Loading...
Planning Commission Packet - 03-26-2025Page 1 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MARCH 26, 2025 110 EAST MAIN STREET TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM Emily Thomas, Chair Kendra Burch, Vice Chair Jeffrey Barnett, Commissioner Susan Burnett, Commissioner Steven Raspe, Commissioner Rob Stump, Commissioner Vacant, Commissioner IMPORTANT NOTICE This is a hybrid/in-person meeting and will be held in-person at the Town Council Chambers at 110 E. Main Street and virtually through the Zoom webinar application (log-in information provided below). Members of the public may provide public comments for agenda items in- person or virtually through the Zoom webinar by following the instructions listed below. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online at www.LosGatosCA.gov/TownYouTube. PARTICIPATION The public is welcome to provide oral comments in real-time during the meeting in three ways: Zoom webinar (Online): Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device: Please click this URL to join: https://losgatosca- gov.zoom.us/j/84581980917?pwd=HBC1JDVAnIv95RNwWbWOUU0PKq949O.1 Passcode: 943933. You can also type in 845 8198 0917 in the “Join a Meeting” page on the Zoom website at https://zoom.us/join and use passcode 943933. When the Chair announces the item for which you wish to speak, click the “raise hand” feature in Zoom. If you are participating by phone on the Zoom app, press *9 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand. Telephone: Please dial (877) 402-9753 for US Toll-free or (636) 651-3141 for US Toll. (Conference code: 602463). If you are participating by calling in, press #2 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand. In-Person: Please complete a “speaker’s card” located on the back of the Chamber benches and return it to the Vice Chair before the meeting or when the Chair announces the item for which you wish to speak. NOTES: (1) Comments will be limited to three (3) minutes or less at the Chair’s discretion. (2) If you are unable to participate in real-time, you may email planning@losgatosca.gov with the subject line “Public Comment Item #__” (insert the item number relevant to your comment). (3) Deadlines to submit written public comments are: - 11:00 a.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting for inclusion in the agenda packet. - 11:00 a.m. the Tuesday before the Planning Commission meeting for inclusion in an addendum. - 11:00 a.m. on the day of the Planning Commission meeting for inclusion in a desk item. (4) Persons wishing to make an audio/visual presentation may do so only for items on the agenda and must submit the presentation electronically to planning@losgatosca.gov no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the Planning Commission meeting. Page 1 Page 2 MEETING CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS (Members of the public may address the Commission on matters not listed on the agenda and are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission. Unless additional time is authorized by the Commission, remarks shall be limited to three minutes.) CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) (Before the Planning Commission acts on the consent agenda, any member of the Commission may request that any item be removed from the consent agenda. At the Chair’s discretion, items removed from the consent calendar may be considered either before or after the Public Hearings portion of the agenda.) 1. Draft Minutes of the March 12, 2025 Planning Commission Meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS (Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may be allotted up to three minutes to comment on any public hearing item. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of three minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to the Commission’s consent at the meeting.) 2. Consider a Request for Approval to Construct a New Single-Family Residence and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Vacant Property Zoned HR-1. Located at 16497 S. Kennedy Road. APN 532-17-038. Architecture and Site Application S-24-037. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. Property Owner: Robert Nicol. Applicant: Chris Spaulding. Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman. 3. Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish an Existing Single-Family Residence and Construct a New Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 14341 Browns Lane. APN 409-14-035. Architecture and Site Application S-24-017. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Property Owners: Roberto E. Flamenco. Applicant: Gordon Wong. Project Planner: Suray Nathan. 4. Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish Existing Commercial Structures, Construct a Mixed-Use Development (30 Multi-Family Residential Units) with Commercial Space on the Ground Floor, a Conditional Use Permit, a Condominium Vesting Tentative Map, and Remove Large Protected Trees Under Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) on Property Zoned C- 2. Located at 143 and 151 E. Main Street. APNs 529-28-001 and -002. Architecture and Site Application S-24-007, Conditional Use Permit Application U-24-002, Vesting Tentative Map Application M-24-004, and Mitigated Negative Declaration Application ND-24-003. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Have Been Prepared. Property Owner: David Blatt, CSPN LLC. Applicant: Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners, Inc. Project Planner: Ryan Safty. Page 2 Page 3 REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS / COMMISSION MATTERS ADJOURNMENT (Planning Commission policy is to adjourn no later than 11:30 p.m. unless a majority of the Planning Commission votes for an extension of time.) ADA NOTICE In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Clerk’s Office at (408) 354-6834. Notification at least two (2) business days prior to the meeting date will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR §35.102-35.104]. NOTICE REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Planning Commission after initial distribution of the agenda packets are available for public inspection at Town Hall, 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos and on Town’s website at www.losgatosca.gov. Planning Commission agendas and related materials can be viewed online at https://losgatos-ca.municodemeetings.com/. Planning Commission meetings are broadcast Live on KCAT, Channel 15 (on Comcast) on the 2nd and 4th Wednesdays at 7:00 p.m. Live and Archived Planning Commission meetings can be viewed by going to: www.LosGatosCA.gov/TownYouTube Page 3 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 4 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 03/26/2025 ITEM NO: 1 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 12, 2025 The Planning Commission of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on Wednesday, March 12, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 PM ROLL CALL Present: Chair Emily Thomas, Commissioner Jeffrey Barnett, Commissioner Susan Burnett, Commissioner Steve Raspe, Commissioner Rob Stump Absent: Vice Chair Kendra Burch PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) 1. Approval of Minutes – February 12, 2025 MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Raspe to approve adoption of the Consent Calendar. Seconded by Commissioner Barnett. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. 176 Loma Alta Avenue Architecture and Site Application S-24-042 APN 532-28-031 Applicant: Jap Plett Property Owner: The Thornberry 2021 Revocable Trust dated November 4, 2021, and the Donald S. Thornberry and Barbara J. Gardner Revocable Living Trust dated December 21, 2010. Project Planner: Maria Chavarin Page 5 PAGE 2 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 Consider a request for approval to demolish an existing single-family residence, construct a new single-family residence to exceed floor area ratio (FAR) standards with reduced side yard setbacks, construct an accessory structure with reduced side yard setbacks, and site improvements requiring a Grading Permit on a nonconforming property zoned R-1:8. Categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Continued from January 22, 2025. Maria Chavarin, Planning Technician, presented the staff report. Opened Public Comment. Jessica Thornberry (Property Owner) Myself with my husband Blake Thornberry own the property. There appears to be a misunderstanding of our data, so I will walk you through the design compatibility study and let the data speak for itself based on 16 homes in the immediate neighborhood. Our current FAR is significantly smaller than the houses around us, and our proposed FAR has been reduced to .386, seventh out of the 16 homes in the immediate neighborhood. Our house falls in line with the neighborhood average with respect to square footage and FAR. Our lot size and house size are average when compared to the neighborhood. Despite the narrow lot, the rear projection of our home is consistent with what is found in the surrounding properties, because we have chosen a space-efficient Italianate/Victorian design. Our setback is compatible with the neighborhood already, but we have increased the setbacks on both sides of the property. Many homes in the neighborhood have nonconforming setbacks and we are simply requesting to align with the typical setback pattern, despite having the narrowest front lot. Our proposed home is the shortest in the neighborhood and we are not asking for exceptions. We commit to addressing the privacy concerns through fencing and landscaping at our own cost. We have received numerous letters of support. Gina Tuckfield I take issue with the applicants’ accusation that their neighbors built a house with disregard to privacy. The photo presented in the agenda packet was taken from where the new garage would be, not where the new house would be. The applicants cut down at least eight trees, which contribute to the lack of privacy, as well as being illegal because there was no permit from the Town Arborist. The applicants have refused to work with neighbors regarding window placement when the Town recommended they do so. The applicants have cited my house at 162 Loma Alta as 30 feet in height, but our home is on a downward slope and the 30- foot height is at the back of the house. Page 6 PAGE 3 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 Paul Tuckfield I read the applicants’ chart of houses in the immediate neighborhood, because I wanted to understand why they are trying to justify an extra 420 square feet, and the chart does not agree with the Town’s own list in five cases, including my house. The Planning Commission cannot use that chart until it is fact checked. In earlier documents the FAR code was not computed correctly and quoted in some of the original documents, including my house. Other errors in the document include setbacks and inconsistent application of the years the homes were built. The applicants have chosen this process where they risk their plans being denied, but they are making that choice and the burden of proof that they do not impact other people is on them, but somehow it seems to be shifted to the rest of the neighborhood to prove something. A bigger house, even if it meets the FAR without impacting, does not have to be exacerbated by adding another 420 square feet. Tony Alarcon My house abuts the alley and I’m familiar with it and the water drainage issues as well, which is a concern with this project. I am a real estate agent and have 255 Johnson Avenue listed, which is the property adjacent to the subject property on the alley. I measured the alley and it is 13 feet where they are at. They cut down a perfectly healthy 40-foot tree and a healthy 32-foot tree with no permit, because that is where the garage is going. The applicants are showing data, but data can be manipulated, and I agree with Paul Tuckfield and would like that data confirmed. The fireplace location is adjacent to a tree canopy, and this is already an extremely high fire zone and the fireplace should be moved to a location without trees. Four- hundred and twenty square feet of variance in size with the scale and mass of this property is not reasonable. I urged the Commission to not approve the excess FAR ratio. John Panighetti I have done construction on my properties on Loma Alta twice since 1982, and both times I had to maintain my design within the requirements for the FAR, setbacks, and height restrictions, and I had to take neighbor considerations into account. I don’t believe we should make any exceptions to things like FAR and setbacks. If the driveway is removed it would shove the house over toward the properly line, so the natural setback on one side is eliminated, and that is not reasonable. The façade is imposing and looming. Typically, taller houses in the neighborhood are softened by a porch roof, gables, or other roofs on the second story, and I’d like to see that in this design. The house is not a good fit design-wise, even though this is an eclectic neighborhood, because this house needs softening in front. Kim Couchee I will read a letter from Winifred James, who could not be here in person. “I am the previous owner of 176 Loma Alta Avenue and lived there for 55 years. At the time of the sale of my home it was a given that any new owners would remodel it into two stories, and the neighbors expected that; however, I am appalled at the size of the basement, 1,500 square feet allowing the ADU. Where are these additional people going to park? Using the alley as the only access for vehicle use of the garage is not practical as the alley is often blocked. I am surprised Page 7 PAGE 4 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 the Town issued permits to cut down trees on the property even before remodel plans are approved.” I will now read my own comments. The applicant’s current plans still exceed the FAR, amongst other variances. I ask that you take into consideration the effect on the neighbors and listen to their concerns. Phil Couchee The neighbors and the Planning Commission have expressed concerns about this project, and I urge the Commission to listen to the concerns being raised. The original submittal was way above FAR, as is the resubmittal. Matt Railo I live next door to the subject site. The FAR is the big issue from our perspective. Nothing has changed about the FAR above ground other than a one-foot movement of the nook. That is not what the Commission intended, and it does not address the neighbors’ concerns. The mass and scale remain the same and is problematic. After the last hearing I met with the applicant and had a nice discussion and explained what is most upsetting to us about the plans, which is the size of the house, particularly toward the back, and he understood clearly what they could do to reduce the mass to get our support. After three weeks we met again and found that plans had already been submitted to the Town. Allison Railo At the last hearing the Planning Commission gave unanimous direction to the applicants to propose changes and share them with the neighbors, but the most recently submitted plans were neither shared nor discussed, and there are no noticeable changes. The applicants’ comparison of houses does not take into consideration the context and how it affects the neighbors. There is no new evidence to change the size of the subject lot or the excessive size of the proposed home, which still exceeds the FAR. There is no evidence that the applicants have at any point shared proposals in response to neighbors’ concerns. At the March 2nd meeting all that was presented to us were plans unrelated to this proposal, which is why we had no questions for them at that meeting. The house is far too large for the lot and negatively impacts the neighbors due to its exceptions. As at the last meeting, I am asking for reasonable and equitable application of the guidelines and allowances. Mary Ann Carr I lived next door to the applicants for seven years before they moved, and they showed amazing kindness to me. During the years we were neighbors, what impressed me the most about this young couple was despite being working parents, they took time to become advocates for street calming on Blossom Hill Road. Every time a young couple moves into our neighborhood and starts remodeling our home values go up and they update our community. Joan Gardner I do not think the Thornberry’s have been treated fairly. The Town planners concluded that the proposed setbacks of the subject site are compatible with the neighborhood, given the Page 8 PAGE 5 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 preponderance of nonconforming lots. The applicant’s setbacks, house size, FAR, height, and lot size are all within the range of the neighboring homes. The applicants’ neighbors have enjoyed the benefits of living near the smallest house in the neighborhood for many years, take the advantages it has conferred for granted, and view it as something they are entitled to. Just prior to the first Planning Commission meeting in January the applicant’s immediate neighbors made objections that largely amount to wanting to deny the applicants the exceptions for their nonconforming lot that most of their neighbors already enjoy. The Thornberry’s proposal for their home should be approved. Yu Chen I walk by this site every day and the current structure is an eyesore, so I was very excited that the applicants are going to build a new house to improve our community. The design aligns very well with the neighborhood character, and the homeowners have worked hard to ensure the design fits the neighborhood. The exceptions they are requesting are very similar to those granted to other homes already. The proposed house is not the biggest in floor area or height, and it matches the setbacks of its neighbors, so if other homeowners have benefited from similar exceptions, why is this one being denied? Change is hard, but for our Town to thrive we need to support development. The project simply brings the smallest home on the street up to the neighborhood average and is a reasonable change. Shelby Roshan I’m here in support of the applicants, who are my former neighbors. Both properties on either side of the subject site already exceed allowable FAR, and the applicants’ proposed home would rate seventh out of 16 homes and is in line with the neighborhood. How can the neighbors object when their own homes exceed those same guidelines? FAR is a guideline, not an unbreakable rule. The Town’s regulations prioritize compatibility, and the applicants’ plan fits seamlessly within the neighborhood. Ayhan Mutlu I am an immediate neighbor and I’m here to express my strong support for the revised plans for 176 Loma Alta. The proposed home is comparable in its bulk and scale to its immediate neighbors. I believe the applicants have made thoughtful and meaningful revisions to address the immediate neighbors’ concerns, and worked in good faith to modify their plans while maintaining a reasonable and well-designed home. Any two-story home in this location would have the same impacts on its neighbors. Wendy Squire The applicants are wonderful people and I’m surprised by all the arguing that has gone on, but I echo the previous speaker who said we should not create things that inhibit or damage the enjoyment of home. I am not against having a new house built, and do not question wanting to put a two-story house into a neighborhood that already has many two-story houses, but I would ask the Commission to consider not only the structure of the house, but the impact to the neighborhood. Page 9 PAGE 6 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 Fred Gerbino I live across the street from the project and down two houses to the west. We remodeled our small bungalow and revised our plans three times to comply with the FAR requirements. I’m here to object to exception to the FAR. The applicant should have to comply with the same FAR rules that we complied with. They’re entitled to seek an exemption and roll the dice, but I see no compelling reason to grant an exception to the FAR requirements. Thomas Valencia I live next door to the project site. The data in the applicant’s presentation was not compiled by an unbiased third party, and measurements were not conducted by a licensed or qualified surveyor. The data was compiled by the applicant, and upon closer examination is disingenuous and imprecise, predominantly skewed to support the applicant. Instead of focusing on the impacts of this proposed project, a lot of effort was spent in finding reasons why they deserve to make those impacts, and instead of asking the Town for exceptions to be made, they are implying those exceptions are guaranteed. Cherry picking data as a reason for exceptions should not be entertained. It is a slippery slope if the Town allows this type of building mentality. Kelly Garton I own the property immediately adjacent to the subject site. From the beginning the chimney and window placement have been concerns. Without story poles it was not evident, until re-reviewing the full plans alongside the initial Staff Report, that the proposed structure was more massive and higher than interpretable on printed plans. The chimney location remains within the under 5-foot reduced setback, and is still proposed to be under a tree canopy. With respect to window privacy, specifically to the master bath and bedroom, the revised plans do not denote obscured glass nor any third-party report to confirm no impact to these private spaces; and no offer to shift, resize, or remove a window. Although the proposed home detrimentally shades my home and surrounding environment throughout the year, the applicant does not find it justifiable to lower the height. Despite current California and Town codes allowing exemptions of basement and repurpose as ADU space, the proposed home remains well above the permissible FAR by 17 percent. All excess square footage is located above grade and in the main residence, significantly impacting the adjacent homes. Lisa The Thornberrys lived next door to my mother for a decade. Despite demanding careers and raising three young children, they prioritized their family and community involvement. The applicants have demonstrated their commitment to neighborly collaboration by sharing their plans door-to-door and incorporating feedback. I request the Planning Commission approve the applicant’s proposal for a modest and tasteful home, a project that would enhance property values and pride in Los Gatos. Page 10 PAGE 7 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 Patricia James I live diagonally off the alleyway. I’m a big fan of FAR and believe it makes Los Gatos special and allows us to maintain the character of the Town. I think having FAR was well thought out, as well as our requirements to check with an arborist before removing trees, and I ask why don’t we reject the plans that exceed FAR? It would be better for neighborly relations not to even consider plans that exceed FAR, because in keeping to FAR we can have trees on our properties, we have more land than we have house, and it’s why we have such a lovely Town. This home would be just as lovely if it were 420 square feet less. Lee Quintana I’m a member of the Historic Preservation Committee, but I am speaking as a community member. Cypress trees are probably the highest fire risk of any tree available to be used. Additionally, the trees are being proposed to be placed in a setback of 5 feet, but my understanding is there should be no vegetation between the house and 5 feet out for fire preparedness. The issue is: keep the comparisons consistent and to what is normally looked at. The Planning Commission compares homes two on each side and five across the street, not 16. The FAR is not an absolute, but it is used as a guideline for what would be the absolute maximum unless there are other circumstances. While the house meets the height and setbacks, the length of the roofline causes it to have a much more massive appearance. The Town’s architect stated that the massing of the house in the front was not consistent with the neighborhood. If the FAR were brought down likely there would be no problems with the compatibility of the home with the neighborhood. I urge the Planning Commission to not approve the project as presented. The representation of the FAR as one-third is incorrect; that is a FAR that is used for commercial, for other residential, it’s a sliding scale. Blake Thornberry (Property Owner) Two years ago, we bought this property to be closer to the downtown community and schools, and we felt our plan for a single-family home was compatible with the houses already in the neighborhood. Since the last meeting I spent many hours collecting data, and in many cases, I found the data in the staff report to be outdated or incorrect, and that’s why I did it myself. The data I collected clearly shows our proposal to be compatible with the development on the surrounding lots, per the Town guidelines. In the context of the 15 surrounding neighbors, our proposed home is average in lot size and height. Since the last meeting we have reduced the square footage of our home, improved the setbacks with the neighbors, and reduced the house height. The exceptions that the neighbors object to are all exceptions that they enjoy themselves. I ask the Planning Commission to approve our application based on the data and facts of our proposal, especially in the context of the existing neighborhood. Closed Public Comment. Commissioners discussed the matter. Page 11 PAGE 8 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Barnett to deny an Architecture and Site Application for 176 Loma Alta Avenue. Seconded by Commissioner Stump. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 3. 10 Charles Street Fence Height Exception Application FHE-23-001 APN 532-36-022 Property Owner/Applicant/Appellant: Firouz Pradhan Project Planner: Sean Mullin Consider an appeal of a Community Development Director decision to deny a ence Exception Request for an existing fence partially located in the Town’s right-of-way and exceeding the height limitations within the required front yard and street side yard setbacks on property zoned R-1D. Categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Sean Mullin, Planning Manager, presented the staff report. Opened Public Comment. Firouz Pradhan (Applicant/Appellant) When construction was happening, there was a six-foot solid green fence, but we were never informed there were concerns about visibility. When we designed the fence and home we worked with a top rate architect, and the objective of building the fence was safety and security, particularly because the front yard would be the grandchildren's main play area. Most of the neighbors did not have a visibility issue, and we are working with the one neighbor who has some concerns about tweaking the fence to address his needs and the needs of the police officer who also had issues. I asked three or four police officers parked on Charles Street if they had visibility concerns, and each one said no, because of the way the fence has been designed and built. If you need to tweak the last two or three sections, we are willing to do that. With respect to the right-of-way, we will do whatever is needed to protect the Town. Michelle Huntley I am the property owner at 264 Los Gatos Boulevard, which shares a properly line with 10 Charles Street. When the applicant finished his remodel, he approached me about a fence going on Los Gatos Boulevard, and I expressed my concerns, because it is a busy road. He made many changes to the fence and provided some spacing so I could have some visibility, because if it were a solid fence my driveway would be a safety hazard and unusable. The fence has affected my vehicle visibility, and pedestrians walking by cannot see me. I drive out carefully because of this, but I have witnessed the surprise on people’s faces when they see my car, Page 12 PAGE 9 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 because they had no idea it was there. My concern going forward would be allowing an unrestricted fence to be higher and with unrestricted materials, because someone in the future could install a solid fence and the driveway would be unusable, and visibility at Charles Street would be even more impacted. Doug Olcott I live at the very end of Charles Street and am speaking in defense of the appeal of the denial of the exception. I have sent photo slides to the Planning Commission showing the access to Los Gatos Boulevard, first from Charles Street, and looking left and right, and that shows the applicant’s fence does not block any view. Traffic stops at the end of Charles Street and looks in either direction, and again, there is no obstruction. I think the current location of the fence and the safety provisions the Town has made are adequate, and I have not seen any accidents there in all the time I’ve lived there, and from the time he built that fence. Sayid Nejard (phonetic) I live on Charles Street a couple of houses down from the applicant’s house. I don’t see any issue with visibility from Charles Street to Los Gatos Boulevard. There is a stop sign right there and anyone passing can be seen. