be halted, theyCommunity Development Director notified. and an archaeologist shall be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mrtlgatlon measures shall be fornlulated and implemented, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section ? 1083.2. 18. CULTURAL RESOURCES-2. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified to and provisions of Public Resources Code X097.98-99, Health and Safety Code 70~0.~ shall be carried out. If the remains are determined to be \ative American, the Native American HeI-itage Colnlnission (tiAHC) shall be notified ~z ithin 24 hours as required by Public Resources Code X097. The NAHC ~z~ill notify designated "Most Likely Descendents'' «~ho «~ill prop-ide recommendations for the treatment of the remains t~~itlun 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The NAHC will mediate ally disputes regarding treatment of remains. A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant archaeological site, andior ~~-hen Native American remains are found on the site that includes backgl•ound information on the completed ~~-ork. a description and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources. any testing. other recovered information, and conclusions. 1~IlljC~lllg 11'1.51011 19. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Qualit}• Management Application from the Building Department Service Counter. Once the demolition foI-m has been completed, all signatures obtained. and written verification from PG&E that all utilities ha~-e been discoluiected, return the completed from to the Building Department Service Counter with the J~= Certificate, PG~.E verification, and three (3 j sets of site plans to include all existing structures. existing utility service lines such as «-ater, se~~~er, and PG&E. No demolition «-ork shall be done tivithout first obtaining a permit from the To«-n. 20. HOUSE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new house numbers'suite numbers to the BU11dIIlg Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process. 21. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 24" x 36." ??. NONPOINT SOLRCE POLLUTION STANDARDS SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (or Clean Bav Sheet 24x36) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter for a fee of S2 or at San Jose Blue Print for a fee. v 23. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the follo~ying departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development -Planning Division: Suzalu~e Davis at 408-3~4-687 b. Parks R Public «'orks Department -Engineering Division: Fletcher Parsons at 408-39~-3460 y y c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: 408-378-4010 d. Bav Area Air Quality J~4anagement District: 41 ~-771-6000 Page 3 of 10 TO THE SATFISFATIO\ OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS ~ PU BLIC «"ORhS Elt~lllC~'1'111~ ~Il'ISIO71 24. DE~'ELOPME\T AGREE\~iE\T. The applicant shall enter an agreement to construct public improvements in accordance with To~yn Code ~?=1.40.0?0. ?~. PUBLIC I~iPROVEVIE'~T SECURITY". The applicant shall supply suitable securities for all public improvements that are a part of the development in a fore acceptable to the To~~~n in the amount of 100°'0 (performance) and 100°'0 (labor and material) prior to issuance of any permit. Applicant shall provide two (2) copies of documents verifying the cost of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public V4'orks Department. ?6. FI~+'AL PARCEL MAP. :~ final map or multiple parcel maps shall be recorded. Parcel maps(s) shall be in substantial conformance to the approved Tentative iVlap and shall be prepared, wet signed and sealed by a civil engineer or land surveyor registered in the State of Califonlia and licensed to prepare final maps. T~~~o copies of the fugal map shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public ~'Vorks Department for revie«~ and approval. Submittal shall include closure calculations, title reports and appropriate fee. The map shall be recorded before anv permits are issued. 27. DEDICATIO\S. The following shall be dedicated on the final parcel map by separate instrument. The dedication shall be recorded before any permits are issued. a. Union Avenue. A =15-foot half-street right-of-lvay. b. Panorama Way. Street right-of-~~-ay tuning circle ~i•ith a minimum radius of 37 feet. c. Public Service Easement (PSE). Ten (10) feet wide, next to Union Avenue and Panorama Way right-of-way. d. Ingress-egress. store drainage. sanitary se«-er easements and private access driveway, as required. A deed restriction «~ill be required for affected lots. 28. PRIVATE EASEMENTS. Agreements detailing rights, limitations and responsibilities of involved parties shall accompan}~ each private easement. The easements and associated agreements shall be recorded simultaneously with the final map. 29. UTILITY COMPAI\~Y REVIE~~~. Letters from the electric. telephone. cable, and trash companies indicating that the proposed improvements and easements are acceptable shall be provided prior to recordation of the final map. 30. ABOVE GROUtiD L`TILITIES. The applicant shall submit a 75-percent progress printing to the To«~n for rcyieu~ of above ground utilities including backflo~~~ prevention devices, Fire Department connections, gas and water meters, oft=street valve boxes. hydrants. site liJ~ting, electrical"communication%eable boxes. transformers, and mail boxes. Above ;-round utilities shall be reviewed and appmyed by Conununity Development prior to issuance of any permit. 1. E\CROACH'~1E\T PER\IIT. All «-ork in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroaclunent Permit. All work over 55,000 ~t~ill require construction security. ~?. PC,BLIC ~~'ORKS INSPECTIO\TS. The developer or his representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (?4) hours before starting anv «~ork pertaining to on-site drainage facilities. ;trading or paying. and all work in the Town's right-of-«~ay. Failure to do so will result in rejection of work that went on «~ithout inspection. ~. SITE SUPERVISIO`. The Genera] Contractor shall provide qualified super-~~ision on the job site at all times during constn~ction. Pad e ~l o f 10 34. L~IO\ AVE\UE DRIVES\%AY. \e~~- dl7~~e«-ay(s) on Lnion A~~enue shall be desi`nled with an on-site turnaround so vehicles do not have to back out onto the roadway. The driye«~av design shall be approved during the Architecture and Site review. 3~. GRADI\G PEIZ\~IIT. A grading permit is required for site ~-adinQ and drainage. The grading permit application (with grading plans) shall be madeyto the Engineering Division of the Parks R. Public ~~"orks Department located at 41 :vliles Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading. drainage, retaining wall location, dI-ivewav. utilities. and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earth~~~ork quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks and Public \\%orks, the grading permit «~ill be issued concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building footprint(s). A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department on E. '~~Iain Street is needed for ~•ading within the building footprint. 36. TREE REMOVAL. Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to issuance of a grading peI-mit. 37. SURVEYItiG CO\TROLS. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed sun-eyor or registered civil engineer qualified to practice land surveying, for the following items: a. Retaining ~yall--top of «~all elevations and locations b. Toe and top of cut and till slopes 38. SOILS E~GI'\EER CO'\+STRUCTION OBSERVATIO\. During constructlon, all elcavations and grading shall be inspected by the applicant's soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design-level geoteclulical report, and recommend appropriate chances in the recommendations contained in the report. if necessary. The results of the constriction obsel-~-ation and testing should be documented in an "as-built" letter-report prepared by the applicants' soils engineer and submitted to the To~~rn before final release of any occupancy pernit is granted. 39. PAD CERTIFICATIO~+. A letter from a licensed land surveyor shall be provided stating that the building foundation ~t-as constricted in accordance with the appro~~ed plans shall be provided subsequent to foundation construction and prior to construction on the stI-uctt~re. The pad certification shall address both vertical and horizontal foundation placement. X10. RETAI~I'~G ~~vALL5. A building permit, issued b~- the Building Department at 110 E. i\lain Street. may be required frn• site retailung walls. \T~'alls are not reviewed or approved by the En~ineerin~ Division of Parks and Public \\%orks during the grading peI-mit plan review process. 41. PRECO~STRLCTIO\ MEETI\G. Prior to issuance of any pernit or the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall: a. Along with the project applicant, attend apre-construction meeting i~~ith the To~t~n Engineer to discuss the project conditions of approval, ~;~orkinQ hours, site maintenance and other construction matters: y b. Ackno«~led~e in writin{~ that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval, and will make certain that all project sub-contractors have read and understand them prior to commencing ~;-ork and that a copy of the project conditions of approval «-ill be posted on site at all times during constluction. Page .5 of~10 4?. SOILS REPORT. One copy of the soils and Geologic report shall be submitted with the grading peI~Illlt and public llllpr0~"eIllellt application. The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards Goti•erning site ~:a~ading. drainage, pavement design, retaining «-all design and erosion control. The repol-ts shall be sig~lled and "~~•et stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section 67 ~ ~ of the California Business and Professions Code. 4 ~. SOILS REy'IE~~'. Prior to issuance of any permit. the applicant's soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainagge plans to ensure that designs for foundations. retaining walls. site grading, and site drainage are in accordance «~ith their recommendations and the peer review continents. The applicant's soils engineer's approval shall then be conveyed to the Town either by letter or by sidling the plans. 4-1. DEtiIOLITIO\'. The existing building shall be demolished prior to recordation of the Final \Iap. -1~. JOI\T THE\CH PLA\S. Joint trench plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Town prior to recordation of a map. The joint trench plans shall include street and'or site lighting and associated photometrics. A letter shall be provided by PG&E stating that public street light billing will by Rule LS?A, and that private lights shall Ue metered with billing to the homeowners association. Pole numbers, assigned by PG&:.E, shall be clearly delineated on the plans. 46. ~~'ATER DESIGN. ~t~'ater plans prepared by San Jose yy'ater Company must be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of any permit. 47. PUBLIC I\~PROVEVIENTS. The follo~~~ing improvements shall be installed by the developer. Plans for those improvements shall be prepared by a California registered civil engineer, reviewed and approved by the To«•n, and guaranteed by contract, Faithful Perfol-tnance Security and Labor R i\~laterials Security before the issuance of a building permit or the recordation of a map. The improvements must be completed and accepted per the schedule identified in each sub-item by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. a. Union Avenue. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, tie-in paving signing. striping, storm drainage and sanitarv sewers, as required -Improvements must be completed prior to occupancy of the second nee;~ residence. Any improvements (including utility poles, gu}~ wires. etc) on Llnion Ave shall not extend any hirther south on Union than the proposed barricade as sho«'ll on the proposed Preliminary Development Plan dated -I ~ 10. b. Panorama ~Vav. Curb, gutter, sidewalk. street lights. cul-de-sac. tie-in paving si~~ning, stripingg, store drainage and sanitarv se~ti-ers, as required - Improvements must be completed prior to occupancy of the first new residence. 4S. FRO\TAGE I\'IPRO~%E~IE\TS. Applicant shall be required to improve the project's public frontage to current Town Standards. These improvements may include but not be limited to curb, ~nrtter, sidewalk. drivetcav approaches, curb ramps, traffic signal street lightin<~ etc. 49. PUBLIC IyIPROVEy'1E~TS SECliRITY, The applicant shall provide suitable securities for all public improvements that are a part of the development in a form acceptable to the Town in the amowlt of 100° o performance and 100° o labor and material prior to issuance of any permits. The applicant shall provide two (2) copies of documents verifying the cost of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the En~~ineering Division. Page 6 a f 10 ~0. TR=~FFIC I~-IPACT ~1ITIGATIO\ FEE (RESIDENTIAL). The de~-eloper shall pay a proportional the project's share of transportation improvements needed to sen~e cumulative development within the To~z-n of Los Gatos. The fee amount «~ill be based upon the To«-n Council resolution in effect at the time the building permit is issued. The fee shall be paid before issuance of a building permit. The traffic impact mitigation fee for this project using the current fee schedule is S~,742. The final fee shall be calculated form the final plans using the rate schedule in effect at the time the building permit is issued. A full credit shall be proved against the first requested occupancy to account for the existing single family home. 51. DESIGN CHANGES. The Applicant's registered Engineer shall notify the Town Engineer, in writing, at least 72 hours in ads-ance of all differences beriveen the proposed work and the design indicated on the plans. Any proposed changes shall be subject to the approval of the Town before altered work is started. Any approved changes shall be incorporated into the final "as-built" drawings. ~2. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted To«-n Standard Dra« inys and the To«-n Standard Specifications. All work shall conform to the applicable To«~n ordinances. The adjacent public riglrt-of-~z~ay shall be kept clear of all job related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be ~z~ashed into storn drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and or the street will not be allo«~ed unless a special permit is issued. The de~-eloper's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of--way according to this condition may result in the Town performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense. ~. EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks R: Public Works Department. .~ Notice of Intent (NOI) and Storm «~'ater Pollution Prevention Plan (S«~PPP) shall be submitted to the San Francisco Bav Regional «%ater Quality Control Board for projects disturbing more than one acre. A maximum of two weeks is allowed betu-een clearing of an area and stabilizing~`building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control measures. to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final landscaping shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include. but are not limited to: silt fences, fiber rolls («-ith locations and details). erosion control blankets, To~~•n standard seeding specification. filter berms. check dams. retention basins, etc. Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months. The grading, drainage. erosion control plans and S~y'PPP shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the amended provisions C.3 and C. l ~ of Order No. R?-?00~-00 ~ ~ of the amended Santa Clara County NPDES Permit. ~~. DUST CONTROL. Blotiving dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that pa~°ing and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trlrcks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blo«~ing dust shall be ~~~atered as often as deemed necessary by the To«~n. or a minimum of three times daily. or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staying areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. ~y'atering on public streets shall not occur. Streets will be cleaned by street stiveepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the To~~n ingineer. or at least once a dav. ~Z'atering associated with on-site construction Page 7 o f 10 activity shall take place betu-een the hours of 8 a.m. and ~ p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon ~yatering to minimize the effects of blo~t~ing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this constnlction activity shall be cleaned and s~yept on a daily basis during the workweek to the satisfaction of the To«n. Demolition or ear-th«-ork activities shall be halted ~yhen wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed ?~ \~PH. All trucks hauling soil. sand. or other loose debris shall be covered. ~~. COtiSTR(/CTIO\ ZIA\AGE~IE~T PLA\. The Applicant shall submit a construction mailagenlent plan that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan., Traffic Control Plan, Project Schedule, site security fencing. employee parking. construction staging area. construction trailer, and proposed outhouse locations. ~6. COI\STRL'CTIOti STREET PARKI\G. do vehicle haying a manufacturer's rated gross vehicle ~yeight exceeding ten thousand (10.000) pounds shall be alloyed to park on the portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone tivithout prior approval from the To~~~n Engineer (~ 1 ~.~0.070). ~7. SITE DRAI\AGE. Raimt~ater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains «-ill be allowed. y ~8. STORV[ ~y~ATER VIA\TAGEVIE\T PLA'~. A stornl ~yater management shall be included ~yith the grading permit application for all Group 1 and Group ?projects as defined in the amended provisions C.3.d. of Order No. R2-200-003 of the amended Santa Clara County ~PDES Permit \o. CAS029718. The plan shall delineate source control measures and BVIP's together with the sizing calculations. The plan shall be certified by a professional pre-qualified by the Toyn (a deposit for consultant review ~~-i11 be required for this «•ork). In the event that stone water measures proposed on the Planning approval differ significantly from those certified on the Buildin~~'Grading Pcrnit. the Town may require a modification of the Planning approval prior to release of the Building Permit. The applicant may elect to have the Platlrrina submittal certified to avoid this possibility. ~9. AGREEMEtiT FOR STORy~~~~ATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES I\1SPECTION & MAINTENA\CE OBLIGATIO\S. The property owner or Homeowner's Association shall enter into an agreement ~yith the Town for maintenance of the stormyater filtration devices required to be installed on this project by To~yn's Stornlu~ater Discharge Permit No. CASO?9718 and modified by Order No. R?-2005- 003~. The agreement will specify that certain routine maintenance shall be performed by the property o«ner"homeowner's association and tivill specify device maintenance reporting requirements. The a`n-eement ~;-ill also specify routine inspection requirements, permits and payment of fees. The agreement shall be recorded prior to release of any OCCUI)aI1CV perllltS. 60. SILT A\D \-ICD IN PI;BLIC RIGHT-OF-«'AY. It is the responsibility of contractor and home owner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt. concrete and other constnlction debris SHALL \OT be washed into the Town's stone drains. 61. liTILITIES. The developer shall install all utilih ser-~•ices, including* telephone, electric po«~er and all other conununications lines underground. as required by To«n Code ~27.~0.01~(b), All ne«- utility ser<~ices shall be placed underground. Lnder~-ound conduit shall be provided for cable television service. 6?. FE\CI'~G. An} fencing proposed «-ithin ?00-feet of an intersection shall compl} ~~~ith Town Code Section ?3.1 O.OSO. Page 8 0/10 63. AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion of the construction of all work, the original plans shall have all changes (change orders and field changes) clearly marked. The "as-built" plans shall main be signed and "wet-stamped" by the civil engineer «•ho prepared the plans, attesting to the changes. The original "as-built" plans shall be revie«~ and approved the Engineering hlspector. A '~~Iylar and AutoCAD disk of the approved "as- built" plans shall be provided to the To~~~n before the Faithful Performance Security or Occupancy Pernit is released. The AutoCAD file shall include only the following information and shall conform to the layer naming convention: a) Building Outline. Layer: BLDG-OUTLINE: b) Drive« ay, Layer: DRIVE~'~%AY; c) Retaining ~~%all, Layer: RETAINING WALL; d) Swimming Pool. Layer: S«'I~i\~IING-POOL; e) Teiulis Court. Layer: TENNIS-COURT: f) Property Line. Laver: PROPERTY-LINE; Q) Contours. Layer: NE~~%CO\TTOUR. All as-built digital files must be on the same coordinate basis as the Toy;-n's survey control net« ork and shall be submitted in AutoCAD ~•ersion 2000 or hi Sher. 6~. RESTORATIO\T OF PUBLIC I~IPROVEyIENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are dammed or removed because of developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs. gutters, sidewalks, driveways. signs. pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc. shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Constlltetion hlspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. Developer shall request awalk-through tivith the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions, 6~. SANITARY SE«-ER LATERAL. Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used or reused. Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean-out at the property line. 66. SANITARY SEWER BACK~~%ATER VALVE. Drainage piping sen-ing fixtures which have flood level rims less than rn~-elye (12) inches (30=1.8 mm) above the elevation of the next upstream manhole and~or flushing ii>let cover at the public or private se«•er system sen-ing such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved t}pe back~~~ater vale-e. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the backwater valve, unless first approved by the Administratiti~e (Sec. 6.~0.02~). The Town shall not incur any liability or responsibility for damage resulting from a sewer overflo«• u-here the property o~i~ner or other person has failed to install a backwater valve, as defined section 103(e) of the Uniforn Plumbing Code adopted by section 6.0.010 of the To~yn Code and maintain such device in a fimctional operating condition. Evidence of West Valley Sanitation District's decision on whether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. 67. ~~%EST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT. All sewer coimection and treatment plant capacity fees shall be paid either iimnediately prior to recordation of any subdivision or tract map with respect to the subject property. or immediately prior to issuance of a sewer connection permit. whichever event occurs first. ~~'ritten confirmation of pa}~nent of these fees shall be pro`~ided prior to map recordation. Page 9 of • 10 68. CO?~STRLCTIO'~ tiOISE. Bet\veen the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., \veekdavs and 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. \reekends and holidays, construction, alteration or repair activities shall be allowed. '`o individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eiglrtv-five (85) dBA at t~renty-fiv-e (?~) feet. If the device is located within a st111cture on the property. the measurement shall be made at distances as close to hrenty-fire (?>) feet from the device as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the propely plane shall not exceed eighty-fire (85) dBA. 69. HAULING OF SOIL. Hauling of soil on or off-site shall not occur during the mol~tiina or evening peak periods (betn-een 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and bet\veen 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall vrork vy~ith the Tovvn Building and Engineering Department Engineering Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods ~\•hen soil is hauled on or off the project site. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the developer'o\vner to place construction notification si~IS noting the dates and time of construction and hauling activities, or providing additional traffic control. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand. and other loose debris or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. 70. GOOD HOL-SEKEEPItiG. Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times durng the course of construction. Superintendence of constl~llction shall be diligently performed by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during ~yorking hours. The storing of goods and'or materials on the side\valk and.`or the street \rill not be allo\ved unless a special pellnit is issued by the Engineering Dlvlslon. TO THE SATISFACTIOti OF THE SA\TA CLAR_a COL`~TTY FIRE DEPART?vlE:~iT: 71. PUBLIC FIRE H~"DR.=~'~T(S) REQUIRED. Provide pubic fire hydrant(s) at location(s) to be detel-Inined jointly by the Fire Department and San Jose «'ater Company. Maximum h}-drant spacing shall be 600 feet, with a minimum single hydrant flow of 1,500 GP>\,q at ?0 psi residual. If area fire hydrants exist, reflect their location on the civil dra\yings included with the building pel~nit submittal. 7?. FIRE HYDRA\~T LOGATIO'~~ IDE\TIFIER. Prior to final inspection the general contractor shall ensure that an approved "Blue Dot" fire hydrant location identifier has been placed in the roadway as directed by the Fire Department. 7 ~. PREMISE IDE\TIFICATIOti. Approved addresses shall be placed on all new buildings so they are clearly risible and legible from the road they are fronting. \umbers shall be a minimum of four inches high and shall contrast \\~ith their background. \: D[\" CO\Dl"11S ~OIO I-nionl~9_~-T\L-1~n°.doc Page 10 0>`~10 TO«'\T COI: \CIL - AL?GUST 16, ?010 CO\DITIO~S OF :~PPRO~':~L 1 X928 union Avenue -Parcels 2 and 3 Architecture and Site Applications 5-09-33 & S-09-34 Requesting approval to construct two new sin,=le-family residences on vacant parcels created by a three-lot subdivision on property zoned R-1 :8. APNT X27-~?-008. PROPERTY OW~'ER: ? 17 O'Connor LLC APPLICANT: Tony Jeans, T.H.I.S. Design TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COQ°L\~iL~~ITY DEVELOP\~1E\T: Pla17T1177g Dll4sio71 1. APPROVAL. This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval listed Belo«~ and in substantial compliance with the plans approved by the Plaiuung Commission on June 9, 2010, and noted as received by the Town on May 20, 2010. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Corrununity Development Director, the Planning Commission or Toren Council depending on the scope of the change(s). ?. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL, The Architecture and Site applications will expire two years from the date of the approval pursuant to Section 29?0.33~ of the Toga n Code, unless the approval is used prior to expiration. 3. TOWN INTDEMNITY. Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.11 ~ requires that any applicant «-ho receives a permit or entitlement from the To«-n shall defend, indemnify, and hold harniless the To~~~n and its officials in any action brought b}% a third party to overturn, set aside, or void the permit or entitlement. Tlus requirement is a condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements «-nether or not expressly set forth in the approval, and maybe secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney. 4. TE\TT.=~TI~'E MAP. All conditions of approval for Tentative 1~1ap M-09-13 remain in full force and effect unless modified by the conditions herein. ~. OUTDOOR LIGHTING. House exterior and landscape lighting shall be kept to a minimum. and shall be do«•n directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. The outdoor liahtinQ plan shall be revie~~~ed during building plan check. Any changes to the lighting plan shall be approved by the Plaiming Division prior to installation. 6. GREEN BUILDING. The houses shall be desig7led to aclueye compliance with GreenPoint Rated Standards for green building certification. The GreenPoint checklist shall be completed by a Certified Green Building Professional. 7. NEW TREES. Required replacement and screening trees shall be planted prior to final inspection and issuance of an occupancy permit. =vliiumum tree size is 2~-inch box. 8. TREE STAKING. All newly planted trees shall he double-staked usin~T rubber tree ties. Buildi~~g Di~•isio~~ 9. PER~~~IITS REQUIRED: A building pern~it is required for the demolition of the existing single famil} residence and construction of the ne~v sin:tle family residence and accessory structure. Separate permits are required for electrical, mechanical and plumbing work as necessary. Page 1 of ~ ATTACIiI~.NT 5 10. SIZE OF PLC\S: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 24" x 36." 11. CO\D1TIO:~S OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on the cover sheet of the constriction plans. A compliance memorandum shall be prepared and submitted Zvith the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval ~;ill be addressed. y 1?. SOILS REPORT: A soils report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Buildin; Official, containing foundation and retaining wall desigtl recommendations. shall be submitted «-ith the building permit application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer specializing in soils mechanics (California Building Chapter 18}. 13. FOlitiDATION I\SPECTIONS. A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil en`rineer or land sui-~~eyor may be required to be submitted to the project building inspector at foundation inspection. This certificate shall certih% compliance «-ith the recommendations as specified in the soils report: and. the building pad elevation. on-site retaining wall locations and elevations are prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items: a. ~ Building pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation corner locations d. Retailing Walls 14. RESIDENTIAL TO«~ ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: The residence shall be designed with adaptability feah.ues for single family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61: a. Wooded backing (?-inch x 8-inch minimum) shall be provided in all batlu-oom walls, at water closets, showers, and bathtubs located 34-inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of Arab bars. b. All passage doors shall be at least 32-inches wide on the accessible floor. c. Primary entrance shall a 36-inch wide door including a 5'x5' level landing, no more than 1-inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level with an I8-inch clearance at interior strike edge. d. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance l~. TITLE 24 E\'ERGY COMPLLA\CE. California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF- 1R, Z~IF-1R, and 1~%S-~R must be blue-lined on the plans. 16. BACK~~%ATER VALVE. The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary se«-er backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.>0.0? ~. Please provide information on the plans if a back«~ater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Toy;~n of Los Gatos Ordinance and ~~'est y'allev Sanitation District («`y'SD) requires backwater valves on draina_7e piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 1?-inches above the elevation of the next upstream mai~liole. 17. TOt~~ FIREPLACE STAti'DARDS. New wood burning fireplaces shall be an EP:~ Phase II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance 190. Tree limbs within 10 feet of chimneys shall be cut. l S. SPECIAL I\SPECTIONS. «11en a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1701. the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. The Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out. sided b~~ all requested parties. and be blue-lined on the construction plans. Special Inspection forms are available from the Building Division Service Counter or at ti,•~,•~r.los~atosca.Qoi~'buildi~7~. Paa~ ? of 3 19. NO\POI\T SOLRCE POLLLTIO~ STANDARDS: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley \onpoint Source Pollution Control Progl-am sheet (or ?436 Clean Bay sheet) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Counter for a fee of S2 or at San Jose Blue Print for a fee. 20. APPROVALS REQLIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuinff a building permit: ay Community Development - Plaiutinv Division: Suzanne Davis (408) 3~-I-687 b. Engineerin~'Parks 8. Public ~t"orks Department: Joluz Gaylord (-108) 39~-3.160 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 d. ~~%est Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-?407 e. Local School District: The Town ~z•ill forward the paperwork to the appropriate school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit issuance. TO THE SATFISFATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF P_~RKS ~: PL:BLIC }FORKS E~rgir:eerir~g Di~~ision 1. PAD CERTIFICATION. A letter from a licensed land surveyor shall be provided stating that the building foundation was constructed in accordance with the approved plans shall be provided subsequent to foundation constnzction and prior to construction on the structure. The pad certification shall address both vertical and horizontal foundation placement. TO THE SATISFACTI0~1 OF THE SA'~TA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPART:~IEVT: ??. AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRI\KLER SYSTE\~1 REQUIRED. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system is required for the new residence and QaraQe. hydraulically desisted per \ational Fire Protection Association (\FPA) Standard ~13D. A State of California (C- 16) Fire Protection contractor shall submit plans, calculations. a completed permit application and appropriate fees to the Fire Department for approval. prior to beoiiuting their work. 23. FIRE APPARVTLS (E?~GI\E) ACCESS ROADS REQUIRED. An access road with a paved all weather surface, minimum unobstructed «'idth of ?0 feet. vertical clearance of 13 feet sil inches. minimum circulating tuning radius of 36 feet outside and ?3 feet inside and a maximum slope of 1 ~°'o shall be provided. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet A-1. ?4. PRE~~IISE IDE\TIFICATIO\. Approved addresses shall be placed on all new buildings so they are clearly visible and legible from the road they are fronting. \umbers shall be a minimum of four inches high and shall contrast «•ith their back~-ound. \: DEV' CO\D17\S 21110 ~~nionl>92?-.-~~~S.doc PQ o'~' i O f THIS P_~GE I`TE~TIO~ ~LL1- LL- FT BL.~~h FILIV~C FEES $3? 1.U0 lZcsicirntial $1,3ft~3.DI1 EL'I' C01111]]C1'CIa(, ~Iulti- f'amil~ ur'I-cntativc ~111_IZ_lhpcitl 1'o\i n of L Gatos Of'f'ice of the Tow l~k I10 E. \I~~in St., Los G CA I. the und~rsi~~ned. da'.t~rcb+ ap,:eilf a decision uCthe Alannin~~ Commission as I;;,Ila++s: (NL!~.:1>!= T PE OR O:1~1~!:01= PL;1\\l\C; CC)?,~1\•i1SSi0` DECI~!O\: E~_/~_~10 ~ ~ I(~'ll~)\ It l \"l~ \ L:1 } 1. l" fOWW Og tOG G~,70S I'RUJ1=.C~1- ;\I'Pi_IC.\llU\ \U __ -t , I _ 'ti.~" -' -- -- . - - 1 ~ ~r-] :1D[)Rl_S[; I.OC:\T10~: [ ~ =~-~--~ t~ tile.^~ :r~C r ~ n,~E.i'~F-. ;=; . -J` -, Pursuant to the To++°n Code. the ho'.+n Council may only ,rant an appeal of a Plannin~~ Commission decision in most matters I!-the ` Coul;cil finds that one of chr_e (31 ri:asons exist for ~rantin~ the appeal by a +ot~ of at }east t}u~ee (3 j Council mctnb::rs. Thercior~. please snecil~' haw one of those reasons exist in the appeal: - u v ,, u I. 1'he Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion because sue;-"~'~ ~'`: ~~r'S"' or u~cf' ~i~T ~ ~ ~'~ 1> S '~-~- 5~~,i ----- - --- ' ~~ !r CS~SI`rc' [ i1J'.ie`~l?~-. t~ ~~'~t`f"-~ ;t'..}t;'it"l~C'!Yli i C{t'L. ~. ~~'1f:G~ [l-- C..G"r`1 ~ 12~ ; ~ri~%U ;,~ . , = - ._ .- , - _ ,~ _ ~,~ '~~~(1Cre~1S-n N in~0{Fil~F~l%'.t~`.[J:IE ):c ~ lV~si'.:t5i3n~ t'SIC-j.Y~i'a11I~:if=t`~1~1:711~'~11 tllc.'~}]~nillfl~'COi',}:Tll~:ifs.ifi[C:.:~itDl].~I`c3.C-~1-" L ;/ _ t, 'a Ij_ ~GSIG~tJ ~(2. lf-1! i'c'L`t c`.^.-[~" lair' SF-C~ii 1y~?~:~/'J ~.~~ (tV c-v~':.T~~rlt~-) r t~ ~f ~"~- G~ s~~. - 7'^': \ •~ ~ ~.~ ~~~+'•._ V~ 1~:1~: t ice,, r 3 I f.~; - r'.~ u 'ri ( j I`, !~~'t_C 1 I t ;i~t'~'~~rtt••r ~ ~, f ~;4-i '=tj°.-y,.C~CT.C.k'.~- e -1 =~- l`-rl~ rr - -_ - -t-'` ~. ,. a-? l ~. u,<_ .~ ~~:.. •. _ ~ ~- ~ ". ~°~..~ ~~ ~_ i.._'~c::~ ~~.1_~t~-~ :aet~ .t stcYr.=`m,a. trt..tiv;a if=pos~rt. e't-f3~t __ fhe Planntn ~ CatllllllSStOtt did aut ita+e discretion to ttlodil'v or:tddress the i'o[Iv++in~~ po!ic} ar issue chat is vest~;i in !11: I ~,~n C:nl nc i l If 11012E SI':1CE IS \EEDk:~, NLk:~St::\ f"I':~Cli -1 l)DITIQ~:~I_ SIIF:E~f`;. I:A9I'O1ZT.Atil": I. ;lppcllant is responsible i~or fees [or transcription of minutes. :\ J~D9.0(1 deposit is required :tt the time of filing. ~. ;\ppeal must be ;llcd +aithin ten 1:101 calendar da+s e! i'lannin~, Commission Decision ac::onlpatlicd by the regtlircd Jilin ~ fc~. Dcadlin~ is ~:OG p.n;. on the IG"' day folL•.;++'in<, tl.c c~cisic]n. If the 10" da`: is a Satw•day, Sundae, or -I-own holida+. tiler it m^+ be ~Iled on the ,aorkda+ irunediate!~ [ollo++ in~~ the 11~' da,,•. usually :i \tonda,; . __ ~i~he l~c++n Clcrl: ++il! set the hearin« ++itLin~ ~(i dais of the date o! the Planning Comt]ti~siol; Decision (~l n~+n Ordinance ~:u 1 ci5~) -1. \n appeal re~,ardin ~ :i ~~itanse of lone application or a subdivision map on l+ n-:tlst he G}ed witllinlhc tin-~o lima specilicd in the7.onm~ or ~uh!Ji+izion Co +c. as :ip}:iicable. ++hich is .Jit'?ercnt Irom otl?zr appeals. ~/ G+•;ce til~:~. the ar.[]ai',+'il} be heard b+ the Ter+.n Council. _ / I ,,. li t}1C i'C;liUn !DI' _!r:i ll{;I?!1 flll al]{]l'al U iI1C I`. CIpI i~l !'~'.+ F111 i`I?ll::!lOn. II1C :IPpI'i:allVtl ++'!ll ~1S',t t7, }I_v []t: rCiUl'11t (.} ti7 l}?C }'Ii:I?1:11'.' LUI?litli»!on !oI' r'til7?1SIiICI":It:Ull J'7,.`,'/'rf. 1)IZ!\ f y.:\\.[}:. i C:r :~-f ~, ~t~-i -.~ 5111:\ }l. lcl.~_- __''il'~--I_ .~- -- _ ,. -~ -~°- OFFICI:~I. 1. SE: O~I.I "` l):1~1~}~. O}= ?1:I31_IC I III:\i:l\G C0~1=1}Z~1.~11 !G\ l.}=~h~hLR ~I.\"h: [~a?~c: Pcndin~,! Planning; I)cparttttent Confirmation ___ hG ;\PPLIC:\\ I ~~ :1P!'LLi.:1\~I~ 13Y: I) \ i~l- fG ~l`:D PL l3l_1C:111Q~: D.1T1 GF Pl: Ii~IC:1T10\: ATTACHMEIrT 6 THIS P_aGE I\TE\TIO~_~LLI~ LEFT BL_~\K v _ - _ _ _ - >_. _ r ~ c _ ~ J J m - = c r - J c a m 4 3 _ - _ _ s > 3 - - - U > J ,~ - > > T ... _ ~. j. --+ C ~ o ~ c'~ a - ~: _ ~ 3 ...~ V .~ u x .. ~ ~ CJ TO C~~ ~ C - F r .. x L N u .~ a U - - - ~ ~ x .~ -_ __ .. o - h - _ v _ t 1 v z ~ - ~. _ c 3 -.a n U _ ~ 3 - _ C 3 ~ 47 - .~ J r - ~ V c i _ _ ~ ~ C 3 - U -, _ _ _ J v o a n L b% v. ~ v U ti :: - -- - - - C Q ~ n r ~ ... C x u; 7 C O ~. v. 3 o E f- ti. - ~- G - 3 :l ~ - u7 v, - - r o m _ v. - :~ ~ -_ :. n N M .~. x i~ .. 'J r 'l.' ..{ - J M1j /: C C > U ~ bt .. C -~ v. e~ - > r - _ ~ ~ M1 > ~ e c ... > n o r ~ ~ Z o 3 u ~. a a. .-.>. >- - -. ~ ~ Z u ... - ~ .s n c 3 ~ G L ~ > ~ 4 m n o - c .~ ~•. .. - ~. n r. - - > - - ~ ~ G ._ _ ._ `. - x _- _ _ _ - -7 _ _ _ - ~ v, ~ _ - L' _ - C Z - C $ - _ T r C - ~- Z j ". C E r ~ =_ .l z_ ~' 7_ G :: i.7 O .~ . T - > _ C C _ _ v - C - _ ^ >v r ~ r L: G r g ! ~I ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ 7 - Z I I I -~ a~ al ~. .~ .. T ~~ - o - - - 5 _ _ _ ~ _ < r .. - Ci 3 _ _ _ L- L _ _ c' - _ _ _ L. - C C _ - _ :> 2 j "' C r _ F J _. .. z z -' z < .,: C - ATTACFt2'II?I~T 7 - L; ? C D -. J 7 -_ -~ C fr ~-. _ - ~ ~- ~ U - ~ _. J c D 3 - C: s .. C' 4' rt - _ ~ _ .. Ci ?. -- 'G E x r. _. U - - C - ~9 - ~ W -. 4 - _ E _ >, 2 O _ 3 O ~ ~ c '7 ~ r_ C' c _ 7 - C - ..- G .. 4 d' ~ - T G C R! 07 ~- _ .. > ti i :~ 7 t7 r _ 4 i+ C C U G >, ~^ 7 C C C ~ E r x s r_ u ~ - r > ~ ~ .,~ D u ~ - - ~ ~. rt 3 ._. 'C a, -J. C - ... _ - r - ._. - G ~. .~ C - - t: -, ~. - - - 3 c T N u- -~ C` r •- - - n ~ ti 5 L D ;~ rt ~ C ••~ U s.. s. U a: N U+ G U ~ v.~ 'J L: c c ~ ~ ~ ^ a u ~. ro S a 3 U ~ N v. Q~ ,~ ~ N C7 C'• Gl _ .a d C~ --. - C'~ rt 7 ~ c - a• L N ._ .. _ > ~ ~ ~ D ._. ._. G G 3 ~ - 3 r .- n r < ~ _ c. - - - o _ - _ _ .~ ... _ r. .. > l _ C' c: - v rt ~' c - - T 3 ?~ ? -- - ~ - C 7 .. ^ :1 ~ m N i - ~ c 1 ^ '[ --~ 7 fJ U_ v ^1 ~ N .~ :J J t U N r .- r,7 3~ LL~ U u ~ e~ 'O v; u; • f G 3 -- ^ r_ c: -- '= - ~v ~ r. -. C 0 c ,. Z C 'l.' .-. E ~ ti z ~; L G .~ ~ ~ v E C G '~ i:1 ~: C J r-. -~ W N v V: rt •l. O U' CJ O >- V. Vi ~ - C J ~1 ~ r - W --~ C - V rt c F ., ~ G - ~ ~ 3 ., .~ G: -_ E r C rt :J ~: ~ - C - D r C rt G d rt a c -- m u; ~ o c w a - - X 'C V. v: N r t: ~J - ~ ~ D D co a~ 3 -^ m > c ~ c ti C N ~ s. C -. C9 Q` - q v U U ~ Vi O E C D =~ 7 M ~ G O J Ql r„ C 'J R1 t7 :~ O C; C C .~ - 'O .. rt C ? _ ~ v v _ E e; ~ 3 u ... `o .-_ r ~ _ _ U .- E ~ D rt v C - - C O: N ._. u: r ... ~ E ~. ~ ,. U Q: ^ x y C :/ ~ v. C rt Vi -~ rt i- _ 3 c ~ c u v s~ ^ W ~ ,= ti c ~ 'c c ~ = D - ~. t. N v e' c` m v -~ ~. -~ a c v ~ a -~ ~ c m G - r - a o w +~ -~ ^ a~ a ., ~ _ ._ ~ ~ u r t ~ `o _~ c v _ ~ ro W w > ~ a ~ m t rt ~ rt -+ - ~. c' - .~ v. - ^ J J ~' 3 ~ .. c - u u - C N N tr. r.; r - Ti :: E C Cl n ., r, ~ ._ y. ~;; .-~ J C C ., v. ~- .~ . v 3 L _. C U, C+ 1 O. C ,~ N q -. w G v: ~ < 3 ~p q t. G _ _ - v. 3 rt -' _ :J a 3 ~ - e .. D - D - e e a x - 3 x ~ c c 3 c - c - -_ = U r ~ ~ E _ - - - _ _ - C ~' r -/_ C. G G - v ~. ~ 1 z~ z '" z G c C _ f O `O - b ~; t7 _ J .- - cc - C ~ - _ > r - > - _ _ 3 - r ~. - C n C - .- _ L v > r T - - -• - - C - ,. C. X V C~ - ~ - ~ C > ~- r > :~ __ _ .- } C G ~ _ - - _ _ .-. ~ C G G - - 4 - ~ - cs a -: ~. C c e n ~ ~ ~ g- +C n a Oi .~ C; •~ Z C L: n C: G C 'J. - C ... - _ T C ~; ~ G _ _ - C - - C: ~ - G C 0 C - rp ~ ~ - s. ~ > - > Z f C C O. ,.. ., ~ 3 ~ .-. > G e -- u > C. 3 P U v ~- .- - r 3 'O O - .. _ _ -.- _ - ri. ~ ._ Y. r. } v a. v ~ ~ 3 - - .- e, m c - - _ - _ _ C = - - - c- _ _ - - ~ ~ c - _ - - _ = - - ~ = -~ E - - 3 - ,p C - ,. - - ` 3 - ' 3 3 - - _ - > - - - 3 - _ _ _ _ _ - - ` ~ ~~ ~ - - __ .- .. ~ :ti C .: - ~ -_ _ - 6~ r ._. . „ r, U - - r - ,C. "" ~,. - - - ,_ _ - :J _ - _ } ~ ~ ^ _ ~ _ o .. _ .. C J .~ _ _ ~ ~ _ ~ _ u _ _ .. r - - .- C' t - _ ~ G - - - = _ - r - - ~ _ g _ - ._ - _ :v G .- ~ G ~ u ~- - ~. - t7 Z Z - {., - r .~ = _ - L c _ _ C - r - C ~ _ - G .: C~ ~ r -; .-. G C G - - T - ., ~ - 3 ~ - U r C Z - •.i C ~ ~ J 7 L J C ~. ~ _ t7 - - V. _ L'. - - 3 - _ t - 3 ~ ~- _ ._ _ - - _. n: G ~: - - - ~ _ _ - - - - - - - - - ~ ~: n n r. -. > - a _ ¢ _ _ = ~ - > t _ _. - -- -- _ o o _ :~ e ~ ., - _ 3 .. -. is Y - _. - _ _ - 3 J - Vi .'~ ~ 3 ._ _. v 7 > .~ ._ _ C - _ > ~ C-i :1 _ _ _ _ C J ,-. .~ - u .. - c' .. ~. -- 3 c .~ E - 3 -- c c < •~ c; ... _ ~ - C .. >• C >- O ~ ~ J - ~' C - _. x .~ Q: G _.. >. C _ C _ a~ J C: - 3 _ -- - > .. ._. ~ o v U v - 3 - G r ~ n ..- - x m U' 3 - - C' +- C r , v ^p Q C - L U G ... .. - - ... L rC v :J V.' Z n ~~ n r c E c5 C z -~ q C > - ~.+ ,4 C ~0 G J .~ x - O - =~ ~ --, ~ ~ _ ~ _ r ., ~ .c .. _ _ a: r~ ._. C ~ - Li -- G O .. J ^ a - .- n .- . ~ ~ ~ Ul -.: L c: -- = ~ ~ a u ~ .~ 3 c c v. ~~ s - ~ w L C T --i ~ O :7 6 --~ - N C > C - E U ~ - J - N v ~ 7 Vi L' V.~ C _. > - J m e ~ - c ~, c v ~ _ 3 3 N - O >, :J v rJ >, C L O - ~`j U U: J r C' '7 C '.~. N 7-i fv N . O G 7 Li E > ~ _ i:. :: U - - •-. >. C: O :; Cpl O .C m c -- o m 3 e o ~ -- 3 a m •~ c r. ~ o o a ~ c ;; Y - .r ~ c --. - c. ~ .. ~ E 3 _ J u ~ J ~ - _ ~ U ~ ~_ z - < v ~ s z Z '" z < ~~ J U E ~" c. 4' L v. [~• ti O U] ,: c s N N --+ a~ .q ~, --~ W _ QJ r aJ nJ - e - C v G C C' 1+ O s u c ~ c. c 3 :~ v t u e` i, v, a G. a ~+ .o v. U ~ ~ Ci i r7 6 G ~C N C >, ~G -~ G G c > > N~ E -' ~' U T -.a C ~~ r. r ~ O N ~ - 3 c ~ _ _ c v a C -- - ~ E -- L, m ti m .- ,- C ,. F' C~ - - C C~. - 4-. .. ... J C - is > 6 ~ .. ~7 ~. Y. q' ~ - 'l. U C~ C J C s - - - .. 3 ~c ~. n u..i C: ~ .- L v. C C 'C E r ~ ~ C >. U .-. .. v r r C'. ... - a ;r. ~ c ¢ c ~ a = ~ c v r C - - CL _ C: --+ -~ U ~ O - ? C C -, v C O < 2' ,,. Li 3 v ,. r C 4 E ... n .. G. 3 v ~ c v ~ c`' s.. c c m ~ ~ = _ _ ~ e .~ _ o = ~ c ~, c m a m < r; ~ ~ A ~ C ... Y .C Q: s. 2 G - C' ~ >. C r C ~ U _. r _ @ _. v, v, .. W rp _ c - 3 3 b ~ ~ >, ~ - R. C -~ ~. J U ~+ C n m _Z ~~ c; - z: m "T_ ~ z Z 'C r. y r C 4 N C5 J - G V. ,. ., .-. - L - ` C' 3 r, ~ - ro C 3 n ~~ ., - _ _ F. _ v.~ ,. 3 ,. r - _ U G } ., ~ ~ r P ' T ?, _ _ F - C _ _ __ - - ,_ C ~- 3 > - >. ~ ~ [: a .. - n ~. C > .. ~- _ "- - -~ .. - p ~ - - - _ _ F ~ - - _ _ - ~ .. u° r - 3 c J ~ J r _ + C - m _. r. ., U .- - SI C' - - y Li U - - T ., U.~ Z - C ~ q - ~; K - > u ~ u n t, ^ U J - G~ C 3 f: ..~ J M J E O -~ v c 3 3 -s { C .. Vi rr N S. ,Y u J t9 U - L7 C~ C U w t U - C C nJ ., _ ~ .-~ C 7 > 7 ~ .. ~ "i te - £ ~ •-. .J ;A ~ ., tr. ~ U C >, . a C .~ cn '~ 4 -~ ~ C ,. E ? rp :J ~' J o .. 3 c~ o m - -. _ 0 G v~ ~ - c: ~ .a _ - Y _~ ~ ._ .- ~ -. - U - C '- (J - - - T - >. H C _-. C _ _ 3 _ . . ~ ~ y~ 3 [ ~ - C 3 3 N U 3 x v 7 G G V, • C .~ _ ^ ~•, G - V - ti 3 L: _ r :J _ C } 3 > C 3 C ~ 0 r N -.+ > r Y ~ - _. L: '- z Z ~ Z -' z C C C T - v, U .,. ~ ~ 3 U ~ Cl _ __ ~. r > c - .... ~ +- ~_ C - C _ ._ C .- - .. -. _ - .= c7 _ - _ ~ c _ ~ ._ - ~ % _ u ~ e - E ... - - - .3 ~- - - > _. r - .- 3 ? r .~ _ ._ _ _ - - `- .Y - C Y. C T - .... 3 ~. _ 3 u ~ r ? - - ~: 3 _ U J ~. .., J _ _ Li -. C C .~. .: .- ti ~: Ci y .. ~~ ~ a 3 ~ ., _ ~ >. 3 V N e, _ c 5 ., ~ C - - ~ - .. C .... ~. _ ~ -. r v. - r O C - C y J T s >, C ~ r _ 3 J - ~ ~, ... - .. _- - - ~ ~ z _ ., _ ~ - _ r - 3 r - c U - - _ ~ - _ _ _ _ ~ _ - - L. - - ?, -- _ 3 E T ~ _ . - -~ - _ v. - -. -- ._ ~ c r m _ - - > a O s r r } =~ \ Q> 2 _ G .~ Z - z C _` C C 4 _ L: _ - - V, .. r7 (~ _ '/. J U Z E C r - - - -- 3 C C - •^ ^. ;J 3 v .. - D. C C. T - _ 3 C v f 4 O C N ro - - _ i. ._ - C - r C C ._ = ~ .- ~ _ m c - c~ . - n v -a - - r ~ ~ C• Ln L .~ s U~ .. G ^ -- 'C U C ~. 7 ~ J ~ J J C _ - .. .~ 7 C' CJ - W L ... _ - [P. 1. ~ ..-. y C r ~ L s. Z C r J 3 N ^ Z P v D U CJ .:a _ _ _ C ~ - L C: C _ ~ n v .~ >, ro v, o , x 3 u J J J 'D - ,1 U 'i7 G .-. r,7 ~ D ro .. ~ v; m C ~ 3 u c ~ >. ro u > 3 J N U - E U s. v '. ,. ~ C •- r• r ~ ro ro r i .-~ SC a . . U C J ~ ~; - x r ~ J u D ?i _ C L: J - U C .. - G - ~ E - - _ - g U < _ ~e a - 3 ~ - - , - c .c _ ~. o - - _ _ _ c•~ .. G Z ": C +-1 r Z '~ L 'J z C .,_ G -" ~~ r C' > m 4 J i1 C U ~+ - ~ C7' r' - v. ~ r C - C Y L ..i X L ~ 'J. ~. V. "' 3 r N C ~- P. ~ - C ~- C PJ - al - - ~ ¢ ..-. .~ Cr .. -_ c - _ _ c ~ - ~ ~ c v C ~ .. r`. L .~ _ C ~ C .-. ~ ~~ 3 u - c c- X n C'. _ c ~ c 7 .~ - ~ " D'. _ >~ .~ .: ~ C to D ^ CJ v _ .-~ _ w z c -.. ~ ~ r _. Y ro •• D z X U r ~-+ D '~ v. ~ Z J ~- z .J C v in :Il --. s :J Z _ L:' E ~ C C' O J O Z :J J G. i L: C is _ C% L1 -+ +: ~ s - v. G C U 1. N G 7 QJ -+ I N A :L ~ .: 7 . u C r - v; P y C D ... ~ r - ~ 4 ~: v. C r QJ L u 4- .. >. ~. -, v. ,, v. C D. ., O ro L .. ;r. a: r 3 i , D ~ .. r 3 ~- a L ~ c N ~ _ c L: ~- ... 3 v. ._ _ .. v. C ~. C' _ - Q' c5 G ~. O N C 2 _ [ ~ T r C ... v .r ~ 6 P. C .- '- r '~ Y. ~' e `' C z N G z- U ~ z ^' n; ~' CG S O a s C' -- __ - 3 c y ~- 3 - _ >. T .. J r ..- - J - - ? _ - ` - 2 O C ~ y - - C _ •-v r _ - ~- a ~ ~ u - C E U -. v - ? _ ~: G r_ - ~ 3 i 3 a. :, ci '' ~ v ~ ~ :~ u ~ c V; ~% ~ _ 1-. 'J \ J fem. -_ _. ._ _- -~ L ~ N - \ - ... ~ r Vi J -ti U -~ .. ~ U v q C .- ;.~ •- v ~U .9 3 - - ~ 2 v1 J ~ 3 c., ., r U 2 r- t r ~..+ rC r > -~ ar 3 O v 3 J C =_ ~.~ J C _ a 3 ~ _ O O ., • 4 ~: c. r .-: U U C C ~ C 7 3 - .- n n7 fP. r C 'C U U J t^. _ ~ Lj _ - E s. -~ > .. - -~ n ~ ~ J U ~-! J p ~ J ... > > 1: Ci .-t _. a :..i 0: N - rp - T - ... ~ -' .., 'n E rp G U C - ~j ~ r - .- - _ ._ - ~ 3 3 _ _ -. .. ._ .. a ` c z ~, G ti > ~~ '- Z 2 < _~ C " L` C. - - r ~ C - :1 ~ - r J L' - =' L' 3 - 3 m ~. ~ y - 3 ~ r ~ 3 a ~ 3 -- .. ~ v, c; ~ L 3 _ 3 ., - ~- ~ .. 3 co - .. - - G 75 - C ~ Q1 u L -. C ? > L _ .-. N T ~. _ _. _ ~ Gl _. - ._ .e ~- 'n ~ - ~ C' J -. o t - ~ :~ C c - 3 -+ ~ 3 Y r, c .. U A v. L - r >- - _ ~,~ _ ~ - - ~ - G ~ - -+ - L ~ J C_ O ~ 6 y r - - .: - > .. - -- s G .X O ~ ~ _ ._ _ .. - r - C = - ~ r_ _ _ ._ ~ 3 - > - - - _. _ r. _ _ _ _ a _ ~ 3 - ,.. - ? C Y C C ? - „ ,sv' - -3 J ~ - s .. .. - - .` - - ~ 3 3 L - - = a a _ .. - - - _ ~ - -- _ r _ - } _ ~ - - - _ _ L - 3 ~ ~ - .. - C _ - r ~ r G - ~ N C - y - 4• .C 7 - C 7 - C O - r _~ ~_ Z L C Z z ^ < __~ C •- _ A t C 'J.' ~+ - i J _ ~^ - _- Q- ~- .. > 3 > C r - 3 y = ~. C m V _. C E !. _ -^ ~ r~ N _ ~ .` l m :J c a 3 .c v 'D ~ > L V v - .- -. r r_ ~ J ... - :J :J C GJ C ... _ m -~ C .. C O. .. c c: x E 3 c ~_ C C - 7 J .. > n - _ 3 - - - ~; r ~ 3 % .~ >~ c: w - E - v m O C •-+ u ~ i. >. -- > m > - ~. - r r E .-• G C ~. -~ ..-, 11 f~ x r.. n QJ C'' > b V L t~ 3 ~ ~ 3 -- m -~ m v m e - :-i ~ Gi v. 3 ~ O C ~. v: 3 n C x c -~ +~ .~ .J n VjJ 2 .3 .. -1 iJ ~ f 3 U t: C --~ CJ i% G - ... n_ C L .. 7 >~ 1- 6' m 7~ -.. -. C u a, m 3 ti > y' c t, ~ u --. q G -' G - x x C E C r - -~ C% r3 V. C C' > x m G r > G _ C C O. r_ X - - - - - - C - V.~ ¢. -- r C _ .= C I - .. m r C- - = 3 V _ .. _ C >- . ~ 3 - t .~ C ~. m . - ¢ 3 L - _ _ - } m J G a 3 0 -. .. U >, CJ •^ 'LS m L C C ,- J: ... h r. -. - D A >. J d• G :-+ - .. > ... U _ r, ~ 7 CJ T J U T r .+ 3 1 >. is U ~ a m N - :J 3 c= - ~ .. .~ 1 i C v. ~ O: m 1 m C ^ ~ V C = z ~: ~. m .~ o J < E >a m u ~ C) ,~ 3 01 a ~ >- i~ >+ ~, Z v C v. C q w p m 3 ~ r 1: J ~ ~ C v. 'O N G ~ _ ~ ; - _ _ ? _ _ - _ > - U - r 0 m C Z C L^, - F_ =_ s ., r. Zi Z z C G G ~ w v Ul C d y 3 v ~ c , ~ • 3 ~ >. a o .~ m J _ ~ N 1- v T m G _ m :J CJ V: ~^ ... 3 U C C iq L~ v, n r ~ C L_ O ? - ~ G C' ~' - -- S. J m !f. Q ._ -i G QI w L N ti U ~C 7 'J.' V -- .. C CJ 7 w f. U :~ 'C _ ~. r, r N - C ~ 3 C m d _ ^ ^ n n i. v. ? .- ~ ~ ~- ~ : .. m to n ~ 1: r. - r 3 Y ~ U L 3 3 ti .~ _ n a' 3 - 3 r e ~ 3 m ~ y C ~ r N -- ~ C ~ F 1' C1 'J. ..~ ~ r ,- ._ >, ~-• .., ~' C 2 1, >. x ~ -+ V: - ~ ~ r, ~ -~ ~~ .G C ~ ~^ ~ ~ C ~ - > e _ ~ ~, 3 m O C J L: ,. r C -. U T - -- 7r ._ _ :~. v T ~ ~ "C .. U c E tr ~ o ~ m 3 . c: Q' r >. is ... _ C: C ? C -ti Y - - C -- 3 c n c v - e C: ¢ - o - :~ c u - _. f ~. - v v 3 _ % N v ~ N - G' - e -~ E~ _. v ..-. C 4 7 is •- > .. 3 V. .~ C C .. - C > 'O 1"i. .-- .. - -' C M c E - - 3 y v. - G .- ? - x E C _ - - U _ _ .- _ ~ - 3 ti- .- E .. v. r L ~ _ 3 T T .. - .... ... - w C V ~ E x C: ¢ C s - c E 3 - E - m > c -- c :r m - - ~ - - v a. - _ _ 3 ~ E c - - -~ .-. c _ ~c . - a a - - ~ o c. G ti z ° ~, G L; ~ -~ O ~ V ~ . h z " z" z < ti L C ~' ~i ~~ _ _ ~ a ~ c ~ ~ - 4 x - - 3 - _-_ _ ; ~ 3 - ~- y. - ~ - .- - ~ _ ~ -, 3 .. - :~ O - - _ - _ _ U ~. ~ _ -- - - C _ - G i 3 3 7. C .. 6i ~. ~ -- - x - - I- c c ~ ~ e c c~ - O 3 - c: a ~~ - -~ ~ - C~ ~ 3 y .. _ c - > U_ _ 3 - ~ ~ a C' .. r- r ., i. _. O C~ :J -~ ~: .~ ~ C ~ ~i x .. J r >.. _ 7 Od .-. L tf. .-. r: V. ~ :,J '~ C~ C v. C r- .. C G x G3 :V L; ., ~ G - J CO ~ e - - c u ~ _ E ~... v. - C _ .. O O - U O G ~ -.. ..~ v.~ O J - ~~ N .. ~. L: v - ,-+ a Y C 3 ~ c c C: e~ ~. G G _~ ~L+ C Ci ~J G~ 7T G G: - Z G. -, r _ ~, - E U _ ~ - .~ i N u O - - ~ .., 3 m ._ - ~. .~ r- ,J U - Q: a ... - O'. N .. ~ i u. n i, c E m e, ~ s - 2 - - L > ~ Ti > r U - G - r j n O •~ C G r: O " < 'I. E ~_ ~ " ti Z `~ z < _~ ~-: L G - tr X ~~ C „ c U ff. - P U7 37 3 ri E G - - - v m r ~ - - C) - 7'. L N .-. I 3 _. U. C. v w >, < 3 ., - Y -- 2 ~ C _ ~: ,_ ._ ._ S. W ~ _ - c _ - m a r- ~C "- -~ -~ U 3 - - ~ 3 - - ., 5 v 3 3 - T tr -. .. c ~ - x - - _ '_ _ T - - v _- - F- -+ _- ~L ~-. - _ - r. iJ O - - _ .. - ~ J ~ - v - .. - C C'. - .. C >, - ,. > W c c _. ~ x ~. 3 v. u 3 > a x ¢ O .. >. - ~ - C G -. 3 G ~ _ 7 _ S - 3 - ~ - „ 3 _ - ~: t C - ~- -- - 7. 6 3 G O - _ > 3 >- 3 x C 3 Y - - -- - U -- - 3 ~ - _ - % n U .- .- > L U - _ L9 C - _ - ., c 3 E - - ~- ~ - s - v. c - 3 - ._ ~ -. r - - _ - _ _ - - 3 ,. ~ T - _. r - _ - - _ v - - - 3 - - 3 _ _. _ O. - - - - .. U C w G x ~ ._ O _ v. - C' C' _ _ u: tr .-. -' ~. 3 .~ -_ - >- _ ,y -' U _ G - C' U - C' - - - _ > r _ - T ~ Li G „a ~, - c r ui J G J .: - G O --~ 7 t:' , - ..- _ ~ ~ Q - - ~ > 3 _ - . C 3 ~ m 3 - L ~ '- - ~ r a -. - r, C ~ r` ~ - 6. - z - C .., _ - u: _ _ _ T -- - - - = r ~ ~ _ - .. - ~ > ~- - ? C ~ - , __ 3 . v - C C O ~' L S.i = - ~ - T _ a C i N. 1 ~ C' G -. O ~ ~. :J z - Z G _: c > 3 = v c~ r, - ~ _. r: 3 ~• - _ - .- - 7. .-. G - .~ - 'C c. ~-. u _ Cl _ - 7 E c ~ G~ ,,: ¢ _ r ., C % O J _ U 'J, U J .. Vi Y J ,.. fr .. 'J. J .. J V: ... C% .C C r. a' c -e u. J - - > - .G i G .+-. tr, ~.. .. G i - >. u ~ r ~ v 7 3 E T _ _ ,~ c - e' U E U C -- G = r: O Z ~ d r, L > e O v 'O > - U CG ... ., 3 - ~ s H •.+ .. 'O L Ci V. r la Z T _ .- C C ~ >. - C - - .. = a r G u ~ -- 3 i. E c; v ,.. ., x _ .. N _ ,, ~ o it m ~ .--. a ... _ - L•: ... ~ C f_ ._ ~ N. . L v. ~ G' G .- C :~ 2 'r. - a- 7 rj ~ V a -~ J m ~ U G r .- i+ G •7 -~ V x !A 3 aC a' L .J J ii G. 3 - J U -1 rJ .-. O t; U: - _ ? ^ C a r_ v. ~_ G - - C C - :., r _ }r N ~ - - - - J C - _ - n 7_ ~ C E .i y 1 Z '~ z - G C G - .~ _ ~ J fn N Cl C' v~ - >, T U - p _ u > .C L .. N h a r C. J C -? O C O C .. :-. x J :J 3 C N n v, c: o > L 3 G ~ U 3 ~ .-- -+ O -- O ~' C fJ 7 C ~ .. J -~ :1 E v G < C - - T C - +~ N T J C _ o o .- v. - s n L v, c~ e ro .~ ~ - v 2 - c - _ 3 C ~., v, ..-. C~ u.~ C' ~p _. v ~- > ra C O v =_ - _ _. c x .c U J r - _ G K _ -- O - - 4 3 ~ - - .. - _. _. `~ - C - ~. "' - C - C' L V _ T - ~ ~ .. ~. - G - N~ 7 - L ~ Vi - .- .. _- :l U - L C' G ~ ~- - G -~ c c: c ~ ._ - 3 - _ - :J V. 4: - - - J. ~. .. a .. 0. tc C~ S_ ~ r n x c >- C'. r ... .- 3 - N N v x ~- v a r -, .. C: ~ C' .= C -~ J ~ J N v. (I. a a' a u ~ U 5~ .- r c _. s a 3 .. O L .~ x z > v w .» m 3 3 ~- N T r 7'. _ .- .. - .y v r ~: L ~ - 'U U N c L ~ a a O ~ - Z q C' A_ L ~ L cr L ~. - - C - ~ ~ c - v-, - .- _ u ~ . a a .-. ., ~ a - .. y - ~ C' a G ~ .. -- 3 u G .-- e - a G C' a' 2 .-+ - [s. u x _ a - ~i - L: _ .. .. -f .. _ -. ... _ .: E - _ .. _ C: c C T G z ~, C V z ... '1: v Z v, Z ^ C ,' L. = s E { - ~. ~ u. - C_ - - ~ _ £ - .~. - ~. c m ., .. y _ ~ _ c _ c - - - _, ~ _ U _ - > - - - - ~ L _ ~ - r J _ ~ r 1. _ z d - _. _ - > - _ _- ___ .. - - - G: - q ~... ~ .. - .~ q z 3 > ~ _ r - U m ~ .~ Z " - Z U - ¢ r .. U __ 7- r V. :: _ _ z ~ m ~: :; ~ ~ - c ~ J. - L E _CC O ~' E I _ ~. r r, - J ~ O U l~ i- G _ ~ ~' X J ` ~ r - ? V r k .-. Z j = ~ L z Z T ^~ ~. C >' .ti [. > - - _ _ - - c o - . ~ _ > > -. > z 3 .. u 0 3 .. .~ o ~ '- - " - - r - ._ U ¢ Ql U 3 y u L - ' - - - y 3 ~ _ - - _ C Li _ ~' _ - _ J ~ ~ ^ _ 8 ._ _ ._ ~ - } r~ 3 .~ _ _ i _ ~ - _ - - _ _ - - > _ _ 3 ~ _ ~ > V _ ` - 3 - ~ _ - - _ ., r 3 _ ~ U _ - _ > ^ - - - C > 3 - C 3 ~ _ _ - -. .. r s .c ~ c. - Z z ~ z G _ ti - ~ >. L .-. v f` - .. W.. y G ~ >- .J ~ .. .. > L x - -_ .T - C~ ... r L N 1-I - .. ... ~ v. > ~ - - i, a r- _ ~ r i. E u 3 C _. ~ r C ~ = a U .~ C v O ~r. 3 -~ N 3 ... -, ., u 3 - ~. v J o N - J vT > - J .-. r,~ r s C C -- ~' C' r 3 _ J m 3 ~ . _ 3 x is '~ v. ^ -3 .. e £ s .~ ^. .~ =' - _ ~; _ _ ~ - - N til - E c 6; 2 .. - 7 G: ... - - u J z n i ... U, u O ~ - ., L ~ -- C G r+ C G _ - - - c ~. c z - - - c a ., z ~ z ~ 1. x C N > - x -v J x ~ ~ £ ~ ^ ~ ~ 3 n e 3 c. z ~ .-- ~ ~ o s ~ c o .. _ ~ ~ -- i. o N v. ~ ~- c _ >. ?, C c7 N C L.i CI G! C .C rti v. >-: ., J 19 .C r, r U G r' a t,^ R ~/.' G O' O C: ? - ` - C. 3 u e ~~ 3 ~ ~. v ^• c - ^ m ~ - >. C = e e - - a. 3 c ~^ --. -. U v. R U O _ r - G N L Ci 'C ^ _, n .- c C Ci ., .~ -. s V, ~ .. C v c e .~ c: _ N ~ c -~ u 3 ~ ~Li >. ~ G O L' -- -- O R C C: O m G C - O u: v ~ _ ~ 3 U -- c: ~ .: O a _ o c e r, r J _ 3 m 4 " r a, - _ _ - e u e~ ~ e = ~ e O ~. L ._ c: -. C N~ .. 3 'D - - 3 r .^ a C~ a c ~ C' :~ - 3 .. - n ~: e 3 A 3 ~ - - v, .. u. .. .L r~ :. -- ., u o .L .. y .-. x ~ N r, d .r aJ .. U C .- r_ L j, C1 ,., .._ 3 - _ •.- Vi C V. r~ ~ L: c - x [; ti c ~ c ti c ro - m - J ~ ~. _. C ... ~, N J 3 ~ ~ _. ... e -- e 3 .c o 3 > > J ~_ :li C: ~ C C - --. - .- ._ v L ., x -_ -c _ - r >. - C U .. r - ~. - .. c: - _ r C 1 z t ~ - :: ~ .. :~ z °' z " z ~- s c~i Z ~ r ~ - .. L ~. Z < -' r - a v x y 'l, f" - .: v - - ~- > - :~ C, G - U n ~- _ L - .~ .~ - > - - - _ 7 7 v _ _ :~ G - - ~ ., n a _, c~ -. = - - >- u ~ :~ r m 3 ,. ~ > - 3 .. x >, r~ r- ~ .~ C c: - rL~ d ~ c O ~ v N CJ u J a c - ~: ~ ? v ~... ~ ~ n a _~ 7 - U: ~_ J a u O 3 C ~ r C - ~ ~ G O'. ? Z C ? - ^ ~ ~ -~ 3 J ~ ? _ x - - -y a _ ~ _ ... _ ~.. ~' 3 _ _ °^ _ 5 ~. a n ~, V v - - - c -_ ~. = ~ _ • _ - ,Y - .. .. e . r ~ ~ s - e _ ~ > - o - s - = m O' - - > a - C~ ~ O r - _ - - - 'l. _ .. - - > > - 1~ - r - ~" - - V. I - -. - c _. c ¢ c _ _ _ ~ ~ z C "~ ~ .; :J ~ 7_ a z~ G L ~ i!. ~~ I _ T - T ~ > > U - _ j > - > r 3 3 v - ~T ... _ _ - - Y v _ - _ > _ _ _ fi ~ r _ _ -- _ ~- _ > ~^ - _ r r - - __ _ ~- c - m 3 - ... - w r _ - ~ _ - - _ ~ ¢ - _ ~ .-- ~. C - - - - _ - C - ~ _ ~ ~- > 3 ? _, _ _ - ~ _ j a = _ _ _ - v - - _ x - .y - ~ .~ C - ~ E -~ V. - - - _ L - 3 - _ - > e - __ 3 - - _ _ - ~ c _ - -- - _- - c= CJ 3 v C - ~ - - -- - .~ 6 r ? v.~ _ _ _ r. ~ '- 3 C~ ? - C - c. - c x U v 3 - - .~. _ T-i - -- .-. - .. - - q ¢ - Z - G L - - - -- .. ,; - - Y X - Cf; - ._ - _: v. - O .1 .. C - - - ~ - - c ~ _ C~ _ - .. - .. .:. .. - Y f T T - C - - r J - - `- - _ _ -~ 3 ~- .. w ~. C c - 3 > 3 > v - - 3 - ~~ _ -_ ~ - - ~ - .. .. m r- ._ - __ - ~~ G, - _ __ _ - _ _ _ - ~ ~ - - - - -~ b ._ _ ... > -. - c c :- m .. _ - _ _ _ c C, :C z 4 Z 2 "' z C l 1 3 z Z Z v i Ci .~ G ~ i :f - ~[ 'S 3 .-. -. O 3 ,. G V - u: C _ v, C _ V. G O ... C1 > x N C; _.. r a~ x c 'O O T c G G r, G; C r' ^ ~ _ C Z C - 3 ~- > - _. :. C: - ~ 3 3 V. C; C x ,. O V. ~- .. O C V. -~ _ > s U C J l: r .. ~ ~ ~: ~ ~i r O -- U V G. .r _. 3 x % _ E ~. n - ~ ~ - .. m .- s 3 v ~ _ r, -- ~ r U ., ~ - ~ r Ci ~ -, - 3 ~ 3 .- c u c z m > 7 - E -7 t G G :~ C x u` 3 y z u; - C > CJ - ~ r _-. -~ ~ r .C ~ r- Z ~r. x c: s r c a` .. ~ -= o >, z 3 O ~ ~ 3 - O -~ - Z :J U f G C~i ~ J 0. •~ e o ~ ~. 'c ~ s: u m o ~ >, ~ > 'O +6 J > s C ~ ~ J~ 4i 4; V• O :J O >- 7 >~ -~ ~ r C r O - - 1, O -+ O ~• r ~ a_ - .. 7 ~ C C u. ~ 5~ - _ -• .+ ^ - _ C O ., G - - ~, - Y 3 l - - 3 J G 7 X C7 L ~. ,, Y a ~ C -- r - Q r '- E rJ O ~ :J C G r: 7_ C Lr. H F '•J '" .: ~ `~ z ., Z - 2 < ~~ • f ~ ` m ~- CJ c: -: V. - Q: J `c •J. C N 7 > m u - - O [i J C C' S V, C' 6: 4 > 3 c v, C E 3 ~. G ~„ ... .i ;~ ~ ~ L` C ~ r E _ r s 'j 4; U ., r C E U ~-+ N U .~ G O ~ 1. C > 0: ti O QJ O _ ? C ~ P L - O -~ ~ O u .- ... 3 ... n C,' o - .C U _. E ~ ._ ?, ~ ~ .. ti u, m ~ E - 3 = G X C~ C- v.~ - ... 'O G - ¢ ~ u r.~ .. c^ ~ > C~ u. ~ C~ C~ C~ ~ ^_ ~ x ~ r r, ~. '- ., C ~ " ..^. > C Z ~ 3 ._ _ a' E z ~ ~ _ '~ C C G_ m A C 'J. C' 'O C 'J. Z C~ ~ C~ c ~' ~ ~ .~ ~ 3 C .. n. Z _ .- ~ G: V. Y .- d :v 4: a V. - ^u• ~ L ~. _ .= c _ - - ~ - e ~- - ~' _ _ _ C C "v C" C C ~ _ C' >~ ,.. v ~ ~ ¢ m .~ - y ~ c - o _ - _ _ _ -- ~ c - >. r _ ~ - - a - _ ., - T :J - J .. ~ ~ - ._ - ~ C _ _ u ~ ~ } ~ c ~ = 3 _ _ '~ > _ T - _ - J _ _ _ _ r _ ~ _ r .~ .. 0'~ - - - Y } ~ _ _ - r ~. _ .~ _ 3 - - - > - - -. .. ~ Y - C~ ~ - _ 1. - _- j, .. - _ _ } ... 1 L ~ _ - ,c > ~ _ c ~- _ - ~ ~. .,. i., _ U. T v.~ _ C - 3 ~ >. _ ~ ~ _ _ .. - } L'. - G X _ E+ r3 ~ _ ~-+ - ~ -~ L; C7 N. ~- 2' V _ ~ U .. L ~ _ J ii [~ 3 _ _ - n s - - ., _ 7 _ ~ ..a ~ y V ~ r ~. _ L . V' _ -- .... - V. _ ~ - ~- u. :f - -- i. U _ s __ Y. .. - .... ~ _ - L - _ +- - . . L: 7. _- v ~- ~ _ - - r. - c .. L~ _.. _ C _- '" _ - L: ~ - 7 Z _ _ ~_ Y _ i- r .= G v _ ~ c _ n } y 3 .7 T C r .. _ r T _ C S _ r, .. r. .. _ - > .. .. s - c - r, - r 3 = - r~~ _ - ~. - e o } ~ > "- e - _ -_ - -. r ,. - _ - ., _ - ~ - _ C L" ~ . r u: 3 K - .-. _ - ... _ - .. _ - ~ c ~ _ c ~_ _ - ~ z u .-, - ., - Y. L ~ - ~ 7 - - ?~. u: - C v _ _ - _ - - } - ~ e; c - _ = 3 - - - 3 - ~ ~ ,, r c T ., c - - _ _ _ ,~ c ~, ~ ~. C r - - .-. _ ._ _ - .. _ > .. - - _ - ._ -. _. T c° r .. - _ ~ C ,,. L ~. ~ ~ _ - .. r ~ ~ - •_ - - Z C c - ., _ - _ 7 C C - T y, r - .. - _ 1 ._ _ Q _ _ - _, R - _ >' _ _ - T C_ _ _ _ v. _ ~- r. J _ _ _ r _ T• - _ - - - _ _ F. .- _ - - _ .. _ _ - _ r, _ _ _ _ - _ - ¢ v. _ 3 r ~. - E ~. = - -J ... _. _ r r ~ r 3 3 _ z ., ~ ~ _ Z '` z ~ G ,_ U. G c ~ C_ L = z - c .. x z °1 z '- z ~ -: -. 7 U _ v, cq _ E L ~- C - _ 6 _ _ ,-+ _ _ e . ^ ... _ _ __ L _ t .. s U, r. m ~n .., ~ C 1 _ - ... A. O 3 ~- ~- ~ >= N -~ .- _ ~. N O v v, m O L J s -- x r -~ L ~+ U O X ~ C C .~ m >. L v r, Z O y .~ U .. 7 Ci .. L -~ _ > s '~] ~ C 'r Ci Z U Z .~. -- Z -~ Z A U 2 - ~ x N Z '~ Z .. Z _ - ~- U C Gi T x u x _ -- J c•. O PJ -• u _ r ~ A - _ g r L J O .. >. u ,,, L~ ~. O 6~ ._, _ G L ~ C C - r E O .. .~ .. ~ - N ... z 3 = ~ z Z ~ z z c z z z c N - - ~ ~ r ~ - Z ~ ... ~ - ~ 3 ~. C O -~ C C -i c: J _ - ~ c: - --a r G Q' a _ ~ ~ C' > 3 u _ c _ >• - '_ _ _ _ n r _ _- _ ~ C T N m ~' e ~ •~ m % u s e~ ~ _ ~ C ... 4J = Vi '.. _ C O y ~ •ti rn Q •^ d • -a O ... c ~ C L 7 6. • v, O E C Q: -r G: R 7 • . ~. •~ w N 2 m U c ~ c a >. v. .. ~ L ~. c C~ - L U .n 3 .. 2 0 w ~: v, _ j. .: a c .- - c - ~ v, -.. 3 - L G r T ._ "~ 7 ? V. N ~ -~ ._ _ e .~ x ~ _ ... ._ O - .~ _ _ 3 y. C L - J ~- L C V :C m .. ~; > _ -~ J C C' 6' Gi >. - 01 E C' > - >. ~. G O ._ > C _ v. _ _ ~ ~ _ 3 :: V H r_ C - _ fL .,. c ~ i c 3 e e - _ - .. - u, ~. _ r, _ r c_ _ v.. _ .-. M C U -- ~ ~ _ -. .. .- _ ~ s ,. - - Z ;C ~ '~_ O Z ~., z Z 4 .~ G ~ r: z G f. z' Z ` Z _ t -, !. U• - ~• r _ - - l - - - __ _ __ _ __ _ -' - - _ - 3 3 3 _ 3 = - _ 3 s - - -. _ _ r G _ r - - _ _ _ - _ n. _ _ .T ._ C _ _ _ ,~ c - - r _ r 3 J .-. C _ - - _ ~ ~ - ~ - _ > _ - c- J v - _ ~ ... > - _ ..Vi - G G - y ~ ~ c, J } - Y n U L^ s. 1L L _ _ _ C ~ ., .. c. 3 ?. C L U .-, i 7 u J - - -. ~ ~- p r T ., ~ _. G ['' L ~.. .-. ..- ~. - _ _ _ G. > QJ >- - u 3 - ~ [: .~ -, _. ~ ~ _ _ _ 3 - C' J ,., ~.. - t: r - 3 [- - - - . n ~ _ r - _ _ >. n c r _ - a _ s c ~. U' - 7 _ , - - J -' - c _. ~ - r - ~. ,. ~ C c _ CJ t .. - -: - - .. v: 3 - 3 rm ~ a r: -' ~. _. c - J _ _ - .. S _ ?, - _ v. _ r - C - __ C - ~ U 'O C _ C "' __ _ 2 _ c .-~ C ._ .- _ - _ - _ 3 3 ~ = - _ _ 7 c. 3 - _ = L _ V a _ C; = 3 C _ _: G _ Q, ~ 3 q - 1. - -' C r v G .- _ _ ~ ' _ ~ _ .' _ _ _ - ._ .-. _ - - - -~ .. -. 1 n .. _ ~_ a _ - >- ~ ~ m -_ r U _. _ r - c x i~ 3 ^ - - 3 3 -- Y c D -- - - _ _ v. `-- ~ - - C - - ._ 0 ... _ - .. - 7 _ _ c _ .. _ .-, r .. - .- - ~- a ~ .. 3 _ ~- C ~ - - ~. 3 3 - - ~ ... 3 a .. ._ - c ~- 3 > -- 3 ,. ,. m -+ o -_ C >~ E > C r -a U ,. .. _ r U C E C C .. ~- C_ U m y .. ., M ~ L: .-. ~. 'I. - ... l J - C ~ 'l. C J >, r 1 .a _ 3 ~ ~ x c _ = > ~ _ 3 L r _ ~ [ _ - -- - _ L G C ~- G U 0 - _ ._ C' sn G 1 O I~ U U -J ._ > 3 < - q ~_ _ ~ N - m .-. s G V: ... U U T C - ~ > - U G U - r, ., m >, 3 >. _ J - 3 rW ~~~ - Li e > c _ U N ~ E U D `-+ -~ Vi C; ~ r .. 'C N - V.' .. > > w c a~ .. m .. r ., c - V. G U G1 N _ x .~ ~ ,. ~ .ti ~ c r ._ +U C U U r .- cr. _ ~. ~ _ _. K 3 ,r c _ - C X G - >• 'J C .- _ v ~' ~ - 3 u m 'C cc 3 s. ~ U C is v. ,- X >, r ~ O U Lt X - M ~~: a - ~ ~ s: ~- ., - - ~ ~.. ti t r C r ~ - T ~ U 1. C' C' J - 7 ,' O U m ~ - .~ V. Vi v O 'l. U m 'J. C r C C L; ,~ U L; ¢~ 3 C` U C' - m U ? >. C' J +~ - .I, C' m G .- - C .~. .. U C N x - .L .C T ... .. rt - - - 7' G ~ ^J 3 - ~ - G U ~- C -J -~ c > o _ > 3 ?, r - L ti ,,. r C -. cc U .~ .... L J N ~- C 3 ... K .. 1 C m .. c c_ ~ _ ~. - ~ z e ~ -~ _ r m - v ~ .. G ... Z --- >. c ~D Z z v v. C r r ~ c v: n. C ~ 3 x _ _ _ 3 r 3 C v. r _ u z - -- m ~ o .. a G z z ~ ~: r c O T L-: ? C -~ :/ _ O L O fi U T ~ ~+ _ .. r ~ } ~ ~ ~ U L-' C L•` v C m r E 4'. s_ W U n. W Z C~ T C - O Q 3 Z 2 - U G - - _ 3 .c > ... ~. O r r .~ w U C C ~ G +~ n. r ..• •- C iC F xG r~ - v. r~ % C: r U' ;r ., V. _ ~ 'L rte. E ~ _ - C c7 ~. cr. r t til ~ K [_ v ~ _ E O ... U ~ - v, m - E ~ E 3 G; >. ~- 3 .. ~ cy ... - 2 E .. 4; - - .-. C _ m ? C .` - - _. v. C v - c u e v. _ ¢ 3 - v - m _ ^ ~ .~. 3 - c e - - - - - _- U. V C U. s _ - ~ - - - _ 3 _ - c: - < r .. c ~ -- r r a c - - Z v ~ £ ~- 2 2 `- z G G G L D J 1 \ c y _, > x n: Z °' _~ I L < l - ~ C - c _ - i. E _ - _ - r ~ _ J ~? v = - _ ~ ~ - - _ > e - ~ - _ - - m e - - - ... cc _ _7 3 = c Y N 4: C C: J > V. J G T ,7 .- - ~ .-. N r.. _ L 3 .J~ >. ~. - - rJ ~ T U -- - - - ~ > - f; } a _ ~ - ~. ~ _ ~_ 7 3 ~ J _ C Y f- •-. _ u O :q i _. ... e Y ~ ., , ~ C 3 _ _ y - _ _ ~ _ - x 3 _ _. 3 ~ e - a ¢ ~ v o - .\ F f[ .> J U.' v >> .l _ - E ',q ~ ~ ~ - 7 C J -_ -- ~~ i _U _ __ c y ~, _ G C - .. v, >, - r .y G ~ V G r- - 7 _ .. - ~ ~-. r Y ., C 4 - J C.' ., C r ~ _ ~ 3 ~, l ~ ~ ~ r _ _ - - - c - _ ~l. C y L: 'Y. C - .. _ r_ _. ., _ - - .. ~ ~- ? ~ _ _ _ 4 - -. - ~ _ C, _ ~ ~ _ i.. -_ ._ ~ - - Y __ C - v ~ Q ~ -- - C _ ., _ C C C ._ r ~ .. .: r ~ O i r ~ - - e ~. = 3 _ - __ - - - .~ .~ c - G ~. - - _ V. 2 3 _ ~ _ ~ V - C e` C ~ - 3 .. _ ? _ V. 7 L - - ._ C - ._ ~ -~ > - V. - - ~ _ .. - _ - c N LL ._ ~ - ~ - U. - - i. ~. - .. - ^. v ._ ~ - - z - _. - 3 - - - - W ti ~ r~ - ~ - L :_. z i_ ~- -, z C ,,; L - C _ Z _ ~ ~ -= ~ ~. ~, Z Z ~ z G _~ ~ - L" - .. - - U q _ 3 =_ _ .~ ~- - _ 7 _ C' _ > .., G .. v, > _ T _ V, _ r - y ~ ~ - u u 3 - - - - > >- - .u K - ._ ~ ~ U a ~ J - _ x _ ' - .. - c~ y - - m ., 'O - f. E v. - - U, - O O% ~ v U -- '" c 3 _ ~ E a -~ o _ _ - 3 _~ ~ v- 3 :~ u ~ _ r1 J s r ~ 0. U -- c:- U J x C > " +. _ ~ .~ - l: F 'J' •• ri, T J U J 3 C C m ~ U _ .. U U V, J -.'. vi J - >~ x C' ~ 3 m r J 7 ., Ui T. C Ci }~ - .~ - - _. -C - __. _ ~ -N ~ ~. rn U ~ G: 4i J v 7 ~ -a -^ 0 '. C - v: .. 0 x O ~: > ~-+ C it r`. C: ~+ 0. `c > _ v -., C _ - :~ s. - _ - _ _ ~ - - _ > { r _ _ 3 C' .. E - > - ~ _ - _ C - G - x >. ,. c: -J J Q 0 i - -. G U L v - rJ J .. U U 0 E 'l. _ .. 2 ~ ~ `~ ` a 3 :J ~ 3 > O 1 .. .J [ -~ ~ - F :J •- - >. _. J r ~ .C a ... - ., U --. .-+ - G ~ 3 ~: >, V 1. C; J f} T .~ r v ,~ ,' ... 3 _ G - ~ : ^. _ 0 C it O O1 --+ > r ~.-~ a. _ c _ e' _ - [• ~' •- 1 U: r - - - X .. c; ~ ? m >~ li a ., (~ 'l. 3 N 'J.• ~ ~ 2` E J w u H V. U >i - s C T r E J > 0 N .N x 1J U .~ C •O .i Q c ~. :.J C) !~ ^c v, m ~ ~ ~ a u, :~ ~ v c x ~ c u c ~ v a o :~ ~. >, ~ C 7 4 ~ ~` E U ~ ~+ 0 >, 4 -= - _ ~ ~ .~ a ~. c ~ ~ u ~ c :~ ~ -a _ c ~ ~ ~ c a F L U x U ~ F+ C -~ t: O. 0 -~ - c m v c 3 > _ ~ L c ¢ ~+ m T J .` ~ c > ~ v - m c --~ e~ m v e .c _ e >. m ~c c; cr - i 3 C/ ~ - v. n O u e >, U 'D r ~ T 6' -+ n .~ C - 'p cc F r n O ~ ~ Od ~ d O a O, 7 r' ~/, iJ 7 0 _ - - 0 a' - ~ N 6'~ U. C - - 6' >- u - ~ _ A sa _ a m rJ Gi >- '- - ? - a - 7+ A. r x rt 3 C _ ., - - 7 - ., u C C - _ ._ C .. ca v 3 a .. O ~ - ~' - - - s 2 ~ > 3 ~- ~ _ _ _ ~ ., t; ~~ G. ~ U - ~' t- G ,. -- _ J. U C _. G V 7 v N J~ O: z a _ ~. e~ >. re ¢ L .G C v \ r ti _ M _ ~ S V, V. ~ - C' r U -. R - G r ~~ ,c v ~ m - ~ -- ~ it J x v: ~ - c - 3 3 c a _. - e e _ r-, J 'J. ~ > ~- -v ~ 3 ~ e' - 1 _, v. ~ .. u ~ - C L - 3 r, v r ,. ... - ~ - - r ~. -- C 2 R - v. C - 3 m ~. - e c Q~ -- - 1 C: ~ - J y z 1, z~ Q .~ ~ ~ U: U J C _ O 0 c :-~ rn ~ Z U G '~ E 7 z J { ,l :: C ~ ~ s 0 r C+ ~ _ - _ ~ r ~ ~ _ '- J -~ V G - c a , - - _ - _ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ., v v 3 U - v. o ~ _ e .. >- c - _ ... -_ ~ __ 3 - - - - _ -• - _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ ~.. -~_ ~ _ ._ J 3 .~ _ .. _ - G ~` .-. ..- - _3 _ E J -+ - .. L - F v ~i ^~ - 3 _ -^ ., ~ ... L ~ ~' GI ~ J - >. .y 2 ~ _ ~ C C' - a. ~. - ~ .~. 3 J ., _ - 3 - - i - ~, .. ~ .. .. - ~ n J ._ - _ - ._ '- r- J _ v - - - - _ J ~ 4 X J > _ _ ~'i ~ ._ > ? 7 .. V~ O _ u. rt. ~ G ~ J U 'B ~ _. C .. 3 -' G ~ - - ~~ ~ G C' 7. ~ ,~ 'S - .'~ - C - _ ._ _ .. J -- 1 r - J ~ _ 2 F_ = Z '' z _,. Cr - CT C G 7 ti L - _ - ~ ~ T ~ - C :. _ .. F - ~ ~ = 3 - _ - _ _ - - c ~ ~ v: " - - - - - - - ~'- - - - $ f e - N 3 cr -- - -- v, - ~ n ~ _ - - t~ CC - - - - Ci _ C~ ... W _ - _ - - ~ ~ = - E ~- -= r - ~ ~ a G _ _ -_ ~ Y. C _ J - .. ~' r ~ - - ., 4 - - - _ _ ~ ~ - 1 C r ~. c 3 ~ - _ r _. - - - 3 _ _ J - _ z _ c ., ,. _ _ A ? z _ - 3 - - C ~ _ ,,. - _ ~- _ - - ~- _ _ ~- _ _ - = _ r C 3 _ _ ~ - u; _ C r c _ - / C _ _ - ~ - _ - _ -_ s - _ c _ r - ~ J -. .~ „ V - e. - .. c - .. - _ z ~ - - - -. ~ - ~ - - - - - s -, - - .. - n , . r. 1 Z z C _~ < - C _ v, a L J J >• r: - - - ~- - m C' 3 ~ ~ - >, -- 3 _ _ - E_ ~ ~ ~ C -_ - - V. 4: r C _ A - _ _ r_ c ~ 3 a 3 _ - > ti .. e 3 ~ - - - c _ > _ _ v, ~- ~. is O U --+ o U u, t - 3 _ ~" E -~ C' h t: _ U' Vi _ -~ C -- _ ,, cam. ~ S a: V.~ .- C' ro ~ C _ ~ U .. _ C. G -, v 3 = IC U - G C, ._ Y C n ~ 3 0 .r ~ U A _ ~-+ 3 C r C Y+ G A = c e o v c~ ~ ~ c- - _ _ - 3 u u 3 C C Z :J n •l.~ r. ..- G C C~ rS G . 1 > -- - 7 ~ r G > -- _ _ .. U _ C N P. ~ t~ .~ '= _ C 7 P n ... v - - - C O. !n - _ i. U C Cn V. U C C -, --~ ~ v. ? J L: .. C c ^. e: _ 3 - - ~'. ... - i .. o - P O J ~ G u - O v J N 3 - - - - - q - y F ~ ~ _ - > C J ? C -, U G C Z C "- < ~ '~ z ~, z~ ~ fn E O C, :il J ro E ~.' Vi V: _ _ > .= r _ - T u cs - _ E ~ c = - c i v~ 1: C S > C r? r, M C r ,... t^ > n C tL ~ ~ E •- ;~ L i. C `+ _ 'C r > -.• , 4i .. o v ~ : ._ v ~ ~ .. f ~ E E -. Y n C' C. V. 'C 1 m _ o T ~_ u 3 1 i7 - ~ - _. .. 3 +c m _ m ~ + j. N U ._ - U - C - O ? - S~ .T .Y ~. L ~. y - N > ~. a > U C - - i r C~ C' m E -- > m a > .. m :. ... _. C ' I _ C f.. -+ ?~ J ~ _ C J ~ro ~ > E o • e p L ~ ~ ~ r C~ C > .y t - _ ~ c: p ~ O .-, N ~~ m r z > ro -, + c LL- z ~ L ro 3 d o v. - G :J U A C W I _ -_ .. r` L ~ .-. , - - J U C - ~ C. - L L C .C ~ ~ ~ -- U rt - ~ i .- > 3 L _ e - .C V,' .-. ro C 'J .C - m e s c - 1 _ .. E v v. >, - ~ i, - - ~ ~ x >: - 1 _ _ ~ _ - rv - e ~ _ - s _ ~ - . - _ - _ - - < G+ >. ?~ C; L 3 u v - ~ ~ _ ._ r r G -~ l; .. .J J C L tt, C E J q + P C U G :v - ~ ._ ~ ~ .. _ _ _ n ¢ _ - ~: _ - ._. _ ~ 3 r r 3 V C L _ } E - .C G, .u r_ G - - - L L .. G .~ .. > r 'C ~ c e ~ - c C' _ L -a L m v ` c E 0 ~ .. ., v L C r - r ~ = r r ~ P Y E tr _ G r J ^-. _ >. d >r -~ v. G Ci _ ~ C ~ w e c - ~ C 7~ G v i c v v ~, C e 'e y r, _ r c - c °` e 4 ~_ Z C - C E _ E C " U ~ 2 1 `z 4 ~; o. 'J.' c - - - - ~ - _ - _ e: T ~. _ - ~ - - J _ ~ _ ~.. - .f _ J 3 - _ C C - - ~ - ^ U - - - - ~= m ~ .. ~ o c Vi C C C CI C ? G v 1: ;r C ~ y !~ 3 ~~~ - e ;r ~. c ~ w - - 3 _ ._ ~- r -.~ 4: ~ x - - ~ >- n i ~.. G _ U O -. L w ~ Ci ._- _ - 3 _ - _ - a 3 _ - ~ i _ - > _ - __ c Z ~ ~ z. ~ _ r: L z '- Z L (• Q C r. ~, ? > ~ G ~ ~ 7 L; - r rv ~ - _ _ _ _ _ - - >. >, ~ v, - v ~- - - ~ E - ~ 3 - - G _ .c - _ - - > - r a - y - - - > - - 3 ~ C >. - r - _~ > ~ .-. 7 J ._ - - ~-- G = C - -- - F _ ._ ~. - ~ ~ _ - ~- .. L: _ C c-. - > _ _ r_ - - _ a - - - 3 ~ c: - .~ - - c - _ - V - _ - V __ _ _ e ~. o ... _ - - ~. .-i -- - ._ - - ~ _ f. (~ '~ -~ .. -. -. z a. Z - G ~~ T s C~ -- c; = - >, Y C C .- C~ ?~ J 3 ~ ? u c .~ ~. = ~ - ~ - - ~ r Y - _. - - _ -- ~- ... c C c C u - ~- - o _ 3 _ _ _ . - _ ~~ _ e ~;. ~ - v. ~ ~ "_ 2 _ - C ~ C _ v ~ V ..-. T ._ ~ m J } ?~. T _ z - - 7 X E v. - -. ~ ~ r. r, _ .. - 2 - ~ - C ~ v. ~ CL 5~ U C C - r U _ „ 7. ~ ~ .. o _ Z v: r G Y G j - Z ~' r t G = r ~ _ T r_ Y r ~. - ~- -~ C T T J r ~ a J 3 L . ~ e L .. >- rc r r ~ ~ -+ w ^ T C a~ .~ s r j :.~ N ~ 3 ~ p - C7 3 ~~ Y _. r CJ r 3 3 - -- CJ ~ ' - .. 7 C ^ -. C C ~ ~: v. C Y. v ~ - ~ J ~ CJ 7 ~ T ' ,' a .. C ... ., -+ m - ^ w m 2 = - r a~ r= a ~ r y - r 3 ., x a > v ~ - c - ~ F - a. x _ ^ 3 - .- e z E ~ '~ :J z. Z Z r ~ ~: ~ '. G _ . _ ~. - - - c~: -i v. C C ~ C` - ~ T E -Y - r. _ G v. e, ~ is - .- r. r w- 3 ~ m 3 v. - r ~ v ~ _ - c ~ '- 3 '~ a' G C v ., r ~: N C n. 4 .C T o _ r ~ ... % ~ % m 3 ~ ~ a C r % .c U :: n ., - .. y o %r, - y T r 2 _, c 0 m r. a E v, ~ a - ^- r ~. e` ~ ? ~. - ~ ^ - - ? _ R u. .--e v. -.- C C r, o ~ C- _ -~ . . v. - .. . J -~ ., ~ ~-. ..- 7 ~ ~ N U1 7 r S. O i7 - - U _ ~_ J 4 _. G C m L ; ~ s ~ r K -_ ct 0 ~, ~ .- r t •J - C E rJ ~ 3 r - ~' - .. - - C' ~ - ?~. -- C r' ,. ~ •- -~ c C ~ T > _ - ~- N Q~ ~ ~+ - 4 ~ - q r .-. - 3 2 c~ v. r n ~, ... T - ~ ~~^. J C7 .- r G g ++ :~ ~ .. /~ .i a ,G v ~ - e,.. L i` ~ ~ f _ - Y -~ ~. C is C O U _ _. vi U ~ ~ r -, u T _ ~ T - n .. r U~ r a ? :. _ .~ - .-. c' n 3 - 3 - .. - - v. - a £ - c - ~ - ~ ~ - ~~ 3 - r ~ c n ~: Z ,y t J: Y "' ~i - z z G t ~r _ 3 - - O = _ _ _ y c 3 - ~ s 3 > - v a - .- - r, > G' .. _. .. ~ T X r J ~ - U _ r r 7 ... - c; ~ - - T ._ ` ~ _ v o _ O 7 ... y E _ - ~ >~. - _ F r_ - V C' ~ _ 4 G _ r_ >' L r 3 ~~ J c > - 3 u -_ >_ - ~ ~ i > - ~. .. .- - j - _ _ _ -- = 3 - ~ - - ~- - v ~ C V z C ~ L; _ L: ~ _ C Z ', 2 '~ Z C .,: ~' C L A c7 C ? - ¢ - cc 3 - - _~ ~~ _ -- _ - - -_ a - ~ - __ .. _ _ - - C •_ z - - ., J - - u ~ c - - y 3 ., ~ e _ - _ _ - > >: - - _ - - - .. C C ~. .` ._ - - - y ~ _ _ T > -_ 3 u 3 T _ n - - s ._ - _ _ ~- - - a' c _ _ r - > - C .. C~ c; - .. _ C r - J. _ _ .. t'. ~ Yy 1 C' - _ -~ _ v. .. .7 v. _ - T ~- ., - v C v. ,_ . . c. - ~ - ~_ v - E _ _ e C: 3 C J r 3 = e - - - _ £ - '- - ~ _ - V. 4 r _ 3 ~ _ ~ A G r C - ._ _ c _ .. ,. - C fl' _. G - - - G- .. ~ rf _ C Ct _ - _ - -~ - c _ ~ r ~ c - - - ~ ~ ~ C C' ~ _ z C ,~ C - C G. n r, - _ U n Y .. 3 '- - '~ .-. - ._ - - .-- r O ... - ~ - C' - ~ - U C G _ _ v.~ 3 .. .. 3 - 4. _ _ L: .. .-. J .--e - J 'l. ~- ... .. ~' j. - _ .~ L - _ v - LL _ F ~ u 3 - J S. ~. CJ = Ci ., C r ., - - r, .. - - ., R t Y ~ v. ~ C - ~. ~ =. d r G :n --1 N ... ~.' '-i 3 Vi J -1 E N M n ~ < v C ~ A -- .+. 4! i. J _ ? C. ~ V; L Y, X .. s - L•i PJ Z - n. -.y G ~ O _ G r rJ >- } - J ~. .. -- - Li --• - - .. _ - Ci - ~ _ Z U ". < ~ ~ :J .~ z ro Z C „~ J O (~ ~-~ J } J C O 3 r ~ U v v. .. 5~ -~ v: O n U n ~ -.+ ., N v. r ~ ~ .~ .. U a - ~ 2 .+ U .n .., v. ~ ~ n U ~ ~. _ v, r, >, .. C' y r m _, U c ~ - E ~ c O ~ e v U -. C; U U tr' - 5~ 'J. J } c U -~ C~ ~ O '" N v, d D - r ~ C C; _ 7 - .~ U _ ~ c a y_ - -- '~ m u e' > a 3 C' CU >. ca G' >, Y .. > _ _ c -~ o ~- > N ro U G' r. v _ ._ Gy' J ~J = Gl U C O U. U' x b .i Li J. '~ G _ - u ~ 3 a% .. 3 U u r ~ ~ m .... v. ^ - ~ c' a ~ a r - e o '- c' c < - - v. -Y r iC fJ CG r ~ _ C > ~ 2 E ~ ~ r r. = N m c .. ro u e~ -1 C L 'J,' ~ C -~ ~~ ~- 3 v _ -- _ •z U 2 ¢ A _ 3 ~ ~ ~ u m 3 - n c' u a e c .- e 3 - m v. c > U _ G Q rC 3-. - ~ -- ~ ,r .a r _, c - _ _ ~ _ .-. ~ ~ .. _ ti n n r. .. n ~ ~ z N ~ ~ J ,: x ,. :v 7 rn z ~ < u ~'l G L G ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - r ~. _ _ ., _ _ U 3 g _ r ._. - -. - _ .3 - y = ~ .... r. ~ _ - - _ J .. - ..- _ a ~. E _ ~ _ - - Y - 3 ~ y v ~' a a - - c' 3 - C - - - l _ - ~ C 6 - ., - - .-. U ~- _ _ .-.. >- - ? - ._ _ - - ~ -' _ _ - - ~ 3 r. ._ - _ U - _ ~ ~ - _ - - - - _ C: ¢ _ - - - 3 -+ _ - - - s r m - - C -. C ~ - G J > O ~ T ~ - -~ t; C ra c. u s -- T G - - a, 'I. ,~ ~' C -~ C -~ - > .- .-. c7 b ..e ~~ ~ U ., - r C: L ~ --i - 3 C ~ r r C C .-. - Q _ 3 G 0 U r J - - - _ - - -_ - - - i~ - - - '- = 3 ~: - r o 3 - .. ~ ~ ~. r _ _ -• - __ - - ro - E _ _ _ ~ - _. _ a`. _ _ - v. - - _ - ~ - ~ - -- r. ~ - _ - Y -_ - - ~ -_ - - ~ ~- ~ r ~. .-. .,. _ ~ _ u1 a ... V. - _ - Ci 3 u. x - .. ~' J C - r .. C s - G ._ - 5_ = _ - -- ~ ? .. C ~ - ._ - _ - t9 ~ .~ _ ~ - _ - CS _. c .. - % _ - C .. ._ - ._ -- Z T - ~~ - ~ U _ j. 3 ~ - r - A - - c ._ ~. - .-. _ - r- G >- - v. - - - - l ~' j. .._ - - - -- ~ - _ - - 3 - w v. - _ _ s: _ _ ~- .. C _ ~ ~ ~. PJ - r @; ? r s - ~ - c-~ - - _ 3 t 3 ~ _ - r, - x > _ _ __ - - ~ _ _ ~ c: _ - _ ~ _ 3 - - - ~ - ~. c _ -> _ J 3 - - - - - _ - - - - c•• ~ - s 3 - _ .. i- -- - - -_ ~ - e ~. - ~ ~ _ - - ~ _ .. ,.. ~ x .- -- _ - - e > _ _ ~ _ ~ e = - - c - ~-- - - - G _ - _ _ = - _ - _ .c z ~ ~ Y '- _ ;~ Z z G G ~ - ., m 'L .'.. z l < .~ < - L CS 'J. s • L G - ~ _ ~ ~^ - - U _ .. G - _ J. _ _ J - G G C1 C r. 7 - v: O E ~ .-. G S - - - ., s _ 3 _ 3 0 _ r U .--. - -Y -- - .. .~ O r O _. J O'. _ - - E _ ._ ... .. ~. u _ -_ _ _ - J U -~ ~ - > v, U .. -- -- O .Y C .- .-. A l+ ~ G r o, c .~ n U - ~ C% C 3 J % - C m C C c 4 ~ 7 .~ r: :; -. 3 ~ .. c - E O V - ~'J C rJ .. ~ ~ E C v o c n .. j r ~ 4 ~' > G T J c c ~c ~ m >, ~. - S U _ J - O ~ i!. U. E ~ - .. C U: l >. ti .. V. U - ~ _ .. G v U G c 3 .. ~ ^J - ~. - G - 7 W ~ - - y ..y ~ V-. H U: ~ ~ 1. >. 0..' J r v Y ~ - _ f _ -. .~ _' - ~ ~- C7 J r' _ - ._ y __ ~ - - - r _ ^_ _ - C r1 3 -- - f - >• ~ - r -' - ~ 3 -' - v r ~c x C ~ _ _. .-. .-. .- - ~ _ _. n. C c. C ~ - 2 _ < -~ Z ; z '" z ~ ~ m ..~ C' 1+ ~ >~ j - < ?- C v 3 -- .G - v -~ C~ ~ ~~ -- n c x c: > ~, > > o ~ 5 _ 3 ~ c _ 5 .r r C~. .., = C: _ u r ^ ¢ > _ ~ C - -- _ C ?. .. -.. i 3 0. _ .. - E u _ - - ~ - v ~ ~ T S C 2 ~ 3 - a .. -~ `3 ti., U - J 3 _ .. ~,, r.. r r _ L - W - T J ., .> ., T n .-. .- - .. ~ V r: C .~ G ~ ~ - .. _ ~. .~. ~ ~, _ Z ~~ .Cis .- C r C u. .^. ~. C 7 ~ - ~ E ~ ..-. _ L 3 ^- i. e v O ci >. ~ _ ~ ~ 3 ^ v. C. w >. ... c .- O C. R _ _ > u > n a~ ~ a c v. ~- c 3 - '- c ~ ~_ Z U .. > ,a < L -' £ = z r, z C .~ L ~ G^ E ' U E C - - - 3 c ~- - ~ ~ _ ~ - c _ - .. 7 - J - C V -' _ - > - - ~~ _ _ _ . - ~- _. ~, ._ - ., - 3 ~. s 3 C V _. - o x - ~ - ._ _ n _ - ~ c r - - _ ~ _ - - ~ ~ ~ - o c S 3 u 3 ^ 3 c - - > _ > _ _ ~ c - ^_ ~ _ .~ ~ ~. J .~ _ .., - -- -- _ 3 s ... - - Z C O -~ L~' C: - ~: Z C -~ = Z ~ r u = ¢ - < i _ ~ - _ - { ~ ~, C ~ - Z H Z L4 C~ - Z ~ ~-i _ Z -. _ r - i) sC' - ~ J v r. ,~ V. .T. _ _ _ - Z _ - c - ~ U. - ~ - r _. ~ ~. - - _ - -_ C' _ r_ > C~ 7~ U ~, ,c+ ~. 3 r x 6 n D l ~ C _ 3 T m - o ~- r, 3 _ ~ ~-- c r - _. ._ = - _ -- - m .. - 3 ,_ . C ti C ~ - C' C - U~ _ l _ c ~. ' - - ~ ? C _ _q 3 - c c. - .. J ~ ,. ._ _ ._ _ ~ - - - - - - ~ , _ c ~ c . - _. - z . z _ 3 = r _ _ _ - _ Z E Z G r, _. _ - - - _ ._ J ~ _ _ _ _ e ~ ~ - - < E C ¢ 3 C _ _ ~ ~ ? Z - - c- Z -. c~. C z ~- 1 _ ~ - Z - - Z Z .. Z 7 ~- > _ - - .- - - ~ Y - . - 3 _ r. Z _ ~ Z ~ Z r ~ Z C - - - ~ r E ., -- ., - - _ _ -- 3 C~ C ~ _ _ _ ~, _ c Z j _ { ~ "~ £ - ~ ~ Z :. Z '- z G _' ;r C u z c = < -~ Z - { . C _ - I ,. Vi J v _ ti C Z C J _ S C' J - :.l C'~ J v U' - >- ~ r ..y is - - T =. .. - - O .~ v. .. - - - - - > 7 E 3 .~ ~ C _ ~ V ~ T T .- ._ a O C L r ... - I C v, ~~ C - ~: U .~ _1 _ - U ~ L~ - ._ J r _ - .~ U ._. u G .- C .. E' C .~ ~ -_ is .. -y ~ 3 ~. E r a > - .: - N x --+ a ~ .. - J r O'~ Z C J U a J ~ ^~ n .-. 1 L ~ :_ ~ x c 3 li o ~ c > o -- 3 c v, ~ ~c c J ~ ~ ~ z 3 ~ ~ ~ c 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ E u m u a ~ v ~ U u CJ H V V U ._ ~ L: C - U Z - .~ G ., .. - r C N _ > - _ - c _ >. ~ >. 3 - r ~ - - -- - 3 = 3 3 1 Z _ ~ m 2 ~' C W J y _ ~. _ ~ J _. ~. r O ... v 3 ,~ !.; 7t T ? Vi ~ _ .- ti _ s _ ~ a ~ ~ Y v: 3 - ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ 1 ., a c 3 t. LJ - ~. 3 3 7 C' v L C -. _ O ~ _ J N v v U > i; .~ V v: _ ~ 3 -+ a '+ :~ r v c c~ a c O C C :v .-s ,: c: ~ - - l. si G --~ C ~ .-. - _ O r„ U ... _ V. J -- - O -- ~ .u ~ ~~ O U J J > ~ C' v J ` r - ~, 7 L Q _. C .. t9 ~ r 1. J v '-' i- .}. G. - .. J c ~ .J L C' E n F C' Oi ~ n .J .N O 7 C ,. - a c --, - w u u `~ - -> :: c - ~ w _ c: a c ~ - - - ~. ..i - r J '.~ 2 ~ _ M ~ 1- ~- f:. 'J. J y I- O - ~ _ ~ e a c cr _ a c >, ~ m ._ ~ .. V: v: >• C. .. L ... u :~ -~ - 4 .. ._ _ C C` 1 C: G -. r C - _ - G 3 ti m - - - -. r 3 T - - _ - .-. .-. _ - - :~ n rv n .. c C~ °' L L ~ Z C n > c ~ ~ z z ~. 2 z G C :y e - - ~ c 3 - c _ e 3 = - - c c - - - - - - - - c ~. - - _ _ _ ?- - - -.. _ 3 - - ,. ~ _ - _ - _ _ - , -. i - c ~- - = 3 0 3 - ~ ~ r ¢ ~; E. - J - C u 3 - - - - -- ~_ > ~ Ct - - -- ? G z U i5 ~a - -3 ._ _ - -3 _ G_ y ~ - - 4~ ~ ~ _ ~ - .. ~ ._ - - - a - - - 3 ~ ... _ .. w .-. .- - G v U ~ ~ -' - - ca U ~ s -~ - K r C _ _ _ ., r G ~ -. C ~v. - - r - a ~ _ -- G r - ~. - ~ ~. ~... - C~ C L C ~ _ - >. Y J ~ p - -J- _ 1 c _ 3 ~ - .. - = _ = z - n~ a .-+ w ~ - 3 a ~ r ,- 3 c 3 _ .. = 3 ~ - J s. - _ 3 .- ~~ ~ .. _ - - _. C ... - - - j -- C - .. T ... -- .- :J :J _ - ~ :- - ~ .. r -_ _ Z p - -' - _ - - - -- ;JI J. J -- J - - .. ..-. ,,. -- C S.i ., 3 _ _ - - _ - - C - r; ~: - > p G .. u .- - T - - ... ~ _ - - 'J. -- 2 j ~' ~ ~ -~ C " z Z - z C -; C C - 0, n,, s - ~ c - ~ ~ C s r ~. .. .- ~ U r - 3 -- ~ - C -- _ r_ - - - - ... .. - - ~ PJ L - ~ C j 3 .~ ~ y J c J J c: ~ - = - - :. L t r, J .,, r y _ _ _ - C _ C C ~ - J - - -, ~ C ~~ .. ~: - -, C - C J - _ .~ - _- C I - r - - -_ _ _ - J. -- _ - ~ - .-. ~ - .- - ~ - 3 - 3 - ~- - Q - c 3 T ~ - 1 E - i. ~ ~ - V. - -- - .. ~ U -. _ _ Z _ G - - ._ - ~ ~ r. r. - ¢ - ., z ~- v - 3 - - - z ~ - C 7 -- - C. -- 2'• - 2 _ - Z _ - L. ... - - ~ .. _ C - _ - U " ~~ - _ _, _ .,. _ _ 3 _ _ ._ _ _ e., C = _ _ J = _ a J F = ?- ~ z 3 -~ 3 > ? -- - c ~. -. .. - - ~ -- 3 - C C = ~. - -- c - - 3 -. c v. .~ _ v- - - _ 6 - >- - - ¢ 7 C C :ti -- ? ~ - _ T _ .-. _ - - - _ ~ ~ = E C ~ _- - ... _ - ~ - -- ~ _ - r C ~ r - _ .. -: - ~ - - ~ m - E 3 i'. r 3 - - = _ _ ~ v c' ' ` c w e - z - ., - _ - .. - _ 3 ' ._ - _. ~ C : ~.. _ C _ 'y - C _ _ - ._ V. _ _ s ~ 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ ? _ - _ - r - _ - - ~ _ c _ _ - -. - ~- _ ~ .~ ., - - - - - a - - Y J C ~ C _- _ c: -. ? - - .3 _. _ _ _ _ O >, - C ~ - _ .. -- ~- Li r, > - - _. _A U - _ _ _ _ y _ _ O - I m r 3 •. ~ O .. E ? 'C tr '- .. -. ... - - (S :! ~- C ..~ 3 ~ t~ - - 3 N ~ - _ K L ~ - ? ., 'c _ r X 3 - N ~ - 'C C 3 c _ - - L7 t U ._ ~ _ _ X C •. .. -+ m c ~ .. - T T u .. E 3 _ >, 3 ~ - m a ... .- A -' 8 - Z U r s :~ v, - >, c s. i. y v a ~ .., o ~ >. a - .. ~ ~ ~ ~ c - u ~o c _ c _ ~ m m -+ ~ + a -- _ .. ., £ 3 ? ~ -= v. ~ r! .C ~ 3 - F c. r _ u a - / ~ 3 G ~ ~ ~~ y u m ~~ •a C v. 7 -i C i. -+ -- m .. E .C T _ .- N ~ J --a - 4 L x L -~ - r. 7 C E - G N C -J t] O s C ~ ' v, r r >, G u- C - O ~ C 3 C' - ~ C ~ ^ > - c: - 3 - - - C' _ L ., .. ~ - - -_ _ ~ ,~ ~ _ _ ~ x c - O •-• 'J. _ _ C .-. N 1, O N G m C G rJ 3, C .. .. 7 :~ L - N C s -< .. v. C _ v, ~ . U - _ ._ _ 3 J - - _ _ U ~ - ~- _ - ._ ~ - Vi c: -.~ r 'O > 7 V ti ~ ~ G _ v, = ` E J o u .. ,7 ~ ~ ~ v. 3 n c c U a G C O .. a u C, .~ a m v c > F ' .,y y p ~ m E a >. i:. O: .+ O A .. C ~': a U J 'O C/ ^ is G t r >, ~ - w > > O' N 1 ~ J C' i ti C 7 •- m L a I~ 1. 2 - T - n i ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ C: z C O ~ - Z z^ z 4 a° U L O Ci 3 ~ e ~~ 'C C v. U O ~ U 1 O U. .C .. .. -- C C - p ~ J _ O - ~ c, 0 3 c _ ., i. ~ L' N ~. z m i+ N O T G U m m N 5' C ? .. C '/+ a L7 trI G rs. C - n• C is _ m ,. .. U ~ t~ .C ~ .c C > 4 J C' 'C N C C` _ G a ifi n X 3 t~ C 3 ~ J C ~:~ i~ z >, tq _ u. '~ '- t- w E z C v - ~ r/ _ - _ _ ~ o ~ a _ .. o _ O a O J - < t ~ v.• u ti - 'C r J J U C 3 m m r L7 C .. Y C b' X .C C :~ ~ v, m >. ~ ~ c~ > A ... > r c r T m 3 ~ ~ _ ~ v .o _ c - - _ ~ .,. r 'O ~ C C~ 3 U X £ O r ~` E o _ J t v, c m - ~ o x c m - - v a ~ t. 3 .C ~ - m rt Cl .. >. C s. ~: a ~ 3 ~' ._ E - :j q .. -~ 3 .- r 3 ... -` _ ~ ~c s m o C rn C J ~ 7 ~ .- Z v ^ r. 1 Z ~` i~ z ~ ,` 0. ~ G J - ~. _ ~ - - - _ 3 ? .L -' _ ~ - - - ~ J -3 - ~ _ r - - - 3 _ ~ ;I. __ ~ _ C: r_ ~. _ :J _ .. ~ _ y - __ - - _ ~ ~ .- ~ ~ - L ~ - v ~ .. Gi ._ r _ _ = .. _ - ~ 3 - ~ .__ 3 - L >, E s .. _ ~ _ _ 3 C i G G _ - _ ~ - - 7 a s .J ~: G C -~ _ m U - _ ..+ G _ ~ _ _ +U G r_ - - .C Y .~ --i _ ~ v -`. .- - _ 3 - _ c~ c _ ~- c - u; _ - _ ~ s _ _ - C_ 3 3 T - ui _ _. c`. .~ ._ u _ - _ s ~ - ~ 3 - - - -- - x - _ ~.; _ C __ _ _ ~ - _ T ~ O -_ - _ > > - - ,. m _ ., .Z E ~. _ s - _ e _ - - _ _ 3 v. c e ~ - _. _ T ~ v ~. - r J " - C - _ -~ - ~. .- C J _ ,. A T 3 -- ~ r ._ ~~ -, _ - - c - -_ - .c ~ - = v ~. - - - - - ~ c: ~- = 3 ~_ ~. - T - _ - - Y _ - - ? - _ ._ _ .- __ - _ C J~ - r-_ - 3 = _ - c e _ - - _ - ~ 3 s .~ - ~- ~ - - - _ - Z = = C C F. _ .. z ~' z C C J z C E _ _ z - z -_ L C '- 3 > ~ r _ - - C .= ~.. -' r ~ 3 ~ x _. - m .. J o ~ L7 ~ ~ m _ - 7'~ - C ~ 3 A ^ - - _. '.' ~ N ~ ~. 3 - ~ J. ~ G J ~ G -. -. C 3 G 3 _ 3 --a _ ~~ E ^ .- .-. > _ y C ... - c .~ ^ 7 ~ = > ~ h ~ n ... L N to O Q - J .. 'J O >. U O J w `- ..-i s - ~ r ~ 3 c j ~ O ~ ~ v V e• _ y - ? _ o ~ c < ~ c ~n 3 1 ~ o ~ - ~ v ~- 7; > i N y - J - 3 J 4: N J J ~ G ~ QJ U C- _ O :J u .~ C a u 7 ~ v. C' - - y C 3 C N N. -+ ~~ 3 > 3 - r y - 3 ~. .. .- ~• - i: ~ -~ ti• r U e - a ~ ~ n U C -~ ' J n L: v r G r N > v ^ s~ G L C' u v .. >. ~ 7 ~ G . J G - ^J a ~ - ~ u C C '- 'C LT E i0 a ~ o c s 5 C u s .~ >. w ~ T u rv ~ > :l }~ ~"J t+ t: s O -~ U :~ u a u ~ --• C E y w ~, O '~-~ C U r v C7. m >, m V, iJ CI C u .. C% is 1r ~ ~ ~ -- G ~ J FJ 8: 7 r ~ 2 ~: 4 ..- G ~_ -- G - -- O C £ i. O 4 '{ N Y-. E .-. -N ~i -1 1' L- v; C C > 7 N D: ? ~. >. ~, :~ c ~c E s. M -- C. ~- C' i. G1 C V. .- O O G - le ,C J ._ _ ~ U _ T ~ Q% - c . _ tr s. 3 ~ ., _ ~ >. c C _ ._ v c~ ~ ... s ~^ >. Y l+ C C - -+ Q r F y > ? _ n -- _ - :J :~ r ~ _ - 5 G` 3 r ,~. s .. ~; - - '- N ,L Cd a C i. C~ r-~ >- r c. - ~: ~ ~ T a~ c ~ > a O G C ~.+ - .. n L L l.` u i; -~ ., - C 'C - v u +~: - _ to -' 3 ~ w 3 ~ - U m 0 - -. c C C .^ ._ c ~ u i _~ -- c C' O Vi -~ -- - G -J 1. t1; .. E c ~ c: ~ ~ c 1 - i ~ -~-_ T e C C ^ LG 3 ~; ~ .., '3 ~. >, is . v: > - _ is ... ~ _ ~ C' r r C r O _ J o. U 3 ~ _ L: C C O .~ •1 .. r ~ _ '~ G. C~ n 1 .~ - .. 3 ~ N r .. .. G ^ _ c c m - E _ ~ ^ ~ ~ - - a c re e e; c c .., s c ~ - - ~ _. _. .-. .- .-. .- -, . , n n n z C w ._ ti ~ _ Z J C C :. = .. i ~ - _ - _ >- .- _ ._ _ y C ~ _ _ .. _ ~ _ _ _ _ C _ _ _ a 3 c~ G: ~-- vi - __ ~. - _ _ _ c: E - tr, ._ ~ y. - u -- c ~ 3 u _ - ... J C~ N v ~ G - G r 0 3 0 > _ -- G u ~ C ~~ ~ ~ ,. c _ C_ - 3 .. J c > .. C r' .. - _ 6_ - ~ ~_ 'J. '~ L > - ~ - _ ~ - - - 3 3 = ~- O G > E e 3 v is C: _ T - - U _ - y ~ -i - ~ _ - 3 _ _ _ > ~ _ .. - _ __ - ~ .. - - L - _ __- y _ _ v - .. - I - _ ~ - - C 'T G - - ? ~~ N Z R C ~. ~ _ _ L ~ 3 -~ -, X -_ 4 .. S. - .. E -. ?~ ~ L: N ~ n _ C_ C i ?, s t^ _ l _. .. _ - .i ~-~ e; J Y tf. - L .') 'J.~ 'l. ~ - ..a - U - - ~ U - ., = - - 3 s .. U _ J c - ;, ~ _ - - .. t .. 3 _ ~ J - _ - .. _ J _- < 5 - - .. - >. _ - - 3 - ~. .. - 5 G C A = 7 .. r T > _ v.. L r = r ... - L U a. Ci _ ~ ~~ > _ - rt ~, T 7 U - _ .. - - _ _ ... ~ £ - ~ _ Z Z C ., G :' J ~. J ti_ - U - _ - s n 3 J _ _ r u u - 3 m ~ V J c >_. _ u: m c r v C 3 ~; -~ - ~ .. G = V ~_ _ - - - - - - ._ -_ - - - 3 ~ - - [ - - - .` _ ~ >_- _ 3 5 C ~ _ 4: _ - - C .~ I _. - E C - r - = 2 .. .. cc - - ~ J. v 3 ., m 3 ~_ c 3 - ~ ._ ~ - 3 _ ". -_ - - - ., ^- - - _ r . ~ 3 _ -_ - 3 s. -_ - - _ _ - ~ c _tr .. - _ _ _ _ C C _ - ~ _ v .. r - C C ~- - s c- G r. > G V. -- - ~ - _ C _ _ - L r - - ~ _ ._ _ - ~. ~ ~ - 3 .- C 4 ~ .~ '` z 4 , < - u < -. -, >. c s 1 _ L' C r _ r r - - -_ g` _ - _ _ _ i G r- ~• O ii - r_ ... u. C' J E~ -- ... _' C 3 - ._ - .. .. .-. ~ r, _ 7 p. Ci -- - - - a -_ - - - r _ .. - .l Ci J r _ - C 1 - U ~ .. t J - - .. 3 ~ c U - r ~- ~ - .. ~^ - .. 3 ~ t_ ._ ~ .. .. _ ~ _ - _ _ 'u V. _ Y - - .. ~^ a 3 0. C r .- __ x _ - _ - _ _ 3 > - ~ ,- ~, l r - > - r .. Y - C~ .. _ 'o a :~ o _ C L: x U C O _ J f 3 D Y ~ 3 ~ ~- ,.. v_ ~. U ~ _ r~ ~ - ~. 3 ~ ¢ ~ .. -rl - J ~ U- .. C' v .. D ~ ~ rJ i C C C .O N U C - C' Ir - +~ 3 U r E O ~ - U U O W ^ .. i } ~ C; G ~ _ E 3 7 - r_ ~ ~ O _ 1 _ r .: r_ >_ _. x_ c _ v _ ~ _ _ 3 ._ - - -_ rc -. c i .. a .. - - - - o 1 T x x W C l _ ~ .~. ti - Ur .i [P_ 3 • ~ O U O J _} 7 rC m ~ , z C z z 'J z < _,~ ~ ~' G _. C .. Pj _ U U C ... G ^ 'O m m _ ~ G E C -- O ~ v, E ... 3 .n _. a e' C^ L 3 r .- u J T u rC 3 o L~ ., c m Ln 3 ^J ~ - ~ r 3 c: C 3 - J ~ ~. .~ - x D r r r, y a. C W ~ c - ~+ c ~-+ 3 L' ~ ? r a - r _ C ~+ O _ .Y ~ ~ U r O ., O _ T 2 C v ..- m ~ y ~ -- .. Y u ~ 3 - _ C, _, E _.. 'D N U t~7 U -.~-,, r. -. _ n ^ n .. 3 •^ *+ .a 'D ~ ._- a~~ ~ C _ ~- 4 c c. Y a J ~ ~ LL 3 ~ r u; o ~ v: ^. u E 3 0. n O - v: J '+ U y - v.~ 3 4% N C' n _ v +U ¢ G V, --+ C G L ~ U .7~ .C N J - ~. iJ ~. _ l .. ..• v C 7 ri Y H r 41 3 _ V E+ ~_+ C - C ^ ~- - r _ C r m r _ 3 C .= C _. ~- - .. C D @ 4; is C .. > ,- - i~ 3 3 - - ... c - - -- c _ c' e c _ 4s ~. x - - .~ 2 G r - x 1. W _ r - n ~- ~- - .., .... c rv r - c ~. ~ ., Z ~' _ < 2 _ z '- < ,~ ~: C r G .. - ,. t: _" .- _ ~. >. - - 3 - v. - - - ' y - c ~ r - _ _ - 3 C _ !. - O _ c ~ 3 3 V _ _. - - _ ,. - - e > c - - .. ~ .- _ - _ ~ _. _ - _ U C~ ~. - -~ s ._ ? - - - - a c q r = ~ _ _ .. C ¢ .~ - = 3 - a d 3 ~. y - ~ -' ~ 3 c - _ '~ ~ - 3 - _ J = - - 3 3 c: J 3 _ ._ - u ~ - -- _ - 3 3 ~ ~- - _. _ ., 3 _ - U ~ .. ,-. - - C C i j _ _ - _ - r ~ _ _ _ _ i Li z - < c: g -- E ; z z ? > C _ _ - ~ 3 n tc _ _ = ~' U c ~ > ~ - _ ~_ 3 ~.. .~ r _ _. ~~ ~ U >- - G _ _. .. - rt a _ t; 3 - ^~ 3 -~ - ~ e ~ _ ¢ - 3 - ? c: a .-_ r s - _ .3 ~ - - 3 - o - _ ~ - - - - m - 3 ~ ., ~ t - ._ _ - - - 3 ~ _ _ - - _ - e _ ~ `- 3 a >. - _ _ - - >. .. 3 > ~ 3 _ _ - ~ ~- C - -- - - _ C ~. - ~: - __ _ - _ c 3 - _ - _ _ -. ~ ~ e' - _ C >~ 7 - C .. - > G Cl C 1 C _. .. X - ~.. ? :i _ - C ~ n .- u ~ v, - r [,. - - ~ v >. .x _. >. - G U_ L U ti 3 J s _ ~ > ~ e 3 = a , - - - >~ 'c G ~ - _ - 3 z _ _ - L: - - ?` - C .-_ - c _ a - v. - - v ~ c v. _ U. ~ ~ _ _ _ ~ L - - - 1 - - ~ ~ _ _ n .~ - - _ - - 0 ' 3 ~ ' - u 'J. ~, ^, T y U U e ~. 3 = _ 3 .- r 3 - - Y >. } ~ _ z > V 3 ._ ~ ~ _ z ~' '- . ? 3 L: 'J. J V. f _ - m E ~ U.- .. U. _ _ 3 C" - ` _ z G z "' Z `" ~ M1. C T - 3 ~ x .' x ., 3 L _ - _ .- C Y ... G .. U ~. > _ C C U x C _ _ _ ~ - ... ~ 3 - _ ~ _. G ~ 7 ? -- c: - 3 c: T - _ __ r - ? U --. ... ._ - ~ - ~ U G - .` c 3 v - - - x i y ~ - _ >. - >. r - ~ 3 m ~^ - C 2 = U O E' E q r C ... ~ ~ ~ -- u -~ x _ ~ ~ 3 g - o :~ >. 0 3 c - 3 ~. .J J ._ U ~ C ., > _ ~ 3 ~ -. _ >. C c: c J . - -~ ~- - 3 ~ O ... a ~ .O U U - ~ - ._. C v a'L v 'I, U Q'. - 2 .. } • 7 O q U W C• O•: L; -- t~ ~ ti v ~ ~ - 3 .. _ >. 3 ~ r a C v ~ 3 v ~ ~' V ~ ~ w s ~. U L; U ,~ U O -~ .-. ~ ^ J T .= O ^J V. ., A :fi 3 J :r O ^ 'J.' - r i J ~ C 7 v. O 'D ~ /J O --t -- C% tv L: C _ G J ~ U ~ .J u L fJ 3 ~ r. ? ~ .. % U O ;r ~ ~ ~- 3 ~ .- U ~ C Li ++ ~. x i~ - ~ L^. .~ v. .. ~ - .7 -- ~ .•- ~ -. ~ V. -. _ y ~ J . _ - - ..- - ~^ .X 4 - ~ - - - 3 "' - G ~ r - - _ ? C L; H C :~ C. z r Z 'J z ~ ~; - C 'r 4 '- v -. J T O C _, = r C• .. C~ r 3 ,. t: ~_ = v .L U -. 3 3 3 n ... a v: r ~ ![ C a: G ., ~ O L v ~ ~ ~. ,, v, C O g n c r O ''' - _ ~ C .,. -6 K v, ~-. ti m G U ~ 'J 4 _ ~~ J U .~ r_ 3 O v .O ~- - ,,, -. :1 R v ~, ~ V, - v ^ 111 ri G _ w ;J 1 - T .-. O. _ ~1 r 3 - > m C _ ^ Y E C' 7 '-' 3 ~ u = c 3 e ~ ~ 3 a m C; O ~C -- - U v x _ e u~ .._ _ r > _ ~. r C' L: ~'. D - -- ~ .` 1, .-f a C' ~ _ j L•' J C L L O ~ .- ~3 O ., v 3 -- T - -~ '- C -, C -. _ U ... J - ~~ r 2 3 .. - ~ G. - ~' _ G - - - 3 L" - E rt Q c - ;r, - f~ - .-. - ... J - x >. .- N C C ..y .-i .-~. .. " Ci rJ C v: r~ ~ G M .- ... w C: .. ... C J - V. .7 - 'J. G O? L' ? U -. T - O ~: O r. _ U v. v. = w C C` O ~ C ~ - r,. r. G. 3 c: .. ~ 3 - :r. ~ ~ _ ~ x j _ U L: G .~ 3 3 m ~. ..y :: a x ro ul -. r r r. .,7i `~ .Y C' C O _ J ~ O .~ v .. ~ >, .-~ - c ~ ,; 3 ~ ~ J N -+ .+ +- ~ 3 ^J C -. +- C U` U v .. ,~ U ~ r ,~ o --/ J T ,~ x U rr: O s+ ^ r ^ 1 ~ ti C1 J Q' H .. 7 a '' .~ t N v. _ Lc x .~ ~, ~ o m .. L Ia N t~ C `++ ~ Y .- V vm, .-- ~ C v _ _ a C ~ 9 1: r O V: .C O. -~ O. 7 - L ~ - ... - C ~, -L. C_ C U' G. _ £- - v.• 1 ^. n N N N ^. r (\ ~ ~. z C ~ -~ ~ , .~ J 1 z z~ C L } _ r _ Cc G .. - C Q - O _ s _ ~ _. _ e _ .-. 3 3 ~, C'1 ... .. - _ - _ _ ~ r_ - C. 3 _ C: _ - - ~ v _ ~ - - _ ~ 3 - 3 ~ _ ~ > s _-. n. _ _ _ _ - G_ - C~ 3 - - _ - _ - _ >• E -- s 3 -- - - - - 3 _ 3 _ - - y = __ c - Oc ., _ - J _ ~ i _. ., r >- u _ Y _ ~ G _ ~ - '- - - 3 _ _ J J C ~ _ _ _ r ~ C ~- - _ -, G - L; U U 3 _ ~ - _ .-. r - .. ..s -.. ~. .- 3 ~ c: v ~ _ 3 m J - a ~ - ^~ 3 ~ - U v.• ~ _ v I ~ -- ,~ - -' - - C U -. - L - C h ~ ~ --i C ~ .~ - C C C T 6~ v~ u G _ y: ~ ~ 1. - C ~ >- > ~ ~. u Cl v; V. G' T ~- w - r C' ., C ~ _ 1 r- :- 3 ~ C rC G _ .~: - ~ _ _ ~ .- z c - - .. _ _ m o _ c c ~ ? z C F. - E = z z _ 7 -- v < -' G U 3 0: - i ? r G C C - .. G .. J u c s o ~ o 3 - .. - _ .. 3 ~ ~ _ J c: 3 ~ G ~ : 3 = _ _ ... v L - _ _ ~_ - ._ ~ _ .- - v. ~ - - - _ _ - _ - ~. _ - .-. v _ _ .. >, ¢ U v, 3 - C - G - 3 c. J _ _ 3 - 3 G - l .. - T _ .~ v. __ _ _ _ - ., ~-~ T J c v. - ... - - 0 0 - = a 3 - 3 ~ e ~ c .. = s = c c x - 3 > G > _ c ~. C > ~- _ 7 - - CJ - ~ r ~ 3 _ _. _ .. 3 _ .., - _ - -_ _ ._ _ C - - _ ~ .~ G - % _ _ 3 c . c - - - _ - _ _ ~ C E _ -- _- - - _ _ _ ~ _ 3 - ~ = 3 ' - _ _ c - _ - ~. - - c = ._ z _ ~, - 3 - "- -- - - > _ _. _- C - ,,. y - x r C _ 3 - _ 3 3 '" - - - - 3 ~ C z - C F z_" z " Z Y ' L _ __ _ ~ -• C - a - L _ 1 • 1 a'. - ,- - - r 1 - ~ - c ~ ~ 1 3 - - .- - - - - - _ J ~ r --, I _ c _ U ., ,-.. J - _ y [ 4 G _ _ ' G ~ _ c - , ~ ~ - r_ U x -•- E -> > < G 7 - .~ ~ ^ V J - 'C a r c :. >, C' _ J L ~ .Y ; .~ ~ C. C' U C >. In ~ = L: ~.. .- L .G - -~ 4: -- r, [: o - .- -- --. C; ~ ? ~c - ~ C' > T v. C ~ x > U - - 1.; 4: 11 J~ = >. .., .. ~ _ q ,.. .. f. 7 L - 7 C r_ 3 ;r c o T o - •+ G ., U _ A - •.+ .J ~ C E :f. 4 - v: a C c _ - - G ., 1- U __ U m ~ - _ - _ - .- 'I. C -- a C FJ v G >. C' O. "" O O r_ r Y ._ .~ -- v ~ % _ -y - -. ^. L r. -- T T -~ , 3 c, c cr > r >. 3, U U 3 _ r`_ - > O C J - ... ... ~ C' _: O - < _ >. - H • 'J ~. 3 O - O ~.. J L _. L: 'O U - O. T = a 4 - _ ^ -~ r - r '~ G --- ~'~ Li S+ E a in 4: c ~ 0 i; ~ u 3 - - 3 v ~. .. U ~ O a r, _ ~ 3 ~ =+ L7 O > C -- C U U -- N ~. 3 --- u T ~ c~ E a~ x O U ~ ` a - 3 O --+ ~n ~'3 w -- n >. U U r' U J ~ ~~' a' y > r ~ > .. G - _ _ 'l. G c c, ., z ~, C U C ~ c £ .~ :J .x 7 z z < ,~ C - "~ J s '.) '7 C - C ~ ~-+ .•- U_ _ - O _ ._ y ? _ 1 _ - - ~ - _ -.. r - ,h .q - v. O - C 7 C T n % U ~ ~ - . s >. R - _ a~ v. r O C s.. -• - U -~ C B ~ _ .C rt O - ~ - _ - u 3 v a - ~ > G' .. r - 3 > id - " - - 1 3 - ._ .. ~ u _ .c _ '- - J 2 ~ O ., .O - 7 - c - 3 -- o ~ v _ E ~ a, - °, ~ :~ ~: E O aJ v G s~ +~ 7 tf. C E -- U :: ~ M17 ~ :. rl U 1, a r' .i v L` 7 - ~ e [q . ~. rc U u ^. ~ - 3 - v Y e~ ~ r rc e 3 .~ e'~ e~ 3 F ~ o ..- .-. ... ~ 3 J .. r L E is O i _ - A V -., ti N .- O. rc 7. w - rc~ G. ~ G 3 G .. G. r. . y >~ _ ` r ~ - e - - < o ~ m ~ -~ - -- - .- :~ U i- ^ N U. rc r JJ - Ci ~ C J C ., rc a' .. CJ 1: a ^ ~ ... - ~. w y - c - 3 a ti m 3 rc ? ^ - ~ - Y _ r n CU P C: r _ .., -. 5 O - ~ 3 C ... _. - ~ _ - C ti ` r. ~ _ E z c. z ii 4 3 G - G - E .. - _ G 3 3 - ~ - U - 3 - - 5~ > >* - [: q _ - - [; S L" ^J .~ ~ .. ~ - T - ~ _ - _ y - - - :J _ ~ _ - 3 V Y r ` 3 -_ J c c $ _ u - fy I ._ ~. > 7 ~ ~ C _ .-. G _ 2 - Z 3 ~ _. C e~ Y _. 3 r >, _ C ., ~ ._ U C` _ _ _ - -- _ .~ c: - - _ 3 ~ v. ~ r _ _ - U - > ~. U - '- .. .- _ } T C r > 3 .~. ~ :I .~ J ' 3 v. ' L C: P ' r .. ~ T ~ _ - _ _ G - -1 - - .. > 7 .. J -' - v C: _ - ~ L _ _ _ .. C __ ~- _ _ _ _ - _ _ ~ 3 3 1 3 .' D- _v _ J h - C - G :J -Y _ j _ ~ 7 3 o ~. 1 Z ,`LL < C; ~ ' ^. '.-'~ ^ z ,,, z ^ Z - > ~ ,_ Y _7 v .~ ~ r - ., 3 3 _ ~: - r _ 3 7 C 3 _ _ -- 7 - 3 .: .j 2 ~ - V. _ _ r e. ' Y > >, _. _ 3 - ~ 3 - 'l. - _ :/ -, .- ~ Gi o _ c - t ~+ - J '~, C .~. - ~. ~ ~ _ - - :. ~ - C 7 ..- r _ ~ _ - i' U .~~. J _ (,' - -- 3 - L - - _ s 3 =_ - ~- >. _ ., T - - C r 3 ~- C ~. - tC 'J. - _ ~ - ~ - .~ ~ ~ - - _ ~ 3 T - - V _ .= C C ., C _ Q _ `, _ _ = E 3 3 ' - T C - - Q _ C Q T - a ~ a ., e _ - G r, - _ ~ C. -- ~ `S 3 - v: 'J. . _ T, CJ _ J "s i- «- T 3 - _ 2 ~ i ? V. v. L. - - _ - - _ r .- - r - G. ' 3 } - < L ... - .. 1 - ~. _ 3 - G ,- ~- ., - r C r .. ,,. - - V ~- - ~ - - _ V. T C ~ s - v, -- C C: c > - v - C U. - V. C _ 'J, E C C: C' - C - 3 - - ~ r. .. :. r- Z = G S_. - F 7 - C ,` s G } L} - _ - n ~ :J f~ - _ _ v ~ - - - - - ~ .. } - .~. _ 3 _ ~- - = 3 - - ~ u 3 - r - Gi L :! _ - tJ r ... n U -_ U s. ~ _ U > .. w c ~ d > c v. c 3 r 7~ a = ~ _ ~ _ _, ~- - - > 3 U 4 - s. O - .- x c .- _. r ..- _ .- - x u U'. ~- .. - .. = r - n - - _ T u >: ~ c ~ - > .. - -a } > - ~_ - C ~ - ti u ., a -_ 3 O r O ro Y ., o 7 Po -~ } Z Z ~ Z U C 7 D'~ ,, 1. U J 3 t U :J .-. I U U1 t± :t, --i J ,.. v. 7 C H ~-+ C: i -- A .-. 4 E t, X .. - ., is :J £ >. F v L'7 iV ~ ~ G O ~-+ O 3.: ~ C J A -y O C tl. D E q a~ rt s - U :7 ~ [a E N m F 'C J -a V - ¢ .. .. ci 3 - J .. _. n m. z ~. c .~ z~;; z C ,. E J u } ~ .- 0' T C r V.' ~ } c u 3 w -, - c c _ ~ ~ % a v, >~ - a L' -- C r. .y G ~- T v x C' ~ rJ C ~ _ r N ~ _ - -> ~ ~ v ~- ~ c' 0 3 c .n C• ~ ~ - c ~ ~ v, - _ 3 y N 3 x ~ n 3 0 u to v, -' 4 ~ r. >, 3 o C1 .G rp ~ ~ C G - C' .-. _ ^ - > C C n C1 b to Cv' G G _ E N L r .a - O , ,~ .- , V .. _ _ ~ U r -.- y C m v. v, v. ~i - T C: ro O x - - ^~. C D :J O ^ -- x - --i .~ to .- a .. ~c o m o. >, >, ~ 3 - J C .J-+ i - '-' U C - } t } L > C C ~ C~ J D U U C U G E H u - ~ v, ~. C v, ~ O - L - O. -^ O C r. p. .. G C ... m ~ r c ~~ % - v _ ~ ~~ tv - _ _ ,~ p -, ~ ,.. - r O U U n ~, u C 'D - ~ ,, "o m ~ u ~: x ~ D - r > -- } .. > a ~ ~ ~ ~a -- _ c v; - - _ -- -- ~ Q' C v. G. ~ ~ > O C ., s- O U~ c t. ~ V, [: ~ N C U - Ll U C ~-~ D - ~ _ > ~ _ a c ~ c e~ c tr. N x ~ U Z G C f ~~ . T: Z ~n 7_ C .~ ~. C ~ ` ii «. ^J i i - a a - nJ - ~ -_ c ~ - C - _ L: _. Y .. ~ - _ Ln ~- ._ .y 1 J _ .n _ _ / C .~ _ J ~ ~ T 3 < ~+ _ r ~+ J .7 ? _ J O - - - - .~ - ~ E G .. J 3 ~ ~ 3 j C ~ ~ p ~I ~ G J 3 v ;n ~ - -. - = y. J r 3 J ;7 ~ .~ Z G T - -- 3 a _ ~ ~ -~ v, t, .~ v. C C7 Z 3 - ~.. ~ r _ ~ ca v G '~ U L c: .Y s -_ L' - ... - - C L is s, ., - n - m ~ _ _ - .,, ~ n - n f ... ~. r ~ _ ? v: .-. _ r. -. U] .. 3 - _ - - ~. - 2 v _ - c., n - .. G - 3 ..-. - 'J v, ~ - '~ C - - _ 'C _ G _ - r v, _ ~ - _ .- .~ - - ~ _ _ 1 = C - 3 3 _ r - - > w :I C` 1, i T G; U .~ ,7s .. -. ;j _ _ _ 'l. - `~ y_ - y ._ _ C -. J - u, .~ r ~: - J _ _ f' .y U _ n _ _ _ '1 ~ ~% -. Y_ .. r ~ - •' - - v, .. •~ 3 _ v: - _. E - - - 3 3 - - - `c 3 _ _ _ .: = E 0 _ - V, _ _ ? . - - _ ~ _ Z ,~ ~ - _ ` - .. .- _ `L ~ r - _ - - ~ ~ - _ 4 - ~ ~ - ~. -. J - - .} tt - L' C U, z m - _ ~= 3 _ ~ _ u - ._ .. - ~ ? C E - ~ - - ._ ~ - - - _ ~ - .~ _ - c: C - .- } r_ -- ~' ~. - ? V. - _ ~ c _ _ s c .- _ _ C r 'l. q D - U - _ L S 1 C rS y - < - - _ ~ .-. _ _ E > - - _ - 3 r E V _ ._, _ ` _ - '.l._ - - x _ .~ e - - _ c ~_ '" - r.. r _ r G .~ _ - - ? .\ - 4: .J Z - - r n u. r. ~ o ~ T, .,. G. ~ - _ ~ _ _ C _ C' C C C 4- Y - - ._ Z U - 5 r v ~. ~ _ < - - - - - - 'l. Y - r, ~ r .z _ C' > _ _N r. - G C £ Z 1 U Z C > C .. = ~ _ 3 ~. .. ~ s. - -i - C C _ ._ ._ _ ~~, _ 3 - G _ - - - - - C - C n ~ .. 2 ~ !.' _ E _ z °' 1, " z Z - > F ~ _ Z Z ~ _,; _ - - ~ - r - _ ~- - > c - ~ _ _ _ _ ~ - - G C - - _ -. v J 3 - - ~ v _. - - n 3 _ - .. o _ ... ~ a. o _ ,~ - .. ~ 3 = -- O ~ - C ^ V a C D - -- N _ Q' D .' N _ _ ~j ti ... G Z v v J - L U ~ = X Z [; .-I .-. i . al 71 Li -- _ ^ G ~ L: A G IL Z ~ s c -, 7 [:: 2 - -- >, .. :~ ~ n - 'C ..- J ~J :: .~.. ,~ G 1. a CJ u -. 'J - ~C vi C :. J J N E c7 U _ U r O _~ .. .. ~ G U ~ +% G V to C' J U y 3 a A v ~ 3 - C ' w _ 3 - - _ - ., 3 v, 5 .. r - y - .- ~ ~J ' - -- - _ _ e ... C C - _ C! X L ~ (~ W J .J r ~ _ ~ J _• ~ : ~: - ? _, 4; v ~ ~= 3 c m ^~ g , , 4 _ 3 v .-. 3 >. 4 - ~ U C 3 .C r G a r C~ ~ ^~~ ~ 1: J lr G-~ .J~. ,~ U U :1 C ~-! 3 U ~ OJ Y i. U U r Vi Vi +% C O U 2 ._ 3 _, C +- .. is 3 .-' ~ w - t: u ~ c a ~ c o m -~ > ~- Y - G .. > 0 ~ r y _ c 3 o ~, T 3 m a .. ~ ~ z - _ a rc 3 ti o ~. s _. ^ _ z ~ a _ m L. ~ - .~ ~ _ - - C ~_ > r 7 e 3 c m m ~ :: a ~ c .. - >, c ~ C N ~ 3 c s: ~ .. o c - c v e G :: r, O ~ c- -.. ~ ~ :~ ~ _ ~~ :. r, ~ o 3 rr c o ~ ~ ~ ~ m r_ ~ .; ~ z Z .. _ ` o = ~ v _ 1 ~ ti v - q > .. t: 4 N ._. - >. ? a~ ? - :J _ C. ~. v Z C y - - G C v `. C' r ~ O C C .-. n r. c ~ ~ m .. _ e ._ _ _ ._ J - ~' ~_ _ _ _ _ - s ~ - G L ~ 3 - - _ - e+ ~ _ X -. ? _ ._ ._ -_ -- J _. .. - Y - _ C: - ~ - _ _ _ - ~ ~ - - Q% 3 E - T 3 _ - _ -_ -_ ~ -s -- 3 ~, -- Y - s - -- ,. G 3 m >, - __ J _ _ _ _ 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ N _ _ - _ _ ~ _ ~ - _ r_ - - - 7 - s >, r Y - ., .. > - G 0 - - C' - -- - -- - - 0; .. C ... G J ,-. ,~ ~.~ c 3 'a - _ C' :/ _ - X r J r. - - ~ 3 - 3 _ _ - G G -_ ~ O > C c. .. C 3 _ _ s: _ 1- G ~ - c: C _ .. ~ _ C m - - Z u _ 1. U_ E: _ V ~ r_ _ j. U - .. U U - G n, E C ~ _ ~. ~ r E" G ? - T ~ O :~ L _ ~i - ~ ._ i E r_ r _ v c; - C -- (~ U V fn 'I) ~ 7 J _ c 3 -- 3 3 ~ a u - ;7'; ... - U ~ U U ~. .. A C - - - Y G -. _ _ v, 3 r _ ._ ._ ~ C c a c 3 - _ - _ - ~ _ - - - - 2 j - C ~ . ~. L' z s z r- C ~~ ~~ -: C - C, __ _ ., __ _ _ _ ._ ~ - - i C G ~ s _ L ~ - G .. - } - v) - - c - '- 'l. :. C -~ - r _. - r. ~ L ._ - - ~ ~ 3 C U - - T - ~ - _ _ ._ -- _ ~. C _ J Y - - .. _ ., ~ - Y - ..1 - .. - - > ., 3 c e - _ o t: - C ti - ,. ... J T > ., .C _ 3 .. .. - _ ;. _ 3 - - - G 3 v -- ~ ~ .. 3 .. - 3 i; - - _ - ~ z ~ o _ ~ f; - - ~. C _ ..- - ~ s - - - - G ,. -_ ~. 3 - - G C - _ ~ ., - -. U - > C: -- - _ ., 3 E - - C - _ > ., - _ T _ 3 - _ - - ~ - _ - _ - - _ ~ .- 3 -.. ._ - 3 - _ _ _ _. .. - ~- _ _. s c - .. - - - r r, - -, -_ ~ _ r .. C' _ - . _. 3 - - G ff - - J = y _ L ~ X - _ 5. ~ L' r - -- - > n $ v G v C 5 C } - - - G C: _ - _ c. _ .Y =_ - ._ _ -- .. Z - z - v J ~ ., s _ - - > _ = r ~ ~ 3 G f- 4 - C c ~ - - ~: - Z - r _ C' - _ - L: ~• G = .~ _ .. _ - 3 - - .. ._ ~ 3 r, ~ - - .. - ~ ~ -- 3 - ~ > ~ 2 ^f - __ 1 Y V Q _- _ r_ = e ~ - ~• ~, z .- > ~. ~ f L .r - :ti z ~ Z - ~ r< ~ `. C- i - - = Cl - -: - 4i T 3 ~ r >- - - _ - _ r C ¢ - t: .u :i .-. 3 - - -_ 3 3 v T r .^ i .- O. .~ C J - >. L: 1 .- C ... C - 3 _. ~ - _ .~ ~V. - ~ >. c ~> h c - _ c ~. .. .3 _ -~_ ~ - `o x G C'C ~-- A 7 - -+ C O E .c ._ _ -~ ai .C 6. >, >. - v ., rt L _ ~ x 3 .. _ ._ -.- J J' `G - c' 3 - m u ~ - ~ s. - - O - ., -z - ~ U - _ - _ c- L i. - .. 7 - ~ C .- _ C _ ~ J '- •- c c - 0 3 - .. C ~. • .~ _ _ o m q ~ .. .. U 6l ` p _ - C ~ Ca _ i- J 3 .. > .~ .. c: u~ v: - _ J -. J ..+ ;f. i - ._ _ __ _ _ _ .._. _ - - 3 r .._. _. L; f_ ~. - - ~ ~ ~ J 0 `I ? O C U U _ ? >~ J .. _ O G _ ~ m o _ - s ,- ~ - o J x ~ 1 'J. _ _. L - Q U Y _ > .^ ? _ - 1 rJ - 0 .. J' U (_: 3 Z ~-+ C z J 't U Ci V O. O ~ D: ~: N -' _ n >, L 2 J r! V. _ ~ _ 3 I Cl ~^. Ci v 0 S_ n C O ~ .-. ~ ~ v _ U v O J O r , 3 y - T U C O U ~ ~ ~. a' r. z ~ - 7 r ~ ^: ,'J~' C `" O w - :n >. x -- ~- 0 3 v _ _ 4: ~ W W Gr ... :J C _. j. ... O .- T. O A N C7 C~ - ~ -. 'J. ~ u ~ U L o .- ~ - - c c c 3 > L .c a _ a: o m :: u _ ~ - v - e' c v. M _ r _ 3 ~. ~ _ _ x - ~ - _ ~ a u ~ s. _ ~ ~ > _ _ u ~ c. - - G G - O m - - - -- '- J N C ., C O L• i v.~ - ,T Cl ~- :C r C :C C' c: 3 3 r c -- T a c = - u A ., - _. - o m - o e rn o a ... - r ~. > m ro i - ~. - v o ~ ~ ~ o e o -~ ~ - W _ a u s r 5~ C _ N G: i- V C J W ~ C1 2 Y r ~ 1 r/, ` x %r .,. ~ 3 _ -.>. a ^ QJ J I:: .r L U C N If, C ' q 'v ~ ~ - >. C .-. ~ O ~ x E C .^ _. C ~ .- O 4 - C ~. _ .. - U J' r J L 2 s. U O ~ C: 3 ._ ~ _ -- C ~ N U _ - _ 3 _ _ .. 3 0 G - ~ a ~ ~ - - D T .. C~ C ro 3 f- .' E r > _ ~ _ - c >- 3 - - - r. - c ~r. .. a .. - ^^ - c - -~ .-. - _ _. _ ... -. .-. n :v :. ~ ~ rv 0 0 m z s E rn L1 Z ^ C y 5 ~ N ~ *' CJ U: .7 T < - ,: _ - r - - _ c - c _ - _ ^ ,~ - ? _ C _ - - C C _ .. - - c - y b ~ .. J ,... .. .. C^ _ 1 U a: y. 3 ~ V _ n " C~ ., ., = C .. ... r, u _ ~ _ ~ 3 (u ... ~ - X C: - .,. - - r U ~ C - ~. ~' ~. C ~_ U ti 7 - C G = L ... _ __ - o = ~ e~ n - V` ? C ~ V. -~ - ., ^. ~, G x v - - 3 r V. G ~ J -. Z 7 CS J U -~ _ _. rr 3 - _ ~ .. u ~ ~ 3 .- `c _ c ~ - .. M C 4: c: - 3 ..- _- .. G: .. X .. ._ ~ - ~ s - -_ -- U _ ~ ..c .-. - ._ -~ c - e - , n .. > _ ~. - s l - ~ - - - C1 x - - r ~ ~. _ ^ - - 3 -. < _ ?~ s _ - g F_ t?. - x ~ j - _ „ - r .~ .~ - - _ .~ u .. U -.+ F L7 ., n ~' C1 s U >+ O J r' J a; n ~ ~. o o >~ r*. n ~ G J ~ Gi .. o a X : .Y ^~ -_ G _ ~ G7 -~ ._ ~ c , y s _ 3 ;~ - 7 - - 3 - - 4 ~ r - _ _ 3 3 - - a Y - i 2 ~ v. ,. z _ Z z C ._ - _ - c -" .. ~ >, .~ o o ~ - - c - - ~ .i - r ~ L J - - C - ., 3 ~ - C C r v J - c: - J, E .. r - r ~C V. C - 7 - T - G = v: r .-. _ > _. - ._ 3 .. _ - _ _ ~_ C V ~ _ _ _. _ - - .- _ 3 _ ~ - 3 - _ _ __ - - - i`• _ - -- - - 3 - - > x _ y - _ ~- ~ _ - _ 3 _ - - - - - - T ~ .: ~ C _ _ - _ _ C > _ ._ .. C - >. r - ~ _ ~. - _ _ ._ - -- ' 3 3 G ~. .. ~ - ~ - 3 -- - - - v. - _ - 3 - ., ., - A - _ t: > O .~ -v ... v. - - _ c; V 3 = - C 6 - _ - _ 0 ~.. ~ ~ r _ _ - r .~ - - 3 -_ ~~ ^ s ~ v. - C` - .- G C ? - - C u. C r _ _ - _ - -. - r .- !c e~ ~ - - - _ _ -v Z C: C ~ - ~ z =~ Z ^ ~ ~: < - 3 -- _ ~: - m - C s ., O _ ~ J O - ~ 3 x _ _ - -- n >. 3 _, 3 .- rl. v _ _ _^ ~ C - ~. U > s ... J C m • .~ 1 _ w _ _ _ - U ~ ~ _ ~. v G .-. • Z w ., 3 u w ~i _ S' Y GJ ~ ~ v D ~. ~ T .~ G L: C1 s ~ L" G - s. _ ~ _ - ~, ^ ~ ^ ~ a _ ~s m c CI 'hJl ~ r' •-~ O r .+ r 'C - U J U ..3 e >. 3 .. .,- C' C .~ - _ G s 3 = - C' U > 3 U > - c; _ - > - ~ _ 3 i T 3 G m r •~ _ >, ~ L 7• - „ r_ >_ _ 0 3 c - i 3 ~ .. - - C V. ~ >~ ~: ~ 1 ~ m ~ :J - `o ,. 3 - - ~ v, C - > - ~ _ c L c 3 ~ 3 m i e - >_ >. .- w c .. - _ r_ r J ~~ - 'J. ~- J .. C ... ~ v. _ U a ! - i C r - ._. J. >- >i C. ., E >- o _ _ ~ >. m ~ 3 ~- u 7 C -. -.a v. c ~: ., :~ .•. 3 - ~ c; 3 .. .... 1J ... ~. / r„ 1- ... C - - > 3 C c ~ ~ u: ., C G .- J > F U > -- O O r C T m L'~ ~-- l+ ~ :J 1 U - C 7 ti 4 7~ 1 .-. '3' 'C m a - ~ m 3 _ _ ~ .,. v o '~ m ., V. w > V, v U C i c ro L s: o ~ w ~ w CJ > J Vi ~ ~. , G f H L J ~ cy s: m r. ,., x i o ~ _ c u~ ~ 3 E ~ e - U ~ -~ C W ~. --i J DU V O1 ., is n_ n ,., ~ y > m -~ ~ ,. O .C - ~ - U U - > > - = O. O _ -_ r_ 3 r_ - - - - c u > .r •.a _ T. m O ~ - GJ s. >. >+ ~ ~ N QJ pi A - _ a _ O i-i m .C c7 y T O C .-- ~'. .~ C1 -~ v C L m r - C .. N '. m V N A y m w E 3 .. ~ 3 ~c o .. U ~c 'c -- a u 3 d - m J L - ~ v C E - r -• 3 .~ •T ~ 7 .. O m ~ J = v, a, a ~ m ` 'r _ s G; G - Y .. s. r, p w Y C C - C . -~ -_. C O v - - - v. ~ > m a c 3 ., ~ -~ J a o a- a ~. e v. ~ _ _ 1J ~ 7 l' l: .. N - C o e ~o a m c: c u ~ m ~. - c a .- m a a~ >. c - ., ~, ,~ u m a, ~. ~ .. - c. r t ~ C .-~ 1 O O ~- i3 2 v - .- r" 3 = N 'C - C1 .C J C ~ A rtl ._ ~ pj w _ a ~ =: 3 ~ _ ~ ., o m a o ~ L ~ ~: n: E `v - _. a -: r, O ~ - m c p .- ~ ^ A ~ ~ ^ O m a ~ .. '- _ C m C - ? 7~ ~ C .C .- ~ - ~, > 0 3 a e c ... - - C - V .. > -. .- c ~ . a c - - - - .n r m Z .. ~ ] ~~ Z '' Z n _O U ~ cq O rn ~' U ~ ~ z G _~ ^ ., m z ~^ z z C _ J G ' c J J C - ~ .: - (: - >, ~, 7 - - 3 C - ~ O - - _ 3 ~ r: - - 3 .i C' - Q = - > - .. Z r -_ >- - - - - _ - 3 > 3 - LL > = _ _ -' ._ - _ L' - _. - .~ _ ~ 3 - _ ~ ,.. ~ c ., 3 - _ V. _ _. _. _ _ ~ .- - c- ~ ._ r ~. ~ V. - - _ _ = 7 _ ~ _ - > _ 'J C - ~ G: G } ,-, ~ C G r ? -- ? - F O .., ~. - C ~' C 3 - - ~C'~ 3 ~ ._ _ J - - .. > - C - ... C } ._ L' ~ C' .. - m 2 - ~ >, > 4 J. ~ r v -. - C '? 4- - ._ - - _ J _ _ - > > > _ _ .. - - - ~ - ~ ~ J _ J ~ Z < E - }, } Z - { .l' C _ O V. - - r_ L = ~. _ ..-. - C - G_ _ .. r - - - > _ _ _ _ _ - ~' - ~: >- > L: - ,- >- ~ .. ~ _ > --. - ~ - C J - c ~. .Y > - 3 - - n - r ._ _ _ ~ - s 3 - c ~ - ~ - _ Sl 1` - - _ - ~ _. .. - - C' - G - Q; .; .. :a r - c7 C -- ~ J '~ - .... _ 6'~ J - - - _ ~ c .. _ - .. >_ ~ - _ - _ _ ._ _ _ _ - .= Z ~. > _ - ~ _ - _- ~: - ~ ~ > ~ _ 3 O C v r -- ~ v. - C - __ C: ., ~ F - - v. > - e - _, 7 - _ .~ - ~ ,. -. ~ 3 > .. _ > - ~ .._ - 3 - v - - - 3 - c - - -3 _ - - - - a 3 •- s 6 ., v. _ _ G ._ > ~ .= C tfv v. _ 3 c _ -~ _ q - e - _ ._ c c v __ - - ~,_ -- = m - - x _ ~ a <~ _ C ~ U r L G C - 3. 3 - - - - - r s r _. ~ - -- Z Z 2 < . < ` C T 1. C u :1 C ~ 3 v, -o ~~' c~ .. L C ~ _ L: n - a - J r a D U. Y ~- L e u a c~ Z H ~ ~, z " z C 4 `°w~~"~°~-~ TO«'N OF LOS G:~TOS ITEM ~O: 2 :--~ ~- ~~ PLA\\I\G CO~IIiISSIO\ STAFF REPORT ;.,~, ,~: cos--cA~oS~~ ~Ieetin~ Date: June 9, ?010 PREPARED BY: Suzanne Dayis. Associate Platu~er sdayis c los~~atosca.~=oy APPLICATION ~ ~O: Architecture and Site Applications 5-08-30, 5-09-33, and S-09-34 Subdivision Application \-1-OS-13 LOCATION: 1~92~ L:nion A~•enue (east side of t'nion Avenue, just north of Leewood Court) APPLICANT: Tony leans, T.H.LS. Design PROPERTY" Oft NER: 217 O'Comlor LLC CONTACT: Tony Jeans _~PPLICATIO SL'\-I~1ARZ': Requesting approval to demolish an existing single family residence and subdivide a .9 ~ acre parcel into tlu•ee lots and to construct two new residences on property zoned R-1 :8. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project, and a \~IitiQated Negative Declaration is recommended. APN X27-=I2-[~08. DEEI~~IED COL~IPLETE: iblav 20. 2010 FINAL DATE TO TAhL- ACTION: July 9, 2010; for Tentatiti-e ~~Iap; November 20, 2010, for Architecture and Site applications. RECO'\~I~IE\D:-~TIO\: Soft approval (Alternative T~1-?) PROJECT D:-~~f.-~: General Plan Desi~~nation: Lo~v Density Residential Zoning Designation: R-1:S Applicable Plans & Standards: State Subdivision \-Iap Act Subdivision & Zoning Ordinances General Plan y Parcel Size: 40,~79 sq. ft. (existing) ~?,9 ~6 sq. ft. (after R-O-~'~- dedication) Surroundin~T _~rea: Existing Land L se General Plan Zoning North Single Family Low Density R-1:8 East Single Fatnily_ _Lo«~ Density R-l:10 South Single Family Low Density R-1:10 j ~~i'est Single Family __ Lo«~ Density R-1 :8 L~TTACF~MENT 3 Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 2 1 ~92q L'nion Avenue ~1-OS-1 ~. 5-08-~0. 5-09-~ ~, 5-09-~=1 June 9. 2010 CEQA: It has been determined that the project will not have a sig~~ificant impact on the enviroiunent and a Mitigated negative Declaration has been prepared. FI\DhGS: ^ .-1s required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for the demolition of a single family residence. ^ As required by Section 66-1?~ of the State Subdi~-ision ti-lap Act. CO\SIDER:aTIO'~S: As required b}' Section 29.20.10 of the Town Code for Architecture and Sitc applications. ACTIO\: The decision of the Plaiulin~ Commission is final unless appealed y within ten days. E?iHIBITS: 1. Location map 2. '~~iiti~ated ~'e~ati~-e Declaration (2 pa~~es) 3. Initial Study (42 pages) 4. Mitigation ~~Ionitoring Plan (1 page) ~. Required findings (2 pages) 6. Recommended conditions of approval for Tentative Ylap (10 pa~~es) 7. Reconunended conditions of approval for new residences (3 panes) S. Project data sheets for Parcels 2 and 3 (2 pages) 9. February 1, 2010, Town Council verbatim minutes 10. Consulting Architect's report (-~ pages). received tiiarch 26, 2010 1 1. Applicant's letter (~ pages) and exhibits (2 pages). reeeiyed N1av 26. 2010 12. Letters fi-om Stephanie L_ynott (S pages), received April 29 and June 1, 2010 1 ~. Letter from Cecilia Holmberg (1 page), recei~~cd ~~tav 6, 2010 1=3. Letters from Ter-1• Hickey (2 pages), received \~Iay~ 1 1 and ~1av 27, 2010 1 ~. Letter and information from Thomas Mangano (1S payees), received \Iav ??, 2010 16. Letter fi•om Geoff Mitchell (9 pages). received ~-Ia}~ 27, 2010 17. Letter from Oreille Buesing (~ pages), received \7ay 27. 2010 18. Letter from Jolu~ Schwarz (=1 pages), received ~Iav 27, 2010 19. Letter from Paul R, Jane De Bella (1 page), received June ?, 2010 20. Existing lot pattern exhibit 21. Development plans and Tentative map exhibits (11 sheetsj. received \~~1av 20. 2010 Plaiuling Commission Staff Report -Page 3 ] ~92~ Union Avenue tit-08-13. S-OS-30. S-09-33. S-09-34 June 9. 2010 BACKGROL~D: The subject property is zoned R-1:~ and is cur-entl}' developed «-ith a 1.010 square foot single- story home and ~2S square foot garage. The property o«~ner initially submitted applications to demolish the existing house and to subdivide the property into tlu•ee lots. Subsequently two applications were submitted for the de~~elopment of proposed Parcels 2 and 3. A total of tlu-ee new single-family homes will be built if the subdi~-ision is approved. Plans for the neu~ residence on Parcel 1 will be considered under a separate Architecture and Site application that is vet to be subn~irted. The project site is cur•ently 40,79 square feet (.93 acres). The property owner ~~•ill dedicate 2~ feet of frontage on [;pion A~~enue and the area for the Panorama ~t'av cul-de-sac to the Town f'or public right-of-« av. Riy~ht-of-«~av dedications ~l-ill reduce the land area to 32,936 square feet. On Febnlary 2~, 2009, the Commission considered the proposed subdivision and demolition of the existing residence. Following public testimony and discussion the Commission continued the matter to ti~larch 2~, 2009, requesting that the applicant provide an exhibit showing a conformin~7 cul-de-sac for Panorama ~~- ay and directing staff to prepare an Initial Stud}-'. An hlitial Study and \~Iitigated Negative Declaration ~~ere prepared and released for public review on July 17, 2009. The public review period ended on August 17, 2009. On .-~u~ist 26, 2009, the PlaiuzinQ Conunission considered rivo alternati~-es for the subdivision. one ~~-ith a reduced right-of-~i-ay for the cul-de-sac at the end of Panorama ~~vay and one «~ith a fills right-of--« ay. The Commission voted unanimously to demo the Architecture and Site application for demolition of the existing residence and the Tentative Map application citing inconsistency with the surrounding neighborhood. The Commission determined that the project did not comply ~ti~ith the existing lot patters to the north of the site and that the proposed development vas not appropriate for the property (making findings card d from Section 66474 of rhz State Subdivision \I ~p -1ct). The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's decision based on his belief that the Plaru~ing Commission erred or abused its discretion in finding that the subdivision application was not consistent with the su~~-ounding neighborhood and in finding that the site vas not physically suitable for the proposed density and or type of de~~elopment. On '~ovember 2, 2009, the Town Council denied the appeal upholding the Planning Commission's decision. Prior to consideration of a resolution on this matter, the applicant requested that the Town Council reconsider its decision and that the applications be remanded to the Plaiuling Commission for funkier consideration. On December 7. 2009, the Council decided to reconsider its decision. Planning Conunission Staff Report -Page -I 1928 L"nion A~~enue \i-0~-1 ~. S-08-~0. S-09-3 ~. S-09-,-I June 9. 20]0 On February 1, 201 U, the Council reconsidered the applications and voted unanimously to remand the project to the Planning Commission for consideration of hvo alternate three-lot confi~7urations. A verbatim transcript of the Council discussion «•as prepared (see Exhibit 9) since a resolution documenting the decision was not adopted. Following the remand the applicant decided to combine the Architecture and Site applications for proposed homes on Parcels 2 and 3 ~~-ith the subdivision applications. Detailed development plans have not been completed for proposed Parcel L Complete story-poles have been installed on proposed Parcels 2 and ~. Heiuht-poles have been installed on proposed Parcel 1 to sho« the approximate hei~~ht and location of the north side of the house. PROTECT DESCRIPTIO\ .-~. Location and Surrounding \eighborhood The project site is located at 15928 Union Avenue, on the east side of the street just north of Leewood Court. adjacent properties are all occupied by single family residences. Homes to the south (Lee~~-ood Court), east (Cambrian ~~'iew). and across the street to the ~-est (Union Avenue and Lasuen Court) are t«~o-stories. Homes to the north on Union Avenue and Panorama ~Vay are one-story. Existing home sizes range from 1,73 to 3,70 square feet. B. Tentative i\-tap Approval Approval of a Tentative ~~1ap application is required for the proposed tlu-ee-lot subdivision. Section 66=17 of the State Subdivision ~~Iap Act includes the following seven findin~~s relative to subdivisions of land. These criteria are in essence reverse tindin~s; should the deciding body (in this case the Planning Commission) make any of the findings, the Tentative ~~Iap application should be denied. a. That the proposed map is not consistent «~ith applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 6~4~ 1. b. That the desi~m or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable genera] and specific plans. c. That the site is not ph~rsically suitable for the t~-pe of development. d. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is are likely to cause substantial en~~irotunental damage or substantially and ayoidabl_y injure fish or ~~~ildlife or their habitat. f. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. ~. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict ti~~ith y easements. acquired b~~ the public at large. for access through or use of. propert~~ within the proposed subdivision. Plam~ing Commission Staff Report -Page ~ 1 ~9?8 Union .~~~enue ~1-08-1 ~. 5-08-30. 5-09-3 ~. 5-09-;.~ June 9. ?010 C. Architecture and Site Approval The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residence and garage and to constrict two new residences. Architecture and Site approval is required for the demolition of the existing single family residence. Architecture and Site approval is also required for the proposed homes that «rill be constructed on the site if the subdivision is approved. Architecture and Site (A~;S) applications have been provided for development of Parcels and ~. A separate ARS application ~~ ill be filed for Parcel 1 at a later date. D. Zoning Compliance The applicant has proposed t«~o tentative map options, one ~~ ith traditional pie shaped lots (T\~1-1) and a second version with modified propert}' lines to provide more usable yard areas (T~~1-?). Both options comply Keith zoning requirements. TJl-1 liinimum Re uirement Parcell ~nio~z Parcel2 Par~a•ama ParceI3 Panorama lot size j 1;,000 sd. ft. 11.996 sf 10,~~4 sf 10,92> sf Iot '~ frrnltaUe 60 feet L'~nirn1 30 feel Panorama 110 feet 30 feet 1 ~0 feet lot depth ~ 9~ feet 108 feet 1 ~ ~ feet 17~ feet ~ T1I-Z ~ ~Iininntm Requirement Parcell ~nio~z Parcel2 Panoranur ParceI3 Panorama lot size ~ 8,000 sq. ft. 11;989 sf 10,087 sf 11,390 sf lot frontage 60 feet L'tuon 30 feet Panorama 110 feet 3~ feet 1 ~0 feet lot depth ~ 9~ feet 89-1~8 feet 160 feet , 1>0 feet Panorama ~~'av is a cul-de-sac «•hile L'nion Avenue has a linear fronta~~e: minimum frontage requirements are different for the t~yo situations. E. General Plan Compliance The General Plan land use designation for the propem- and sutz-oundin~T area is lo~v density residential. 0 to ~ units per acre. The proposed density is ~.? units per acre and is within the allo~t~able density range. _a\ALZ'SIS: A. :~-chitecture and Site The applicant is proposing to construct t~~~o-story homes on proposed Parcels 2 and 3. The maximum height of the house on Parcel 2 ~yill be ? ~ feet 11 inches. and the house on Plamling Commission Staff Report -Page 6 l ;9? 5 L'nion Avernle ~ I-OR-1 ~. S-08-~ 0. 5-09-; ~. 5-09-3-1 June 9, ?O10 Parcel 3 «~ill be 2~1 feet sir inches. A maxinnun of 30 feet is allowed in the R-1 zone. The proposed houses ~i~ill meet the minimum required setbacks. General project data is included in Exhibit 8. The Consulting Architect visited the site and reviewed the proposed home designs (see Exhibit 9). The Architect commented that the home proposed for Parcel 3 is well designed with good forms and interesting details. and is of a similar style to homes on Panorama ~~•av. _-~ recommendation to reduce the number of second floor windows was incorporated by the applicant. The Consultin; Architect initially had a number of recommendations for the house proposed for Parcel 2. The applicant revised the design, resulting in t«~o minor recommendatii~ns as follows: • ~I11e window frames should be recessed t«-o to three inches from the wall face • Add a stucco «~all base in areas with where stucco siding. A condition of approval has been included requiring the final elevations for the house on Parcel 2 to be reviewed as part of the building plan check process. B. Lot Confi~lration The configuration of the proposed parcels is more conventional with option Tv1-l, providing pie-shaped lots off the Panorama cul-de-sac. y~lodifi-ing the lots lines as shown on option TAI-? pro~~ides more usable yard areas for Parcels 2 and 3. The other noticeable difference is that T~-I-? has an angled property Lille between Parcel 1 and Parcels ?whereas T~•1-1 has a line parallel to Union Avenue. The building envelopes are not significantly different with either option. The applicant's preference is T'~I-?. If the decision is to approve the Tentative \iap. the Commission should indicate ~yhicll option is prefelYed. Staff does not have a strong preference on the hvo options as both meet Town Code requirements. ho«~ever, T~~I-? «~ould pro~~ide more usable yards for the ne~~~ homes. C. Pan01'aln~l Rl<~}lt-Ot-~`~aV The proposed physical improvements for the ne~~~ cul-de-sac at the end of Panorama ~ti"av complies ~~•ith To~t~n Code requirements for paved width and bulb radius, but the right-of- wav is less than required by code. Town Code requires a =1~-foot right-of-~~-av radius, -bile the proposed radius is ~7 to =1 % feet. The proposed right-of-~~~ay will accommodate the physical street improvements but not the street landscaping. Utilities and landscape areas will be contained ~a~ithin an easement. The To~ti~n Code allows a reduced ri~~ht-of- wav to be approved b~ the deciding bode if, based on site characteristics.. it is determined to be appropriate. Each site is considered on a case b~~ case basis. There. are no other Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 7 1928 Lnion _wenue \I-08-13. S-08-30. 5-09-;~. 5-09-34 June 9. 2010 projects that are similar to the subject application for comparison purposes. The cul-de- sacs for Lee«~ood and Lasuen Courts are the same size as the proposed Panorama «- ay cul-de-sac. Staff does not have any concerns about the reduced right-of-«-ay. The pa~~ed area complies with minimum Fire Department and Engineering standards, and is not reduced in size. If the reduced right-of-way is supported by the Commission, landscaping and street trees will be required to be maintained b}~ the homeo«-ners since they «-ill be located outside the dedicated right-of-~~~av. C. Aei~hborhood Compatibility The applicant has provided detailed development plans for the proposed homes on parcels 2 and ~. House plans have not been provided for parcel 1 although the applicant has indicated that gone-story home will be proposed. There are a variety of home sizes tyith both one and t~vo-story homes on sun-ottndin~~ properties in the surrounding area. The Town Council placed more emphasis on homes on Panorama `~~av and the east side of Onion .~l~enue as being the most relative to the project site for purposes of evaluating neighborhood compatibility. The homes on I_eeu-ood Court will have a relationship with the new houses on the project site as they are adjacent to one another, and staff has included four homes on Leelvood Court in the comparison of home sizes and F:~R. The following table shows house floor area and F:~R and ~araae size for properties in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Data ~~-as obtained from County records and does not include cellars. ~ _4ddress Lot Si;,e House si; e House F,4R Ga-•a~e ~ 112 Panorama «- av ~ 7.942 ! 2.311 29.0 430 11~ Panorama ~~ av ~ 8.018 1,89 19.8 487 11U Panorama ~~'av ~ 8.668 ~ 1.924 ~~.1 470 ~ 111 Panorama ~~'av ~ 8.668 ~ 1.?68 18.0 ~ 484 ~~ 118 Cambrian Vie«~ ~ '0.909 I 3,70 ~ 17.7 i X60 1 X910 L:nion Avenue ~ 18.40 j 1."i~3 j 9.~ ~ 714 :lrf~ir•ess ~ Lot Si;.e House side House F.4R Garage 101 Leewood Court ; 9.83 i 3.128 ~ 32.6 _ X60 103 Leewood Court I 9.83 'i 3.086 ~ 32.2 ~ 632 10~ Lee~~-ood Court 10.019 '~ 3.131 31.2 ~ 360 107 Leewood Court ~ L.197 ~ 3,164 ~~.9 632 Parcel 2 i 10.087 I 3120 30.9 I 86~ ~; Parcel 3 I 11,390 ~ 3-I0-1 29.9 ~ 93~ ~ There is a mix of small and large lots in the area surTOUnding the project site (see Exhibit 20). Immediately to the north the pattern is one large lot of ]8,000 to 20.000 square feet fronting on Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 8 1 X928 Union .wenue~~~~1-08-13. 5-08-30. 5-09-3 ~. 5-09-~~ June 9. '010 Union _wenue ~ti ith a smaller lot of about 8.000 square feet fi•ontina on Panorama ~~'ay. Parcels to the 5ollt11 011 Lee~yood Court are approximately 9,00 to 1 x.000 square feet in size. The lots closest to Union .venue are square shaped while the lots fronting on the cul-de-sac are pie shaped. The lot to the east is over X0.000 square feet. Lots across L"nion .a~~enue to the east are 10,000 to 12,000 square feet. D. Green Building The project was revie«~ed lIS1Ilg the Build It Green standards adopted by the Town Council on June ?. 2008. Preliminary checklists completed by the applicant show that both houses will exceed the minimum number of points (>0) needed to achieve green building certification ~yith scores of 109 (Parcel 2) and 112 points (Parcel 3 j. Condition ~6 requires the project to be certified as ~•ecn using the GreenPoint checklist. L--. Demolition aonroval of demolition In order to approve the demolition of the existing sinule-family residence. the Plamlina Commission must make four findings (see Exhibit ~). The applicant provided a structural report documenting the condition of the existing house that «-as previously provided to the Commission (available in the project file). Extensive ~t-ork ~i-ould be required to repair and upgl-ade the house, including replacement of the foundation and lateral bracing system and framing improvements. The house would also need to be moved to meat setbacks from proposed lot lines. The applicant asserts that it is not economically feasible to relocate and save the house. Demolition of the house has not been raised as an issue at any time during the process. Timin~~ of demolition «-ork The applicant is requesting that the existing house be allo~s~ed to remain on the site during construction of the ne~v homes on parcels 2 and ~. Staff has several concen~s about this proposal. If the house were to remain on the site after the final map is recorded it will cross a newly created propel-ty line. It is standard practice to require buildings that will become nonconfol7ning due to a subdivision to be demolished prior to recordation of the map. .allowing an exception could set a precedent for future projects. In addition. there «~ill be greater construction impacts to Panorama ~~'av residents if the site cannot be accessed from Union Avenue (see additional discussion on this topic on page 7). Lastly. if the applicant «-ere to incur financial difficulty following the start of construction. demolition of the house could be delayed. ~~~hile a bond could be required to cover the cost of demolition. it is time consuming for staff to pull a bond and have the work completed if the applicant is unable to complete the demolition work in a timely manner. Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 9 l ~9?8 L'nion Avenue'Z~-08-1~. 5-08-30. 5-09-~ ~. 5-09-34 June 9. ? O l 0 If the Commission finds merit with the request a condition u-ill need to be added that specifies when the house must be demolished. In that e~~ent, staff recommends that a bond or other surety be required for one and a half times the cost of demolition. F. Tree Impacts The Town's Consulting Arborist reviewed the proposed subdivision and prepared a rep iced arborist report for the project. Seven trees are proposed to be removed including two Privets. and one each of the following species: Juniper. Deodar Cedar, Italian Stone Pine, Live Oak. and ~Iontere~ Pine. The tree removals are consistent with the Tree Protection Ordinance. Replacement trees u"ill be required to be planted prior to occupancy of the neu homes. Locations of new trees on Parcels 2 and ~ are shown on sheet C-1 of the development plans. The project will comply with all Arborist recotntnendations, including relocation of a storm drain and adherence to minimum setbacks from trees that a-ill be retained. G. Construction hnpacts Panorama `y'ay residents are concet~ned about construction impacts including traffic, parking and the safety of children in the neighborhood (see Exhibits 13 and 14}. At a minimum, direct access to the project site u-ill need to be taken from Panorama to construct the cul-de-sac. If the existing house is allowed to remain on the property beyond recordation of the final map; all construction related vehicles would need to access the property from Panorama ~E av rather than Union Avenue. union Avenue is an arterial and is more appropriate for primary construction access than Panorama. H. C_ E~.~ Determination As required by the California Environmental Quality Act 4CEQA), an Initial Study_ and \~Iitigated \egati~~e Declaration ha~~e been prepared (see Exhibits 2 and 3). The environmental reyieu u-as completed b~~ the Town's consultant, Strelow Consulting. As part of this process a biology report was prepared by Ecosystems «"est. an archaeological rep iew u~as completed b~ Pacific Legacy and an arborist report was prepared by the Town's Consultant, .=~rtior Resources. The public comment period for the ylitigated \egatiye Declaration ended on August 17, ?009. Protection of nesting birds is the only potentially significant impact that a-as identified. A mitigation measure has been included in the conditions of approval (Attachment 6) and in a L~Iiti~~ation yIonitoring Plan (Attaclunent 4). The Initial Study also included several recommended conditions that have been included in the conditions of approval. Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 10 1~9?5 t'nion Avenue \I-OS-1 ~. S-OS-30. S-09-~ ~. S-09-~4 Jwie 9. ?010 P~BL1C COI\IE\TS \eighbors have expressed concern about the proposed project at all previous public hearings and have submitted written documentation supporting their assertion that the proposed project is too intensive a development for the property and not compatible with the neighborhood. 'neighbors have specifically requested that the Planning Commissioners visit their properties to vie~z the story poles to have a better understanding of their concerns about visual impact (refer to Exhibits 1 1. 1 ~ and 17). tieighbors are advocating a two lot subdivision with one-story homes. CO\CLCSIO\ _-~\D RECD\I\tE\D:~TIO\ A. Conclusion The three-lot subdivision is within the density range allowed by the General Plan, and complies «~ith minimum frontage, depth and lot size requirements. The Commission should determine if the reduced right-of-«~av for the Panorama ~~'av cul-de-sac is appropriate gig en the characteristics of the propert} and existing improvements. If found to be acceptable. the Subdivision application should be approved as outlined in the recommendation section belo~~~~. If the Commission determines that the 17~r lt-of-~i-av should not be reduced, a fi.ill right-of-~~•av should be required. The Commmission should also decide which lot confimiration is more appropriate and specifi- «~hich Tentative ~~Iap option is being approved, and if the existing house will be allowed to remain beyond the date the final map is recorded. Staff supports option TVI-? as it provides mare usable yards for proposed Parcels 2 and 3. If it is deternined that revisions are needed to one or both home desi~ls the Commission may approve the Tentative ~-1ap independent from one or both i~-chitecttue and Site (A~:S) applications for the proposed residences on Parcels 2 and ~. B. Recommendation As required by the Permit Streamlining Act, final action must be taken at this mectin<~. Staff recommends approval of the subdi~~ision. The Plamling Commission should take the following actions to approve the Architecture ~. Site and Subdivision applications: 1. \lake the \~gative Declaration (Exhibit ~): ~'. Approve the ~liti~~ation \~Ionitorin~z Plan (Exhibit -1): ~. \lake the findings for demolition of a single family residence (Exhibit ~); -t. Detel7nine that none of the findings for denial of the tentative map can be made (Exhibit ~): s. Approve Architecture and Site application 5-05-~0 and Subdivision application -1-US-1=. subject to the conditions in Exhibit 6. 6. :-~ppro~~e •-architecture and Site applications 5-09- ~ ~ and 5-09- ~4. subject to the conditions in Exhibit ?. Pla>uZing Commission Staff Report - Pale 11 1 X925 Lnion _~venue ~1-03-I ~. 5-08-~0. S-09-3 ~. S-09-~-} June 9. ~'O10 Prepared by: Suzaiu7e Da~~is..~ICP .associate Plaiuler approved b ~: '~ ~~~ endie R. Rooney Director of Community Development ~`-RR:SD cc: Jeff Grant. ~9 Resen~oir Road. Los Gatos. CA 9030 Cliff Bechtel. 24~ Laning Drive, ~~'oodside, C.~ 9406? Ton~• Jeans. T.H.I.S Desi~i, P.O. Box 1 X15, Los Gatos. CA 9031 UE~' REPORTS :O 10` L nionl ~y_~-l~~U-060y l0.du~ T~llS P.-~GE I\TE\TIO\.-1LL1- LEFI BL_-~\I~ 15928 Union avenue ,,~---- ~,i; -DGWNIN~AKS - - 4 -- - z '~ CT o.~ --~ K~NTF7~CD D w---- ~, ~ ~ i f------_- i-, ~ ,: i i - ~-- - - BLOSSOM~ALCEY DF~J~'- ~ ~ --'~~ ~' .> ~NN~WAY~ `~--_- J I W---'- n-- y~0°-. BLOS50M;___ c~,t~sRtx~r~Y Q - L-A_S d E N --~1~-^ ~. LIB.--~ ,---~(~ " CT ~~ ~ ' ~ WY ~ ~ ~ ~.~_ 'I _ W Y CEEV~OD 9 i-~ , - - CT., '~~ ~`' - - _ ~ ,.~ F3~ `ANT - - -~- CT ~ j-~-S=FCO~S -~ _p~--. ~r ~~ ~ ~ c7 C~ C T -- ~ ' ~l[ST. ~~ ~ w--w ~-.~ \~' ~~ _ ~--a - ` R~~ s~ ;~~ - ~~ WY i __` ~_ ~ ~~ , E~3IBIT 1 Txls P_~GE 1\TE\TIO\_-~LLI- LEFT BL_1\K To~~ti- ~T of Los GATOS cnlc c~.~~a llo r. ~ t.~ srz~r P.O. Boz ~=t9 L:~ G~.r~, C_-~ 9~C31 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The Town of Los Gatos has prepared this Mitigated Negative Declaration for the following described project: PROJECT: 15928 Union Avenue PROJECT LOCATION: 15928 Union Avenue (APN 527-42-008) APPLICANT: 217 O'Connor LLC PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of demolition of an existing house and garage and a tentative map to create three residential lots. No plans for the ne~v homes have been submitted; although a conceptual layout plan has been prepared that shows the proposed cul- de-sac. driveway and building footprint locations. An Architecture and Site approval is required for demolition of the existing single-family residence. If the subdivision application is approved. separate Architecture and Site applications will be required for each new residence. FINDINGS: The Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department has reviewed the proposed project and has determined. based on the attached Initial Study. that the project will have a less-than-significant impact on the environment with implementation of mitigation measures. Consequently, adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. An Environmental Impact Report is not required pursuant to the California Ei7vironrnental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA). This environmental review process was conducted and the attached Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the State CEQA Gc~ideli~~es. BASIS OF FINDINGS: The Initial Study finds that all potentially significant impacts that could be caused by the project can be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of mitigation measures as described in the attached Initial Study, agreed to by the project applicant; and will be incorporated into the project plans and specifications. The following mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project design or as conditions of approval. to ensure that any potential environmental impacts vdill not be significant. Impact Mitigation Biological Resources: The removal MITIGATION MEASURE 1: Avoid tree/vegetation of the trees and vegetation from the removal activities during the breeding bird and bat proposed project area may adversely season (January 1 to August 31). Conduct affect nesting birds and/or raptors or tree/vegetation removal activities after August and roosting bat species if they are on site. before January to avoid impacts to potentially nesting birds and/or roosting bats. If tree/vegetation removal cannot take place during this time, require a qualified biologist to conduct breeding bird surveys and roosting bat surveys no more than 15 days prior to project activities to determine whether nesting or roosting activity is taking place on the property. If nesting/roosting activity is observed. avoid active ffiIBIT 2 Impact Mitigation nest/roost trees and structures until a qualified biologist has determined that any young birds have fledged or young bats are able to fly from roost sites. Coordinate with a CDFG representatives to establish an appropriate buffer zone around active nest/roosting trees and/or structures if work cannot be postponed until young birds and/or bats are able to fly. If nesting/roosting activity is not observed during the bird and bat breeding seasons. conduct tree/vegetation removal activities as soon as possible after surveys have been completed. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: Public review of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration is from July 17. 2009 through August 17, 2009. Written comments should be submitted by August 17. 2009 to: Suzanne Davis Town of Los Gatos, Community Development Department 110 East Main Street Los Gatos. CA 95031 By: Wendie R. Rooney. July 17. 2009 Date of Community Uevelopment TOWN OF LOS GATOS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT INITIAL STUDY 1. Background 1. Project Title: 15928 Union Avenue 2, Application: 5^08-30,1~I-08-13, ND-09-02 3. Project Location: 15928 Union Avenue (APiV 527-42-008;; see Figure 1. 4. lead Agency Name and Address: Town of Los Gatos, Community Development Department 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 5. Contact Person and Phone Number: Suzanne Davis, 408-354-6875 6. Project Applicant's Name and Address: Tony Jeans, T.H,I.S. Design 7. Project Owner's Name and Address: 217 O'Connor LLC. 39 Reservoir Road Los Gatos, CA 95030 8. Initial Study Preparation: Stephanie Strelow, 5trelow Consulting, 831-425-6523 9. General Plan Designation: Lott' Density Residential 10. Zoning: R-1:8, Single-Family Residential Zone (m;n;r,um lot size of 8,000 square feet} 11. Other agencies whose approval is required (and permits needed): ^ Santa Clara CountSr Fire Department: Review ar,d approval of site plans for $re access ^ West Valley Sanitation District: Approval of wastewater collection service II. Project Description The project consists of demolition of an exis~ng house and garage and a tentative map to create three residential lots. Proposed lot size ranges from 9,96b to 11,112 square feet, which exceeds $Ze minimum 8,000 square feet required by the zone district. Access thrill be provided to t~,vo of the lots via a ctrl--de-sac off of Panorama VVay with a shared drivetaray to proposed Parcels 2 and 3. Access to 15928 Union Avenue initial Study 1 7~13~09 EXHIBIT 3 ~~ ~~ Parcel 1 will be provided off of Lnion Avenue. The tentative map includes a 20-foot w~_de right-of- way dedication along Union Avenue and right-of-way dedication for the new Pa_-~orama ~^+ay cul-de- sac. No plans for the nex~ homes have been submitted, although a conceptual layout plan has been prepared that shows the proposed cul-de-sac, driveway and building footprint locations as shown on Figure 2. An Architecture and Site approval is required for demolition of the existing single-family residence. )f the subdivision application is approved, separa~e Arcltecture and Site applications w11 be required for each new residence. The project applicaflor, does not include specific development designs for homes on the proposed lots. Specific development designs on proposed lots world be evaluated at a latex phase of project planning, as pa_°t of the Architecture a_-~d Site approval process. III. Environmental Setting The project 0.93-acre (40,579 square feet) site is located in the northeastern portion of the To~nTn of Los Gatos off of Blossom Hill Road. The site is bounded by Union Avenue on the west and si-ogle-family homes on all other sides, which are mostly two stories in height except for homes to the north, which are one story in height. Existing homes to the south are situated at a higher elevation than the project site and overlook the site. An 8-lot subdivision to the south off of Leeivood Court recently was built out in 1997. Homes across the street (,vest) on Lasuen Court were completed in 2006. The project site is flat and consists of non-native grasses and a total of 16 trees, including ~ coast live .- oaks. All other trees are non-native. one existing single-family home and garage exist on the project ~, site. IV. Environmental Factors Potentia}ly Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, invoh^,ng at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the Eolloitivzg pages: X Aesthetics A iculture Resources X Air Qualit - X Biological Resources X Cultural Resources X Geolo ~/Soils X azards 3r Hazardous Materials H X Hti~drology,~4Vater Quality Land Use/Plarvlina 7 ~ lYiLT:eral Resou_rCPs X Noise X Po ulation(Housin X Public Services X Reaeatior. X Transtiortation/Traffic X Utilities/Service S`rstems Iviandator Finc?:nos of Si~rti`icance t. 15428 Union Avenue fnitia( Study 2 7j '! 3j 09 _4= FIGURE 1 - Project Location VVY T 5928 Unron Avenue fni;ial Study 3 7/ l 3/09 ~: FIGURE 2 - Proposed conceptual Development Plan u ~ ~ ~~ _ ~~ . K.- ~ } 1~gf`i ~~ ti :fir v ° p~~ ;! ~ i j_ _ j;;as ~ 4 ~~ ~ ~~~~ i 15923 Union Averue Initicl Study 4 7/ 13/09 V. Determination (T'o be Completed by the Lead Agency} On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION wilt be re ared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because re~,~isions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A A~IlTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ~~ be re aced. I find that the proposed project IviAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IVi IPACT REPORT is re aired. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1}has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheet,. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must anal e onl the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, becaL~se all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier E1R or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR ar NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the ' ro osed ro ect, notlun further is re ' ed. Wendie R. Rooney, Director of Tulv 17, 2009 Date i 592 Unicn Avenue Initial Study Development 7/i3/09 V1. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts_ Instructions; 1. A brief explanation is requires (see VI. "Evaluation of Environmental Checklist Responses") for all answers except "No IrnDaCt" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in +he parentheses following each question (see VII -Reference List, attached). A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that t,'~.e impact simply does not appl}' to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project faIls outside a fault rupture zone). A "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 aproject-specific screening analysis}. 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indu•ect as well as direct, and construction as well as operationa] impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substanrial evidence that any effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially SigniF::cant Impact" entries µ~hen the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: applies where /' incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to ~-.~ a "Less Than Significant Impact." T'he lead agency must des~-ibe the mitigation measures, and briefy explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significal~.t level. 5. Earlier Analysis may be used K'here, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D}. In t'.~ris case a discussion should identify the following on at`.ached sheets: a) Enrlier annl~sis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review, b) Impacts adequrtei~ addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standazds, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects tY:at are "Less than Significant with Mitigador. Incorporated," 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 project. 713/09 15928 'Jnion Avenue lniiial Study 6 , ~. AESTHETICS ould the project: Fctertlally Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Ivlitigation tncorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ^ ^ ^ ~ highvray or scenic vista? b) Substanpaily damage scenic resources, including, ^ p ^ ~ but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character ^ ^ ~ ^ or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare ^ ^ ~ ^ which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a-c) Scenic Views, Scenic Resources and Surrounding Visual Character. The project site is located withi-- a developed residential neighborhood, Views to and from the project Slte primarily consist of neighboring homes and landscaping, Limited views into the site are available from the end of Panorama Way. The existing onsite residence along Union Avenue generally blocks views into the site horn this vantage point. There are no mapped or identified scenic views from surrounding public areas. However, a vegetated ridgeline is visible to the south of the project site from the end of Panorama Way. F~cisting residential development to the south of the project site is visible in the foreground of this ridgeline as seen from adjacent private properties. One public comment indicates that the hillside to the south contributes to the visual setting and character of the neighborhood. The Town of Los Gatos General Plan includes a policy that viewsheds should be promoted and protected (Policy CD,P.1,4) and that new structures that affect existing scenic views of neighbors be designed so all affected properties have equitable access to views {CD.P.1.11). The cul-de-sac design at the eastern end of the proposed subdivision would maintain the backg_-ound ~>Zews of the ridgelilne from the end of Panorama Way. Thus, the project would not obstruct or remove public scenic views or vistas. Future construction of hernes on the project site nzay affect private ~~iews from homes to the north. However, these residences have partially blocked views across the project site of the distant hillside due to fencing and landscaping, and the newer homes to the south that are visible in the foreground. Additionally, the proposed project lots have been reconfigured frenl a previous 4-lot design to pro~~ide increased setbacks between building envelopes and adjacent residences to the nor~h (Source VII,~Town of Los Gatos, February 20Q9). (See Figure 2.) Thus, the project would not obstruct or remove public scenic views or vistas or views from neighboring properties. T5928 Union Avenue Initial Study 7 7~73~09 ~? The project will not result in removal of resources that would be considered scenic resources. A number of small trees will be removed and 4 trees that a.e subject to the Town's "Tree Protection" regulations. However, these trees are located ~n~ithin the site a_-rd are not highly visible from surrounding areas nor are they visually prominent. The trees are not unusual or distinctive in comparison to other landscaping and tree cover in the area. Locations for tree replacement will be ored f a r~hi a~fiira ~ITP ~rio~n~ a niira. nnc corsid~. v.~th h~ A..._...t~_...._.. ~ Re. __.. pr__..tl____. d) Visua! Eflects upon Surrounding Area. The visual quality of the project vicinity is currently characterized by a mix of residential uses of varying age, style and size with a low, vegetated ridgeline south of the project site that is visible from file end of Panorama Way. Existing home sizes in the neighborhood range from 1,630 to 3,705 square feet, and homes in the azea are mostly two stories in height, except Eor one-story residences located to the north of the project site (Source VII.3 - Town of Los Gatos, February 2009). Impaci Analysis. The proposed project will result ir, creation of three residential lots and future COnstrUCtlO~i Cf ti'ue~. ne:v l;cmes ul:at TiV01:;!d be expeL~ted tC be t:1'O Stories LTl hP:ght and larger-sized homes. This would be consistent with development trends of recent residential corstruction within the neighborhood and similar to scale and mass of recently constructed homes in the neighborhood. Thus, the project would not substantially degrade the visual character of the area. This is considered aless-than-significant impact. House plans have not be prepared or submitted at this time, but conceptual building footprints have been provided. Future homes are likely to be two stories in height based on ~~ recent development trends in the area, and are likely to be of similar size and scale as homes ` . _ on Leeward Court to the south. Homes range in size from 3,104 to 3,164 square fee:. Homes on Lasuen Court range from 3,200 to 5,297 square feet. Future residences may be larger than smaller homes to the north of the project site, but are expected to be similar in scale to newer homes that are located to the south of the site and throughout the neighborhood. Furthermore, if the subdivision application is approved, separate Architecture and Site applications will be required for each new residence. House plans are not proposed at this time. Future detailed review of the size, style and siting of new homes will occur as part of the Architecture and Site review process at the time heroes are proposed. d) Lighi and Glare. The project will not result in introduction of a major nosy source of light and glare, although there will be exterior building and street lighting that is typical of the type associated with resider_t;al r_eighborhoods. One new streetlight is required on the Panorama cul-de-sac, Design of street lighting would be dLected dow-nwazd, limiting the potential for adverse impacts on adjacent residences. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance (Sect[cn 29.10.09035) would prohibit the production of direct or reflected glare (such as that produced by floodlights) onto any area outside the project boundary. Thus, the impact of new light and glare from new residential development within an existing residential neighborhood is considered less-than-signi~`icant. 15°2° Union Avenue iniiial 5fudy B 7% T 3 f 09 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES In determining whether Impacts'~o agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California P~griculturai Land Evaluation and Site lissessment Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia Dept of Conservzrion as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Potentially Less Thar, Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact V4'ith Impact Mitigation Would the project: Incorpora±ed a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ^ ^ ^ s FarTnland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program cf the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (Source VI1.5) b} Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or ^ ^ ^ t a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment ^ ^ ^ which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? The project site is located within an urban residential neighborhood. The site is not designated for agricultural use nor are there agricultural uses on or adjacent to flee project site. The site is not designated as prime, unique or other farmland in the State Farmland MappizZg system (F~~M'). The FMtiff', operated by the California Department of Conservation, produces snaps and statistical data used for analyzing impacts on California's agricultural resources. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and urigafion status; the best quality land is called Prime Farmland. The maps are updated every tvti~o years with the use of a computer mapping system, aerial imagery, public review, and Eield reconnaissance. The project site, as well as most of the Town of Los Gatos, is designated "Urban and Built-up Land" in the State's Farmland Mapping System (Source VIf.5 -California Department of Conservation, 2006). The project site is surrounded by existing residential development. Thus, the proposed project would not convert agricultural lands to other uses or have other indirect effers upon, agricultural lands. 15928 Unior. kvenue lnrtial Study 9 713/09 ~5 L 3. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quallrj management or air pollution control district maybe relied upon to make the fcllowirg determinations. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Impact With Mitigation Impact {ncarporated a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ^ ^ ^ • applicable air quality plan? b} Violate any air quality standard or contribute ^ ^ • ^ substantially to an existing cr projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net G ^ ^ ^ increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozcne ~,_ precursors}? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ^ ^ • ~ pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ^ ^ ^ • number of people? (Source Vll.4) a) Conformance with Air Quality Plan. The project would be considered consistent with the Bay Area Air QuaLitST Management District's (t3AAQ1VID) Clean Air Plan ii population growth fer the jurisdiction does not exceed the values in the plan as established by ABAG {Sottrce VlI.4 - BAAQIVID, December 1999). The BAAQ_N1D adopted the Clean Air Plan in December 2000, which is currently being updated, and adopted the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strateo f (BAGS) in 2005. The consistency of the proposed project with the BAGS is determined by comparing the project's consistency with flee Los Gatos General Plan. Since t_he BAGS gro~~~~h assumptions for Bay Area cotm~tunities are based on the Association of Bay Area Government's (ABAG) population projections and these projections are based on the Totim's General Plan land use designations and population projections, consistency v<ridt the General Plan would indicate consistency with the BAOS. The project world result in a net increase of 2single-family dwellings on the project site. This is slighly less than the 4 units tha* could be allowed by u'~e T,os Gatos General Plan. T`:~erefcre, the project ;would be consisten+. zvi~.h tl:e BROS. 15928 Union Arenue Jnitia! Study 10 7/13/09 •-'~ 6) Project Emissions. The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, in which the project site is located, is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Qualit~~ Management District (BAAQIVID). The District is the agency primarily responsible for assuring that national and State ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the San Francisco $ay Area. The District's jurisdiction includes all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Mann, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, and the southern portions of Solano and Sonoma Counties. State and national ambient air quality standards have been established for tr-e following pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, fine particulate matter (PM10) and lead. For some of these poIlutants, notably ozone and PM10, the State standards are more stringent than the national standards. These pollutants are generally lalotivn as "criteria pollutants" (Source VII.4 - BAAQMD, December 1999). The principal sources of NOx and ROG, often termed ozone prec~.zrsors, are combustion processes (including motor vehicle engines) and evaporation of solvents, paints and fuels. Motor vehicles are the single largest source of ozone precursor emissions in the Bay Area (Ibid.). The basin currently has anon-attainment stahis for the state 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standard, the federal ozone standard, the state PMio and PM~s standards, and the federal 24-hour Phri~s standard. The basin is considered attainment for other state and national standards, except that it is unclassified for the federal P1l~Iio standard.' lmpcrct Analyss. The proposed project will result in demolition of an existing home and garage and creation of three single-family residential lots that would be developed with homes in the future. The project results in a net increase of 2 single-Eanuly homes over existing conditions, which would generate air emissions through new regional vehicle trips. The proposed project does not have stationary emission sources. Increases in air emissions associated with the proposed project world not be considered significant since the size of the proposed project would not exceed the BAAQII~ID's project screening level. A project of 320 or more single-family trips could exceed the District's threshold of significance for NOx (80 lbsjday) (Source V1L4 - BA.4QA~ID, December 1999). The project's net increase is substantially below this screening level. Additionally, the District generally does not recommend a detailed air analysis for trips generally less than 2,000 vehicle hips per day (Source VII.4 - BAAQMD, December 1999), and the proposed project would result in a net increase of approximately 20 tr_ps per day. Thus, the project would not result in a level of permanent emissions that would be considered significant or substantially contribute to an existing air quality violation, and project emissions are considered aless-than-si~cant impact. Project construction could result in generation of dust and PM~o emissions. The project parcel is 0.93 acres, and future development of residences on Ehe proposed lots wo~ild resiilt in surface disturbance. The BAAQiV1D does not require quantification of construction emissions, ` Bay Area A;r Quality Mancgement District. 12/30/20C8. "Ambient Air Cruelity 5tanderds 8~ Bay Area Attainment Status." 15928 Union Avenue initial Study 1 1 7/ 13/09 ~""_~ but outlines measures to be implemented for different types of construction project that would substantia:ly reduce PMia emissiens. Given that site is relatively flat and less than an acre in size, significant g-tiding operations are not anticipated, and resulting P1Vr~o emissions and dust is not expected to be substantial. 1-1Q~veYer, CO^St^.:~On ~:TOL'1~ COrtriht~tn tr, a~,iciinoU rnn_atFaiPrrlPn± IPynlc of P1~Tlp~ aura thttc is considered a petentally significant impact. jti'itl'r implementaton of the r7inimu~'r. measures for all construction sites (under 4 acres), the BAAQMD considers emissions from construction activities to be a less-than-significant impact (Source V]L4 - BAAQMD, December 1999). These measures aze included in the Totem of Los Gatos Project Conditions and include or exceed the B 4AQMD recommendatons. Conditions are included for dust control, construction :management, erosion control and NI'DES compL'ance. Thus the project as conditioned would implement BAAQMD standards, and t}:e impact is considered less- than-significant. No mitigation measures are required. _~ rJr~yrlnljyg Frt7iSelpnS, ACrnrrling tp ±he RA A~NT~'s n?OSt Curre_r!t CFQA Gi?idel?ne5,2 if a project ]s proposed in a city or county ~Tith a general plan that is consistent with the Clean Air Plan and the project is consistent with that general plan (i.e., it does not require a general plan amendment), then the project will not have a significant cumulative impact (provided, of course, the project does not individually have any significant impacts). i\TO further analysis regarding ctunt~lative impacts is necessary. As indicated above, the proposed project is consistent with the Town of Los Gatos' General Plan, and, thus, the BAAQMD's Clerm Air PIan (Source VII.4 - BAAQMD, December 1999). 'Therefore, the project would not result in cumulatively considerable increases in any criteria ~ ' - pollutant for the air basin has been designated non-attainment ~ , - d) Sensitive Receptors. Adjacent residential uses are considered to be sensitive receptors. The proposed project would not result in stationary emissions or sigiuficant vehicular emissions that would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Temporary emissions during construction would include diesel particulate matter from construction equipment. Diesel particulate matter is a toxic air contaminant (TAC), and folie~ving its designation as such in 1998, file California Air Resources Board (ARB) developed a comprehensive strategy to control diesel particulate emissions. The "Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel- Fueled Engines and Vehicles"-a document approved by ARB ir. September 2000-set goals to reduce diesel PM emissions in California by 75% by 2010 and 85% by 2020. This objective woulc'i be achieved by a combination of approaches (including emissior, regulations for new diesel engines and low sulfur fuel program). An important part of the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan is a series of measures for various categories of in-use on- and off-road diesel engines, which are generally based on tl~e fallowing types of controls: ^ Retrofitting engines with emission control systems, such as diesel particulate filters or oxidation catalysts, `Thee BAAQMD's CEGA Guidelines are current'y in the process of being updated. 7 ? s" '09 ~"~`~"° 5928 Union Avenue fnifraf $~udy ~ 2 ~ / Replacement of existing engines with new tecl~,nology diesel engines or natural gas engines, and Restrictions placed on the operation of e.~cisting equpment. Once the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan was adopted, the ARB started developing Plvi emission regulations for a number of categories of in-use diesel vehicles and equipment. In July 2Q07, the ARB adopted regulations for in-use, off-road diesel vehicles that will significantly reduce particulate matter emissions by requiring fleet owners to accelerate turnover to cleaner engines and install exhaust retrofits. The ARB does not have a specific threshold of significance for diesel exhaust. Proposed project grading and construction would involve the use of diesel trucks and equipment that will emit diesel exhaust, including diesel particulate matter. Construction-related diesel emissions would be of limited duration (i.e., primarily during grading} and temporary, although residential uses are located adjacent to the project site. Given the zelatzvely small size of the site and 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 standazds for different lasses of on- and off-road diesel vehicles and equpment. e) Odors, The planned residential uses will not create objectionable odors and the use is not listed as a BAAQPVJD project for potential odor sources (Source VII,4 - Bt1AQIv1D, December 1999), 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Poter•tiaily Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated a} Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly L~ ^ ~ ^ 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? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ^ ^ G ^ habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the Galifornia Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and t+`v'ildiife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ^ ^ ^ protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but net limited to, marsh, vemai pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ?5928 Union Avenue lnificf Sfvdy 1 3 7/13/09 ti 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project; F'etentially Significant impact Less Than Significant With Uitigatior Incorporated LessTnar. Significant Impact No Impact d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any ^ • ^ ^ native resident or migratory fish or wi(clife species or with established native resident or migratory 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? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ^ ^ ^ • Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or sta#e habitat conservaticn plan? The vast majority of the site is upland habitat dominated by non-native annual grassland with scattered non-native trees and 5 small coast live oaks. A number of the trees are located along the southern fence line. Due to urban development surrounding the parcel on all sides, and high levels of disturbance including routine mowing for fire prevention, grassland habitat within the site is r'` comprised primarily of weedy, non-native annual grasses a_r<d fortis. The remnar-ts of a small fruit t• orchard is present immediately east of the existing residence and is comprised of black walnut, English walnut, cherry, apple, olive, and pomegranate. Although these trees to not appear to be actively maintained, they continue to produce fruit a) Special Status Species. A biological review of the project site's resources was performed by Ecosystems Nest Consulting Group. Literature and special-status species databases were reviewed to identify special-status plant species and sensitive habitat types with potential to occur in the project site. Sources reviewed include California Natural Diversity Data Base (CN-DDB) occurrence records, county occurrence records, and the California Native Plant Society's (CI`tPS) Online Inventory of l:are and Endangered Vasc~clar Plants of Californin. Plants. T`he review found that the highly disturbed non-native annual grassland and remnant orchard are not suitable habitats for special stat,is plants lmewn to occur in the vicinity of the project site (Source VII.B-EcoSys+P.sis West Consulting Group, JzLne 2Q09). ~Idlife. The review of natural resource databases and literature resulted in finding no knos~~n occurrence records of special-status wildlife species within the proposed project site (Source VILS- EcoSystems West Consulting Group, June 2QQ9). Special-status wildlife species lrnown to occur within 5 miles around the parcel are listed in .'able 1, 1542$ Union Avenue Inlfia! Study ~ 4 ~%! 3/'~9 E~ Table I.Special-Status Species Known to Occur within 5 miles of the Proposed Projecf Site Status Species Scienfific Name Federal/ State/ Other .. _. _ AmphFbtarts andRepfi(es ~ ~ . California tiger salamander (Ambystoma califorttiense} FTf SCSI CSC California red-legged frog (Rana draytortti) FT/-/CSC Western pond turtle (Actirtemys marmorata) -/_/ CSC `. Birds (nesting and/or wintering} ~ - Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicutaria) -/-/CSC;BCC Allen's hummingbird (Setasphorus Basin) -/-/BCC Ivuttall's woodpecker (Picoides nuttatti:) -/-/BCC Oak titmouse (Baeotophus inornattts} -/-/BCC .: Mammals ,.. ; _ - .. _ :: - -- Pallidbat (Antrozous pattidus) -/-/ CSC; l-IP San Francisco dusky-footed tiroodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectetts) -/-/CSC N f1IPG• Federal (USFWS 2009b,c,d; CDFG 2009a) F't= Listed as "'threatened" under federal Endangered Species Act. fate: (CDFG 2009a) SCE = State Candidate for being li5~ted as "Endangered" under California Endangered Species Act. Other. (CDFG 2009a; USFWS 20086; WBWG 1998) CSC= Considered a California "Spe~es of Special Concern" by the CaliforniaDepartment of Fish and Game; roosts, nests, rookeries, and K~intering areas are recog;Zized as significant biotic features (CDFG 2009). BCC= Species of migratory nongarre birds that LSFWS considers to ie of concern in the United States because of (1) documented or apparert population declines, (2} small or restricted popttlatiors, (3) dep~dence on restricted or vulnerable habitats, HP = Considered "High Priority" on the Wester~t Bat Working Group's (tiYBWG) til~esteL--t Bat Species Regional Priority Ma~rix (1998) The California tiger salamander (CTS), California red-legged frog (CRLF), and western pond tt~.r`~le (ti1Jl''I) all require aquatic habitat in which to breed and forage as par`. of their Life history. The project site does not provide any aquatic habitat w_thir. or adjacent to the parcel boundaries. Thus, the CTS, CRLF, and WPT are not expected to occur within the project site due to the lack of aquatic habitat, 15928 Union Avenue lnitiai Sfudy 15 7~13~09 -_. ~- ~ - the distance from known locations of these species, and Erom surrounding dense urban areas restricting movement bet<~n=een 1cnoKrn ccc:Lrrences. The property does not occur with any federal'_y designated critical habitat for t<ne CTS or CRLF {Source VII.8 - Ecosystems West Constilting Group, June 2009). The +T~ stannds a_*~d the exten_or of tine current residence on the property do not appear to pro~ride suitable crevices, cavities, or limbs to provide suita~le roosting habitat for the special-status pallid bat (Source VII.S -Ecosystems West Consulting Group, June 2009). Other more com~,non bat species such as Yuma myotis (Ivlyotis ~umanensis), big bro~rn bat (Eptesicus fisscus), and the Me,~dcan free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasitiensis), may utiL'ze the tree stands or structures on the property to roost during their spring/sumrner breeding seasons (April-September) or during their seasonal mig-ations in the fall and spring. California Department of Fish and Game Codes provide regulator}' conditions that protect non-game species, including special-status and more common species of bats and their roost sites (Ibid.}. None of tine birds listed ;,, '1'ahle ?were observed w.ith;n ±he proposed protect area of the parcel during spring site visits in March and Ma}' 2009. The trees on the property lacked cavity features and snags for cavity-nest birds (i.e. Itiuttall's woodpecker and oak titmouse) to utilize the site for nesting. The grassland area on the property lacked sufficient open, unobstructed habitat and fossorial small mammal burrows, (e.g. California ground squirrel), for the western burrowing owl (BUOi~ to occur on site. The scattered coast Live oak trees, flowering plants, and fruit trees offer potential nesting and foraging habitat for the spe~al-status Allen's hummingbird and a variety of more common bird species (Source VII.S -Ecosystems West Consulting Group, June 2009). Further discussion of potentia'. nesting birds is presented below in subsection 4(d). ._- - Four nest/house structures for flee San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat were observed along the south side of the property, east of the current residence. This species is not federally or state listed as threatened or endangered, but is identified by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) as a "Spedes of Special Concern." The majority of the nest,'house structures were constructed in the dense blackberry thicket along the wall bordering the south side of the property. One nest/house structure occurred under a coast live oak tree near the south east corner of the property. Focused surveys to identify species occupying potential habitat Eor the San Francisco dusky footed woodrat (Ideotonta fuscipes anxectens) were conducted to deternune if wocdrats or non-native rodents [black rat (IZrth~s rattus) or Nor<,~'egian rat (IZnttus nornegicus)[ occur on the site. A trapping effort was conducted I41ay 5-7, 2009 under a CDFGissued scientific collecting perr::t The trapping effort confirmed the presence of at Least one adult female San Francisco dusky-footed v<=oodrat occupying the nest,'hcuse structures on the property, and trapping ceased caper, deter:?iir:ation of tl~e woodrat's presence on the site. lmpaci Analysis. A scull, apparently isolated colony of San Francisco dully-footed wood-rats is located within the proposed project site. The conceptual site plan shows that the proposed building envelopes and cuI-de-sac Footprints are located outside of t:1e woodrat nest areas. Ho~vevcr, future construction and residential habitation may result in removal of vegetation and loss of the individt.al woodrats irilabiting the site. It is likely that many existing small fruit ( 35928 Union .4venue lrifial 5fudy 16 7~ i 3~C9 ` _' trees currently providing resources for the woodrat colony will be removed for future home construction and landscaping. The woodrat colony within the project may be a remnant of a larger population that has become isolated because of urbanization a_nd recent development in the vicinity of t'~e property. The project site is surrounded by a developed residential neighborhood. Due to the isolated location of the site from other suitable woodrat habitat and likely Lack of genetic connection to other woodrat colonies, the potential loss of onsite individuals would not result in a significant impact on woodrat populations (Source VII.B -Ecosystems West Consulting Group, June 2009). Thus, this is considered aless-than-significant impact. There is no nearby stutable habitat is available to enhance and to which to translocate the woodrat colony (Source VII.8 -Ecosystems West Consulting Group, June 2009). Although mitigation measures are not warranted, after informal consultation with CDFG, the following Condition of Approval is recommended (Ibid.}. RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL: Implement the following: • In consultation with a representative of CDFG, a qualified biologist shall collect a genetic sample from the woodrat colony. • Woodrat nest house structures shall be avoided as much as possible and as much cvoodrat habitat and resources (blackberries, seed-bearing plants, fruit and oak trees) ~~~thin the project site shall be retained as is feasible. Izlstall a temporary exclusion zone and buffer (10 feet m;n;mum is preferable) between the area of disturbance and the woodrat nest/house structures. Retain vegetation within the buffer area, and upon completion of construction, enhance the buffer between Parcel 3 and the southern property boundary and any additional available adjacent open space with native and frail-baring vegetation that the v~roodrats may utilize for additional cover, nest construction, andJor foraging (e.g. Pacific blackberry and coast live oak). If avoidance and buffering of the woodrat colony is not feasible, the applicant shall coordinate with a CDFG representative to arrange for a qualified biologist to capture and relocate the woodrats to a wildlife rescue or living natural history museum faalit~,~ for educational purposes. b) Sensitive Habitats. Sensitive habitats include riparian corridors, wetlands, habitats for legally protected species and CDFG `Species of Special Conceni , azeas of high biological diversitd, areas providing important wildlife habitat, and unusual or regionally restricted habit<zt types. Habitat types considered sensitive include these listed on the G~IDDB working list of 'high pi7ority' habitats for inventory (i.e., those habitats that are rare or endangered within the borders of California). No sensitive habitat types including potential jurisdictional wetlands or "other waters" of the U.S. or the state of California were observed on site (Source VII.8 -Ecosystems West Consulting Group, June 2009). 15928 Unron Avenue Initial Study 17 7/T 3/09 ~= d) Nesting and Wildlife Movemenf. T'ne scattered coast live oak trees, flowering plants, and fru•: trees offer potential nesting and foraging habitat for the special-stafias Allen's hummingbird and a variet;~ of more common bird species. An active western scrub ay (npheIocoma caI;fornica} nest was observed v~~ithin one of the coast live oaks near the southeast comer of the property. One large stick-nest structure was observed w~ithil•n one of the Iarge trees in the front of the current residence, along °l:e sou+?1 side of tl:e prnpP:-±~,, ~,~l,~ch provides potent. resting habitat for larger buds including raptors, owls, and/or American crows. The property provides potential nesting and foraging habitat for a variety of birds and more common raptors a_nd owls such as the red-shoulde.ed ha~tirk (Buteo lineatus) and great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) (Source VII,B -Ecosystems West Consulting Group, June 2009). All of the special-status birds (Table 1) and their active nest sites and more common species of birds and rapiers and nest sites are protected under provisions of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act California Fish and Game Codes provide further regulation, for all raptors and owls and their nest sites v~rithin t_he state (CFGC 2006). Impact Analysis. The removal of the trees and vegetation from the proposed project area may adversely affect neswr:g birds a_nd,ier raptors Or Tr;Ocfing tias gpartag tf ~hPy arP nn C7tP, GzVen protection under federal law, the potential disturbance to nesting bird species is considered a potentially significant impact that can be reduced to a less-than-significant level ~ti~ith implementation of file following mitigation measure. MITIGATION MEASURE 1 : Avoid treelvegetation removal activities during the breeding bird and bat season (Januar~~ 1 to August 31). Conduct tr•eelvegetation re!novai activities afler• August and before January to avoid impacts to potentially nesting birds and/or roasting bats. If ~'~ treelvegetation removal cannot take place during this time, require a giccitified biologist to conduct breeding bird survei~s and roasting bat surveys no more than IS days prior to project activities to determine whether nesting or roosting acfzvifnj is taking place on the property..£f nestinglroosting activity is observed, avoid active nest/roost trees acrd str.~ctures until a qualified biologist has determined that any young birds have ftedgerl or young bats are ab?e to fly from roost sites. Coordinate with a CDFG representatives to establish an apyropizate bvfJ'er• zone around active nest/roosting trees and/or structures if work cannot be pos~oned until young birds and/or bets are able to fly. If nesting/roosting activih~ is not observed during the bird and bat breeding seasons, conduct tree/vegetation removal activities as soon as possible offer surveys have been completed. Monitoring: The measure shall be included as a Condition of Approval. The Applicant is responsible for hiring a qualified biologist to conduct pre-construc'aon surveys in accordance ~Tith provisions out':ined in the measure and submit~ng the report to the ToKZn of Los Gatos Communit~~ Develo_ornent Department prior to any ground disturbance or issuance of building permit. e) Tree Removal. The Town of Los Gatos' consultng arborist, Arbor Resources, reviewed an arborist report prepared for the project and reviewed potential tree impacts of the proposed subdivision. It should be noted that the arborist report re~~iewed a 4-lot subdivision Eat was proposed at the time of the review, but the current application is for 3 lots. The report identifies i6 trees en the project site that would qualify for protection under the Totivn's "Tree Protection" regula7ons. These trees are ~_ 15428 Union Avenue lnitio! 51udy 1 8 7/ 13/09 ``` mostly non-native landscaping and fit:it trees, except for 5 coast live oak trees. The trees' conditions are rated from good to poor (Source VII.7 -Arbor Resources, I\TOVember 2008}. There are also numerous, small fruit- or nut-bearing trees on the project site because they had trunk diameters less than IS inches, and are, t'rerefore, exempt from the Town's tree regulations (Town Code section 29.10.0970) (Ibid.}. Section 29.10.0950. et. seq. of the Los Gatos Town Code cats for protection of specified trees to "presence the scenic beauty of the Town, prevent erosion of topsoil, provide protection against flood hazards and risk of landslides, counteract pollutants in the air, maintain climatic balance and decrease wind velocities. Removal of protected trees requires a permit from the Town Director of Parks & Public Works except for specified exceptions and emergencies. Two or more replacement trees are required with variations in size based on the canopy size of the removed tree. Impvct Arrafysis. The proposed subdivision improvements and future residential home construction would result in removal of 4 trees regulated under Town ordinances. Numerous smaller fruit, nut and oak trees also would be removed, which are exempt in the Town Code tree regulations. Tree removal in eludes a 27-inch pine located in the Union Avenue right-af- way and 3 trees located v~~ithin >:he building footprint on proposed Farcel 1. The arborist report found that removal of these trees conform to Toxin regulations (Source VII.7 -Arbor Resources, November 2008), and replacement trees will be required as determined by the Los Gatos Town staff (ibid.). Thus, the tree removal resulting from project construction wotild not conflict with local ordinances with Town "Tree Protection' regulations, and tree removal is considered aless-than-significant impact. It should also be noted that since the arborist report was prepared in November 2008, the project has been modu'ied to reduce the proposed number of lots from 4 to 3 and reduce area of the cul-de-sac footprint, which results in retaining two smaller oak trees on the southeastern edge of the site and on the adjoining property. Additionally, the arborist report identified potential indirect damage to several ash trees on adjacent property to the north due to installation of a storm drain. Although mitigation measures are not warranted, the following Condition of Approval is recommended. RECDMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL: Trre Trn.;~n's Consulting arborisf shall reai~,v any r•~isions fn f;~e site plan and modify reeon:~nendat;ons as appropriate. The applicant shall corr:ply with aII reeatnmendations contained in the Arbor Resources report dated November 2008 ar:d as may be amended follouring-reaiew of the r~~:sed plans. fJ Habitat Plans. The project site is net located within the boundaries of an adopted Habitat Ccnservation Plan or Natural Com~-nunity Conservation Plan. Neither the project site nor the Toti-n of Los Gatos is located wi+hin the study area of the "Santa Clara Valley HCP/NCCP" that is being l 5928 Union Avenue fnifia! Siudy 14 7 f i 309 ' ~;: prepared as regional plan between the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, the Santa Claza Valley 4b'ater District, and the cities of San jose, Gilroy and iviorgan Hill.3 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Pctentially Significant Impact tessThan Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Nfl Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse chance in the ^ ^ ^ • significance of a historical resource as defined in 15064.5? b} Cause a substantial adverse change in the ^ ^ • ^ sign~cance of ar'i archaeciogica(i esource aiii 3Uar',i to 15064.5? (Source VI1.9) c) DirecBy or indirectly destroy a unique ^ ^ ^ • paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d} Disturb any human remains, including those ^ ^ ^ • interred outside of formal ceme`eries? aJ Mrstorica! Resources - No Impact. The project site does not contain structures or other features that would be considered historical. The existing single-family home on the site will be demolished. While, tfie existing single-fasvly home is an older home, it does not possess unique or distinctive qualities that would be considered historical. The finish materials consist mainly of s~ucco and wood siding exterior walls and a sloped composition shingle roof; the bt.ulding consists of wood wall constn~ct=er., CQ??~'?nt•^?la~~ j/ framed roof raf±ers aPd flr~nr o rderS with concrete footings lSource VII.10). Therefore, the project would result in no impact to historical resources. b, dJ Archaeological Resources. A cultural resources review was conducted for the project site by Pacific Legacy. The reviev,~ consisted of cultural resources records and inforn•tation research at the Northwest Information Confer (Iv~tiiC} of the California Historical Resources Information System, consultation with the Catiornia Native American Heritage Commission (?VAHC) and an archaeological reconnaissance sun~ey of die project site. 3 ICF Jones and Stokes. August i, 2^v0~. "Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, 1" Administrative Droft." Prapared for County of Santa Clara Plannins Of=ice. Gnline at http:/%www.scv-habitctplan.org, 15928 Union A..enue tnifia! Study 2Q 7/ l 3 f 09 The investigation indicated that there are no pre~~ious studies or recorded sites for cul~ural resources within the project vicinity, and there are no indications of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area (Source VII.9-Pacific Legacy, ?vlay 2009). The site survey found no evidence of archaeological materials, although soils were only 10-20% visible due to grass cover. Impact Analysis. The review concluded that clearance for the project is recommended as ro heritage resources are lrnown to be present in the project area, and no adverse effect to historic properties are anticipated (Sou~•ce VII.9-Pacific Legacy, iVlay 2009}. However, given the poor ground visibility, much of the ground on the project site could not be examined. Although ground disturbance from previous constnuction reduces the chances that intact azchaeological resources may be present, unlrnown archaeological resources may be discovered during construction. This is considered a Iess-than-significant impact Because of the possibility of unidentified (e.g., buried) cultural resources being found during construction, the following condition of approval is recommended. Howe RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL. In the event that archaeological resources or human remains are accidentally encozentered during construction, halt atl construction within a 50-meter radius of the find, nom fir the Community Development Director, and retain an archaeologist to exatnine the find and make appropriate recommer:dations. If the find is determined to be significrnt, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and impiernented, in can+`or-mance witrr the protacoI set fo~•th in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If human remains are discovered, the Santa CIara Counhy Coroner will be not2fied to and provisions of Public Resources Code 5097.98-99, Health and Safety Code 7050.5 2vii1 be carried out. If the rernairs are determined to be Native Americrn, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) un71 be notified within 24 hours as reruired by Public Resources Code 5097. T"ne NAHC aril nohfi~ designated "Mast Likely Descendents" zoho will provide recommendations for the treatment of the renuzins within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The NAHC will niedinte any disputes regarding treahnent of remains. A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a signifecant archaeological sire, anchor when Native American remains are found on the site that includes background information an the completed work, a description oral List of idenrfied resources, the disposition and curatian of these resources, ar~y testing, other recovered infornuction, grid conclusions. cJ Paleontological Resources. No unique geologic or paleontological features have been identified i.-t Town plans and none were observed on the project sites during site visits. Therefore, the project would result in no impact to t:~-ese resources. ] 5928 Union Avenue Initial Study 21 7~ ] 3/C9 ~L' ~ - . j 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the projsc#: Potentially Less Than Less Than he Significant Sign cant Significant impact Impact With Impact M1i5gation Incorporated a} Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 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? (Source: I?C.16) Refer to Division of Mines and Geolcgy Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground sha{vng? ^ ^ • ^ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ^ ^ • ^ lique~action? {Source Vl1.2) iv) Landslides? (Source VI(.2) ^ ^ ^ • b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ^ ^ • ^ ~~ topsoil? 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? (Source VIf.2} d} Be located on expansive scil, as defined in Table ^ ^ • ^ 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code {1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting ;he ^ ^ ^ • use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater dispcsal systems where servers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a,c) Seismic & Geologic Hazards, The Town of Los Gatos is located within an area cl-.aracte:-ized b5- moderate to high le~~els of seismic activity {Source VII.2 -Nolan, Janaary 1999}. The princripal fa~.il~.s lil tl•12 area, the San Andreas, ]-idj'Ward, znd Calai'craS fai'il~~i, have 17een T2Spor~ibl2 fOi Se`Jeral moderate to large historical earthquakes. T"ne Sargent, Berrocal, Shannon and Monte Vista faults belong to a group of faults referred to as the southwestern Santa C1_ara Valle}- tl,.rust belt; these faults 15928 Jrior. Avenue lnifial Study 22 7,'13/09 ~'~°` are considered potentially acdve, al+hough none (except for the southern end of the Saxgent fault) has been specifically linked with significant historical earthquakes (Ibid.). Re~zew of the Town's hazards maps indicates that the project site has a high potential for fault rupture, moderate potenfial for seismic shaking, and very low potential for liquefaction. INTO debr?s flow hazards or fault traces were identified for the site (Source V]I.2 -Nolan, January 1999).4 The Towr.'s Fault Map indicates that the site is located approximately 2,000 feet north of a mapped "unce_rtain" fault trace, 100 fee± south of a lineation and 250 feet east of an area noted as having a concentration of coseismic ground deformation (Source VII.2 -Nolan, January 1999). The hazard maps were prepared as part of a geotechrtical and seismic safety review conducted for the General P:an, which recommends that geologic investigations be conducted in areas of high ground rupture potential for critical and sensifive facilities and for all development within 200 fezt of a known acdve or potentially active fault trace. The proposed residences would be expected to be subject to strong groundshaking during its design life. Construction of the building in confor*nance to current State California Building Codes typically will provide a design to withstand seismic shaking. The effects of ground shaking can be reduced by earthquake-resistant design in accordance with the latest edit;ons of the California Building Code, although some damage to stnzctures may occur during a lazge earthquakz (Source 47I.2a - Nola.-, 1999). 6, d) Sa7s and Erosion. A ret~ie~v of the Towri s hazards maps (Source VII.2 -Nolan, 1999) indicates that the project site has aslight-moderate erosion hazard and high shrink-swell potential. Impact Malysrs. The proposed residences would be subject to soils constraints wz{.hout implementation of appropriate soil preparation and engineering measures. As a standard project condition, the Toti`~n ~4~ilk require preparation of a soils investigation that will address any soil engineering constraints (including shrink-swell hazards) and specify criteria and recommendations for site grading, removal treatment of fill and expansive soils, drainage, foundation design, and other site and structural designs relevant to soils conditions. Assuming all recommendations of the required report are incorporated into the project design, no significant impacts from soil engineering constraints veoukd be anticipated. The potential for erosion is addressed below in subsection 8(f) -Hydrology, Water Quality. ^Tnese maps are included ir. the Nolan geotechnical study (Source Vii.21 are dated January 17, i 999 and mdude: Seismic Shaking Hazards Map, Fau(f, Lineament & Ceseismic Deformation Map, Fault Rupture Hazard Zone Map, Liquefaction Hazard Zones Map, Cebris Flow Hazard Map, Slape Stability Hczard Map, and Erosion Potential Map. 15928 Union Avenue tnitia! Study 23 7/] 3/09 ;; 3 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS Potentially Less Thar Less Than No MATERIALS Sigr:ificant Signficant Significant 1Tpact Impact 1~lith Impact Would the project; h-litigation In~nrnnr2M~~ „ .. ~... a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ^ ^ ^ • environment through the rcutine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 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? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ^ ^ ^ • acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list et ^ ^ ^ • hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Secticn 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (VI1.6) 1_ 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 for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within, the vicinih/ of a pr!vate airstrip, ^ ^ ^ • would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g} Impair implementation of or physically interfere wiih ^ ^ ^ ; an adopted emergency respcnse plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ^ ^ ^ • loss, injury or death involving wildland fres, including where ~rnldlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (VI1.1} l ~r 15923 Union Avenue 1ni}ivl S?udy 24 7~ i 3/09 The project site is not included cn any Hazazdous Wastes and Substances Sites List (Source ~~II.6- Califomia Environmental Protection Agency, 2609). This was also aclrnowledged by the applicant in a statement to the TowTn of Los Gatos in 2GG8. The proposed residential subdivision and development would not involve the use, disposal or emission of hazardous materials that would constitute a threat of explosion or other significant release that would pose a threat to neighboring properties. The site location and scale have no impact on emergency response or emergency evacuation. The site is not located neat an airport, airstrip. The site is not located within or adjacent to a wildland fire hazard area as mapped in the Town of Los Gatos General Plan (Source VII.1-Town of Los Gatos, 2000}. The existing onsite house and garage structures are proposed for demolition as part of the project, If these buildings contain asbestos or lead-containing paint, demolition could result in airborne release of hazardous building ma `erials, such as asbestos fibers or lead dust. Proposed demolition would be rern~;rnd to comply with state and federal regulations for inspection and removal of hazardous building materials, including asbestos-containing materials and lead-containing substances, including clearance for asbestos removal fiom the Bay Area Air Quality Management District prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Therefore, due to existing regulations, the potential for public health hazards associated with the release of airborne asbestos fibers or lead dust at the project site would be considered less-than-significant. One public comment raised an issue regarding potential pesticides due to past agricultural operations. The existing single-family home was constructed in the 1940s according to information provided by the applicant (Source VII.10}. The project area was developed with subdivisions starting in the 1950s prior to the time that pesticides were used for large-scale agricultural purposes, The remnant fruit trees on the project site appear associated with residential uses and not commercial agricultural uses. Therefore, past pesticide use at the site is not expected to be an issue. 15928 Union Avenue lnifial Stuffy 25 7/ 13/09 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Poten~aliy Less Than Less Than No Significant Signific2n`. Sicnificant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation DIY Vl1tU L,IIG ~1 V~G V`l. a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems cr provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) OU~er+irise suustantially deyraue water quality? g} Place housing within a 10C-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood H2zard i3oundary or Flood Insurance Rate ivtap or other flood hazard delineation map? h} Place within a 10Q-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flours? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ • ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ L ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ C ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 7 73/09 15928 Union Avenue Iritia! Stc:dy 26 S. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Less Than less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact tvli5gation Would the project; i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ^ ^ ^ ~ loss, injury or death involving flooding, includirg flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ^ ^ ^ ~ aJ Waste Ducharge. The proposed 3-lot subdivision and subsequent construct;on of single-family homes would not result in discharges that would be regulated or potentially violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Therefore, no impacts are expected. bJ Groundwater. The proposed project is not located in a groundwater zone that provides domestic water supplies or a groundwater recharge area. The project would be supplied by domestic water supplier. Therefore, no impacts to groundwater are expected. c-eJ Storm brainage.. The project site is located within a developed urban area. Existing drainage from the site is via sheet flow toward Panorama Way. Impact dnalysis. The proposed project will result in a net increase of two single-family homes Huth additional impervious surfacing. The increased runoff is not considered substantial or significant n relation to the surrounding area urbanized and developed neighborhood. As required by State and Town regulations (and further discussed below), the project will be required to design a drainage system in which post-project runoff does not exceed pre-project leve]s. Thus, the project impact related to drainage is considered less-than-s bonificant. ,fJ Water QuaPfy. The project site is not located adjacent to any creeks or ~~~ater courses. The project site also is identified as having aslight-moderate erosion hazard {Source Vll.2 -Nolan, January 1999). The Town of Los Gatos is part of the Santa Claza Valley Urban Ranofr Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) that has been issued a National Pollutant Discharge Pemnit (NPDES) under the Clean YVater Act for discharge of storm water ru:toff. The SCVL1`RPPP >; an association of thirteen cities and tottirns in the Santa Clara Valley, together with Santa Clara County and the Santa Clara Valley Water District that shaze a common permit to discharge stormsvater to South San Francisco Bay. To reduce pollu~aon in urban runoff to tl'~e "maxirum" extent practicable, the Program incorporates regulatory, monitoring and outreach measures aimed at improving the ~a~ater quality of South. San Francisco Bay and the streams of the Santa Clara Valley, In 199Q, the Program received the first municipal stormwater permit it the na+don from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water QuaLty Control board, 15928 Union Averue Initial Study 27 7% 13/09 jn~luch was reissued the penult in 1995 and 2001. In 2001, tre permit was amended to ir.clu~?e expanded requirements for controlling pollutant from new development a?Zd redevelopment activities (Provision C.3), which was further amended in 2005 to allow or phased implementation of new requirements (Source V ~Llla - SCVVRl'PP, 2008). As pal-t of the \~PDFS permit requirements, the Program produced (and updates) an "Urban Rur_off Management Plan' and submits annual work plans and rPpom to the Regional_ Board, IV'PDES requirements include compliance with Provision C.3, New and Redevelopment Performance Standards, including incorporating appropriate source control and sire design measures and to design and implement stormwater treatment measures to reduce the discharge of pollutants to `11e ma~dmum extent practicable (Order No. 01-024 of the NPDES as amended by Order No. 01-1i9 and Order No. R2-2005-0035}. Site design, source control and stormwater treatment BItiL''s, including pesticide reduction measures, are outlined by the SCVLTRPPP in its C.3 Storrnwnter Handbook. Stormwater treatment BMPs include bioretention, infiltration, and media filter with absorption (Source VIIIlb _ SCVURRP, 2004). lmpoct Analysis. Project storm drainage could affect water quality, and grading could result in erosion if not properly managed. With the new cul-de-sac and street widening on Uruon Avenue, ne~N impervious surfaang will exceed 10,000 square feet, and the project vti~ill be required to comply with I~~DES requirements ti~at require post-project runoff not exceed pre-project levels. The Totem of Los Gatos staff has indicated that $~e preliminary level of detail that has been provided by the applicant is adequate for a tentative map application ir. order to determine that the project can comply with NPDES requirements. Onsite detention 4r'` and water treatment can be achieved through various means, includutg infiltration swales, pervious paving for driveways and/or mechanical structures that are placed underground. The location and type of treatment will be determined and approved by the Town Engineer. The conceptual plan includes a series of shallow gravel basins on each lot prior to discharge into a storm drain along the northern site boundary. Further details and calculations ~4-ill be required and reviewed by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of any permits for future homes. The Town's engineering staff reviewed the preliminary drainage plan and found it to bean acceptable approach. The Town of Los Gatos has a standard condition of approval that requires preparation of a Storm Water Ivi:anagement Plan. that identifies source control measures and BNiT's that demonstrate compliance with NI'DES requirements. In addition to preparation of stormw°ater drainage plan, t'_1e Town's standard "Santa Clara County Valley Nonpoult Source Pollution Control Program: Sheet" is required to be included in project plans. The Conditions of Approval for the proposed project also uiclude preparation and implementation of an erosion control plan for interim and final erosion conwol. Thus, as planned and conditioned, potential water qualit)~ impacts would be considered less-tl;an- significant. ~' 1592$ Union Avenue Initial Study 28 7/13/09 d, g-b) flood Nuzwafs. The Federal Emergency Management Agency {)?l?ZE11~~fA) Flcod Lnsurance Rate Maps for the Town of Los Gatos do not extend to the project area. The project site is not located within a FEMA-mapped 100-year fIoodplain (Source VII.1-Tojvn of Los Gatos, 2000). 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: Pctential(y Less Than Less Than Na Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Physically divide an established community? ^ ^ ^ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or p ^ ^ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance} adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ^ ^ ^ plan or natural community conservation plan? The project site is located within a developed residenfial neighborhood and represents urban u1f~Il development. The Los Gatos General Plan designates the project site as "Loco Densifiy Residential," which allows far residential uses at densities of 0 to 5 units per net acre. The proposed density is 3.2 units per acre and within the allowable density range. a) Division of an Established Community. The project is a residential project that would be located ti~~ith~l an existing residential neighborhood. As such, it ~a~ould not divide an established comn;unity and no impact would result with implementation of the proposed project. b-c) Conflicts with Plans. Re«ew of the Town's General Plan reveals that the propesAd project tarould not conflict with any applicable polic51 adapted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. There are no habitat conservation plans or nat,~ra1 corsunu-uty conservation plans that apply to the project site. 15928 Union Avenue lnrtral Stuc'y 2g 7~13/~9 ~~ [ 6 10. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less Than Nc Significant Signifcar:t Significant Impact Impact Wlth Impact Mitigation hrould the project: Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ^ ^ ^ • resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Source VII.1) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally ^ ^ ~ t important mineral resource reccvery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 'I`he Los Gatos General Plan does not identify an}T regionally or locally-important rniz:eral resources on the project site or in its ~--~cinity. 11. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation Would the project result in: Incorporated a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local genera[ plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (source VI1.1) ^ ^ ^ ^ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above ~{"out the ^ro °ct? levels existing w.,.. ,. ).. 15923 Union Avenue !Willa! S,'udy ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ • ^ ^ ^ • ^ 30 ~i ~ 3i 09 41. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation Would the project result In: Incorporated e} For a project located within an airport land use ^ ^ ^ plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within trvo miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of an airstrip, would ^ ^ ^ ~ the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a-b) Exposure !o Noise. The project site is located ~lnthin a developed residential neighborhood. According to the Town's General Plan, the area along Blossom Hill Road is subject to noise levels of 60-b5 decibels, Ldn, but the project site is outside this area. Project residents are not expected to be subjected to noise levels that exceed standards for residential developments, c) Permanent Noise Increases. Future residential development would not result in creation of a substantial new noise source as the site is currently developed with a residential use within a developed residential neighborheod. The net increase of two residential units would not involve uses or activities that ti`rould result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. Noise increases associated with the project would result frem residential activities on the project site as well as From traffic increases associated with the project. Noise generated by project residential activities would be similar to noise generated by adjacent or nearby residential uses and would not conflict with the existing residential noise environment in the neighborhood. Increased traffic would be minor and would not be of the volume that would significantly or measurably increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. ~) Femur :, fla:se r::cseares. The Town Noise Ordinance (Chapter lb} restricts constr.~ciion activities to the hours of 8:00 am. to R:00 p.m on weekdays and 4:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m, or, weekends and holidays. This ordinance also Iinnits construction noise to 85 dBA at the property line or 85 dBA at 25 feet_ impact Analysis. Project constriction would result in temporary short-term noise increases due to the operation of heavy equipment. Constriction noise sources range from about 82 to 9O dBA at 25 feet for most types of consfruction equipm~7t, and slightly higher levels of about 94 to 97 dBA at 25 feet for certain types of earthmoving and impact equipli~ert. If noise controls are installed on cor~truction equipment, the noise levels could be reduced to SC to 85 dBA at 25 feet, depending on the type of egairament. Wit's controls, construction noise levels could be made to comply with the Tewr Noise Ordinance. 15928 Z'nion Avenue Initial Study 31 7i T 3;'09 `# -,T r Residential uses are generaLy considered to be noise-sensitive uses or sensitive receptors. Significant construction noise levels would Orly occur for a shot`, period when grad_.ng egtupment is operating immediately adjacent to these homes, not d-arir.g t-~e en5:e projec construction period. Construction-related noise increases could be significant periodically, especially to residences immediately adjacent to tl:e project on the north_ Enforcement of time restrictions and noise level standards contained in the To~,n Noise Qrdinance will be required as a standard Project Condition of Approval. Thus, cons action-related noise is considered aless-than-significant impact. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: I=otert;ally Significant Impact Less i han Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Signifcant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, ^ ^ • ^ either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ^ ^ ~ ^ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ^ ^ ^ •~ ~ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The project would replace one e~dsting residential unit with three single-family homes, resulting in a net increase of two residential units could generate approximately 16 new residents. The projects net addition of 5-b persons, which worild not represent substantial population growth compared to the Town s current population of 30,296 (as indicated by the California Department Fina_nce). The additional population would be within the To~nrn's 2005 population estimate of 35,700 as projected by the Association of Bay P tea Gove_-na•~ents (ABAG). Such increases ir, popuia5on also would be within ABAG's projected five percent growth rate between 2000 and 2015, and would not represent a significant increase in local or regicnal population. Project population increases are not considered substantial, and since surrounding lands are already developed, the project ~n~ould not be coiLSidered growth-irducir.g. Although ore exisCng older home on the project site ~ti~~11 be demolished, three new homes rill be constn.cted, ]5928 Union Avenue lnifial S}udy 32 713/09 ~ _._ 13. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact ^a1itigatlon Would the project result in: Incorporated Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for ary of the public services: a) Fire protection? ~ ~ ~ ~ b) Police protection? p ~ ~ ~ c) Schools? ~ ~ Y ~ d} Parks? ~ ~ ~ e) Other public facilities? p ~ ~ ~ ja-b) Pire and Pofice Proiecfion Services. Services have been provided to the existing residential unit on the project site. The project would not significantly increase demand for public services since services are already provided to the existing use on the site and other development iln the project vicinity. A.s infill development, the project will have no measurable effect on existing public services in that the increase will not require expansion or construction of new facilities for services that serve tine project. The Santa Clara Fire Department has reviewed the proposed site plan for site access and fire flows, and the project appears to meet department specifications with implementation of conditions regarding access and installation of fire hydrants5 Thus, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to fire and police protecflon services. c 5choofs. The proposed project would result in a minor increase local population with a net increase of two residential uni*,s. This will resalt in a miner increase in student ersollmerts in all grades in the Los Gatos Union School District and Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District. According to District staff,5 all schools serving the project are at or close to capacity, although there is additional capacity within the Los Gatos Union School District at other schools within the district. SSanta Clara County Fire Depcrtment, Development Review Comments, 15923 Union Avenue, Plan Review Number 08 3203, File Number M-GB-OI 3. November 13, 2008. 5 Donna Dorsey, Los Gatos Union School District and Jane Marashian, Los Gatos-Saratoga Unicn High School District, personal communication, February 2009. 15428 Union Averwe lnitiai Study 33 7~ 1 ?/O4 ~~ The project applicant will be required to pay a "developer fee" that goes to the School Districts to offset potential additional costs associated with school fa~liues. The project's contribution of school- aged children is expected to be minimal due to minor increase of ts: o single-family homes, This level of increased enrollment is not expected to rest<lt in substantial adverse physical impac~ to existing schools or result in the need for carst='uctian of a new school facility t`tat could result in additienal en~nrenmental Lmpacts. T'h,,~s, the project would riot _rest>lt in significant impacts to existing school facilities. The school districts have initiated a joint demographic study to review student enrolL~rteat and projections for the future. cl Parks. See discussion that follows belotiT under section 14-Recreation, regarding the project's impact on local parks. ~ 4. RECREATION Potentially Less Than Less Than No Sigr:ificant Significant Significant 1mFact Impact With Impact P~iitigation Would the }aroject: lncorporafed a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ^ ^ ^ ^ regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? E b} Does the project include recreatienal facilities or ^ ^ ^ • require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed net addition of two residential touts would add approximately 5-6 persons to the area, and thereby incrementally increase demand for recreational facilities. The project`s incremental population increase is not considered significant given the small ntnrtber in relation to fire remaining citywide population, and the population increase would not result in use that would result in a substarTtial deterioration or` facilities. The project is close to exds5ng recreational facilities such as Blossom Hill Park as well as the nearby Vasona Lake County Park. 1592& Union Avenue 1rifiv? Sfudy 34 7/13/09 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact tvlitigation Incorporated a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ^ ^ ^ relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system {i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congesticn at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by fhe county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ^ q ~ c} Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantiai safety risks? d} Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves cr dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e} Result in inadequate emergency access? f} Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conf ict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation {e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ a a) Traffic. The project site is located off of tt~.e union Avenue /Blossom 1'--=111 intersection. The Town's Traffic Impact Policy (Resolution 1441-17~) speci~`ies that a project with a traffic impact of 14 or less additional AM or P?vI peak hour trips could be approved without a comprehensive traffic report if it is determined that the benefits of the project to the Town would outweigh the impact of increased traffic. Ho~n~ever, the project would be subject to payment of a traffic mitigaticn fee. The proposed project would result in a net in~ezse of 20 trips per day with approximately 2 tips during the A1VI and PVI peak hours. According to fhe Town's traffic determination, traffic generated by the proposed project would represent a minor impact and no additional traffic studies would be required. This number of increased trips from the project site would not have a measurable or significant impact cn traffic operations at vicinity intersections. 15928 Union Avenue Inifiai Study 35 7~73~09 r e d-e} Access. The proposed project includes a coal-de-sac onto the site from Panorama 4Vay. The Santa Clara County Fire Department ras conducted a development re~riew of the project p?ars and provides speafic design requirements fer the proposed private access read. Tne Town and Fire Department will review the proposed private roadway design to ensure t_~tat it confom~ ti~~itl: their respective requirements. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially tessThan Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Vlfith Impact tvtitigation Would the project: Incorporated a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of need storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have suffcient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are ne~v or expanded entitlements needed? 6) ReSUI~ In a ucierminaui)nii by ais vvaaicw8 er treatment provider which serves or may serve the project chat it has adequate capacity :o serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill ~.vith sufficient permitted capacib/ to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 15428 Union Avenue lnifial S'udy Q G' ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ C ^ ^ ~ ~ ^ O ^ ^ C ^ ^ e ^ ^ r ^ ^ D ^ ^ ~.. sb 7~ 13,09 -. Utilities are currently provided to existing development on the project site. Utilities and service system operators indicated that no major off-site utiiif~= imprcvements are expected to be required. The project applicant will be required to install one public fire hydrant on-site, and other utilities (electrical, gas, telephone, cable TV, sterm drainage facilities) will be upgraded as necessar}=. fa, b, e) Wastewater Collection and Treatment. Wastevtirater collection to the Town of Los Gatos and the project site is provided by the West Valley Sanitation District. The District provides sewer maintenance, repair and rehabilitation throughout its service area, as well as storm drain maintenance. Wastewater treatment is provided at the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant that serves over 1.5 million people. Treated wastewater is far less than the plant's capacity according to a background report prepared as part of the Town's General Plan update.' b d water su 1r. Water Service is provided by the San Jose Water Company. The Company's water supplies are comprised of groundwater, imported surface water, and surface water collected Ln the Santa Cruz Mountains. According to Water Company staff, adequate water supply and infrastructure capacity exists to serve the project area.g (fJ Sord Waste Disposal. Solid waste collection and recycling serv=ice to the project site is provided by West Valley Collection & Recycling. Re~*use is disposed at the Guadalupe Landfill, located in the City of San Jose. According to recent Santa Clara County re~~e~vs as required by the State of California, this landfill had a remaining life of approximately 25 years.9 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNFICANCE Does the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Impact tviitigation Incorporated a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or vldlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the ranee of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ^ ^ ^ ^ ' Design, Community and Environment. February 7 2, 2009. "Town of Los Gatos General Plcn Update Background Report. s Jim Bariteau, Scn Jose Water Company ,personal communication, Februcry 2009. 9 County of Santa Clara. August 22, 2007. "Five-Year CIWMP/RAIWMP Revie•H Repcrt," submit'ed to California Integrated Waste Management Board. 5928 Union Avenue Inif;al Study 37 7/ 13; ~9 t\ 16. MANDATORY F[NDiNGS OF Pctsntially Less Than Less Than No SIGNFIGANCE Sicnificant Significant Significant lmpa~ Impact With Impact Does the project: lviitigatlcn b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but ^ ^ • ~ cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c) Have environmental effects which will cause ^ ^ ~ substantial adverse effects on human beings: either directly or indirectly? As discussed in this Initial Study, the proposed project will not result in significant impacts to biological or cultural resources, is of a limited scale and will not degzade the quality of the em~ironment or result in significant biological or cultural impars. No environmental impacts have been identified which would have direct or indirect adverse effects nn human beings. There are two small residential projects in the Union Road(~3lossom Hill Road area, but there are no j significant cumulative impacts, A zecent traffic study found no significant traffic impacts with t -. cumulative projects in the general area (Sourco VII.12 - TJT~I, August 2008). Cumulative global climate change impacts are addressed below. GIo6a1 Climate Chonge. The subject of global c'_imate change has gained increasing statewide, national and international attention. Reporic released by the State of California indicate that climate change could have profound impacts on California's water supply and usage in addition to other environmental and ecosystem effects. Tn the recent report prepared by the California Climate Change Center, "Ctur Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to Califor-.ia" (2006), the state's top scientsfs consider global warming to be a very seriotLS issue requiring changes in resource, water supply and public health management. Natural processes and human activities such as fossil fuel combustion, deforestation and other changes in land use are resulting in the accumulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide (CCh) in the atmosphere. Am in~ease in GIG emissions is said to result in an increase in the earth's average surface temperature, commonly referred to as global wai7nitlg, which is expected to a~`fec: weather patterns, average sea level, ocean acidification and precipitation rates 10 ~~ Jones & Stokes. Augur! 2C07. "Addressing Climate Chance in NEPA and Cc.^xA ~ocuments.° Tii3 09 i 592E Union Avenue (nitia( Study 38 Califomia is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases, emitting ever 400 million tons of carbon dioxide (COz) a year.)) Greenhouse gases are global in their effect. Because primary greenhouse gases have a Ieng lifetime in the atmosphere, accumulate over time, and are generally i~Tell mixed, their impact on the atmosphere is mostly independent of the point of emission. Although GHG emissions are not currently addressed in federal regL~lations, the State of California recently passed the Global j-Varming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32), which seeks to reduce GHG emission generated by California. The Governor's Executive Order S-3-05 and AB 32 (Health & Safety Code, ~ 38501 et seq.) both seek to arrieve 1990 emissions levels by the year 2020. Executive Order 5-3-05 goes even further than AB 32, and requires that by 2050 California's GHG emissions be 80% below 1990 levels. AB 32 defines GHGs to include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. The California Air Resources Board {C ARB) is the lead agency for implementing AB32. CA'2B identified 36 "early actions to mitigate climate change in California" in April 2007 as required by AB 32. These actions relate to low carbon and oflter fuel standards, improved methane capture at landfills, agricultural measures, reduction of hydrocarbons and perfluorocarbonds from specified industries, energy efficiency, and a variety of transportation-related actions. In accordance wide provisions of AB 32, CARB has completed a statewide Greenhouse Gas {GHG) Inventory that provides estimates of the amount of GHGs emitted to, and removed from, the atmosphere by human activities within California. The inventory includes estimates for carbon dioxide (C02), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), sulfur hexafluoride (SFb), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), which often are referred to as the "six Kyoto gases." The current GHG Inventory covers years 1990 to 2004. Based on review of this inventory, in December 2007 GARB approved a 2020 emissions limit of 427 million metric tons, which is equivalent to the 1990 emissions level. A preliminary estimate of approximately 600 million metric tons has been estimated for 2020 without reductions. However, the preliminary nLUnbers indicate that the difference between 1990 emissions level and ARB's preliminary estimate for 2020 emissions is 172 million metric tens (Source VII.13f). In accordance with requirements of AB32, a Scoping Plan was released in October 2008 and adopted by CARB in December 2008. Key elements for reducing the state's greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 include: ^ Expanding and strengthening existing energy efflciei:cy progi<~ms as vt~ell as b~~,ilding and appliance standards; ^ Achieving a statewide renewables energy miY of 33 percent; ^ Developing a California cap-and-trade program that li-tks with other ~ti'estern Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system; ^ Establishing targets for trar~spertation-related greenhouse gas emissions for regicns throughout California, and pursuing pclicies and incentives to achieve those targets; a ^ Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and polices, `1 Air Resources Board 1990 to 2004 State Inventory (November 2C07}. l 5928 Union Avenue Initial Study 39 7~ l 3% 09 including California's clean car standards, goods ritevement measures, and the Lo~v Carbon fuel Standard; and Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on :ugh global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative cosy of the State's [ang- term commitment to AB 32 implementation (Source V.13e). The Scoping Plan identifies i8 emissions reduction meastues that address cap-and-trade programs, vehicle gas standards, energy efficiency, low carbor. fuel standards, renewable energy, regional transportation-related greenhouse gas targets, vehicle efficiency measures, gocds mop=ement, solar roofs program, industrial emissions, high speed rail, green building strategy, recycling, sustainable forests, water and air (Source V.13e). Final CARS regulations are not due until January 1, 2011, and will not be operative until January 1, 2012. By the former date, GARB must adopt "greenhouse gas emissions limits and emissions reductions measures ... to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reduc+~ons Lrl gree_nhotlGe gas emissions i1t furtherance of achieving the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit[.]" (Healf;~t & Safety Code, § 38562(a).) Cumulative Impact Analysis. Global climate change impacts are a result of cumulative emissions from human activities in the region, the state and the world. Granulative development and growth in the area would contribute primarily indirect emissions of GHGs that in conjunction with other global emissions, would contribute to global climate change. Giver international concerns and the state of Califomia's recent laws and indication of the serious i nature of this issue, cumulative impacts related to global climate change are considered significant. Cumulative development and grotirth in the project region would primarily contribute indirect emissions of GHGs, which in conj~.mction vtizth other global emissions, ~~~ould contribute to global climate change. The proposed project's incrementa] in~ease in GHG omissions is not considered cumulatively considerable. It is expected that GHG emissions would be partially offset by the incorporation of energy and water conserving features and desib s that would be required under City and State building regulations. Additionally, tine proposed project will replace an existing older structure that will be subject to stricter building code requirements than were ir. effect when fne existing structure was constructed. The net increase of t<vo residential units would not be considered cumulatively considerable given the small amoant cf emissions in comparison tc state and global emissions. Furthermore, the project v.>as fcrmerly rated w=ith a high sccre regarding its "green" rating." 'T'herefore, the project's i_neremental effect on g'_obal_ climate change world not be cumulatively considerable, and no further analysis or quantification of GHG emissions was deemed warranted. ~'` Build It Green. June t4, 2C08. Letter to Town of :os Gotos Planning Commission. 15928 Union Avenue Initial Sfucy 4G 7/73/G9 {'`~ V(I. Source References 1. Town of Los Gatos. July 2000. Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000. 2. Nolan Associates. January 30, 1999. "Geotechnical and Seismic Safety Element Stiorl~g Paper, Town of Lcst Gatos, General Plan Update. Prepared for Robert Beu1, t•Villiam Frost ~. Associates, 3. To4vn of Los Gatos. Plaruvng Commission Staff Report. Meeting Date: February 25, 2009. Item 2. 4. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). December 1999. BAAQIvL'~ CEQA Guidelines -Assessing flee Air Quality Irrrpacts of Projects and Plnns. 5. California Department of Conservation. 2007 "Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program." htfo:!lwww.conservation.ca aovldlralfmmp/PaGesllnd~x asox 6. California Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. "Cortese List Data Resources." http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselistldefault htm 7. Arbor Resources. November 18, 2008. "A Tree Inventory and Review of a Proposed Thzee- Lot Subdivision at 15928 Union Avenue, Los Gatos, California." 8. Ecosystems West Consulting Group. June 5, 2009. "Biotic Assessment for the Proposed Development of 15928 Union Avenue, Los Gatos, Santa Clara County, California {APN 527- 42-008). 9. Pacific Legacy. May 22, 2009. "Archaeological Report for 15928 Union Avenue, Las Gatos, CA." 10. RC Consulting Engineers, Inc. January 23, 2009. Letter to Town of Lcs Gatos regarding structural elements of the e.~isting onsite home. 11. Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program. a) November 2008. "Executive Su~-nmary - EY 2C07-2003 Annual Report." b) Ivfay 200Q. C.3 Starrnwater• Handbook - Guidrnce far Impiemxrirno Siormw,zter t:eq:eiremer2ts Joe• Azea arrd Rer;~~ve?opmeni Projects and May 2006 "Updates." 12. TJKM Transportation Consultants. August 26, 2008. "Final Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed lyiixed-tLSe Development at 15400 Los Gatos Boulevard Ln The To~~:r, of Lcs Gatos." 15928 Union Avenue lnificl 5fudy 4l 7j I3~09 13. Global Climate Change References: 3 1' a) California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. June 19, 2008. "CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change ThYough California. Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review." bj California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. April 13, 2009. I~ropesed SB9? CEQA Guiuelines Amendments and Transmittal Letter Submitted to the Natural Resources Agency. c) California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. Jankary 2008. "CEQA & Climate Change." d) California Air Resources Board. October 2008. Climate Change Proposed Scoping Pi~zn - A Frmttewark for Change." P) California Air Reso»rces Board. October 24, 200$. "Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal - Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds :or Greenhouse Gases under the Califoizua Environmental Qualitlr Act." f} California Air Resources Board. l~iovember 16, 2007. "Staff Report -California 1°90 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and 2020 Emissions Limit." l~. 15925 Union Avenue fnrticf Study 42 7~ ~ ?! ~9 -°' C C L.' ~~ ci .~ cl ~~ CJ C c 0 z M oc v. ~ ~ z ~ ~ r GI V Z ti C _~ ~ x N (~i Z ~ -~ E ~ :J ~ N _~_ C4 3 ~ '~ v ^, ~ o .~ ~ ~ •~ ~. v; ~ ~ f .--. J C Q ~ U J c; ~ ~ ~ C G C U U ~ ~ „p ~ > C~~ULl ~~ c -~ C _, ~ C r '.« > •~ ._. C ~ G ~ U :'~ :.U v: ~^ ^' p U U C 'il cs C C .-. i-. ,,.~ ~ ~ `,n '..' ~ ~ J ~ Y J ~ C C. d rn C C 4-. ra r ti C -y O 'J . ~ cs G t~C ' V ~ ~ ~_ ~ r C ~ f C n C C C O ~' i_ ~. H V ~ "' '~ ~_, ~ ~ .C ;n L. r ~ C ter". ~ r = `~ ~ ~: G ' ~ •- ~ ^i ... ~ ~ :4~ :J s U ~ ~ ~ ~ .. C U J ~ ++ J^~„ ^J y C v ~ r: =L C o 4,? r-, C ° ~ 3 i-. ~, ~+ . ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ G ~ y C C '~ ~ j c ~ ~ ~ `J c 3 c~ ~, .~ G ~ -~ w C c3 . J rn ;3 J C C r /% ' r, ~ U U ^~ ~ w ~ ~ ^~^ ~ M n ~ J O ,., ~., ~ ;~ CA ^~-' ~ C r ' ~- ~ ~ ' ~ C. ..C G~ cJ w ~ ~ ;'3 ~ > ~ 4- ~ C~j '~ ~ ~ ~ G ~' v~ r C ,~, p ~ }, :j y :/:rte- ^ L . ~ :n `~ Ci C/1 J ~~.J. ~ J _ ~ C => ~ r~ .~ v G U C~ C U "" t :.0 C- _ G ~ T ^ r-, s ~ ~ ~^ J r IBIT 4 T~11S I~~1bC Intentlonall`~ L,Cft I3121[l~ PL.~\\I~G COJI~IISSIO\~ - Jt-\E 9, ?010 REQt-IRhD FI\DI\GS FOR: 1 ~9? 8 Union :~~-enue Subdi~ ision application \1-08-13 _~1'ChlteCtl]I'e and Site application S-OS- ~~~~ Requesting appro~'al to demolish an existing single famil~~ residence and to subdi~~ide a .93 acre p<<l'Cel II1t0 thl'ee lots 011 pI'Ope]'t\~ Z_olled R-1:8. ~0 Slgllltlcallt ell~'lI'OIlI1lenCal 1111paCtS ha\'e bull identified as a result of this project and a Mitigated \egati~•e Declaration is recommended. .~P 7-42-008. PROPERTZ' 0~~~~ER: ? 17 O'Connor LLC _aPPLIC~ti"h: Tone Jeans. T.H.LS. Design FI\DI\GS: De1110~1~1Of1 Of a single fnlftih' residence: ~s I'eC1ulI't'd b}~ S2CtlOi1 ?9.10.090~0(e) of the To«~n Code for the demolition of a single family residence: 1. The To«n's housing stocl: ~a il1 be maintained as the house ~t~ill be replaced and t«-o additional homes t~~ill be built. 2. The e~istin~~ structure has no architecttu•al or historical si~niticance. 3. The propel-n- o«~ner does not desire to maintain the structure as it exists: and 4. The economic utilit<- of the structure is poor and «-ould not be cost effeeti~-e to repair and remodel. State Sllhdivisioff .llrlp .-1 et: one of the following findinUs for denial specified in Section 66471 of the State Subdi~ ision Iap _~ct can be made. a. Thz proposed map is consistent ~~-ith applicable ~~ener~il and specific plans as specified in Section 6~4~1. b. The design or impro~-ement of the subdi~~ision is consistent ~~ ith applicable ~Teneral and specific plans. c. Thz site is ph~-sicall~' suitable for the t~-pe of de~'elopment. d. The site is phti sicall~ suitable for the proposed densit<~ of deg elopment. e. The design of the subdi~ ision or the proposed impro~~ements ~~~ill not cause substantial en~~ironmental damage or substantiall~~ and a~~oidabl~~ injure fish or ~t~ildlife or their habitat. f. The desi~_n of the subdi~~ision or i~'pe of inlpro~~ements ~~~ill not cau~z serious public health problems. ~_ The design of the subdi~~ision or the t~~pe of impro~~ements .-ill not cont~lict «~ith easements. acquired b~~ the public at large, for access tlu-ough or use of. propel-t<~ within the proposed subdi~-ision. •; ~«-=~.n~c--c=- ~„o~::..,:.TZ:; Doc EXHIBIT 5 PL.1\\I\G C01I~IISSIO\ -Jt~\r 9, ZOlf) REAL-IRED FI\DI\G5 FOR: 1 X928 t`nion A~~enue - Parcels ~ and 3 .architecture and Site .-applications 5-09- ~ ~ ~C. S-09-~-I Requesting appro~~al to construct t~ti~o ne~~~ single-family residences on ~~acant parcels created b.' a tlu•ee-lot subdi~~ision on propert}~ zoned R-1:8. _aP\ ~? i--1~-008. PROPERTY O~t~ER: ?17 O'Connor LLC :=~PPLIC:a\T: Toni Jeans. T.H.I.S. Design FI\DI\GS: Rcgllrred fi/rrlir2; for CEO.-I: An Initial Study and ~~litigated \egati~-e Declaration (\I\D) ~~i~ere prepared for the Tentati~~e \Iap. do further en~~ironmental anal~-sis is required for the indi~~idua] site de~~elopment. RE'[ll/li'P[I COl)1/Jh[li1CL' )t'Itl2 Residenti[ll Design Guidelntes: The project «-as re~~ie«~ed b~ the To«n's Consulting Architect and is in compliance «ith the Residential Design Guidelines. CO\SIllER.-~TIO\S: Reglllre(1 COIIS![IL'i'(1t1012S !il i'L'l'1L'1V of (rpplic[/tioirs: .~s required b~• Section ?9.~0. I ~0 of the To«n Code, the considerations in re~~ie«~ of an architecture and site application «-ere all made in re~~ie~~~ing this project. Pc~~rlXi::`.:.; _-•-.~~trr::'~;=~-:+.E.S DOC PL:~'~~h;G C01I~IISSIOti - JL~tiE 9, 2010 CO\DITIO\S OF APPROVAL 1928 L`nion Avenue Subdivision Application M-08-13 Architecture and Site Application S-08-30 Requesting approval to demolish an existing single family residence and to subdivide a .93 acre parcel into three lots on property zoned R-1:8. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and a ~~Iitigated ~,TeQative Declaration is recommended. APN X27-42-008. y PROPERTY O~~~NER: 217 O'Corulor LLC APPLICANT: Tony Jeans, T.H.LS. Desi~ TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COM~IL{NITY DEVELOPMENT: Pja31311i1g ~ll'lSi0i1 1. APPROVAL. This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 2010, and noted as received by the Town on i~1ay 20, 2010. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director, the Planning Commission or Town Council depending on the scope of the change(s). y 2. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL. The Subdivision application and related Architecture & Site application will expire two years from the date of the approval pursuant to Section 2920.320 of the Town Code unless vested through recordation of a Final Map. 3. TO~~~~ INDE'VINITY. Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.1 l~ requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend. indemnify, and hold harmless the Town and its officials in any action brought by a third party to overturn. set aside, or void the permit or entitlement. Tlis requirement is a condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements whether or not expressly set forth in the approval, and may be secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney. 4. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL. Separate Architecture and Site applications and approvals are required for each ne«~ residence. ~. RECYCLING. All «~ood, metal, glass and aluminum materials generated from the demolished structure shall be deposited to a company which ~~~ill recycle the materials. Receipts from the company(s) accepting these materials. noting t}pe and weight of material, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Towns demolition inspection. 6. OUTDOOR LIGHTING. House exterior and landscape lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be do«~n directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. 7. TREE RE~~IOVAL PER'~IIT. A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for trees to be removed, prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. 8. REPLACEti~hENT TREES. Replacement trees shall be planted for trees being removed. The number and size of new trees shall be determined using the canopy replacement table in the Town's Tree Protection Ordinance. Required trees shall be planted prior to final inspection. Pale 1 of 10 EXHIBIT 6 9. TREE STAKING. All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties. 10. TREE PRESER~'ATIO\. The Consulting Arborist shall review any revisions to the site plans and modify recommendations as appropriate as part of the Architecture and Site review for the new residences. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations included in the Arbor Resources report dated November 2008 and as may be amended following revie~; of the revised plans. Tree protection specifications shall be printed on construction plans. 11. TREE FENCING. Protective tree fencing shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees prior to issuance of demolition and building permits and shall remain through all phases of construction. Fencing shall be six foot high cyclone attached to hvo-inch diameter steel posts drive 18 inches into the ground and spaced no further than 10 feet apart. Include a tree protection fencing plan ~~-ith the construction plans. 1?. IRRIGATION S~'STEVI. All newly planted landscaping shall be imgated by an in- ground irrigation system. Special care shall be taken to avoid irrigation that ~~ill endanger existing native trees and vegetation. y 13. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES v1ITIGATION ~1EASURE. Tree,'vegetation remo~-~al activities shall be avoided during the breeding bird and bat season (January 1 to August 31). If tree vegetation removal cannot take place after August and before January, a qualified biologist shall conduct breeding bird sun-eys and roosting bat surveys no more than 1~ days prior to project activities to determine whether nesting or roosting activity is taking place on the property. If nestinQ'roosting activity is observed, active nest'roost trees and structures shall be avoided until a qualified biologist has determined that any young birds have fledged or young bats are able to fly from roost sites. CDFG representatives shall be contacted to assist in the establishment of an appropriate buffer zone around active nest:'roosting trees and;`or structures if work cannot be postponed until young birds and'or bats are able to fly. If nesting`roosting activity is not observed during the bird and bat breeding seasons, tree~`vegetation removal activities shall be conducted as soon as possible after surveys have been completed. 1-1. WOODRAT GENETIC S ~~iPLE. In consultation with a representative of CDFG, a qualified biologist shall collect a genetic sample from the woodrat colony. 1 ~. WOODRaT HABITAT. Woodrat nest,house structures shall be avoided as much as possible and as much woodrat habitat and resources (blackberries, seed-bearing plants, fruit and oak trees) within the project site shall be retained as is feasible. Install a temporary exclusion zone and buffer (10 feet minimum is preferable) beriveen the area of disturbance and the woodrat nest'house structures. Retain vegetation within the buffer area, and upon completion of construction, enhance the buffer~beriyeen Parcel 3 and the southeri property boundary and any additional available adjacent open space with native and fniit-baring vegetation that the woodrats mav_ utilize for additional cover, nest construction, andior foraging (e.g. Pacific blackbem and coast live oak). 16. WOODR.~T RELOCATIO\. If avoidance and buffering of the woodrat colony is not feasible, the applicant shall coordinate «~ith a CDFG representative to arrange for a qualified biologist to capture and relocate the woodrats to a wildlife rescue or living natural history museum facility for educational purposes. y Page ? o} 10 17. CliLTLR=~L RESOL:RCES-L In the e~•ent that archaeological resources or human remains are accidentally encountered during construction. all construction ~~~ithin a ~0- meter radius of the find shall be halted. the~Convnunity Development Director notified, and an archaeologist shall be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented. in conformance «~ith the protocol sct forth in Public Resources Code SeCtlon ? 108 ~2. 15. CliLTLRAL RESOL-RCES-2. if human remains are discovered. the Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified to and provisions of Public Resources Code X097.98-99, Health and Safety Code 70~0.~ shall be carried out. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified «~ithin 24 hours as required b}~ Public Resources Code X097. The N.-~HC ~z-ill notify designated `'Most Likely Descendents" who will provide recommendations for the treatment of the remains ~yithin 48 hours of being ~.Tr-anted access to the site. The NAHC «-i11 mediate any disputes regarding treatment of remains. ~~ final report shall he prepared when a find is determined to be a si~?nilicant archaeological site, and.'or ~;hen \ative American remains are found on the site that includes backm•ound information on the completed work, a description and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, an}% testing, other recovered information, and conclusions. Blll~C~l71; ~I1.1SID17 19. DE\~IOLITIO\ REQL~IRE~~IENTS: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Ba}~ Area Air Quality ~~Ianagen;ent Application from the Building Department Sen~ice Counter. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures obtained. and written ~ erification from PG~~:E that all utilities have been disconnected, rertu-n the completed from to the Building Department Ser~-ice Counter with the J- Certificate, PGR.E verification, and tlu-ee (~ j sets of site plans to include all existing structures. existing utility sen~ice lines such as hater, sewer, and PG&:,E. No demolition l~~ork shall be done «~ithout first obtaining a permit from the Town. ~0. HOUSE \L'\-1BERS: Submit requests for ne«- house numbers,`suite numbers to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process. ?i. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 24" x 36." ??. NONPOINT SOL-RCE POI_LLTION ST.INDARDS SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (or Clean Bay Sheet ?4x6) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Sen ice Counter for a fee of S2 or at San Jose Blue Print for a fee. ~' ~. APPRO~':1LS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Deg elopment - Plarviing Division: Suzarv~e Davis at 408-3~-1-6S7~ b. Parks ~. Public ~~- orks Department -Engineering Division: Fletcher Parsons at 408-39~-i-1C0 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: 408-3 7 8-4010 d. Bay Area Air Quality Management District: 41~-?-1-6000 Pcr ~e ~ o f 1 D TO THE SATFISFATIO\ OF THE DIRECTOR OF P.-~RItS R PUBLIC `~"ORItS Ertgr'a~eering Dil~isior~ 2-1. DEVELOPl~1ENT AGREEy~1ENT. The Applicant shall enter an agreement to construct public improvements in accordance with To~~~n Code ~2=1.40.020. 2~. PUBLIC Iti1PROVEMENT SECURITY. The applicant shall supply suitable securities for all public improvements that are a part of the development in a form acceptable to the Town in the amount of 100° 0 (performance) and 100" o (labor and material) prior to issuance of any permit. Applicant shall provide two (2) copies of documents verifying the cost of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public `Yorks Department. y 26. Fh1AL PARCEL it~L-~P. A final map or multiple parcel maps shall be recorded. Parcel maps(s) shall be in substantial conformance to the approved Tentative Map and shall be prepared, wet sued and sealed by a civil engineer or land surveyor registered in the State of California and licensed to prepare final maps. Two copies of the final map shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department for review and approval. Submittal shall include closure calculations, title reports and appropriate fee. The map shall be recorded before any permits are issued. 27. DEDICATIONS. The follo~;-ing shall be dedicated on the final parcel map by separate instrument. The dedication shall be recorded before any permits are issued. a. Union Avenue. A 4~-foot half-street right-of-way. b. Panorama ~Vay. Street right-of-wav turning circle with a minimurn radius of 37 feet. e. Public Sen~ice Easement (PSE). Ten (10) feet wide, next to Union Avenue and Panorama Way right-of--wav. d. Ingress-egress, stone drainage, sai>itary se«-er easements and private access driveway, as required. A deed restriction will be required for affected lots. 28. PRIVATE EASEMENTS. Agreements detailing rights, limitations and responsibilities of involved parties shall accompany each private easement. The easements and associated agreements shall be recorded simultaneously with the final map. 29. UTILITY' CO'_vIPANY REVIEW. Letters from the electric, telephone, cable. and trash companies indicating that the proposed improvements and easements are acceptable shall be provided prior to recordation of the final map. 30. ABOVE GROL`tiD LTILITIES. The applicant shall submit a 7~-percent progress printing to the To~~~n for review of above ground utilities including backflow prevention devices, Fire Department connections, gas and water meters, off-street valve bogies. hydrants, site lighting, electrical communication; cable boxes, transformers. and mail boxes. Above ground utilities shall be revie«-ed and approved by Community Development prior to issuance of anv permit. 31. ENCROACHMENT PER_ZIIT. All ~~~ork in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over 5,000 will require construction security. ,2. PUBLIC «"ORkS INSPECTIONS. The developer or his representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting anv work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all ~i-ork in the Toy;•n's right-of-~~av. Failure to do so will result in rejection of work that went on without inspection. ~. SITE SUPER~'ISIO\. The General Contractor shall pro~-ide qualified super ision on the job site at all times during construction. Page4of10 34. UNION AVENtiE DRIVEWAY. Ne«- drivetvav(s) on Uiuon A4-enue shall be designed with an on-site turnaround so vehicles do not have to back out onto the roadway. Tl1e driveway design shall be approved during the Architecture and Site review. 3 ~. GR4DING PEI2~tiIIT. A grading permit is required for site grading and drainage. The grading permit application (with grading plans) shall be madeyto the Engineering Division of the Parks R. Public «'orks Department located at 41 Miles Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaitung wall location, driveway, utilities, and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building footprint(s). A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department on E. Main Street is needed for grading «~ithin the building footprint. 36. TREE REMOVAL. Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to issuance of a grading permit. 37. SURVEYNG CONTROLS. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer qualified to practice land surveying, for the following items: y a. Retaining wall--top of wall elevations and locations b. Toe and top of cut and fill slopes 38. SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION. During construction. all excavations and grading shall be inspected by the applicant's soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and'or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design-level geotechnical report, and recommend appropriate changes in the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction observation and testing should be documented in an "as-built" letter,'report prepared by the applicants' soils engineer and submitted to the Town before final release of any occupancy permit is ranted. 39. PAD CERTIFICATION. A letter from a licensed land surveyor shall be provided stating that the building foundation was constructed in accordance with the approved plans shall be pro~•ided subsequent to foundation construction and prior to construction on the structure. The pad certification shall address both vertical and horizontal foundation placement. 40. RETAINING `VALES. A building permit, issued by the Building Department at 110 E. Vlain Street, maybe required for site retaining «-alls. ~~"alls are not revie~~ed or approved by the Engineering Division of Parks and Public Works during the grading permit plan revie«~ process. ~1. PRECONSTRUCTION ~~IEETING. Prior to issuance of any permit or the commencement of atiy site work. the general contracxor shall: a. Along with the project applicant, attend apre-construction meeting with the Totvn Engineer to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters; b. Acknowledge in «riting that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval and ~~ill make certain that all project sub-contractors have read and understand them prior to commencing «'ork and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on site at all times during construction, Page ~ o f 10 4?. SOILS REPORT. One copy of the soils and Geologic report shall be submitted with the grading permit and public improvement application. The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading, drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design and erosion control. The reports shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geoloy~ist, in conformance u-ith Section 673 of the California Business and Professions Code. =13. SOILS REVIEW. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant's soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans to ensure that designs for foundations, retaininG walls, site grading, and site drainage are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer revie«- comments. The applicant's soils engineer's approval shall then be conveyed to the Town either by letter or by signing the plans. ~4. DEMOLITION. The existing building shall be demolished prior to recordation of the Final Map. -I>. JOINT TRENCH PLANS. Joint trench plans shall be revie«~ed and approved by the Town prior to recordation of a map. The joint trench plans shall include street and., or site lightinG and associated photometrics. A letter shall be provided by PG&E stating that public street light billing will by Rule LS2A, and that private lights shall be metered with billing to the homeowners association. Pole numbers. assigned by PG&E, shall be clearly delineated on the plans. 46. WATER DESIGN. Water plans prepared by San Jose Water Company must be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of any permit. 47. PUBLIC IL~iPROVEMENTS. The followinG improvements shall be installed by the developer. Plans for those improvements shall be prepared by a California reGistered civil engineer, reviewed and approved by the Town, and guaranteed by contract, Faithful Performance Security and Labor & Materials Security before the issuance of a building permit or the recordation of a map. The improvements must be completed and accepted per the schedule identified in each sub-item by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. a. Union Avenue. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, tie-in paving signing, striping, storm drainage and sanitary se~~ers, as required -Improvements must be completed prior to occupancy of the second new residence. Any improvemments (including utility poles, guy wires, etc) on Lnion Ave shall not extend any further south on union than the proposed barricade as shown on the proposed Preliminary Development Plan dated 4, ~, 10. b. Panorama Wav. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, cul-de-sac, tie-in pavinG siGming, striping, storm drainaGe and sanitary see;-ers, as required -Improvements must be completed prior to occupancy of the first new residence. 4S. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS. Applicant shall be required to improve the project's public frontage to current Town Standards. These improvements may include but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk. driveway approaches, curb ramps, traffic signal, street lighting etc. 49. PUBLIC Iy1PROVEMENTS SECURITY". The applicant shall provide suitable securities for all public improvements that are a part of the development in a form acceptable to the Town in the amount of 100°.'o performance and 100°,0 labor and material prior to issuance of any permits. The applicant shall provide two (:?) copies of documents verifiinG the cost of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the EngineerinG Division. Page 6 of 1 D ~0. TRAFFIC IvfPACT ~1ITIGATION FEE (RESIDENTIAL). The developer shall pay a proportional the project's share of transportation improvements needed to sen•e cumulative development within the Town of Los Gatos. The fee amount will be based upon the Town Council resolution in effect at the time the building permit is issued. The fee shall be paid before issuance of a building permit. The traffic impact mitigation fee for this project using the current fee schedule is S~,7-12. The final fee shall be calculated form the final plans using the rate schedule in effect at the time the building permit is issued. A full credit shall be proved against the first requested occupancy to account for the existing single family home. ~1. DESIGN CHANGES. The Applicant's registered Engineer shall notify the Town Engineer, in writing, at least 72 hours in advance of all differences between the proposed work and the design indicated on the plans. Any proposed changes shall be subject to the approval of the Town before altered work is started. Any approved chances shall be incorporated into the final "as-built" drawings. y ~2. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications. All work shall conform to the applicable Tow-n ordinances. The adjacent public right-of--way shall be kept clear of all job related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and%or the street will not be allowed unless a special permit is issued. The developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of--way according to this condition may result in the Town performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense. ~3. EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public ~~'orks Department. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW"PPP) shall be submitted to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board for projects disturbing more than one acre. A maximum of t<vo weeks is allow-ed between clearing of an area and stabilizing-building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control measures. to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final landscaping shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not limited to: silt fences, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets, Town standard seeding specification, filter berms. check dams, retention basins, etc. Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months. The grading, drainage, erosion control plans and Sw'PPP shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the amended provisions C.3 and C. l-I of Order No. R2-200-00 ~ ~ of the amended Santa Clara County NPDES Permit. ~-1. DliST CONTROL. Blowing dust shall be reduced by tuning construction activities so that paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often as deemed necessary bv_ the Town. or a miiumum of three times daily. or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads. parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. ~w'atering on public streets shall not occur. Streets will be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Town Engineer, or at least once a dav. ~~'atering associated with on-site construction Page 7 o f 10 activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and ~ p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon «~atering to minimize the effects of blo«-ing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis during the workweek to the satisfaction of the Town. Demolition or earthwork activities shall be halted when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed ?~ ~~IPH. All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose debris shall be covered. ~~. CONSTRUCTIO\ ~LaNAGE~IENT PLAN. The Applicant shall submit a construction management plan that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth 3~oyement Plan, Traffic Control Plan. Project Schedule, site security fencing, employee parking, construction staging area, construction trailer. and proposed outhouse locations. 56. CONSTRUCTION STREET PA.R_KI'vG. No vehicle having a manufacturer's rated gross vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior approval from the Town Engineer (S 1.40.070). ~7. SITE DRAINAGE. Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. ~8. STORRv1 WATER V1.4NAGEVIENT PLAN. A storm water management shall be included with the grading permit application for all Group 1 and Group 2 projects as defined in the amended provisions C.3.d. of Order No. R2-200-003 of the amended Santa Clara County NPDES Permit No. CAS029718. The plan shall delineate source control measures and BvIP's together with the sizing calculations. The plan shall be certified by a professional pre-qualified by the Town (a deposit for consultant review will be required for this work). In the event that storm water measures proposed on the Planning approval differ significantly from those certified on the Buildina'Grading Permit, the Town may require a modification of the Planning approval prior to release of the Building Permit. The applicant may elect to have the Planning submittal certified to avoid this possibility. ~9. AGREE~SENT FOR STOR.`~I~~-ATER BEST MANTAGEVIENT PRACTICES INSPECTION & >VIAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS. The property owner or Homeowner's Association shall enter into an agreement with the Town for maintenance of the stormwater filtration devices required to be installed on this project by Town's Stormwater Discharge Permit No. CAS029718 and modified by Order No. R2-200~- 003~. The agreement will specify that certain routine maintenance shall be performed by the property owner*homeowner's association and will specify device maintenance reporting requirements. The agreement «~ill also specify routine inspection requirements, permits and payment of fees. The agreement shall be recorded prior to release of any occupancy permits. 60. SILT AND 'vtt'D IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-«'A~'. It is the responsibility of contractor and home owner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-«~av is cleaned up on a daily basis. V1ud, silt, concrete and other construction debris SHALL \ OT be washed into the To~yn"s storm drains. 61. UTILITIES. The developer shall install all utility services. including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines underground. as required by Town Code ~27.~0.01 ~(b). All new utility sen~ices shall be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television service. 62. FENCING. Any fencing proposed within 200-feet of an intersection shall comply with To«-n Code Section 23.10.080. Paae8of10 63. AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion of the construction of all work, the original plans shall have all changes (chance orders and field changes) clearly marked. The "as-built" plans shall again be sinned and "wet-stamped" by the civil engineer who prepared the plans, attesting to the changes. The original "as-built" plans shall be review and approved the Engineering Inspector. A ~tylar and AutoCAD disk of the approved "as- built" plans shall be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security or Occupancy Permit is released. The AutoCAD file shall include only the following information and shall conform to the layer naming convention: a) Building Outline, Layer: BLDG-OliTLINE; b) Driveway, Layer: DRIVEWAY; c) Retaining Wall, Layer: RETAINING WALL; d) Swimming Pool, Layer: SWL1~I:~1ING-POOL; e) Tennis Court, Layer: TEiVivIS-COURT; f) Property Line, Layer: PROPERTY-LINE; g) Contours. Layer: NEWCONTOUR. All as-built digital files must be on the same coordinate basis as the Town's sun-ey control network and shall be submitted in AutoCAD version ?000 or 1>igher. 64. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC L~IPROVEAIENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of developer's operations, Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs. gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc. shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title ?4 Disabled Access provisions. Developer shall request awalk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 6~. SANITARY SEWER LATERAL. Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by t~-'est Valley Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used or reused. Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean-out at the property line. 66. SANITARY SE~~-ER BACKWATER VALVE. Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims less than rivelve (12) inches (304.8 mm) above the elevation of the next upstream manhole and%or flushing inlet cover at the public or private sewer s~-•stem sen-ing such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved type backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the backwater valve, unless first approved by the Administrative (Sec. 6.~0.02~). The Town shall not incur any liability or responsibility for damage resulting frorm a sewer overflow where the property o« ner or other person has failed to install a backwater valve, as defined section 103(e) of the Lniforn Plumbing Code adopted by section 6.0.010 of the Town Code and maintain such device in a functional operating condition. Evidence of ~~'est Valley Sanitation District's decision on ~•hether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. 67. ~~"EST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT. All sewer connection and treatment plant capacity fees shall be paid either immediately prior to recordation of any subdivision or tract map with respect to the subject propem~, or immediately prior to issuance of a sewer comzection permit, ~~~hichever event occurs first. «'ritten confirmation of payment of these fees shall be provided prior to map recordation. Page 9 ~ f 10 68. CO\STRUCTIO\ \OISE. Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays, construction, alteration or repair activities shall be allo\\~ed. ~o individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eight}`-five (8~) dBA at riyenty-five (2~) feet. If the device is located \vithin a structure on the property. the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (2~) feet from the device as possible. The noise level at an}' point outside of the propert}• plane shall not exceed eighty-five (8~) dBA. 69. H.-~~~LI~G OF SOIL. Hauling of soil on or off-site shall not occur during the morning or evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and bets;-een =1.00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall \ti~ork with the "fo\\~n Building and Engineering Department Engineering Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods ~~•hen soil is hauled on or off the project site. This may include. but is not limited to provisions for the developer owner to place construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling activities, or providing additional traffic control. Cover all trucks hauling soil. sand, and other loose debris or require all trucks to maintain at least t\vo feet of freeboard. 70. GOOD HOLSEKEEPI\G. Good housekeeping practices shall be obse>-~ed at all times during the course of construction. Superintendence of construction shall be diligentl}~ performed by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The storing of goods and'or materials on the sidewalk and or the street \villynot be allo«-cd unless a special permit is issued by the Engineering Division. TO THE S_-~TISF:-~CTIO~ OF THE S_~\T:~ CL~.R.-1 COL'~~TZ' FIRE DEP.~RT\1E`T: 71. PUBLIC FIRE H~"DILL\T(S) REQt:IRED. Provide pubic fire hydrant(s) at location(s) to be determined jointly by the Fire Department and San Jose ~y~ater Company. '.Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 600 feet. \\~ith a minimum single hydrant flo\v of I,~00 GP~1 at ?0 psi residual If area fire hydrants exist, reflect their location on the civil drawings included ~~~ith the building permit submittal. 7?. FIRE HZ'DR:-y~T LOCATIO\ IllE\TIFIER. Prior to final inspection the general contractor shall ensure that an appro\~ed "Blue Dot" fire hydrant location identifier has been placed in the roadway as directed by the Flre Department. 7 ~. PRE\IISE IDE\TIFIC:-~T1O~. Approved addresses shall be placed on all nevi buildings so they are clearly visible and legible from the road they are fronting. A~umbers shall be a minimum of four inches high and shall contrast with their background. \: D~\" CO\DIT~S ~OIO~l;niunl ~9?S-T\t=-jmg.doe Page 10 01.10 PL=~\\I\G CU~I~IISSIO\ -JL~\E 9, 2010 CO~DITIO\S OF aPPRO~-_~L 1 X928 union Avenue -Parcels 2 and Architecture and Site Applications 5-09-33 ~~ 5-09-3-I Requesting approval to construct t«~o ne~t~ single-family residences on vacant parcels created by a tlu-ee-lot subdivision on property zoned R-1:8. APB ~? ~'-~~-OOS. PROPERTY' 0«%\ER: 217 O'Connor LLC APPLICANT: Tone Jeans, T.H.1.S. Design TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF CO\I\ILIITZ" DES-'ELOP~IE\'T: Planning Dii~isiort 1. APPROVAL. This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval listed belo«- and in substantial compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 2010, and noted as received by the Toy;gin on ~Iay ?0, ?010. Any changes or modifications to the appro~~ed plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director, the Planning Commission or 'I'otvn Council depending on the scope of the change(s). ?. EXPIR_-~TIO\ OF APPROVAL. The Architecture and Site applications will expire t~t~o nears from the date of the approval pursuant to Section 29.20.3 ~~ of the Town Code, unless the appro~ al is used prior to expiration. 3. TOtiy"ti~ I\'DE~I\ITY. Applicants are notified that To«•n Code Section 1.10.1 l~ requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend. indemnifi-. and hold harmless the To«-n and its officials in any action brought by a third party to overturn, set aside. or void the permit or entitlement. This requirement is a condition of approti~al of all such permits and entitlements whether or not expressly set forth in the approval, and maybe secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney. ~. TE~~rATIy'E ~IAP. All conditions of approval for Tentative ~Iap \~I-09-13 remain in fi111 force and effect unless modified by the conditions herein. ~. OliTDOOR LIGH"1-I\G. House exterior and landscape lighting shall be kept to a minimum. and shall be do«~n directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. The outdoor lighting plan shall be reviet~•ed during buildiny~ plan check. Any changes to the lightin~~ plan shall be appro~-ed by the Platuling Division prior to installation. 6. GREE\ BLILDI~G. The houses shall be designed to achieve compliance «-ith GreenPoint Rated Standards for green building certification. The GreenPoint checklist shall be completed by a Certified Green Building Professional. 7. tiE~`' TREES. Required replacement and screening trees shall be planted prior to final inspection and issuance of an occupancy permit. Minimum tree size is 2~-inch box. S. TREE ST.-~KI~G. :yll ne~ti~l~ planted trees shall L,e double-staked using rubber tree ties. ~'ll1lC~U1g D11'i51011 9. PER\IITS REQUIRED: _~ building permit i~ required for the demolition of rile existinv single family residence and construction of the ne~v single famil~~ residence and accessory structure. Separate permits are required for electrical, mechanical and plumbing ~t~ork as necessar~~. Page 1 o f F~3IBIT 7 10. SIZE OF PLA\S: Four sets of construction plans, maximum size 2=1" ~ S6." 1 1. C0IDITIO\S OF APPROV,aL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on the co~~er sheet of the COI1StI'11Ct10n plans. ~ compliance memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing ho«• the Conditions of :-~ppro~~al ~~~ill be addressed. 12. SOILS REPORT: ;~ soils report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official. containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with the building permit application. This repol-t shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer specializing in soils mechanics (California Building Chapter 18). 13. FOOD:-~TIO\ I~SPECTIO~iS. A pad certificate prepared by a licensed ci~~il engineer or land surveyor may be required to be submitted to the project building inspector at foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils report; and. the building pad elevation. on-site retaining wall locations and elevations are prepared according to approved plans. HoI-izontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items: a. y Building pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation conger locations d. Retaining Walls 1-1. RESIDE\`TI.~L TO~~~TI ACCESSIBILITY" ST,-~\DARDS: The residence shall be designed with ailaptability features for single family residences per Town Resolution 199-61: a. ~'~'ooded backin~~ (~-inch ~ 5-inch Inininnunj shall be provided in all bathroom walls. at water closets, showers, and bathtubs located 3=~-inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of Arab bars. b. .all passage doors shall be at least 3?-inches ~t~ide on the accessible floor. c, Primary entrance shall a ~6-inch ~; ide door including a 5'xS le~~el landing, no more than 1-inch out of plane ~yith the immediate interior floor level with an IS-inch clearance at interior strike edge. d. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance l~. TITLE 2=1 E\ERG~' COy~IPLIA'~CE. California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF- 1 R. CIF-1 R. and ~~~ S-JR nnlst be blue-fined on the plans. 1 b. B,-~CI~~~~ ATER y- AL~'E. The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer back~yater valve per Town Ordinance 6.0.0?>. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The To«~n of Los Gatos Ordinance and ~~'est Valley Sanitation District (~~"`'SD) requires back~ti~ater valves on drainage piping sel~ ing futures that have flood level rims less than 1?-inches above the elevation of the nest upstream mal~llole. 1?. TO~t,~ FIREPLACE STA\D.-1RDS. \ew ~~~ood bul-ningr fireplaces shall be an EPA Phase I1 approved appliance as per •ro~vn Ordinance 190~.y Tree limbs ~~~ithin 10 feet of chimneys shall be cut. l S. SPECIAL I\SPECTIOtiS. ~~'hen a spacial inspection is required by CBC Section 1701, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection pro~.~ram that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. The "fawn Special Inspection foam must be completely filled-out. signed by all requested parties, and be b1.ue-lined on the construction plans. Special Inspection forms are available from the Building Division Service Counter or at u~1~~~}.losaatosca.aol; bzrildii[a. Pnge ? o f 3 19. \O\POINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS: The To\yn standard Santa Clara ~-'alley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Progl-alm sheet (or ?4x36 Clean Ba\- sheet) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Counter for a fee of S2 or at San Josc Blue Print for a fee. 20. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the follo\ving departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Communit\ Development- Planning Division: Suzalvle Da\-is 0108) ~~~-687 b. Engineering Parks & Public «'orks Department: John Gaylord (-108) 39>-,-160 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 d. Nest Valley Sanitation District; (408) 378-?407 e. Local School District: The To\\•n \\-ill forward the papcr\\-ork to the appropriate school distl-ict(s) for processing. _~ cope of the paid receipt is required prior to peI-Init issuance. TO THE S.~TI=ISF_-~TIOti OF THE DIRECTOR OF P.-ARILS ~. PL;BLIC ~`'ORKS Ertgineeri~~g Dil~ision 1. PAD CERTIFICATIO\. -~ letter from a licensed land surveyor shall be pro\-ided stating that the building foundation \vas constructed in accordance \~-ith the approved plans shall be pro~-ided subsequent to foundation construction and prior to constnietion on the structure. The pad ceI-titication shall address both vertical and horizontal foundation placement. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SA\TA CLARA COU\TY FIRL- DEPART\~1E\T: 22. AliTO~1ATIC FIRE SPRI'~KLER SYSTEM REQUIRED. An approved automatic fire spril>kler system is required for the ne\\- residence and garage, hydraulically designed per National Fire Protection Association (~FP.~) Standard =13D. A State of California (C- 16) Fire Protection contractor shall submit plans; calculations, a completed permit application and appropriate fees to the Fire Department for appro\~al, prior to beglnning their \\'OI"k. 23. FIRE .~PP:~R-~TUS (E\GI~Ej r~CCESS RO_-ADS REQUIRED. =fin access road \~-ith a paved all \veather surface. minimum unobstructed \vidth of ~0 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet six inches. minimum circulating tul7ling radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside and a maximum slope of I ~°-o shall be provided. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet :~- l . ?4. PRE\IISE IDENTIFICATIO\. Approved addresses shall be placed on all nc\\~ buildir.`_s so they are clearly visible and legible from the road the\ are fronting. Numbers shall be a minimum of four inches high and shall contrast vy-ith their backm-ound. ~: DE1" CO\DIT~S ~ijlU L~nionl-9~~-_~s~~.doc Pane 3 of This Page Intentionall~~ Left Blain: 15928 UNION AVENUE -PARCEL 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRED! PERMITTED Zoning district R-1:8 same - Landuse vacant single family residence - General Plan Designation love density residential same - Lot size (sq. ft.) 40.579 10.087 8,000 sq. ft. minimum Exterior materials: siding - stucco, stone - trim - stone, limestone - windows - wood clad - roofing - composition slate - Building floor area: first floor - 1,679 - second floor - 1.375 - cellar - - - garage - 682 911 sq. ft. maximum Setbacks (ft.): front - 04 25 feet minimum rear - 32' 20 feet minimum side - 8 8 feet minimum side - 8' 8 feet minimum Maximum height (ft.) - 231 i" 30 feet maximum Building coverage (%) - 29% 40% maximum Floor Area Ratio (%) house - 3,020 3.120 sq. ft. maximum garage - X77 865 sq. ft. maximum Parking - 4 two spaces minimum Tree Removals - included with TM I canopy replaceme^t Sewer or septic sewer same - ~°/.SUZaNN~I~RC',?P,C.;c~751U'~IOtJ'=?29WN::A __~'--P~L2Jh?=,DOC. EgRIBIT 8 15928 UNION AVENUE -PARCEL 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRED/ PERMITTED Zoning district R-1 :8 same - Land use vacant single family residence - General Plan Designation low density residential same - Lot size (sq. ft.) 8.000 sq ft. minimum Exterior materials: siding - - trim - - windows - - roofing - - Building floor area: first floor - - second floor - - total house size - sq. ft. maximum garage sq. ft. maximum Setbacks (ft.): front - 25 feet minimum rear - 20 feet minimum side - 8 feet minimum side - 8 feet minimum Maximum height (ft.) - 30 feet maximum Building coverage (%) - 40°,% maximum Floor Area Ratio (%J house - sq. ft. maximum garage - sq. ft. maximum Parking - t~yvo spaces minimum Tree Removals - canopy replacement Sewer or septic .-~•• ~ sa"~~ ~ - C ~USERSISDR.VIS'.CESKTOPIUNION•SB2?-?CL3 DOC -+ ~~ 'J _ J n - - _ 3 3 - - - - G V.~ ~ ?~ - C .~ v. - _ - - 3 -~ __ _ d~ ._ _ _ _ - ., _ > - _ u _ _ ~ ~- - - -- -. G r =. _ - _ _ ~ _. _ _ _ ~ ~ 3 - -_ - _ 3 ~ ~ _ -- - _ ~ U 7 G O ., - - e: G" ~„ J ~ £ J` i7 ` '~ G! r 7 --~ ~ 'D G ~ m .~ C E ~. ,. -- J ~i £ .. U 3 ~ n - J Z .. 3 _ U} _ _ ~ 3 - z ~ ., .-. - = ~ ~ ~ .. 3 ~ .. > - ... ' U .. ... ~ _ - - - ~ ~ 3 .~ U ~ ~ ._. .. ~ c 3 - C r-. .~ _ - _ ~ ~ - G G 7'. ~•~ - ~ 3 n ~ C~ _ - = o ~ - _ .. - .. =_ c: J - _ r -, C v Z - z r a= - n _. ~ - < ~ - _ ~.~'~ - r > - L ~ - - ~ _ a U _ ., ... - T - ~ ,. = L C 3 .. c _ ~ ., ':. J - .~ . - < _ Z ` 3 - c F E°HIBiT 4 - T _ _ ~ _ U P' - V - - - _ _. 7 j r 3 # ^~ ~ .. ~ 3 U .. - 3 ~ .. O J 'l. Y -_ - 3 J_ 3 w ~ O M ~ .~ >, - .. _ _ J 3 O q _ S £ _. O v. J is L ~ 4 r 7 v u - " - .1 O "~ J 3 E U ~ O 7 -~ L J .- `. m o~ - ~ z > ~ ~ ~ o ~. N 3 c O ~ :~ ti c. - ~ f. :1 u - ~ O .-. N r O r., 4 > .c ... - 3 .; -. .-. A ~ t w J~ > x, ~ -~ - a: 3 ~ 7: ¢s o > y _. G 3 3 7 ~ ~ .. ~. - .n u 3 u E 'C c .. 1 C 0 z - 3 r C :1 .~ :~ = .. -- _- Y 3 Y _ ~ .. C ~.. ... ,7 - ... L, - N D ,~ U G v, ~J ~ ? - u ~ N .J .. C ~ ~ J ... .. :P J1 V O y i. > J - ~. - > ~- c7 - C _ _ .. U O N 4 Ti a G 3 _ c r ~ c ~ > ~ ~ 3 ~ _ J J ,9 :J r' - G =_ _ - _ S7 N fj Z ~ ..~. r r ~ 7 ..~ N :1 - .. 3 ._ q1 G7 c7 U ~~ U >- G -> .. - n C'~ Y a D - -'~ _ ~ u Ri - J :7 - C Y O L y J r - ~ C v ~ s m >+ C v ~ ~ J ~ 3 n - J y ,1, -' y ~ -~ '~ O 7 f u >- ci _ > 3 ~ - _- _ - ` ~ _ '~ J X ~ T-' _ .. ~ C h .~ O N U O ~ C J _ ^J 2 ... + O O _ ;J ~: > 3 _ ~ ._ 3 .. o J J r ~ y } 3 .~ s ~ n T 3 ~ ~ - - I 7 ~ ^. ^J 3 D 0 J .. ~+ ~ J ~C J ... ~ ^ ~ L ~? ^, -. ~ ~. O :; 3 7 -1 ~ j .- - 'v C ~ ~ G v J > If. J O v, 3 - ~. 1 . h V h a ,`,~ N C o ~ ? y Z 3 '~ V. 7 z _ - - - ; .^ A - - _ - _- _ ~0 E 3 - - Y ` - - T _ _ - - - '~ _ _ ~ - ~. s 3 - .- _. ._ .. "J - - _ - - _ - _ _ y j. -. - = c ... .- ._ - _ - -- -~ 3 - .-. _ - U .~ ~. ~ F. .. ~- -+ _ .~ 3 x ~ _ ., - - ... 3 - -. ., 3 _ .. - = 3 ., ,., .3 - _ _ - - - - __ .. __ F E ~+ - ~_ £ _ _ 71 ,~ T D -- Z ~ E ._ Z E - - - _ ~ - - .- - E r. _ - _ -. .- l - - - - - J - .- . - > ~. - - z z - z - - - - - >. q ~ - ~ c - 3 a a ~_ _ ~. .. - ~ E .. ~- _ -. T = - -- - J - = .. ~ - - _ -_ - - n ... _ ~ ..a~ - - 3 - ~ - - - - G -_ J - J ~ - ~ ~ Z z` C 'J ? J ~ G J 3 - - _ _ ~ ~ r, - _ ~ A J T -, - n ~ _ - u = 3 ~ _ - > _ - __ 'J - > t - L C ~ ._ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ .. .~ l - ' - - cc - ., ,-. 3 - -~ .Y o~ - J - 'l. ;f Ci _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ v ~7 - - - -- ._ ~ ,, r. - .~ _ .- G - _ ~ ~ ~ T ~ - ~. - - - n 3 3 - ~~ - - - 3 - - ~. - - > _ _ _ - ° 3 ? __ . _ .- __ _ T - ~ _ _ - - - £ .. _ 1 v. - - _ - - - ~ 3 - ~ - _ - C -- ~ - L T _ .- L' - _ _ - ~ _ -' - _ - .~ - - - T > ~ ._ - J - ~- - - .. .. _ E ... - ., = ~ - -. _ -- 7 _ - _ .. Z '-. ~ _ _ _ - - 7_ Z - 3 - L ;J ~.. _ .. > .J r. i .. - - _ - 1 ? _ - z V y Z - - C - C _ .~ - _ C - 3 v 3 - ~ ~ .. - ti ~ .. ~ - - •. - 1 - -_ - _ - . - -_ , - L - _,~ G z Z C _ C } v l •1. -- - -- ~ J _ C - n - - - - - = y ~_ .. 3 E 7 U ), __ ~ C U C u 3 - v. ~ o ~ o J - V; ~ _ - = c; U w J _ T ~ __ - _ c = v x ,. ~ 3 x u o L G ~ ~ r7 .T ~,. ._ .. _ .. G. x ~ ._ ~ J C ,~ •a ,-. 3 ~ n a ., 3 - ~ 'l. U N 1 L ^ C J 1--. Sa L y U U .~ .~ j, ~ .. rJ :. J r, a J £ m Y u..i ~ J J J ... ~ £ ril .., n ,. ~J C :~ ~ U :: 3 ., m ~~ o c ~ o ~ o T ~ ~-, L E J r~ ~. ~ ,C .- ... _ 9 . 9 - v _ .- - C. G -- J W ~ 3 C ^~ +- .. - ~ - ~ a_ _ ~: c r ~. v.~ - 3 E rt >. y... v .C U !J C .. " "" ti - _ -. ~ 3 -- 3 ~ - 3 - - ~: J V 4 z - c 3 ~~ G ~. O 4 J J G: :~ H - X v; m ~: 3 c' o c o ., u ~ ~ r, c ~s c ~ ^, ~-- o o 'C J '3 O L Ci C' C 7 -i .~ ~ T. d C -+ O. o u o 3 u 3 - r - v ~ o o u ~ _ c -1 e ~ .a C L ~ O :1: U .: r~ ~ ~ J 3 ., L C C: N ~ ~ ~J ~ i ~ p _ , . .C --~ r. N H C "' - C ~ - ~" .C v1 ~ N C .-c 'O r+ L t~ y 4 C C .- ..a N .-. L ~C •-~ '7 > s. o - _ c ~ >. u x ~ y a, N O U .. U ~. 4J ^J J > ~ C u c; ~ 3 x ~ m - r s u u 3 '~'~ - L C i U - L ~ ~. ~.. -.i fp 3 r m ~. ~ c .~ ~ u r ~ ~ 3 O .. >. 3 ~ c < ~ .~ .. = o -~ o ~ :: o E >, u ^ 3 ~ d 3 v o _ _ ~ o = ~ -~ 3 '' m _ .. _ _ ..1 Z Z ... .--. :J 7: C: G _ ... £ U 7 .. .. ._ £ 'C .. T _ ~ V L Q: ., 1. _ s ... _ N G , :7 ... > ~ 3 > ~ > s .... ^ - ...., 1. _ U C r G ~ G -' .. CJ - V _ ~n C- 5 _ .Ni ~ O ~ n c _ c ~ > c C z z r 3 ~' J: o] 1 3 3 ~ v - - _ .- - C _ ._ _ .~ - ~ _ - - 3 i - - r .. _ .. V z. - - .. ~. 3 ~ 3 - .-. _ - .-. c x _ 3 ~. r 3 - 3 J - - - _ J _ _ _ _ .. T ^_ - _ - _ c ._ _ - _ .-. - - ~ .. _. - _ 3 c - 3 - - ~_ ~ 3 a ~ - _ - > -. ~ _ - ? -. y ;~ ~_. j _ _ .- _ ~ .-. - v _ ? _, -_ ,,. n ~ .. .^ > .. ... .- ~. - 3 - .., ci - _ - - _ - v - o - - 3 ... - 3 ~ - - _ - - _ - u - 3 ~. 3 - >. >, -y - ~. >. - ? - - .-. - J - _ _ - _ J _ _ _ _ - v J ._ - .. _ - _ - y _ ~ - ._. C _ - _ }. J - - _ _ J _ 3 - ~. r. - - J - Z $ _ - -- .. - _ - r. _ .~ .~ J L _ 3 -. n ~ - _ ~ C 4 ., .- - - ~. 3 ~ _ ~ i 3 .. 3 r - ~i ~ ~ 3 v 3 - f ., ... _. .. > > - j f ,- _ >. ~ O - c -, 3 m ~ c - ,. J J Li k - _ .~ _ - _ :-. n J J 0 9 3 > m ~ - ti _ C Z_ - J .~ z = 3 y G G - m E - - - ,. E - _ - - .. "J. -- .- - 1' J f-I ~ .. - - - ~ J _ .- _ p - _ - - - ~ ~' - _ - s C _ ~, ._ _ v - - :S .. _. .. - _ - t _ _. .. .- ~ - .. - - - > .- _ > E 3 _ - _ = - - - - ~ -. n ~. . ~ - 3 . - - -' - - ~ _ J - - - _-. _ ~ - _ 3 ,. x - - - ? ,. - j• - ,• ~ - = L '- - _ T ~ - ~ 3 _ .. - _ ._. _ -- _ v: ~ _ _ .~ - - - -J _ - = 3 - .. _ _ _ - ., ~ _ _ _ - _ - ~ 3 _ ._ _ - _ E -- - - - - - .. ~- ' . ~. - __ _ 3 _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ .... .. - - 3 - - - _ _ _ _ ... _ _ 1 J - - y - .... ._ - - 3 - - ~ _ _ } .- _ - .. G < _ ~ - - - - - - - ~: - .. ~ - ~- _ a i a > - >. ^ - - - - _ m ~ ~- - _ ~. _ _ _ _ _ g - ~. - .~ > ., >~ > ~ _. _ 3 - - - _ - _ _ _ G 1 z = 5 F Y J ~. .... - - _ ". 3 .~ C n ~ ~ _ ~ i ~ ~ _ x ~ o . ~ . J _ _ ~ c - a _ F J _ ~ T y _ .. J ... ~ ._. .-. s T s+ J T ~, , 3 J _ J u ~ 3 ril c .•, ~, - C is _. .. ~ _ ~ ~ 7 U "- ~ - 3 r U ~ r _ ~. X - 4: 2 -- ~ J ~, _ _ ,x ... _ _ u ~L ._ J~ ..... z - ~. _ Ci ~ ~ . 3 ~3 ? - 3 - - ~ ? L ~ J _ _ O G J ' .. ~ .. _- ^ S 4i J J y y ~ = _ - 3 9 C . o ~ c - 3 '~~ u: n o _. ~ ~ r ~ > C D .-. - b N C 3 C. A C - - - r _ _ c ~ 3 3 = u] -J >- 3 - -- >• - - -' C -l CJ T J L J .-. T :~J -_ - J ~ 7 > '!. U 7 l• u .. G1 J _ CJ u U .a _ 4 - Sl 7 - G J i. v C J .-, -- 7 W C C ~~ G >~ .-. _ - - ~ ... C: 7 _. ._ J - ~ > _ U ~ ;r . >. U ~-* - `- y C' x _ c; J 3 - 3 u ro :. ~ T ~ = t c _ u .~ a ~• 3 o ~. J c ?~ _ >, C: L7 _ C 2 -, C --- w x N c N ._ :} . ~ r > :~ ?~ X .J r ~ ~ v - r J ~ y c ^~ 3 ' T ,. _ t9 C _T J 3 -^ C'~ ~~ J7 ~ 3 .. v~ a -r. ^J t`~ o ~ < '_' T .. C _ ~ v J C1 _ U ._ ;~ y ~- 3 -. .~ ~ ~ _ - ~. _ 3 > 3 s - - :~ x .j ... .r c ~ _ s ~ -. .-. .y N 4i .~ J - C ~ -_ - _ U G _ c 3 0 ~ -• 3 y r m __ y ^ T - 3 _ ~ - ~ 3 .~ G t~ ., .... ... ~C, ca U C > 4] - _ ~- .- - 7 ~ 'n - T S+ 7 m > ~ N x L .~ J _, - o _ L' - C~ _ ~ L .J ~ x CTi J - G ; ~ ~ C' U C - iV O ^ ~ A v ~ - ._ 2. O j J V. ~. ... vi+ .~ CY _ ~ _ u L] x !! r. C J U v w F >. ~ G'+ ... V-t O tp J -- G • J L: ca O - 1: ~ O T ~ - = - J U s ~ a - C ~ ~ G z 7 - r _ G ' G ~] J (`: ~ 3 7 U r~ N J ~: T J - J O Jl y `. O _ 1. ~ O J '^ ' ~~ T J ~: ~ ~ 7 r :~ .~ ~ ~ ~ C y _ ~ ~ _ c 7 to -a ~ y V r3 J v z J J U ~ s ~ r {-f 4` v ~ '-i _ - C: ^J J n• .., J J J •r. u . -, L ~ ~ O O - - ~ 3 v J ~ J x U 3 :J ~ .~ w - - T _ _ T ~ 3 - - - - - ~-. c >, - - .-. E ~ - - - - - - - ~- _. _ _ t V -- _ = ~ - L: - T - - _ T - T .. - '~ - - _ _ -- ~- G' ~ ~ z - ._ ._ _ - - T ~ ~ .. 'p ~ _ _ - - _- - E '- .. - _'1 J ... _ _ -_ _ .._ _ - i ~3 ~ .. - - - T - :J Ci ., - J - ?. - ~ ,. ~ ., 7 .. - J J ~^ _ - .-. - t L .-, 5~ - 7 - - ~. - - s - _. - - a - _ .. ~~~ .~ _ T - 3 1 'c o - > s+ u .L -J U O ~ O '7 3 ~-+ _ - 3 - O 7 3 .. 3 T ~. ... u _ y _ ~ ~ ... - - 'J .~ .-. - .. - >. .~ ... - L7 --' J J `. - - E ~ ~- e x j --~ _ r O -- v E J 7 U ... c: ..-, ~ ~- s C ~ B - O .. `. C ~, - - -.. u r v A ~, c _ - 0 3 .. n ~: .. ~ o ., - x -~ ~ ~ -~ J. ~l _ - J 'J.' U J .--. _f- _ r3 > ~~ T :.r U = -- L = T 3 - U = c ti 1 - ~ - _ 1 ~- G C - 2 G '`- 3 C n -- .: _ c. - ro - o - :J .- Z -~ a, r _ ~ _ 'J. ~ - _ ci T .l ?i ~ - T .~ ,. f. 3 - 3 - _ J _ 3 o ., ., - _ _ c - _ j _ O _ ~- _ .~ - ~. ~ ~ L: ~ - J J '_ ~ - - 3 3 _ .- - ~ - T -_ - _ ~ _ _ .~ - _ - ~ m - 3 - - :J u 3 ~ - ~ ' _ m _ ~r, ~. ~ .~ ., 6 U - - -- 3 3 - _ - _ _ _ '~•1 J - O v - __ - -J J O - G - .. v q ? J -... J J l:. - .+. - _ .~ - .. 3 ~~ cr. J ~~ U ~- C 3 .. O 7 f - - - -. - ~ G' - 7 - - > ri :~ _ - _ C - •- - _ G - - _ '' _ _ _ - - 3 - -_ A _ - ~ _ _ _ - 3 - - _ - _ - >, - - _ - ,_ s~ _ _ _ -- - 3 _ = = - - _ _ ? J _ 3 _ - - - > - - - - - .. ~ C - - _ _ >- - _ ~ y ^ .. ~ - ~ - ~. _ = - - _. T 3. - _. - - _ - _. > ~ - 3 - T _ - `. _ - - - - = 3 :.. - - -- - 7 ~ ~ .,. < ~ _. 3 - 4 ~ L v ~ .n J N J _ "' V - u "J _ J C C n. .Y I .~ ,. _ ~ rt r - D - j ~. J Y - t L 'S ~ - U *: m _i ~ ~. _ 4 su >, >, .. ~ ... ... - :~ _ J ~ _ 7 :-J r. _. U - r _ ~ _ .. U a ^ J - a - J o -- u _ ~ ~ u ~ 3 ,~ _ ;~ Z - - Z 7 N U U _ ~ c - ~ G 3 -~ - ~~ - 3 ~ c .. C 3 3 ~ ~ ~ v - •r, .. J - L J .~ - J 7 - Ti -E, _ .. .. L ~ .-f ,., ~ .~ ~ - i. ._ ~ Z J -.~ - U .. C r - 4 - N .. 3 ~ N ~. N ;u J ^; .: - of .7 .^ - ~ - c: _ - U J7 C b~ :~ _ _ ~ - -_ - _ - _ - _ N u 3 _ j. _ - 3 O >- G 3 -. -~ 6 d ~ ~ - -~ 3 - .. _ ~. _ v - _. - o y _ >. v N ~ u - N 11 J .- C ~' - J 47 N ~ N C v C va _ -+ -~ _ n .. -- ~ o 67 C - - i. u J ~ ". V -~ 7 U .C, ~ _ _ U - ~ N E ,v _ ,-. L ., N ~ 3 u u ^ .~ ro o ~ ~- ^ ~ ~ P: ~ U o ~ 4% :: ~ c O - .. - C ~i ^ ~ ro .~ J L U L ~ U ~1 N ^ J ^' - -J J ^ r7i ~ C1 ^'~ CJ D X ' - .~ o ~ 3 ~ a`~ m >- ~ G -% G r J U N .- _- N -' ^ - ... Vi 'A C r' ~ ~ - U Y __ _ .. ~ n ..i ;'. _ ~ U C J L L L ~c J s. C: 7 C - _. c ~ E Z x z ~" G :n O CV _. ~ J 4 C: Z - ~ ~ ~ r .7 ~ J - > - l _ C - ~ - ~ _ J - - .•- - 3 ~- Qi ._. E - - - _ 'l. ~- > _ ... rJ _. .. _ -- ~ J - T - _. .- ~ ~. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ .- 3 ~ .. _ E - ., ~ ~~ ., - ._. _ - - _ .r - _ ~ ~ ~ - >. ~ ~J b m x ~ 9 -- ,. > 7 - - - ... Li •.i - .. -~ _ T _ -n L ~ ,i C' - T T - ~ c7 - C _ _ ti 7 - - ~ ~. ... :J - ~. C _ _. _ Z J - ~ .- J O _ C - - _ - - - - c ~ - - - _ - -r, 3 'c 3 x - E - = O -~ C -~ _ ~ - .: 3 3 - - a. _ -- .. - iJ - - - -. - _ '- - 1J ~ ~ _ _ - ~ _ - -' ~ 3 c , ~ j ~ < o 2 C 's - C r `' c - n r~ c ,.•+ u r ... c - - ~ ~ z a o .-. .~ -. .y .-. ... ... .-. _ ... N n H 1 ~ N ~+ v _ _, - 3 - ~ - J ~ . - _ - _ __ _ _ _ _ T `. -. _ T _ _ _ -_. - J _ - - - _. ~ > .. - 3 - - -+ ~ - -- - _ J C .3 - G% - ._ - _ .3 ;y _ :J :1 - -+ ~~ - - x Sa .~ -~ - >. - - r- - _ ~- - - 'l, x ,. ~ - ti - - ~. .. U 7 - - .._• -- - - - - ._ ~- - - 7 iJ `J - - ., - 3 - 3 ~ `. ., - _ -_ J = _ - ~ - - 1 _ - J _. N. - _ - - v - - r - 7i .~ ~. ~ _ .-_. _.. -. S -' _ 7 J J -- _ _ - _- -' 3 .. - -~ - - .~ ... .. _. .. s ~- _ _ - _. ~ _ ~ - -- ~- 3 - ? - 7 _ ,~ F -_ - ,~ - ... _. 3 ._ - .., - ~, _ J _ _ _ - .. - _ _ - .- ., - _ _ _ - .. _ _ C «-. T c - - 3 - ~- _ ~ s - - - _. ~ - - _ 3 - - _ 3 - - - > = 3 = - J - - "~ - .. .-. V. r r _ - - ., ut ., t -_ .. .. - > - - _ _ - _ - p .- ~ - " _ _ r - .. - O =- _ - _. ~ j ? - G 7 J ~ ~. T - - ti - '' ..i 3 ~ - J - I J- - - i X - n 3 - ~ .. ~ >. V • 3 c, C x ~ '7 .i - U ~ :J ~ t - 'I. Y r C~ > C C 3 V = r G T ~ C y -, Y .~ t' J 7 ... Y = ,~ G .~ ~ U .. •~ .~ 3 ~' C .. C x C ~ > :~ C ~ .... ~ U Q c~ F .. K ~ - ... ~ ~ - _ C ~. v r c_. ~ ,~ ~ _ E .. - - J ~ a J _ C ~ - ~ :J -- £ n - - y D u ~ 3 a QJ ~ H ..a L v - ._ a ~- 7 G ~. 3 a n -Ti ~: ... 3 G a _ :[ ~ c ~L c: ; ~n C >. ~ ~ - - 3 - "_ G y V - ,~ .C ~ - - ~ G G: r 3 3 . _ _ J •~ ~ .3 - ~ - m .- - J - 3 o - "J ~ ,, ~ ~ 0? _ X J iJ C r0 41 ~ >. 3 .. >• J X71 :J ~ ~ s •i L 3 ~ ... ~ .tf, v rC C v, 3 v .~ 1. c v u` w C ~1 f, 3 es , ~ - t; u ._ ~. -- _ V :J - ~ ~. J J :1 o m v. u .. 1. J -, n - o T 'U o ~ m J S J J .. C L _ ~ .-i ~ ~ ~ ~ J -. 71 c a m 3 J .. .: 7 rJ G: r. ~ ^J fj > ~ x ? u ., w U .~ .c 3 n ~ ^1 _ C ~ > C v. ._ 3 J c' n rc o ~ .. _ V - ~ ~ - ci 'o u ~ _ _ r ~ 3 G L ~ -- ... -~ - ~. - t^. ~ ~ c ri. v .^ 3 3 - •-~ v n J ^.~. , - 3 ., - L - - c r ~ i u -, i, - ~ .. - G ~ - x U ~ _ ., u J ~ ~ u; - - - ~ c - _ r ~ ~ _ o ._. 3 ~ ~ - - - ~~- QI ~ C O - _. ~~ ~ - C' x - - c. ~ 7 r. ~ ~ _. - U - _ 3 G' 0' - - G ~~ .. - _ - 3 3 .. - c r ~ ¢ s . - . .- - -^ - - - - s - - o ^~ cv r. :. -. - _ - -~ .. s 3 > - ~ - > - - r - 7 3 T x .. .. - J - - - - - U ._ 3 ~ .~ _ -, c _. ~ - - ~. o ~- 2 _ _ - ._ ~- - - _ _ - - - .: a - ~ > - - > 3 - 3 C' 3 ~ - _ .. - - E _ L u ? - - - J ` ~- v _ .., - = 3 ? - _ z ~. - - ~ - - .. r 9 x ~ - - - _ .-. ~ .. i ._ a - _ - ~ v. , - J. _ .- - C ~ 7 J ~ .. ~ - _ _ O ~L - .. v _ J - - ] J .-. - ~. .J _ _ - .- O ~~ s - 1. ... _ .. _ _ - ~- - -. O - O. - ~ - >. - ... m T C .. C _ o ~~ ~ ' ~~ __ m _ r v. O ~ _ - _ ~ J .. _. O ~ ~ -. S E .. .. ? .. 3 - x - W w .\ - ~ - 3 ~ ~ s T - ~ .. ~ ~ ... - - - ~ 3 -- N - - - W - - _~ - -j - - .. - - _ - ~ ~ 3 - - - .. >. _ > ~. 3 - ~ - _. >, ? 3 - - - _ - - - ~. ._ ~ J - .. _ - - X - _ ? -_ .ti - - s. ~. _ _ ? .. 3 - - _ - - 3 - ~ - 3 _: - - -- _ 7. ~ _ ~ .. - - ~. - - - - .- - _ - _ .. J ... - - _ _ - - _ J .- - - .. _ ti - - ~ - V 3 3 ~- -- _ - 7 - T - - _ y .. _ T .. S - - - ,. .. ~ T - ~- - 2 Z Z C _ - - ~ U _ _. ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~. Z .. > - - .l -. ... >- G a - ~, > _ - - 3 .. U ~ D 3 - - - -J - >• ~ Z r Z i 3 > - > - N - -- C' E T - ~ - z. = T - - - - - ~-i T '-' > - - -- - ~ ,~ T ~ _ _ > _ _ = - - _ C L _ _ - ~~ - 3 - - 3 > _ - T - T 3 - _ ._ - -. J y 3 = ~ .. _ .r _ .x J J - A - _ 3 ~ J ~ ~ ~ a ~ U :~ - ,, n - ~ -- ... O ~ O ~ U - .~ t. T "' ". ~. ~ Y ~ ~ CJ O T ^ _ .-. ... U ... ~ C O b _ - _ L l ^~ £ _ _ £ _ .. z 2 £ - ~ c- ~ j •L7 ~ .\ - -~ .~ ~. - ~ C 3 3 Y C }'y J ~ ~ u Y £ u Y £ ~+ v ie J Y G ~ O T O ~J ^' 'J ~ C; X J ~ 'J N. .~: ..• ~ 'y ?+ ~ ~ :1 ~l U c U J .. F G O .~ H T l 4 7 C L .. ~ ~.. L ~ 3 ~ ~ v A _ ., L N _. - _ - _ .. x n J O _ ~ _ y U U C f: . -, .. ,. ._ ~ ~ .. 3 _ 3 .. -- _ .- _ 0 N S'. ~ > G ~ O z~ L~ "' `~ J :] CJ J 3 _ 11 'l. _ ~G7 C 3 O N > C .n w LL .. ~ ., i :J 1' _ - G] - - - > S j o U ,, 4: _ :1 V. > .- ,_. _ 1 .._ G +] ~- 2 3 J u C n y 2 > ~_ G .C ~ :~ C - ~ E ,. .- - r, C ... G . ~- .-. Q: >. -_ - ~ .ti 3 w ~• /: - _ A C v, - 3 ~ U 1, G - ~ C J m CJ _ - .~ .y _ 2 C H 2 J ~ - - ~~ `~ f ~.. ~~ ..: C _ E u . _ - ? N C' o .~ ~~ .. q a c 7 _ > x - ~ 3 .. ` .] _ - ~• i x < J .,. - :J _ ~ y h _. '-I .t. f -- J 'I. Li _ J J ~ _ 2 - C 3 C _ z ~ x ^~ 2 3 U .. _ ~ E ~ ... m ~ ~ - x _ T - D G; o A _ J _ _ C l T - 7 C1 _ _ - - Ti >~ - C^ _ s c ~ c C ~ O ~ > y C C Z - s :-, r: Z '~ Q c: " 1 J 'J _ - Y > _ _ - y .. = ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ r. _ - r. _ J ~ _ = .. .. -_ ._ .- .. 3 ~ ~ - - N ~ >, -- .. E _ - _ _ J .. y Y 3 _ - - =_ - - _ _ 1 - ~. - - _ _ •7 ~- ~ _ - _ _ - - _ - _ x - _ _ _ -. - ~ - .: X ._ _ "~' _ _ s - c -- T .+ ~ _ _ ._ ~ - x x 3 ~ C - 3 .. - - _ - ~i~ - ? - 0 _ _ _ ., ._ O ~ O -. ~- 'I, - ~~ '. O ~ G > ~ 3 C -, - ~ J L. ., 3 < ., J S- O - - - - .. J _ ~ 7_ ~ ~ 'l. > 'J ~ U ._ J U .~ ,. 7 ~ C: v O - ._ £ :i = - ~ - - - u c 3 - - 3 z z _. ., - .. - ~ - c i• a 3 - > -~ - = C .r ~. ., - v - 3 - - ,. ,.. 3 O L ~ _ _ ~: '_ _ :J :] .b - :~ - O ., 3 is 7 O - .~ U ~ _ - - .. - T ,, ~_ ) ` - -" -` 3 -- - - = 3 - ~ - -- ~ c 0 z = x 2 y' 3 '-' ~ J, 3 ~ x - - J ~ ... „~ ~- J y - > - - - J ~ - ~ u. J 3 .+ ~ U J _ " ~ ^y - _ ~ u X n ~ 3 :: 3 n - - J >. :J - C ~ J _, _ - ~. v. - - _ - - ~ - - C .. _ ?_ > '' -- - - - o J _ - . . z ~ = _ ? > ` _ _ ~ _ _ _ - 7 _ _ w ~ r~ - - - _ .~ _ - O g _~ - - _ - - ~ > ~ ~ _ .. ~ _ _ _ 3 .. _: _ 3 - - _ _ :. ~ _ ~ E - _ - 3 .c _ 3 - 3 - - - - - _ 3 E - -- > - _ _ = 3 _ z T ~: .+ G - G 3 - - _ >- ~ c - ._ . _ 3 = - - ~ _ _: _ ~ - _ ~ 3 _ _ _ _ _ _, - - r ~ - _ _ ., ~ - U - - _ _ _ - _ _ .~ ` >• ~ ~, ., J _ ._ C ~ .- -a ~ - QJ O = _ .- _ s y . _ 3 _ _ _ - 3 J lz - - > _ - - ~- _ 3 > - 3 .. V ~ ?, _ ` _ r ~~ z = x G G a - T - .. - -- -. > Vi - - -_ -- :.i J .- ~ J _ - .. x 7 - i -~ ._ _ ._. _ 1 ..: _. .... ~ - -. .. .._ ti O ~ - .~ y '. m ~- 3 _ ~ - - 3 _ ~ _ w 4 ~ J 0 ~ _ ~V ~ '3 _ Y W x J -C C « .r _ A .. .- ..-~ O O 9 _ E ~ ,. _ o ~ ~ .. « _ E ~ c - N O A 4 :n -- m ~ . - -3 .., ~. ~. ,~ ~ +~ - _ ~ J -. ._. O x :.: _ _ _ _ J ._ t. c x > _ _ - E r _ _ - _ _ G _ _ _ ~ ... ._. 'n _' C: O y 4 z = 2 ~ 3 C :. L _- --, J C QJ ~ . . > v1 J ,. ~ >. > 3 ~ - ^i - - ~ ~ r ~ ... _ r„ ~ - _. ~ J J .. _ ~ ., ~ J « ., .9 c .. 6 ~ A >~ _ _ 3 ~ ~ o - r - - .. ~ ~. S- _ T ^ . v ~ y, ~ ^. ~, l U C ~ > L: ~ - -. - V 3 - - - .~ s ~-- - 3 .' C J c c _ .- - - > .. _.. _ _ ~_ z ~_ -- J .7 _ - v J 7 J C N U~ a ~ ._ _ 3 r ~ C - _ _ ~. _ - ? - _ -_ - _ C - - -- = C _ - _ - r G _ cR .~ ", 3 ~C rU - C J U A _ ti ... ~- ~- ,~ _ ~ _ .., - m c ~ _ , = - - - ~ ~. J ~ ~ ~~ _ -- - £ - - - _ 1, ~ r. 'd ., " .. A ~ K c; 3 < _ -- U - y - . - ~ > , ... s - - .+ 7 - - -. 3 - ,~ > ~ - 7 __ _ - - ~~• _~ 3 - _ 3 - ., _ - ~ T ~ 'l. 'l1 .. _ J _ Z ._ ~ T L~ ~ - C; J - ~ > J _ _ C ._. - j• _ ... ... ~ __ ~ r~ J .. ~ 5_" - :~ T < -_ _ ~. ~ _ _ . _ 3 .. T U N >- U _ ~ O ;~ _ _ O ~ "' c - ~ 3 - - ., - - .. - = ~ ti o; - _ - 3 - > - 3 ~ - v - -- _ - O T 3 .. - >. - ~] fJ ~- _. J -. ,- ~ - - ~ .. _. 7 U _ -~- - ~ -' - - - n: _ _ - . - ~ _ 3 3 .~ 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- .. - r 3 _ - 3 ~- J ~ - - _ _ _ ~ _ ~_ _ - - ~ 7 - _ _ .J ~l. ~ - v - _ .J __ ] - ._. fV - T ~ :J - ... - '- _ _ _ - _ _ 1. = .- - __ _ - ~- ... z _ - _ ~ - 3 _ _ - ~ _ _ ._ : _ 3 _ ._ r - G - ,_ - .._. - - ~- - ~ - - _ - ~ _ _ _ - r a - a - - - .. _ _ ~- ~ L _ - a ~ - °- _ - y _ - - r.. - - ~ _ - ? _ -- - ~ - - 3 .. _ - - - _ _ .. ., - ~ _ - _ - _ _ .., - _ m _ - - - - - ~~ 3 - - ~ This Pale lI]tellti0l1211~~' ~.ett li~~l[]~ CSC CANNON DESIGN GROUP .lfarcl3 24, 2010 lls. Suzanne Davis Community- Development Drparunrnt Tuwu of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street PO. Box 949 Los Gatos, CA 9031 RE: 15928 Union Ave /Lots 2 & 3 Dear Suzanne: •~RCHITECTURE PLANNING URE3AN DESIGN ~G~~~~~ iil' ;~ ~' Li)ii) i owN of t_vs caTOs PLANi\li\~G UI`•IISION This is a revised 61llou- up letter to my earlier review dated March lG, and responds to the applicant's changes made in msponse to the issues raised in that revietu Neighborhood Context The site is part of larger parcel with frontages on Union Avenue and Panorama Vat<. Tlus specific parcel will be located on a new col-de-sac at the end of panorama ~t•ay. The site is bordered o^ all sides by- existing single familc homes, some older Ranch Style homes and others newer, and larger homes. photos uE the site and surrounding neighborhood are shown belrnv. TEL ~{1i.331.3795 F.\X: A15.331.379% Eh1AIL rJ~dan@padKlLnol 1RU HARBOR DRIVE SUITE 119 SAUSALITO . G N4965 ~.XHt84~' i G l5')28 Union ;\vcnuc Lots ? & 3 Design Recie«-Commcnts March 242010 Yaec 2 CANNON DESIGN GROUP 1 SO HARBOR DRIVE .SUITE ?19 . SAUSALITO . G~ 94965 Vieri' from Panorama Ivay looking across site Vie+v from site looking east 1~5ew from site looking north+vest Vie+v from Panorama Way of adjacent house shown to the left Vie+v of adjacent house from Parcel #2 Other houses on east side of Panorama Way 15728 Union ,Accnuc Lots 2 & 3 Design Rc, ic~c (:omments \farth 24,2(11Q Pat;c 3 Issues and Concerns Parcel 3 Tlus home is ruher well designed with good tixms and interesting details. It is similar it sh-le and materials to the existing home nearby un the west side of Panorama \~av. In m~- earlier review, I was concerned about onl}• one element which was the large number of second Hoor windows in the Hat-walled dormer on the second dour. They were visually aen- bust, and less successful than n-pical dormers on houses of this sn~le that have more wall area with sicGng relative to the u-indow area. I outlined three possible approaches, and the applicant came back with a forth one that I Eeel is acceptable and success- ful. The icutial elevation and revised elevation are shown belo~~: Parcel 2 In mt~ earlier review, I noted that the home on Parcel 2 had snore issues. ~`hile sinular in approach to Parcel 3 in its em- phasis un the entr}• and the recessed garage, it was much less fitushed, and had a more fra},nnented design. tiome of the issues included: 1. The stone facing was limited to a relauvelr small portion of the front ele~•ation. That approach would nor be consistent with the Rerideatia! Design Guide/ores Genera! Detiga P,r,reij,/es (page 11 bullet point 9) wlueh calls for "Design L~iiG an/iltec7um/iirtegril~~ oa a//ruler of rbe boute"and Guideline 3.2.2 bullet point 3, "Carrp ma//marzria/r, wradow ~~et, and v~i-l~ire~= Tura! detar/s aromrd a/!sides of !be house. ~4roid .rule aid rear e%trtriau rhat are mrrrked~~ d~erear froi» !be fi•oar a/ee arias. " 2. The round arched rntrl• dour was quite aw6~card used with rectangular side windows, leaving nacrrnc strips of wall bertveen the door and windu~v jambs and leaving an awk-~vardly shaped space between the dour and window heads. 3. Thr transition brt<veen the arched stone openings over the entry and the garage and the cuhunns below was not well resolved. GiNNON DESIGN GROUP 180 HARBOR DRIVE .SUITE 219 . SAUSALITO . CA 94965 Original Parcel 3 Front Elevation Comments Revised Parce! 3 front Elevation 159'_$ (?niun :lccnue L<~ts 2 n 3 Des,r;n Recien~ (:ontmcnt~ March 34,21110 Pa};e 4 -1. The dull Brae- color of the stucco finish did not work ~t-cll with the warm }-ellocv tc,nes of the stone. 5. More detail u-as needed rrgardin}; materials (e.l;., Is die stunr real steer or st•nthedc stone%). The draw-in~s for P:ucel 3 are ven- specific in rrtiard to matrrials..~ similar description is needed for this Parcel. Recommendations Parcel 3 1. I :tin satisfied with the change made «n the Parcel 3 Craftsman Sgle home, and have no further recommendarinns for change. Parcel 2 The house Proposed far dus Parcel is still less finished than the one on Parcel 3, but I believe that the changes Proposed by the applicant are generall}' acceptable. These changes, sumrnarizrd c,n the diagram belrne; include the folla.~•inn: 1. _-~ refinement of the openings in the stone at the entn- and garage in terms of both shape. and details. ~. The use of stare tin selected portions of the rear and side elevatious. 3. The addition of a stone chimnec: Window trim revised OK ii vrindows recessed I do hae•e a couple of recommrudations for the house on Parcel 3 as follows: 1. The revised elevations show the originalle• proposed windrnv trim removed. I believe that wocild be acceptable and fit with the h<,use stti•le, but only if the window frames ate recessed a nuninuun of 2 or 3 inches from the face of the wall (See photo example to the right). Staff should also ask for cl:uific:ttion regareiulg the head and sill windu~v trim shown on the drawings. 2. The design still seems n, be to br a bit striped down compared to that of the Parcel .i house. liv recommendation wotild be to add a thickened wall base in all locations where sncco is used as the wall material. In the architect's a-mail to me earlier, he suggested that the base would not be seen because of fences blocking the view. Staff should pursue this further with the applicant. That surely is the case along the earth side of Parcel 3 where there is an existing fence along the Pruperh~ line with the adjacent existing house. However, the site plan does nut currentl}- show a fence separating Parcels 2 and 3. If a Eence is to be constructed behveen the lots, details of it. location and termination paints are neeeled as well as design details of its height and appearance. Suzanne, Please let me know if }'ou hae-e am• yuesdons, or if there are specific issues of concern that I did not address. Sincerel}•, C.~\\O\ DESIGti GROUP ~~~ Larry Canaan -aICP G~NNON DESIGN GROUP 180 HARBOR DRIVE .SUITE 219 . SAUSALITO . CA 94965 Original Front Elevation Resubmitted Front Elevation with recommended stucco base T.H.I.S. DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Box 1518, Los Gatos, CA 95031 Fax: 408.354.1823 Tel: 408.354.1863 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 Attn: Planning Commission 3 Lot Subdivision nt 15928 Union Ave And 2 New Homes on Panorama Way. THE SUBDIVISION APPLICATION May 20'^, 2010 History of this Project. The developer initially requested a 4 lot subdivision at this location over 2 years ago and was denied. A subsequent application fora 3 lot subdivision wns denied by the Planning Commission - primarily because the proposed lot configuration resembled too closely a'flag lot' on Panorama and wns not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The Town Council affirmed this denial and the project was remanded bock to the Planning Commission for further deliberation based on a proposal by the developer to consider alternatives which would incorporate more conventional lot configurations for a cul-de-sac. The first Exhibit shows this "Original 3 Lot Application" which was rejected, together with an "Orthogonal Configuration" for the 2 Panorama Lots. The latter we also considered briefly, but decided not to pursue, because we feel that there are better alternatives. It is included here for the Planning Commission to review some of the other options that we have analyzed in preparation for the proposed subdivision for this site. Subdivision Desian. In light of the history of this project, we are now proposing a 3 Lot subdivision design that includes for Panorama a Cul-de-Sac that is entirely consistent with the termination of other 'dead-end' streets in Los Gatos. Based on a "pie" cul-de-sac configuration the 2 Lots proposed at Panorama radiate around the turnaround circle in n conventional manner. We have, however, included two variations for the commission to review: One is n Standard Pie [TM1] and the other is a Modified Pie [TM2]. WE ARE REQUESTING APPROVAL OF TM2, but have shown TM1 as it is more conventional and we would be prepared to accept it as on alternative. In both versions, the HOUSES ARE IDENTICAL IN ALL RESPECTS and the FARs for both of the A&S applications have been reduced so as to be consistent with either of the lot configurations. In TM2, all that changes is the street frontage [Larger for Parcel 2], the rent yard [more useable for Parcel 3] and the rear Property Line [more considerate of neighbor views]. A third lot is still proposed at Union Ave, but we have no plans to build on this lot until the 2 lots nt Panorama are nearing completion. E%HIBIT 11 Union Ave Subdivision + A&S The second Exhibit shows both "TM2 -Preferred Configuration" and "TM1 -Alternate Configuration". The Plan Sheet C2 -Site Plan shows the same information without "Comments". In the design of this Subdivision we have been cognizant of the Subdivision Map Act: • There are no Zoning or General Plan inconsistencies. • Lot sizes (in the 10,000 -11,000 sq ft range] are compatible with the neighboring lots. • Density allows 4 lots - we are asking for 3. • Site suitability is evident -with many options available for the subdivision layout. • The Initial Study has determined that there are no significant environmental impacts. Parcel 2 House Location: House placement on the site helped determine the overall design of the subdivision and the way the house was designed for the lot. It could be moved further east [closer to Mangano] or west [closer to Lynot] by modifying the Lot layout or the home itself. Its current placement provides a good balance -minimizing the impact on both properties and maximizing their viewsheds. This is a key reason that we are requesting approval of a modified Cul-de-Sac configuration. A second is so as not to Remove two existing oaks: [Trees #5 & #7from the Arborist Report]. Conditions [for Discussion) that might Benefit Nei hq bors: In our dialogues with the neighbors we have found that that many have been reluctant to offer suggestions as to how we could improve the Subdivision Design from their individual perspectives. The Planning Commission may wish to incorporate some of these into the "Conditions of Approval" if they determine that they have merit. The developer is ok with them. The removal of trees 13, 14, 15 should be mitigated by the planting of six (6) Myrica Californica 24" box trees along the northwest property line for screening purposes. Tree removal and replacement should occur concurrently with the installation of the storm drain to Union Ave. Tree #10 should be retained. [Benefits Lynot] Six (6) Myrica Californica 24" box trees should be planted along the northeast property line for screening purposes. [Benefits Mangano] The fence along the north property line should match the existing Mangano/Lynott fence in style and height [6ft with a lft lattice] subject to a Building Permit with a mutual written agreement between neighbors. [Benefits Lynot and Mangano] Removal of trees 1, 2, 4 should be mitigated by planting six (6) Redwood 24" box trees along the southwest property line for screening purposes. Tree removal and replacement should occur concurrently with Union Ave street improvements. [Benefits Martinez] Any house design proposed for Parcel 1 should attempt to retain the Chinese Elm [Tree #3] centrally located on the property. [Benefits Martinez, Lynot and Parcel 1 as well]. Grading & Drainage: Per discussions with Engineering Dept, it is intended that Parcel 3 and 1/2 of Parcel 2 will drain to Panorama, with Parcel 1 and 1/2 of Parcel 2 connecting to the Storm Drain system on Union Ave. Appropriate 'on site' retention has been proposed on the plans for the subdivision Off-haul from the street grading at this site is proposed so as not to elevate the house pads. The balance of the grading is minimal and will be left on site without changing the natural drainage pattern of the site. Dissipaters and splash-blocks will be used. 15928 Union Ave CONFIDENTIAL T,H.I.S. Design Union Ave Subdivision + A$S A&5 APPLICATIONS -PARCELS 2&3 Neighborhood Compatibility: This is a neighborhood in transition, with no real predominant styling comprising older one story and newer single and two story homes. House sizes range from older 1,700 square ft homes to newer homes approaching 4,000 sq ft. The single story homes are older ranch style homes and newer craftsman and contemporary craftsman & Mediterranean homes; the two story homes are older ranch style with second story additions and newer homes with a contemporary French and mid-European styling incorporating both hipped & gabled roofs and even Dutch/Boston gables. Roof pitches vary from 5:12 to 12:12 and the heights of homes vary from 15ft in the older, smaller ranch style homes; to 21/24 ft in the newer single story homes; to 25 ft - 28 ft for the newer two story homes. Exterior materials vary from wood siding to stucco with stone veneer as n complimentary material used at porches, entries, columns. Roofing materials also vary from composition shingle to concrete tile. Architecture, Detailing and House Placement: We have worked with the Consulting Architect to ensure that the resulting designs are fully consistent with the Architectural Design Guidelines and are compatible with the neighborhood. Parcel 2 A Mediterranean -Cottage Style home is proposed for Parcel 2. This design was chosen because of its potential proximity to neighboring homes to the north and it gave us the most flexibility with articulation and massing [See discussion on Massing]. The exterior detailing incorporates both stucco and stone for the exterior, but adds Limestone for sills and lintels. Parcel 3 A Craftsman design for Parcel 3 enables us to terminate the street with an elegant design, entirely consistent with the character of Los Gatos and fully compatible with the Mangano house to the north. It backs up to Leewood and provides a good visual transition for Panorama. MASS & BULK - A Discussion as it Relates to this Project 'Mass' [or 'Bulk' which is synonymous] is difficult to quantify. It is somewhat subjective, but there are proven techniques that can be used to reduce it. For Parcel 2 Mass reduction strategies are important because of neighbors to the north; for Parcel 3 less so - as it backs up to Leewood at a higher elevation. While still ensuring that Parcel 3 is consistent with the neighborhood in terms of Mass, it is Parcel 2 that has been our primary focus in this respect. Height and Mass Both the Mangano house to the North [22ft in height] on Panorama and all the homes to the South on Leewood, elevated 6-8 ft above the site [from 24.5 to 27,5ft in height] are 2 story homes. The adjacent home on Cambria is a single story, but is elevated 2 ft above the site and it is already 24.5 ft high. The foundation design proposes a 12" thick structural mat slab to remove the need for a crawl space under the house and keep height [and mass] to a minimum. Conclusion: 30ft in height is allowed, but we hove kept Parcel 2 below 24ft. [Parcel 3 is 24'6"] 15928 Union Ave CONFIDENTIAL T.H.I.S. Design Union Ave Subdivision + AdcS FAR and Mass The smaller the lot, the smaller the house - in order to keep the perceived Mass in proportion. The allowable FAR represents the maximum sq ft that is deemed reasonable. We have not used this as n Goal, but rather hove proposed house sizes that are 230 sq ft under the FAR for Parcels 2 and 3 combined. The combined garages also nre 440 sq ft below the FAR allowed. As a contrast the house on Panorama to the north [Mangano] is within 0.5 sq ft of Allowable FAR. With FARs between .30 and .31, both homes are well within the range of neighborhood FARs. Conclusion: By proposing homes significantly under the FAR we nre reducing perceived Mass. Articulation and Mnss By 'stepping back" the second story walls from the first story walls a significant reduction in visual Mass can be achieved. We have done this with the front elevation of Parcel 3. Indeed a shorter house will often look more Massive than a taller house if the second story walls continue up from the first floor. With Parcel 2 we have taken this one step further - by burying the second story walls within whipped roof' and only having 'dormers' at the upper level. The 7:12 pitch roof for Parcel 2 with eaves at the first floor and one small north-facing dormer projects a minimum of shadowing to properties to the north - as can be seen on Plan Sheet C2 which also shows the shadow cast by the proposed fence at the Property Line. Shadows for the proposed screen trees have been omitted for clarity. Conclusion: Architectural Mass Reduction techniques have been employed to the maximum extent possible for Parcel 2. A Quantification of Mass The third Exhibit quantifies Mass comparatively between Parcel 2 and the house to the north on Panorama [Mangano Residence] by examining the 'Profile' of each house as an Object of Mass. The Mangano house, although slightly smaller in Sq Ft is 1.5 times more massive in Bulk. [919:1515 of Primary Profile or 1080:1515 including the Secondary Profile], It identifies the "Mnss Reduction Strategies" used in Parcel 2 to achieve this result. This is not used to denigrate the design of the Mangano residence - which I quite like -but rather to point out ways in which Mass Reduction Techniques have been used effectively towards the goal of maintaining compatibility in terms of Mass and Bulk with other homes in the neighborhood. We urge the Planning Commission to approve this project on its merits, and to ask each of its detractors in what way it impacts them directly. We believe that it has little or no impact on anyone except Tom Mangano and Stephanie Lynot, and that even they will not be impacted significantly by the proposed subdivision design and house placement and design. Yours truly, T.H.I.S. Design & Development per: A. T. Jeans 15928 Union Ave CONFIDENTIAL T.H.I.S. Design From: Ste hanie L nott <sl nott stmar sl or > Y `~ - P Y Y @ Y 9~ 9 t ~b~.~:_ _~~ a To: <planning@losgatosca.gov> CC: Suzanne Davis <sdavis@losgatosca.gov> ~, ,_,,, ~ ~ ~ ~ Date: 4!29/2010 10:08 AM ~ ~~ ' ~ `~ Subject: 15928 and 15910 Union Avenue TObUN Ct= LOS t3,~;fC1S Dear Commissicners. PLANNINU GI`r151ON As you know, the proposed development at 15928 Union is coming before you, once again. I find this disappointing as this project has been turned down twice by you, Planning, and the Town Council, only to return to you. The story poles are in place for Lots 2 and 3 and the impact of this development is immense from my side of the fence, 15910 Union Avenue, and way out of character for the neighborhood. Because of this, I would like to invite all of you on the Planning Commission to view this project from my of the fence prior to the May 12th meeting. Ideally, I would like to meet with personally at my residence to discuss the project and see its immense impact both inside and outside. You will see that entire views of mountains, trees and anything green, will be totally gone, replaced by fence and stucco. I am impacted at every angle in my backyard and from the entire backside of my house. I literally have to bend over to even see the sky from inside my house: family room, dining porch, bedroom, kitchen window and door. To the left of my patio area the views will be totally blocked as the Lot 2 house will extend the width of the yard. The back unit, attached to the garage, is also loosing all views to stucco and fence. If and when Lot 1 is developed, I will loose the entire view from the side of my house: bathroom, and both of my bedrooms. Again, all mountains, trees and green of any kind will be totally gone, with a fence and stucco wall/house, in its place. The views will also be blocked to the right of my patio area from Lot 1 as it will extend the width of the property. If you are willing and able to meet with me and want to make an appointment, my phone number is 402-9976 and you have my email address with this email. If you aren't able to, I would appreciate it if you would make sure to come see it for yourself, walking down the driveway to the back, viewing the project from all angles. As someone said at one of the Planning meetings, while referring to the flag lot configuration, it sounds like a duck and walks like duck, must be a duck. Well, it's still quacking and I hope that all of you still hear it! Thank you for any considerations, Stephanie Lynott 408-402-9976 E%IiISIT 12 ~~~~~~~~ Members of the 'T'own of Los Gatos 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, California, CA 95030 !~a;~ ~; ZO10 T~~'r',~TJ t~F LrJS GATOS PLANS JING DI'~`ly(ON NIy name is Stephanie Lynott and reside at 15910 Union Avenue, the half acre parallel to 15928 Union Ave. I am a native Los Gatos resident, my family living in Los Gatos for 65 years. I am submitting this letter in COI1ILlI1ctI0I1 ~L'lth Benny Pierce, native of Los Gatos over 65 years, owner of 15910 Union Ave. ivlany points have already been made by the Panorama/Union neighbors. Benny and I are in agreement with all points that have been made and fully support them, ~Ve would like to make a few points and requests regarding the proposal to develop the acre lot adjacent to 15910 Union. 1. `Ve ask that you deny this application as not meeting the Town's General Plan and Development Intensity Guidelines and sections B,C,and D of the California Subdivision iV1ap Act. 2. ~Ve ask that the proposed development be compatible with the elisting neighborhood ,which would make this a two house, single story development. 3, This is a three lot proposal and in being so, no decision should made without seeing the impact of all three lots so as to see the entire impact of the proposed de`. elopment. 4~. The proposed t~vo story development of Lot 2 has obliterated, not just interrupted, the entire view from the family room, dining porch, bedroom, kttchen windo~~v anCl d00r. FC0111 lilslde the house one has to literally bend over to even see the sky. `Vhat ~:fould be seen, if built as proposed, ~~~'ould be a giant stucco cube. 5. The vie~~vs, lighting, and pri~.~ac~• from every angle of the bacl:,`ard are impacted. 6.Lot one, even built as a one story, would totally remove the views from the bathroom and two bedrooms, again, seeing only stucco and fence, bending to see the shy. 7.The intensity and the immensity of the proposed development impacts the views, the lighting, and the privacy of 15910 Union. Landscaping and plants would be impacted because of the shift in the lighting brought about by Fences and building structures. Our hope is that you, The Planning Commission ,will continue to see this proposed development as incompatible to the neighborhood. An entire neighborhood should not be so incredibly impacted for the financial gain of a developer. Yes, there is the right to develop, that is not at question. The question is, what is compatible to the neighborhood? Thank you for your considerations and right choices, Stephanie Lynott and Benny Pierce i~C~T/i i~f~ C'~c~c~ ~~~ JJ~ n "~~D ~_ ti~ .i _~ .:.f il~r~~ t':`~',' ~.1 ~L11 ~ 'i ~ t!M] ...._ .. ~Ja~= 't~~ 1! ~~ L~S: i~ ~~ S Page 1 of 1 Suzanne Davis - 1~9?8 tinion A~•e - usinb Panorama for construction traffic From: Cecilia hohnbera <ceciliashao2000 c~z vahoo.eom> To: <SDavis a losgatosca.goy> _, Date: x,'6!20 ] 0 12:21 P\I Subject: 1 X928 Union Ave -using Panorama for construction traffic CC: <panorama~vay'a: googlegroups.cotn> Hi Suzanne. I would like to submit this letter for the next planning commission meeting. Thanks. Cecilia Dear Commissioners- I spoke ~yith Tom ~~Iangano the other day, and he told me had learned that Grant and leans are nosy proposing to leave the existing d«~elling in place in order to continue collecting rent «-bile construction begins on the back side of the property utilizing Panorama ~~-a~~ as the access point, if the application should be approved. For the record, this is coiilpleteh~ uliacceptable to my husband and me, and I'm sure to all our other neighbors on Panorama as well. In order to try to buy- our cooperation, they assured us that construction traffic ~yould be minimized on our street and that the site ~a-ouk•I be screened off to reduce dust and noise, and no«° the~~ «-ant to fiuvlel the bulk of the construction traffic and ~york through our cul-de-sac. V~'e originall~~ asked for the traffic concession not just because of the inconvenience or discomfort, but because there are no~v THIRTEEN children ~vho live and play on Panorama. including tlu•ee toddlers! And I don't mean "pla}~" figuratively -our children run back and forth to each other's houses, pla~- basketball and hockey, ride bikes. play hide-and-seek learn to ~yalk...they really, truly_ pla~~. all up and down our street, pretty much even single day that it's not raining. As residents and properr<~ o~yners, we have the right to peaceful enjoyment of our homes and our neighborhood, which should not suffer a major negative impact when there is another. more direct. access point to the propert~~. I understand that Grant and Jeans are probably tieing to look at all aspects of this project to find ways to sage money, but let me reiterate that their construction budget is not OUR responsibilit<~: there is absolutel~~ VO reason that our children should help pa}- Grant's rent on that old shad. b~- ~ri~ ing up their safer`- and ~~-e11-being for a year (or ho«~ever long the construction would take). This is vet another example to add to the laundry list of things that Grant and Jeans have misrepresented_ with regard to this project. ~?~~ e ask the commission to please take these issues into consideration and protect the children of Panorama ~~'ay by rejecting the proposal to channel construction traffic into our neighborhood. Thank you. Cecilia Holmberg file:;'/C:',Users.sdavis .~1ppData Local Temp.jP~Trpwise`~1BE2B-1~1]TO~~~_DOTO\~~PC F~IBZT 13 This Page I iitc-ltioilall~~ Left Blain: ~~~~~° May 11, 2010 Suzanne Davis Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: Application #M-08-04 and A&S Application #4-08-30 Property - 15928 Union Avenue, Los Gatos, CA Dear Suzanne, TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION This letter is in response to learning that the builders of the above captioned property intend to access the building site through Panorama Way which is contrary to what we were previously told. Our street has been a dead end street since its inception. The thirteen children that reside on Panorama Way are used to having only the residents of the street drive down the street. Those residents are cognizant of the situation and drive accordingly, using extreme caution at all times. On the rare occasion that someone that does not live on the street comes down the street it is typically in excess of the speed limit and without caution for the children that live there. We have two basketball hoops on the street that are in constant use and if you were to visit our street on any given day you would find bikes, tricycles and hockey going on up and down the street all day long. To invite work crews, that have total disregard for the lives of the people on the street, would be an egregious decision on the part of the planning commission. We were told that access to the property would be from Union. Union is a very busy street and tine residents on that street are used to heavy, fast moving traffic. Please protect our children and do not allow for this change in plans to happen. Thank you, Terry Hickey 100 Panorama Way Los Gatos, CA 95032 E%HIBIT 14 ~~~~~~~~ May 27, 2010 Suzanne Davis Community Development Department Town of Los Gatos 110 East Main Los Gatos, CA 95032 RE: 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision Dear members of the Planning Commission: Ml~i 27 ~U10 TOWN OF LOS GA.TOS PLA'~1NING DIVISION My name is Terry Hickey and I have resided at 100 Panorama Way for 20+ years. I have attended the public hearings and have written letters with regard to the proposed development listed above. The new proposed subdivision makes no attempt at compatibility with our neighborhood. The homes are large two story homes that completely block the view of the adjacent hills for many of the residents on both Panorama Way and Union Avenue. The new subdivision makes very little changes from the original proposal and continues to try to put too many houses on this narrow parcel. As determined by the Town Council on November 2, 2009, the immediate neighborhood for this project is the Panorama Way/Union Avenue neighborhood and yet the developer continues to have complete disregard for keeping this project consistent with that of this neighborhood. The neighborhood is not opposed to the development and would welcome seeing a design for two reasonably sized homes on that lot. Many of us have lived on this street and been residents of Los Gatos for many, many years. I would hope that our voices would be heard over those of a developer that didn't do his homework prior to purchasing this parcel. Sincerely, Terry Hickey Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue • Public Hearing Date: June 9, 2010 R~C~IVED • Agenda Item: 15928 Union Avenue, Subdivision Application MAY ~ ~ ~01~ M-08-13 and Architectural and Site Application M-08-30. TO'~ ~r N OF LOS GATOS • Subject: Neighbor Input to Agenda Item -Request Denial. PLANNING DII~IISION ~ Neighbor: Tom Mangano 0 112 Panorama Way, Los Gatos CA 95032 N ~~ Mvrewd~Ke 3 11]iargryrV Wry\ . S Z 1~Page ffiIBIT 15 ~. f' Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue ,.~ Associate Planner: Suzanne Davis Commissioners: John Bourgeois -Chair Marico Sayoc -Vice Chair Philip Micciche Thomas O'Donnell Joanne Talesfore Marcia Jensen Charles Erekson I am Tom Mangano of 112 Panorama Way, an adjacent northern neighbor of the proposed development. I have lived at my residence for 36 years, and respectfully ask you to deny this application. I recognize the property owner's right of development, but this application as proposed supports a resultant development intensity that does not meet the spirit of Town's general plan and development guidelines, and should be denied on sections B, C, and D of the California Subdivision Map Act. This document will be made up of three parts: • Part 1: reasoning for California Subdivision Map denial. • Part 2: partial list of issues I have with the A&S portion of this application. • Addendum 1: collage of supportive photos for your review and reference. Part 1: Three-parcel subdivision. A. The root of the problem is the width of the lot. The 15928 Union Avenue lot width of 110.3 feet is just too narrow (see Figure 1) to properly place three homes and harmonize them with the neighborhood as is done in typical cul-de-sac termination such as Leewood Court (to use a cul-de-sac that is similar to this proposal). As you know, two previous proposals for this property have been denied by the Commission; one for afour-parcel application was denied (5-0) on June 25, 2008 and athree-parcel application was denied (7-O) on August 26, 2009. 2~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue Additionally, the August 26, 2009 denial was upheld on appeal by the Town Council on November 2, 2009. This application before you also falls short in its burden to meet the Town's general plan. Yes, code does allow a 30 foot frontage on a "cul-de- sac,"and that would be appropriate if the width or depth of 15928 Union allowed for typical "pie shape" parcels. The homes could then be placed and harmonized with each other and the existing homes on the street that the cul-de-sac terminates. This new Panorama Way cul-de-sac cannot possibly do that with any three-parcel sub-division. The resultant development intensity triggers a number of significant problems with neighborhood harmonization, view sheds, noise, drainage, privacy and sun access which will individually and collectively fail to meet the specifics and spirit of the Town's general plan and development guidelines. "Modified Pie Shape" Lack of depth approx 35 feet ' ~ Ple shaped lou Leewood Court 30 ft frontage Cul-de-sac Note depth 135 feet Figure 1. Leewood Court is example of cul-de-sac using 30 foot frontage parcels, but the "pie shape" parcels have adequate depth to place homes in a harmonized manner. 3~Page r~~ ~~ Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue 1) Harmonization: The established pattern of the predominate neighborhood of Panorama and Union is broken with the proposal. CD.P.1.7 New structures, remodels, landscapes and hardscapes shall be designed to harmonize and blend with the scale and rhythm of the neighborhood and natural features in the area. L.P.4.3 Maintain the character and identity of existing neighborhoods. New construction, remodels, and additions shall be compatible and blend with the existing neighborhood. L.G.2.2 To reduce the visual impact that new construction and/or remodeling has on our town and its neighborhoods. d a Figure 2. Neighborhood pattern of Union Ave. and Panorama Way 4~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue The applicant states there is a three structure neighborhood pattern for Union/Panorama Way and Leewood Court. The fact is that there are five northern lots on Union, and all five Union lots have detached garages behind the home (Figure 2). One of those garages has a "granny unit" attached. The existence of detached garages or an attached granny unit to one garage does not define a pattern of three structures on the adjacent lots that run from Union to Panorama Way to justify the additional 3200 sq. ft. residence on this application. The three structure pattern on the Leewood Court neighborhood with its own cul-de-sac (which is a typical cul-de-sac in terms of "pie shapes")should not be considered part of the immediate neighborhood as noted by the Town Council in the November 2, 2009 appeal. Additionally, the applicant justifies the lack of harmony and pattern as a product of the proposed cul-de-sac. The fact is as pointed out in part 1, section A, that this is not a typical cul-de-sac and the degree of the non-conformity and harmony in this proposal is based on the limits of the property width not the cul-de-sac. A cul-de-sac pattern shift is not a license to establish a totally new pattern and justify total disregard for harmonization as this proposal is doing. 2) View sheds: The story pole "story" is just that, The subdivision as proposed does not conform to the following of the Town's general plan: CD.P.1.1 Promote and protect the physical and other distinctive qualities of residential neighborhoods. CD.P.1.4 Promote and protect view sheds. CD.P.1.11 New structures or remodels that will affect existing scenic views of neighbors shall be designed so that all affected properties have equitable access to views. L.P.2.3 Encourage basements and cellars to provide "hidden" square footage in lieu of visible mass. S~Pa~~ ~- , ~~ Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue Figure 3 shows the proposed view from my backyard. When you visit the site, I extend an invitation to also visit my home, my side yard, my backyard, and sit in my porch rocking chair and view the story that these story poles tell loudly and clearly. The proposed development intensity of this application does not meet the spirit of the Town's general plan nor the design guidelines that have been adopted to protect the Town's residents' quality of life in their own homes. 61Page Figure 3. The vietiv from my backyard Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue The applicant states that this is a transitional area and that two story homes should be allowed. Nothing can be further from the truth: • 15928 Union because of its northern proximity is a "gateway" of the beautiful mountain ridge views to the south. Any construction over 15 to 16 feet into view sheds will block those views. The applicant has recognized the value of those views and has designed a viewing balcony on the 2~d story of both A&S parcels. • Planning has denied two-story homes on both the east (115 Cambrian Way) and west border (101 Lausen Ct) of this application. In the interest of time and efficiency of communication, at this point I have provided a collage of images in attached Addendum 1. It captures without any ambiguity the aesthetic hideousness of this proposal. Neighbors are referring to it as the circus tent...and worse. 3) Noise: The proposal does not conform to the following of the Town's general plan: N.P.1.12 Evaluate the noise impacts of new development in terms of any increase of the existing ambient noise levels and the potential for adverse noise impacts on nearby or adjacent properties. The evaluation shall consider short term construction noise and on-going operational noise. This development completes a perfect storm for noise because: 7~Paje ~~ Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue .._ • Parcel 2's set-back of 60 plus feet from the cul-de-sac places the home and the garage 6 feet behind the back plane of my residence. • Parcel 3's home is positioned to deflect noise towards my home. • 8-11 foot fences on the south and east and heightened homes surrounding the cul-de-sac on three sides create a virtual echo chamber. • 118 Cambrian View home is no more than 10 feet from the property line. The home is heighten for grade and borders the cul-de-sac 15928 property for 100 feet. Combined a cavernous effect is produced and guarantees that noise -human and vehicular-will reverberate throughout the cul-de-sac area and surrounding structures (see Figure 4). T ! My residence ~ 112 Panorama Way E `o ~ c a Noise source zone Hard Figure 4. Designed to amplify noise. 4J Drainage: The neighborhood has been on record for over two decades of problems associated with natural drainage from the proposed property 8~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue due to the topography, water tables, and soil conditions. I am appreciative of Engineering's increased review and the additional requirements that it has given to the applicant, because of the developer's previously inadequate drainage solutions. The application's floor to area ratio (FAR) requests combined with the 30% increase in first floor massing with the porches and overhangs (800 sq. ft. for parcel 2 only to mask the second floor massing) result in 69% of the drainage surface area to south of my home becoming impervious. I find this alarming and problematic given the history of water problems my house has had in the last 36 years with rain storms causing run-off water to run through my garage and grcund water to accumulate under my house. Most of neighborhood homes like mine will have sump pump activity for a month beyond any rainy season due to existing conditions. Given these factors this subdivision map merits conservative development intensity of two parcels not aggressive development intensity of three parcels. 5) Privacy and sun access: Under "Town Design Guidelines" section 2.5.2, Design with sensitivity to neighbors. This proposal diminishes my residency privacy and sun access. Elimination of direct view windows on 2"d floor north elevation of parcel 2 does not eliminate privacy issues associated with its east facing 2"d story windows. Sun access is lost by my residence in the middle of the afternoon because of placement and massing of parcel 2 during the fall and winter when such sun access would reduce energy consumption, and be particularly enjoyable. Part 1, Conclusion: As part of your review, I also ask you to review the commission's video of August 26, 2009 and ask yourself how this newest proposal mitigates any of the concerns that you voiced in your 7-0 denial. It simply does not. In fact, given that we now have defined height and massing as proposed in the A&S section of this proposal, it is clear that the 9~Pag2 Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue applicant has not listened to any of the guidance the Planning Commission has voiced, nor the neighborhood concerns that have been documented and expressed. The applicant stated during the November 2, 2009 Town Council appeal about the proposal in front of you, "I don't think its right in this context." (Ref, town council video 11/2/09: 02:18:04-07) This newest three-parcel proposal has simply morphed a previous proposed flag lot into asix-sided "modified pie shape" as applicant call it. As result this proposal creates the same issues the Commissioners voiced and voted 7-0 to deny on August 26, 2009. As part of my conclusion I would like to address some of the applicant's assertions and statements to date: • "The primary objection with the previous proposal was the flag lot configuration." The Town Council denied the appeal of the August 26, 2009 Commission vote on November 2, 2009. On February 1, 2010 the Council remanded the applicant back to the Commission to work on a new proposal be it 2 or 3-parcel subdivision. The Town Council never stated on public record that removal of the flag lot configuration was the only barrier to a 3-parcel subdivision approval. I encourage you to review the November 2, 2009 video and the resolution follow-up video discussions of December 7, 2009 and February 1, 2010 to draw your own conclusions on the Council's direction - if in fact there was any given - beyond the fact that 15928 Union application was remanded back to this Commission. • "Three is a compromise between two and four." "The developer originally wanted four and the neighborhood wanted two." The four homes were a proposal that never met the Town's general plan, was not supported by staff and was denied by this commission (5-0). An overreaching defeated proposal is not a viable proposal that merits weight in a compromise. This is a 2 or 3-parcel subdivision and the Commission, Council or a Court will ultimately make that final decision based on the merits of proposal and the Town's general plan not based on some alleged compromise between 2 and 4. 10~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue "We were directed to do three." This Commission asked the applicant if he would entertain 3-parcels instead of the requested 4-parcels during the June 25, 2008 hearing as a vehicle to continue the hearing. The applicant's answer was "No." Investigating or exploring a 3-parcel subdivision alternative did not direct or guarantee the applicant a 3-parcel subdivision approval. The application must still meet the burden of the Town's general plan. This Commission's criteria for development approvals are not based only on zoning requirements and supportive frontage, height and setback requirements as the applicant wants us to believe. "We can't preserve view sheds because the August 26, 2009 proposal was denied." I fought for the denial of August 26, 2009 because I know for all reasons I have stated in this letter that a subdivision of 2-parcels is the only proper use of the 15928 Union property. The burden is again on the applicant to conform to the Town's general plan. To justify loss of view sheds because of the denial of another proposal is disingenuous. In closing this section I would like to take two sentences from the Introduction section of Los Gatos' General Plan: "Proposed development projects are held to a higher standard and what is approved in other communities may not be acceptable in Los Gatos." "Support of new development from surrounding residents and property owners will be a major consideration during any development review process." These two sentences are reflective and important to all the residents of Los Gatos and especially express my own expectations for the Los Gatos Community Development Department, the Planning Commission and the Town Council. I am currently working on my master's thesis for my graduate degree in Architecture. I hope to someday present architectural plans to this very body. I want my architecture to be held to such a high standard. This proposal wilts from the light cast on it by that standard. Land use, view sheds, and neighborhood harmony are irreplaceable, and because of that we must meet a higher standard for our community to take pride in itself and to meet the standards it has set for itself. Too many questions have not been answered by 11~Pa;e Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue this developer and designer. Too many town and residents' concerns have not been addressed; therefore, this proposal neither meets the higher standard of Los Gatos nor merits the support of the surrounding residents like myself. Thank you Commissioners for your time and thank you for your community service on the Planning Commission. A special thank you for Suzanne Davis for all the help she has given me and my fellow neighbors who are only asking for a responsible development for 15928 Union Avenue so the residents present and future can enjoy Los Gatos. Part 2: Architecture and site concerns General: • Southeastern and eastern borders: Development should be required to construct a finish wall, for the developer is removing current screening. The eastern fence is not straight because it is currently built around a tree that going to be removed, and both fences have ongoing height variations. 150 linear feet of "back fence" not built for primary public exposure is not appropriate for the neighborhood. (see collage pictures on page 17 and 18) • I am concerned about the "upkeep" of the eastern quadrant of the development in terms of graffiti and landscape maintenance. • Street lighting is required on the cul-de-sac. • The neighborhood has requested 5-foot park strips around the cul-de-sac to continue the existing park strip width on Panorama Way. • Northern border fences' eastern termination point does not work for my residence. • Six-foot high fencing on the northern border is not defined in quality, style, or responsible costs. Why and how was the fence height determined to be 6 feet? The current open plank fence is 5 feet. • I request driveway edging on northern border of parcel 2 to minimize water runoff towards my parcel. • Quality of homes' exterior finishes compared to detail work on adjacent homes. • Excessive use of first floor massing to mask the second floor massing. • Neighborhood harmonization 12~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue • Drainage, drainage, drainage! I believe the Clifford Bechtel and Associates drainage calculations of April 5, 2010, are dangerously conservative. Calculations are based on an average of 40% impervious area, which is not the case of the effective drainage area to my parcel. • View sheds. • Noise. • Privacy. • Sunlight. Parcel 2: • Home FAR is excessive and does not mitigate issues the development creates. • Home height (2 stories- with 9'6", 1St floor ceiling height) is excessive and does not mitigate toward sharing of view sheds • Home was "ballooned" 800 sq. ft. of non FAR space to mask second floor massing. • Home northern setback is 8 feet, the minimum per code, but does not mitigate the mass and position of the home. Homes adjacent to north have 10 and 13 feet side yard setbacks. • Home position interferes with backyard views for Panorama/Union immediate neighborhood. • Home has a predominated garage facade • Home has aset-back that is not compatible with immediate surrounding structures, and the immediate neighborhood. • Roof ridges do not mitigate view shed issues. Major roof ridges run east/west and north/south. Additionally, aesthetically, the roof is too busy for the home size and surrounding structures. • 360 degree architecture and finishes do not extend beyond window styles. Cannon Design Group (CDG) voices the same concerns in their letter of Nlarch 16 and March 26 of 2010. 13~Page ~-. Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue _~ • No use of basements or cellars to minimize above ground massing. Today's building trades and materials make basements and cellars feasible in like soil drainage conditions. Parcel 3 • Home FAR is excessive and does not mitigate issues the development creates. • Home height (2 stories with 10', 15t floor ceiling height) is excessive and does not mitigate issues the development creates. • No use of basements or cellars to minimize above ground massing. Today's building trades and materials make basements and cellars feasible in like soil drainage conditions. • As a condition of approval, eliminate any future swimming pool (which would acerbate the noise issues). • Requests: • 60-day notice and proper involvement of underground utility pull through my utility easement. • Professional conduct and respect for myself and property by the landowner and any contractors, subcontractors, or agents hired for the development. • Current 15928 Union home be demolished prior to construction • The street safety cf Panorama `Nay is given top priority because of the number of young children who live on the street. • No construction parking on the existing Panorama Way street • Street and residence driveways are not blocked at any time. 14~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue Addendum 1 Picture Collage South view from my home of the development from my sun porch South view from my home of the development from my back yard Parcel two front is placed behind the back plane of my house. Addendum 1 Picture Collage 151 Pave ~~, Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue View of development from my bedroorn Addendum 1 Picture Collage View of development from my inglenook View of development from my dining area 16~Page Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue dew of development from my porch dew of development from my kitchen window Yew of eastern and southeast ofdevelop- mentsection - pa rt of the future noise corridor 17~Page ~~ Neighbor input on 15928 Union Avenue Addendum 1 Picture Collage View of development southeast comer - hodgepodge of fencing now hidden -This will all be exposed by the development dew of eastern fence with height changes and line changes Ytew from future sidewalk of development slotting of parcel 2 home behind partial 3 home . 181Page Geoff Mitchell 115 Panorama Way Los Gatos. CA 95032 Wednesday, May 26, 2010 Suzanne Davis Community Development Dept., Town of Los Gatos 110 East Main Los Gatos, CA 95032 Subject: 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision and Architectural Dear Planning Commission members, Nil-i~ ~ 7 210 TOWN O~ LOS GATOS FLA~lh~ll~lG GIVISION My name is Geoff Mitchell. My family resides at 115 Panorama Way, at the end of the street where the Union Avenue property being discussed is located. I have repeatedly written and spoken at public hearings on this topic over the course of the past two years. In the spirit of being brief and direct, I would like to raise the following points for your consideration. KEY POINTS • Based on the Town Codes and Planning Guidelines, the proposed subdivision and architectural design is unsuitable for this property and the neighborhood of Panorama Way and Union Avenue. The attached January 2010 letter from our lawyer, Kirsten Powell, highlights the Town's General Plan, Land Use Goals and Policies, and Government Codes supporting these findings. • The prior subdivision application was denied unanimously by the Planning Commission, and upheld by a Town Council majority vote, due to toGVn code and planning guideline violations caused by this attempt to fit three lots into a space suited for only two. Nothing in this revised plan has changed that negates those violations. They still exist in this ne~v proposal. • The architectural intensity of the home designs is unacceptable as a continuation of Panorama Way or Union Avenue. The intensity of the size of the homes and the deviation from the uniform use of the land violates the Land Use Goal and Town's General Plan (as detailed ire the Kirsten Powell letter as wetly. • Although the developer previously eluded to Leewood and Lasuen courts as being part of the neighborhood, the Town Council clearly stated that the definition of "The Neighborhood" is that of Union Ave and Panorama Way. (There are no streets or pathways connecting them v/ith Panorama Way. although Traffic exits o~~to Union Ave no homes sit on Union Ave or have a Union Ave address, an 8ft fence running the entire length of the property separates Leewood Court from 15928 Union Ave. and any homes positioned on this lot will inherit a Panorama Way or Union Avenue street address.) FXAIBIT 16 • An historical precedence of the appropriate approach can be found in the directly adjacent development running between Blossom Hill Road to Cambrian View Way. The shape, size and orientation of that development to the Blossom Hill Road /Cambrian View Way neighborhood is identical to the Union Ave property in every tivay (the Union Ave property is acfually smaller) yet the direction from the Planning Commission was for two single-story homes, not three two-story homes. The three-lot concept was deemed "not good planning" by the Planning Commission. There are numerous other essential points and considerations raised in the lawyer's letter as well as the many letters and packets that have been submitted throughout these many hearings. 1 would ask that you take the time to carefully review and study them all when reconsidering this application. They are filled v/ith details and evidence that further supports the conclusion that the appropriate use of this property would be a two-lot subdivision with single-story homes. CLOSING We are a close knit. tightly integrated and connected neighborhood. We welcome and embrace the potential development of reasonable scale homes on a two-lot subdivision, in keeping with the scale and density of our neighborhood. Please confirm once and for all that this lot is not suitable for any more than two lots and two single-story houses. Please let the residents know that you support the interests and concerns of those impacted for years to come over the short term interests of a developer who will not have to live with the impact once the homes are completed. Geoff Mitchell IIII'41'IIII~Iilillli(I,ilifil'll(i'IJi~IJi~III~iJ 2D1 3 INCHEB r~ U tD N • frJ ~ -t OCC N m rD ^/ >< i _ ----~i1 f~ I 0 N ~` a AVE. I r ~- i I f fiJ6 1 l~ H ...- 1 i J 1407 ~~ ~ ~ ` f N I~rjr y ~Gi s ~ _ o v, r ,~ _ ., ,, •~' "' > n ~ ~-- 1 Sad 2 II S~ tea !",tea I ~,L~ y~_nr_ ~ p j ~ C ~ I u I u _ ^ T ' ---iaite --- ~ _ _ ~ - ~ to ~ I ,'~ rva fr'~ ~ ~~.. ~ ~~~ I I I ., V e t sl ~ ` 2 I', w= Mr I~b I ~ p ~ # `- I PANORAMA 1-+acr Neass7 inas „ rrr ror rw WAY ~ 91~ X X20 ~9, ~6~1 ICJ ft _ ~,~ n I I 1 r ' m '~N1dS~l?PR~[!E© FOF{ UNL.Y ;~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ W i ~ s iro ~ir1i~ ~tf~1~L ~ ~T~RY f~OetiPES ^ ~ ~ I i e ~ a~ + ~ t irs~ I - ~ fs.u ., Ig N I ~ I I ---~ ~ 1 w ~--~-~----1r-~- A m < l~ ~~e 1~,, ~ ,a r IA ~ ~~3 I I~ I ~ j f+ ~ ~r -t p~ ~r i~ ~ I I I I O I ~ y (n ss- ~+ ~ i a ° ~ ~_^ I BRIARW000 ,, ,u WAY ~ 3 ° ~ ~ "~ :m ar r ~ _ _ is ~~D w.u f1~ r; . la -_ I W : Iw I ~' I Iw I ~ j ~ ~ kw ~ a b _ rcs ~ ~+ ! D ~ --~--- wnai i-~=L- ~-T----~-ast4x Z C~ I ~ r I mm ~ s 1 0 • r Ii I+ ^ (Cry Y N ^ ;v a '~, ---- I~ r. f0j 1^ ~ ----- m I~ ~ ~~ 4T I 1 s i ~ # ~°a ~ IFS ~ y° ~ ~ PIEDh10NT~ 4 ~ COURT ' I o3~ I J F ~ fy ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ I I = ^ Iis a R I E I I S a I~ ~ a l I d I ~ I ~ I o a `~ ~~ E~ F ~ i la i 14 ~ ~ R ~ ~-t t.n_ ai,oi ~ ei I 1 sc I 76 I a ass fIl ~l, /! w :r1 -KENSIN<;TON WAY a ~ 0 f v _ u~ g I ~~ :I LOGAN & ATTOR~~YS AT L a~;' Robert J. Logz-., o` Ceuasel PO~'VELL LLP 6i East \!zi^ Street, Suite C ^ Los Gz:os, Czl:fernia 9~Q30 Te;enhor,c {eUSj 39~-'3.0 i•ax (a0oj :95-134 E-rizi': info a~iogar.poweil.corr. Hand Delivered January 28, 2010 Honorable Mayor and Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 Town Council Members Re: Reconsideration of 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision; M-d8-13, ND-09-02 Dear Honorable Mayor and Town Council Members: This office represents residents of Panorama Way, Union Avenue and Cambrian Vies^/ in their opposition to the above listed matter. These neighbors remain opposed to this project and any reconsideration of this Council's denial of this project on November 2, 2009. The November 2, 2009, decision was the right decision for the neighborhood and the Town of Los Gatos. With three (3) lots, this project is trying to put too much on too narrow of a parcel. No matter ho4v the lots are sliced. it will still be too much on too narrow of a parcel. As outlined in more detail belo~~r, the project with three (3) lots is inconsistent with the Town's General Plan and the surrounding neighborhood and therefore, must be denied, Reconsideration of this project is unnecessary. Pursuant to Government Code ~ 66474, the Town Council "shall deny approval of a tentative map..." if it makes any of the findings outlined in that section. Given the facts of this project, the following findings must be made: "(b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development; and (dj That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development." "A proposed subdivision shall be consistent tivith a general plan or a specific plan only if the local agency has officially adopted such a plan and the proposed subdivision or land use is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in such a plan." (Government Code § 66473.5) Due to the density and design of this three (3) lot subdivision, it is inconsistent with the Land Use Element and the Community Design Element of the Town's General Plan. In addition, the narrow parcel is not physically suited for the development of three (3} lots. ndeh... ~^aYl~prr,T.'d~ el'~ T^.u^i Cvunc .,• J7 e"S.tO. sG Honorable Mayor and Town Council Members Re: Reconsideration of 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision; M-08-13, ND-09-02 January 28, 2010 Page 2 INCONSISTENCY WITH LAND USE ELEMENT As you knov/, the Town prides itself on its small town heritage, natural setting and architectural diversity. In the Land Use Element of the Town's General Plan, the Town acknowledges that preserving these attributes is important to this community and new development should be v/ell-designed to preserve and enhance these attributes. To that end, the Town has established goals, policies and implementing strategies which must be followed. The project as proposed is inconsistent with several Land Use Goals and Policies. Land Use Goal 3.1 (L.G.3.1) requires the Town "to maintain the existing character of residential neighborhoods by controlling development." (L.G.3.1) One of the policies adopted to reach this goal is L.P.3,5 which states "assure that the type and intensity of land use shall be consistent with that of the immediate neighborhood." As determined by this Council on November 2, 2009, the immediate neighborhood is the Panorama WaylUnion Avenue neighborhood. The project will be accessed on Union Avenue and through Panorama Way. The immediate neighborhood is not Leewood Court because "it is physically separated from the project site by an eight (8) foot retaining wall and a five (5) foot grade separation." Development consistent with Panorama Way/Union Avenue should follov/ the rectilinear orientation and involve only two (2) lots on that parcel as shoe/n an Exhibit A. This development pattern is consistent with the development pattern that was approved on a similarly narrow parcel on Blossom Hill Road as shown on Exhibit B. The developer of that parcel also requested a three (3) lot subdivision but was constrained to hvo (2) lots for these same reasons. The development pattern of the proposed project with three (3) lots is inconsistent with the immediate neighborhood. Another goal outlined in the Town's General Plan is Land Use Goal 2.1 (L.G.2.1) v/hich requires the Tov/n "to limit the intensity of new development to a level consistent uvith surrounding development and with the To~tim at large." For all of the reasons previously expressed by the immediate neighbors of this project, approving three (3) lots on this parcel is not consistent with the intensity of development in the surrounding neighborhood. As stated above, the immediate neighborhood (Panorama Way and Union Avenue) is developed in a traditional rectilinear arientation. in order to squeeze three (3) lots onto this narrow parcel, the developer is forced to orient the lots at angles to meet the minimum requirements. This change in orientation is contrary to the development pattern of the neighborhood and should not be approved merely to allov/ a developer to maximize his investment. ft is inconsistent with surrounding development. V,itCh?II, Geo"'G-e,,,~~,~tia~; -can Counci~;v Ct 2E t0.~ Honorable Mayor and Town Council Members Re: Reconsideration of 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision; M-OS-13, ND-09-02 January 28, 2010 Page 3 Another policy in the Town' General Plan that is relevant to this project relates to infill development. Although the Planning Commission inferred this vas not an infill project because the land is developed with one residential unit, the policies and goals are applicable because that one residential unit is proposed to be demolished to make way for the creation and development of three (3) new lots within an area that is already largely developed. Therefore, the following policies should also be considered: 1) Land Use Policy 1.7 (L.P.1.7) provides "In-fill projects shall contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood (e.g. improve circulation, contribute to or provide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area, not detract from the existing quality of life)." 2) Land Use Policy 1.8 (L,P.1.8) provides "In-fill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning with respect to the existing scale and character of surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the established character of the area." The strategies to implement these policies include: "L.1.1.3. In-fill projectlCommunity Benefit: Applicants for in-fill projects shall demonstrate that the project has a strong community benefit." "L.1.1.4. In-fill project/Community Benefit: The deciding body shall make specific findings of community benefit before approving any in-fill project," As stated repeatedly by the neighbors, this project with three (3) lots is not designed in context with the surrounding neighborhood. Cramming three (3) lots onto this narrow parcel does not create any community benefit. INCONSISTENT WITH COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The Town's General Plan includes a Community Design Element which is intended to protect the unique characteristics that define the Town. To do so, the element includes a goal "to preserve and enhance the Town's character through exceptional community design." (CD.G.1.1) The policies to reach this goal include ''avoid abrupt changes in scale and density" (CD.P.1.5) and ''new structures, remodels, landscapes and hardscapes shall be designed to harmonize and blend with the scale and rhythm of the neighborhood and natural features in the area." (CD.P.1.7) Forcing three (3) lots onto this narrow parcel results in an abrupt change in scale and density r The General Plan defines Ir.fill Development as "Developrent of vacant land {usually i^Cividual Icts or left-over propert'es} vrithin areas that are already largely developed. ldilGhaG, GeoY.;CorcR.1it^..tie'l'ChnCo~^.ca Itr01.28 tOsq Honorable Mayor and Town Council Members Re: Reconsideration of 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision; M-08-13, ND-09-02 January 28, 2010 Page 4 and breaks the established rhythm and pattern of the Panorama Way/Union Avenue neighborhood. Any three (3) lot subdivision is inconsistent with the Town's Community Design Element of its General Plan and therefore, must be denied. Any development proposal on this parcel that provides for the creation of three (3) lots will be inconsistent with the Town's General Plan. No further consideration of this project is necessary as long as the developer is proposing the creation of three (3) lots. The narrow parcel is not physically suitable for the creation of three (3} lots. The creation of three (3) lots is inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhood. These findings will not change. Therefore; this subdivision or any subdivision creating three (3} lots on this parce! cannot be approved. This project should be denied on February 1, 2010. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, ,~ p ~~~J ~- Kirsten M. Powell KMP:sq enclosures cc: client Michael Martello, Interim Town Attorney Suzanne Davis, Project Planner tAilcheil, Geo!UCorrll.!ilchetl Tcwn ~ounc3 lU Gi :8.t0. sq Exhibit A wit ~8a ~ of Exhibit B • M 5 i p r ~~~_~~ I fi i ~~ ~ 21 rr e n ~ ~ •.~ ,, w a i '. ~ i~_,.r..~ .rte 9RlAflW00D t. WAY - ~q,~, DETAiL VIEVv AND CALCULAT IO~i OF SQ F•C ON THE UNION AVE AtiD BLOSSOP~i HILL LOTS USIP.G TF'E '_S98 TR~,CT CIAGRA~~1 FROM THE SANTA CLARA COUlVTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE -__. ...---Y- i --._ i G i~ ~ . r= 3 ~W ~ -,a-s-- r*r r' ~ ~ ; ~ I _J.Lt:L_ ~ ,n .. .. Exhibit Page ~ of ^~ ~ ~~ A r This Page Intentionall~~ Left I31ank Orville Buesing May 27, 2010 Members of the Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission 110 East Main Street ~,' ;• Zu i u Los Gatos, CA 95032 G';'~~ ^~! OF LOS GA.TOS Re: Reconsideration of the 15928 Union Avenue Subdivision And Architectural and Site Application I am Orville Buesing a Los Gatos resident and property owner at 15892 Union Avenue for the past thirty-seven years and have lived in the Los Gatos area for more than fifty years. My property is the second lot north of the proposed development. ask that you deny this application as not meeting the Town's general plan and development intensity guidelines and sections B, C, and D of the California Subdivision Map Act. This property should be divided into two lots and two single story homes. The applicant has submitted plans that have negative impact to the surrounding properties in the neighborhood in several ways. 1. The applicant has requested a three lot subdivision but has only developed plans for the two proposed homes on Panorama Way. We in the neighborhood feel that any proposal should display architectural designs for lot one on Union Avenue to show a complete subdivision package. 2. Drainage issues are a huge concern in this neighborhood. All properties have sump pumps that operate continually during wet weather winter months. The soil in the area consists of clay to a layer of more than twenty feet as verified by soil samples, and as a result there is little or no percolation. The proposed site plan needs to have an underground storm sewer line with appropriate drainage basins spaced along the northern property line that would be tied directly to the main storm sewer running down the middle of Union Avenue. The applicant has proposed a surface runoff bio swale to carry water to a curbside storm drain on Union Avenue. There will be an increased amount of water to percolate in less soil area as added structures and driveways are built. A bio swale likely would not carry the runoff and the water will run downhill north to the neighboring properties. 3. The applicant is proposing two story houses that will definitely reduce, and for some, eliminate hillside views. The positioning of houses on the proposed lots 2 and 3 impact view sheds for the neighborhood. All houses on Panorama Way and houses facing Union Avenue consists of single story residences with lot sizes ranging from 8,000 to 20,000 square feet. Although my residence is two lots north of the proposed subdivision, my view of the hills from my back porch and from my back yard is virtually gone with a two story house design. A single story design and two lot subdivision will lessen impact on surrounding residences. See the following page for pictures: 1. Taken from the back porch 2. Taken from back yard Respectfully Submitted, Orville Buesing cc: Suzanne Davis, Associate Los Gatos Town Planner z 3 ~~ Joint Schwarz 104 Panorama Way Los Gatos, CA 9032 (408) 623-1 ~9~ Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission 110 i:ast viain Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 May 27, 2010 RE: RECONSIDERATION OF THE 1928 UNION AVENt1E SUBDIVISION PROJECT ,~pplicatioo #'1'I-08-04 and Nll-09-0? Dear Members of the Town Planning Commission: I ~ r~ I ~ r '^ n ~~lu TOWN ~F LOS GATOS PLAPvNING DIVISION Thank you for your time in reviewing t}us proposed Subdivision (again} and for considering my input. 1 also want to thank Staff for their time and patience with this matter. As you know, there has been much prior correspondence on this project, and with that in mind, I would like to briefly sununarize and provide some additional thoughts on the following main points: 1}The revised Subdil~ision design is still not compatible with adjacent uses; 2) The same Subdivision Map Act Findines apply to this incarnation of the project, and 3) The project has been segmented and the CEQA documentation is not adequate. I «~ould like to hereby incorporate by reference, the comments that I and my neighbors have made in prior correspondence and testimony on this project. I. Re~•ised Subdivision Sti11 Not Compatible with Adjacent Lises There has been much testirr~ony at the prior hearings regarding the fact that the ] X928 Lnion Avenue parcel mirrors the original parcels immediately to the north, and that the proposed three- lot Subdivision is not compatible with the adjacent uses which make up the true "neighborhood" for this site. Although the "flag lot" line from the prior Subdivision has been redrawrn slightly, the "new" Subdivision layout is still very similar to the prior incarnation. and far the same reasons outlined previously, the intensitti of the proposed development it is not compatible with the neighborhood. 2, Subdivision ~~Iap Act Findings The applicant has indicated that the To«m cannot make any of the negative findings in the Subdivision J~fap Act, a~td therefore, carutot deny the proposed Subdivision. This is simply not true. Section 66474 (Chapter 4. Requirements, Article 1. General} of the Subdivision ~~tap Act specifically states that: EXHIBIT 18 Letter ;o the Tox•r, Plcnnin~ Canunission Recau~idc>rctinn q~ 1 ~ 9_ Q (:`niorr ,4 ~ e. Str~c;r~: LsL ~n 6G-1 ~~1. A le2i.slative bode aka citt-~ or cnuntl~ .shall dc~nv approl~al of a teniative map, or a parcel map for which cr tentative map x°as not reyuire~~ if it makes any of the.follox~ing findings: (emphasis added) (a) That the proposed map is not consistent titi ith applicable general and specific plans a.; specified in Section 6~-l~l. (b) That the design or improvers:ent of the proposed subdivision is not cotsistent rti~ith applicable general and specific plans. (c) That the site is not pfi}•'sically suitable for the hpe of development. (d) That the site is not ph~Jsically suitable for the proposed density of development. (e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage ar substantially and avoidably injure fsh or wildlife or their habitat. U) That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems'.... (9mended by Stats. 1952, Ch..513.) The Subdivision lviap Act Findings above are subjective, and the decision regarding whether they apply to this project is yours. :~s long as the Town', decision is based on and supported by evidence in the administrative record, your decision to deny is legal and appropriate. It is not the Town's job to rescue the applicant from a bad investment. As several of us have outlined in our correspondence with the Town, and as you can see if you review the deliberations at the prior Planning Commission and "Co~ti'n Council hearings, theyTown denied the previous Subdivision on the basis of items b), c), and dj above. The Planning Commission unanimously aereed last year that Subsection (c) and (d) above applied to the prior incarnation of this project, and these same findings still apply to the latest Subdivision layout. 3. CEQA Res•ie~i~ Has Becn Segmented and Documentation Not adequate As I have mentioned in the past, I do appreciate Staffls and the consultant's time in preparing the Initial Study; IvfitigatedNogative Declaration (ISt'~~1:vD). However, given the change in the project scope (the project now also includes tlrchitecture and Site [A&S] approval on hi•o lots, and does not propose demolition of the eaistine. house), the CEQA documentation completed For this project is not adequate in accordance. with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and relevant case. law. CEQA very specifically requires the consideration of the "~~,~hole of an action" [see CEQA Guidelines Sections 15163(a}(l ), 1 ~ 126, and 15375]. CEQA does not allow segmenting or '~piecemealing" the project into parts. so as to avoid analyzing and disclosing all of the environmental impacts of a project [see Bo=~ing :~. Local.-[gooey Formation Commission of Y'entura County and Citizens,-Issociation for Sensible Development of Bishop.~irea v. Coiu~ty ol` Inyo]. According to the Citi~ej~s .~ssocration far S'ettsible Development of Bishop Area v. Cot~nt}~ of Iny~o case: Letter to the Teu~~r Planning Commission ,Recorrsideruron off~928 Uniorr:tve. Subdn~isio~: ,bfn}~? , ?01G Pn,~e 3 of -t "Project means l{2e u•hvle ofan action, which has the potential for resulting in a physical change in the envirorvnent: directly or ultimately... The term 'project'refers to the activil} tirhich is being approved and x~hich rru!y he subject to several discretionary approvals by governmental agencies. The ter~rt 'project' does not mean each separate governme~ual approval... 13-~1er-e the lead agent}- could describe tiro project... as a development proposal 1ti~hich tit~ill be subject to several governmental approvals... the lead agency shall describe the project as the development proposal for the purpose of environmental analysis. " "1-he Town's Initial Study/tifitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the prior incarnation of the Subdivision project in July 2Q09. The ISItiftiD has not been re•.-ised to address the new Subdivision layout, and it has not been expanded to address the specifics of the A&S approvals or the implications of leaving the existing residence in place on the site. Page 1 and 2 of the Town's prior IS/MND describe the project as only including the proposed Subdivision and demolition of the existing house. Page 2 specifically says: '`The project application does not include specific development designs for homes on the proposed lots. Specific development designs on the proposed lots would be evaluated at a later phase of project planning, as part of the A&S approval process." Similarly, the Stafhs responses to the public comments on the IS/1v1ND state that the land use compatibility as well as the aesthetics/view impacts of the future homes "...will be evaluated as part of Architecture and Site review when specific building designs are proposed." Now, the applicant has changed the project, and is actually seeking A&S approval for houses on two of the lots. However, the site specific implications of these houses and their desi ans have never been evaluated under CEQA (and if any additional analysis has been done, it has not been circulated to the public for review). In fact, the Initial Study calls for and promises such further evaluation, but it has not been completed. Therefore, there is no CEQA clearance for the houses. and the Town has no ability to approve the A&S for any of the houses on this site. Additionally, it is project segmentation and piecemealing under CEQ:1 to only evaluate some of Lhe proposed and necessary discretionary actions on this site in the Initial Study. The whole "project" which needs to be evaluated comprehensively in one public CEQA document includes all of the following: I1 the currently proposed Subdivision; 21 A&S for all 3 proposed houses; 3} impacts from the eventual demolition of the existinn residence; ~} a discussion and analysis of the proposed construction phasing and timing of buildout; and ~) analysis of the implications for the site design and project construction if the existing home remains indefinitely. Le:ter to the Tv.cif Pla+uring Commissrvn Recctisideraiien ojl ?9~3 L'rrrvn.-lie. Strndrti'i~v1r 1cr~ ?7, 2G?0 Page d ~f~ I respectfully request that you uphold the prior land use decision on this site and den}~ the proposed Subdivision on the same grounds of the Subdivision i1-lap Act Findings. In any case, the environmental review documents need to be augmented and recirculated to address the entire project as currently proposed. You may reach me any time at the phone number above if you have questions about this letter. "1'hactk you again for your time and for considering mti~ input on this project. Bzst regards, ~ ~ ~~~ John Schwarz' cc: Suzanne Davit, Planning Department, Town of Los Gatos Geoff and Linda vlitchcll. I 1 ~ Panorama Wav Ian Esche and Golida van Haerinaen, 107 Panorama VJav Greg and Cecilia Holmberg, 103 Panorama Way Jeff and Terry Hickey, 100 Panorama Way Mike Brown, 108 Panorama ~~%a}' Thomas tilangano, 1 ] 6 Panorama W'ay ~~6'' ~ June 1, zola Members of the Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 Re: Reconsideration of the 1592II Union Avenue subdivision and architectural and site application. Dear, Planning Commission; TOWrv OF LOS GATOS PLAi~JNIi`JG DIVISIOk'~J We are Paul ~x Jane De Bella, Las Gatos residents and property owners at 11B Car„brian View Way. Our property is the single story home adjacent to the proposed subdivision, located on the East border. LNe are in favor in having the 15928 Union Ave. property developed, but we are opposed to the plans of having the property subdivided into three parcels vrith (2), two story homes built on the site. First; we both thin!< the two story homes do not fit with our it„mediate neighborhood and if allowed it vrould have an intense irreversible negative impact to our curl ent neighborhood charm. From our property we probably have one the best views in our neighhorhood of the Los Gatos/ Saratoga r°lills. Judging from tl,e current story poles of the proposed subdivision, which depicts the building sites elevations, our current view of the hills from our property will be lost for good, We believe the majority of our neighbors would support a plan of a two parcel subdivision with two single story homes. So, 4ve respectfully asl< the Commission to please consider the rights of the existing residents of Los Gatos, Please, do not let the monetary gains of some, to sway your decision in doing the right thing for the citizens of Los Gatos. Thanks for your consideration in this matter. Paul 1. De 6ella Jane De Bella EXHIBIT 19 This Pate Intentionall~~ Left 131an1: 1592 Union avenue r l C C Z i f 7_ Z 1_.\~L~E\ CT LEE\\ OOD CT E3LOS~0\1 HI LL RD "J. i i i E~3IBIT 20 This Page Intentionall~~ Left i3lanl: °W~ °F TO~i-N, OF LOS GATOS ITE1I NO: 2 -:,~,~, ~; '~'=~° °~ PL-~\'NI\G CO~IIIISSIO\ ST_~FF REPORT DESK ITE1I ~:,-.~ `~s`c~toS = Meeting Date: June 9, 2010 PREPARED BY: Suzanne Davis. Associate Plamler sdavis, cc los ~atosca. Gov APPLICATION NO: Architecture and Site Applications S-08-30, S-09-3 ~, and 5-09-34 Subdivision Application M-08-13 LOCATIO\: 1~92~ t;nion :venue (east side of Union .Avenue; just north of Leewood Court) APPLICANT: Tone Jeans, T.H.I.S. Desiyn~ PROPERTY O~~-NER: 217 O'Comlor LLC CONTACT: Tonv Jeans APPLICATION SU~-1~L'1RY: Requesting approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and subdivide a .93 acre parcel into tlu-ee lots and to construct two new residences on property zoned R-1:8. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended, APN X27-42-008. DEEMED COtiIPLETE: May 20, 2010 FINAL DATE TO TAKE AC PION: July 9, 2010, for Tentative Map; November 20, 2010, for Architectl.ire and Site applications. EXHIBITS: 1.-? 1. Location map ?~'. Revised project data sheets ~. .August 2C, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes (six pages) DISCL-SSIO\: There vas an error on the project data sheet for proposed Parcel 2 and missing infoi~nation on the data sheet for proposed Parcel ~. Revised project data sheets are attached as Exhibit 22. Minutes from the August 26, 2009, Plannin~~ Commission meeting are being pro~~ided for background information as requested by Commissioner Savoc (see Exhibit 23). The chart provided in the staff report under the Neighborhood compatibility section shows the maximum allo«~able house and garage sizes rather than the actual numbers for the proposed project The following chart has been revised to reflect the applicant's proposal for the ne«~ homes on Parcels 2 and ~. ATTACi~M~I~TT 9 Planning Commission Desk Item - Pale 1 X928 L'nion .-1~~ellue ~1-08-I ~. 5-08-;0. S-09-~ ~. 5-09-~-1 .Tune 9, '_010 .-address _ ~ Lot Si;,e i House si<,e House I:-iK Gru•rrge 112 Panorama ~t as- ~ 7.942 ~ 2.311 29.0 X30 I 1 ~ Pano_ranla ~~~a~- '~ 8.018 ~ 1.589 I 19.8 487 1 10 PalloraIlla `~ a~~ 8,668 ~ 1.924 2.2.1 ~ 470 ~' 111 Panorama ~~ av ~ 8.668 ~ L368 18.0 -18-1 118 Cambrian Vies~~ 20.909 3.703 17.7 X60 13910 Union .venue ~ 18.40 1.73 ~' 9.~ ~ 714 .-ldrlress Lot Si;,e House si<,e Ilorrse F.-1R Garage 101 Lee~~~ood Coul•t 9.83 3.128 I 32.6 I X60 103 Lee~~-ood Court 9,83 ~ 3.086 32.2 632 10~ Lee~~-ood Court ~ 10,019 3.131 ~ 31.2 X60 107 Leewood Court ~ 12.197 3,164 2~.9 632 Parcel 2 ~ 10,087 3,0~-~ ~~ 30.2 682 ~ Parcel3 ~ 11,390 I 3,2-12 28.E I 677 ~' Prepared b~~: Suzanne Day i~.:~ICP Associate Planner ~~~RR:SD Appro~~ed b~~: ~S~endie R. Roone~~ Director of Communit~~ De~~elopment \'.DF\' RFI'ORTS',~010'.Cnionl=9~S-i \U-dsk.doc 15928 UNION AVENUE -PARCEL 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIREDI PERMITTED Zoning district R-1:8 same - Land use vacant single family residence - Genera! Plan Designation low density residential same - Lotsize (sq. ft.) 40,579 10.087 8.000 sq. ft. minimum Exterior materials: siding - stucco, stone - trim - stone, limestone - windows - wood clad - roofing - composition slate - Building floor area: first floor - 1.679 - second floor - 1,375 - cellar - - - garage - 682 911 sq. ft. maximum Setbacks (ft.): front - 64' 25 feet minimum rear - 32' 20 feet minimum side - 8' 8 feet minimum side - 8' 8 feet minimum Maximum height (ft.J - 23'11" 30 feet maximum Building coverage (%) - 29% 40°i~ maximum Floor Area Ratio (%) house - 3.054 3.120 sq. ft. maximum garage - 682 865 sa,. ft. maximum Parking - 4 t~.a~o spaces minimum Tree Removals - included with TM canopy replacement Sewer or septic sewer same - Exhibit 22 15928 UNION AVENUE -PARCEL 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRED/ PERMITTED Zoning district R-1 :8 same - Land use vacant single family residence - Genera! P/an Designation low density residential same - Lotsize (sq. ft.) 40,579 10.925 8,000 sq. ft. minimum Exterior materials: siding - shake, shingles - trim - stone - windows - wood clad - roofing - composition shingle - Building floor area: first floor - 1 ~5°0 - second floor - 1,552 - cellar - - garage - 677 - Setbacks (ft.): front - 25 25 feet minimum rear - 65' 20 feet minimum side - 8' 8 feet minimum side - 8' 8 feet minimum Maximum height (ft.) - 24'6" 30 feet maximum Building coverage (%) - 3,017!28°/0 40°h maximum Floor Area Ratio (%) ~ house - 3.242 3,404 sq. ft. maximum garage - 677 935 sq. ft. maximum Parking - 4 two spaces minimum Tree Removals - - canopy replacement Sewer or septic sewer same - C '~USERS',SDrV15'~~OESKTOPIUNION- x.29-PCL3. DOC CONSENT CALENDAR ~` 1. 8 Station «av. Conditional Use Permit U-09-00~. Requesting approval to uct classes on property zoned C-2:LHP. APN X29-03-020. PROPS w~iER: Phil Brouwer. APPLICA'v'T: Spencer Belideau. PLA~ti nnifer Savage, Assistant Planner, y Motion by Commissioner ~ -e' ensen and seconded by Commissioner Joanne Talesfore to approve Consen .te ;-rl. carried 7-0. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS 15928 Union Avenue. Subdivision Application M-08-13, Architecture and Site Application 5-08-30. Requesting approval to demolish an existing single family residence and to subdivide a .93 acre parcel into three lots on property zoned R-1:8. APN 527-42- 008. PROPERTY OW=tiER: 217 O'Connor LLC. APPLICANT: Tony Jeans, T.H.LS. Design. PLAN'~1ER: Suzanne Davis, Associate Planner. (Continued from January 28, February 2~, :vfarch 25, Ivfa,~ 13, June 24, and August 12, 2009) Associate Planner Suzanne Da~~is presented the staff report and stated that Desk Item T2 included a petition from Panorama Way residents stating an objection to the proposed reduced cul-de-sac, a letter addressing the State Subdivision Map Act conditions, a letter raising concerns regarding neighborhood compatibility, and a revised Mitigated Negative Declaration. Commssioner Philip Jlicciche • Asked if Parcel 2 becomes a flag lot if the garage door on Parcel 3 is on the driveway side. Associate Planner Suzanne Davis Commented that Parcel 2 is not technically a flag lot. It has that configuration to provide a greater setback from the north property line, but it is not required to be that way. Chair Thomas O'Donnell • Commented that he was going to allow the applicant an additional two minutes to respond to the numerous items in Desk Item ~2, and opened the public hearing. Tony Jeans gave a presentation on the proposed project commenting specifically on neighborhood compatibilit<, 1Ir. 11langano's viewshed, the requested cul-de-sac side~z-alk, and maximum separation between GIs. Ly~ott's and ~ir.:~Iangano's houses. Commission Questions: • Asked if there was an alternate design for Parcel 2 that would not have a flag lot configuration. • asked if applicant examined coming in off Union Avenue with two homes. Planning Commission Page 3 August 26, 2009 Exhibit 23 • Asked if applicant's comments on drainage mitigation referred to existing conditions or previous project design. v • Asked about the proposed sound«-all on Union Avenue. Tony Jeans answered Commission questions: • Commented the proposed configuration of Parcel 2 pushes the house back 3 ~ feet and allows for the maximum separation from ~Ir. 1langano's house and maintain neighbors' view of the hills. • Commented he did not consider coming in off Union Avenue for rivo homes because he does not have enough frontage. • Commented the drainage system will dramatically reduce impact on the immediate neighbors based on existing conditions. • Commented the soundwall wvas a leftover from the 4-lot proposal and the applicant is no longer proposing one. Cecelia Holmberg • Commented the development detracts from the neighborhood and that she does not want a S- lot development. • Commented the only legitimate option is a ?-lot subdivision with a 42-foot cul-de-sac bulb. Thomas Mangano • Commented the houses have gotten bigger with the 3-lot development. • Questioned the legality of the joint driveway on Parcel 2 and how the F AR (Floor Area Ratio) vas calculated. • Commented the garage is 3~ feet away from his breakfast porch with a 60 DB noise level. • Commented that the 3-lot development affects his viewshed. • Commented the flag lot is a runaround using the cul-de-sac rule to provide less frontage. Commissioner `Iarico Sayoc • Asked 1Ir. I\Iangano if the reduced width would impact his viewshed and about his thoughts about rivo lots with bigger FARs. Thomas Mangano • Commented the 3 i-foot width could be worse because it could result in a bigger house. • Conunented a 2-lot subdivision could Give him a larder view. John Sch~ti~arz • Commented that some of the desk items were in response to the staff report. • Commented there is a staff report recotmnendation that still references the categorical exemption under CEQA (California Envirotunental Quality Act) not the ~-litigated negative Declaration. • Asked Commission to consider his recommendations for conditions of approval (in Desk Item =`2) regarding drainage, construction noise barriers, and construction traffic and access. • Commented the requested Initial Stud~~ is very good and that he had some questions regarding conclusions on biological resources, esthetic impact and land use compatiliilit~. Planning Commission Pave -4 August ?6, ?009 • Commented he disagrees wide VIr. Jeans's findings on the (State) Subdivision flap Act. Commissioner Ivlarico Savoc • Asked ~Ir. Sch~i~arz ~~rhy he preferred the standard width cul-de-sac over the reduced width. John Schwarz • Commented he would support the standard width for safety due to the number of turnarounds they get on their street, if this design works for ~Ir. Mangano. Geoff ivlitchell • Commented the proposed turning radius in the cul-de-sac does not allow for any parking. • Commented they need something wide with a sidewalk and a turnaround. • Commented lot sizes and home sizes are not consistent with the neighborhood. • Commented that previous builders were told they could only build tti~-o houses on these lots. Orv Buesing • Asked for clarification on the required public right-of--way on Union Avenue because the staff report dated August 26, 2009; stated that the owner is required to dedicate 10 feet and the Initial Study stated 20 feet. • Asked that Engineering take a look at the storm drain elevations, requested multiple drains, and that they be as long as possible. • Asked how Parcel 1 could accommodate a circular driveway with a 2~-foot setback. Luis i1~Iartinez • Commented that the plan is to remove all the trees from his backyard view and requested that developer be required to replace the trees. Stephanie Lynott • Commented all three houses will obstruct her vie«~, lighting and privacy. • Commented that four years of construction will occur if this is approved. • Commented that houses need to be in harmony with the neighborhood. Ray Davis • Conmaented that ~Ir. Jeans has put up a gigantic house on Lot 4 on Resen-oir Road. • Commented he believes staff colludes «-ith developers for property taxes. • Commented the Initial Study prematurely said that the project would not obstruct or remo~~e public scenic views or vista since the project has not submitted building plans or constricted story poles to support that statement. Lee Quintana • Commented she would like to support the neighbors. • Commented that she believes the analysis and conclusions on the \egative Declaration and hutial Study were not based on all the facts, and the facts in evidence did not support the conclusions. Plaruun~ Commission Page ~ August 26. 2009 Commented she believes the neighbors have presented convincing evidence to support that compatibility has not been addressed. Commented the land use section does not address conformance u-ith General Plan or Zonin~7 Code policies or regulations ~;-ith Guidelines for Residential Development. Questioned tilr. Jeans's drainage calculations. Tone Jeans • Commented that no specific points ~~ere made on the General Plan that it does not meet. • Commented storm drainage is currently at 1 °ro slope, but will look at reducing it, and that calculations have been submitted to Engineering. v • Commented that >V1<r. Martinez has been told that a row of redwood trees will be planted along their property line and they have expressed their support. This will come up during A&S (Architecture and Site). • Commented he supports keeping the Chinese Elm tree, and putting a replacement tree on 1Is. Ly-nott's property. • Commented a 6-foot fence will be put up along the property line as soon as permits are granted which will reduce the noise. • Commented all the houses on Panorama Way have 8-foot setbacks and they are proposing a ~0-foot setback for 1-Ir. I<Iangano. • Commented Parcel 2 is not a flag lot; it is compatible with neighborhood houses, and it provides a much better view corridor. They will agl-ee to a full size cul-de-sac if that is «~hat is determined to be the best way to go. Commissioner Philip 1licciche • Asked staff if Exhibit 27 sketch of lot configuration is accurate. Associate Planner Suzanne Davis • Commented the sketch is accurate. Commissioner Philip ~Iicciche • Asked ~Ir. Jeans if he weed that all the houses that have entrances on Union Avenue and Panorama Way were two-lot areas (Exhibit 27 in staff report). Tonv Jeans • Commented he agreed, but that Exhibit 27 shows lots that are 80 feet tivide as opposed to 110 feet wide. • Commented he believes the lots are compatible and consistent with the neighborhood, including all adjacent homes, based on what he has been told by the Totivn y Commissioner Philip 1licciche • Asked staff if they agree «-ith ~Ir. Jeans's statement. Associate Planner Suzanne Davis • Commented the only difference in this particular lot and those to the north of it that were split in the 2-lot configuration is that this has a cul-de-sac. Planning Comtmission Page 6 August 26, 2009 Chair Thomas O'Donnell closed the public hearing and asked staff to clarify the point made by JIr. Buesing regarding dedication on union Avenue. Associate Planner Suzanne Davis • Commented it is a 2~-foot dedication on Union Avenue and it is shown on the plan. Commissioner Philip \Iicciche • Asked about the September l; ?009, deadline. Associate Planner Suzanne Davis Commented once a Subdivision Application has been deemed complete, the Commission has 50 days to take action on it; however, the applicant can choose to waive that requirement. Conunissioner IVlarico Sayoc • Asked about comment made by ~Ir. 1langano regarding a larv pertaining to shared driveways and reduced square footage. Associate Planner Suzanne Davis Commented she is not aware of the statute, but believes he was referring to when you have a flag lot you do not count the flag stem when calculating the land area used to base the maximum floor area. In this case, the whole lot is being considered to determine maximum floor area for the property. y Commissioner Joanne Talesfore • Asked about parking in the cul-de-sac. Trang Tu-Ngu~-en • Commented there «•ould be no parking only ~~~ith the reduced size cul-de-sac. Commissioner Charles Erekson • Asked if there was anyrthing in the denial of the =1-lot proposal that would have given a suggestion to a subsequent applicant fora 3-lot or 2-lot proposal. Commissioner Philip 1llicciche • Commented he did not recall any direction about number of lots and that it u~as just a denial. Chair Thomas O'Donnell • Commented, in his recollection; the Commission did not try to design the lot. .-associate Planner Suzanne Davis • Commented that staff recommended it be reduced from 4 to 3 lots, but the motion states that the number of lots should be reduced without specifi•ing 3 or ?. The denial was based on the applicant not being willing to reduce the number of lots. Planning Commission Page 7 August ~6, X009 Motion by Commissioner Philip Jlicciche and seconded by Commissioner Marcia Jensen to deny Subdivision Application iV1-08-1 ~ and :Architecture and Site Application 5-08-30 based on size not physically suitable for this development because it has two entrances and it appears like a third lot is tr},zng to be fit into it resulting in the appearance of a flag lot. Commissioner Joanne Talesfore • Commented that although the proposal is calling it a shared driveway, it presents the same issues as a flag lot. • Commented she supports the motion due to traffic and the strong neighborhood pattern of t<vo lots. ~-ice Chair John Bourgeois • Asked for clarification if the motion included both the Subdivision Application and the A&S Application. Chair Thomas O'Donnell called for a recess at 8:~ 1 p.m. to allow- To~~~n Attorney Orn~ Korb time to review the Town Code. Meeting was reconvened at 8:~8 p.m. Town Attorney Orry Korb • Commented that it is staff s recommendation that you not approve an ARS Application separate from a Subdivision Application. Town Code states that the Planning (Community Development) Director can approve a pei~nit application for demolition if there is already an approved replacement project, but if there is no approved replacement project, an A&S application is required to get a demolition permit. The sole reason why the demolition is required by the proposed subdivision in this situation is because the subdivision would result in the house straddling the property line, «-hich cannot occur. Based on the facts, the two applications should not be separated. Chair Thomas O'Donnell • Confirmed that motion to deny is based on subsections C and D of the (State) Subdivision Map Act, which would include the demolition. 'lotion carried 7-0. To~~~n Attorney Orry Korb recited appeal rights. 1S9 Stacia Street. Ar`c[iil.~ ~' and Site Application 5-09-013. Requesting approval to construct a new second story addition, ssorv structure greater than 450 sq ft, and to exceed the maximum Floor Area Ratio on propem- z -1:30. AP\ 5 ~?-31-0?4. PROPERTY' O~?~:tiER: Stefanie Zilka. APPLICAtiT: Robert Fitc ~`~ER: hlarni ~~loseley, Assistant Planner Assistant Planner ~Iarni Moseley presented the staff report. Planning Commission Page 8 August ?6, ?009 Conditions [for Discussion] thot might Benefit Neighbors: • The removal of trees 13, 14, 15 should be mitigated by the planting of six (6) Myrica Californica 24" box trees along the northwest property line for screening purposes. Tree removal and replacement should occur concurrently with the installation of the storm drain to Union Ave. Tree #10 should be retained. [Benefits Lynot] • Six (6) Myrica Californica 24" box trees should be planted along the northeast property line for screening purposes. [Benefits Mangano] • The fence along the north property line should match the existing Mangano/Lynott fence in style and height [6ft with a 1ft lattice] subject to a Building Permit with a mutual written agreement between neighbors. [Benefits Lynot and Mangano] • Removal of trees 1, 2, 4 should be mitigated by planting six (6) Redwood 24" box trees along the southwest property I ine f or screening purposes. Tree removal and replacement should occur concurrently with Union Ave street improvements. [Benefits Martinez] • Any house design proposed for Parcel 1 should attempt to retain the Chinese Elm [Tree #3] centrally located on the ~~ ,~,+~ property. [Benefits Martinez, Lynot and Parcel 1 as wel I~~ i_1~ ~ eL~` Drainage Im_p~o~e utili e Retention -rafiher than J, "Infiltration" techniques. [Benefits Lynot, Buesing, Mangano] '~~~ Any Driveway along the north Property Line shall have a curb ~; at its north edge to minimize run-off toward neighboring properties. [Benefits Lynot, Buesing, Mangano] C~I ~U frl ~i i ~_- , ~~~~~~~ i OVUN G LOS GN. ~-O~ ATTACFIMENT 11 This Nape II1teI1t10I17~1~' Left 131an1: Subject: 15928 Union Data Corrections: I would like this document and attachments be introduced as a desk item for the 6/9/2010 agenda item for the sole purpose correcting numbers that are in error: In your staff report of 6/9/2010 and the applicants' letters 3/2/2010 and 5/20/2010 incorrect numbers are used for comparison orjustification purposes. It is stated that data is taken from the county database. I would like to enter the following on the record for the data in error is being used as part of the foundation for application approval. I used three data sources: the town files on the individual projects, Google Earth and the attached assessors' map, and they all confirm that corrects were needed for the following 5 addresses. I used the assessors' map to generate the correct lot sizes. I recalculated the lot sizes for 112 Panorama Way, and 101, 103, 105, and 107 Leewood Court only. Staff Neighborhood Calculated from House Address Compatibility Assessors Map House Height Height tony 3/2/2006 TM and DP Lot square footage Lot square footage compares plans 112 Panorama Way 7942 8123 22 21.5 101 Leewood Ct 9583 10218 26/27 22.5 103 Leewood Ct. 9583 10022 26/27 25 105 Leewood Ct. 10019 10094 26/27 22.5 107 Leewood Ct. 12197 12554 26/27 not noted In addition the following are corrects for applicants 5/20/2010 letter: 112 Panorama Way. South side setback: Applicant states 8 feet: Actual setback is 9'9" North side setback: Applicant states 8 ft: Actual setback is 11' House width: Applicant states 66 ft: Actual 61'9" For the record: 14% 330/2311 of my FAR is on a loft level: 15S ceiling height below that loft level is 7'6" Thank you, ~ ~~~ ~' = ~" +°~ Tom Mangano ;~ ,>.: n ;., ~, ~: i'9 .: '~ 112 Panorama Way, Los Gatos T VtJ 4~,•~ Gt 1 ~Jv Ji'1I G~7 ~L.ar'~~li''G JIw'IJIGf~I ATTACHMENT 13 This Pale jlltclltlOllcil~~' Lcft Blanl: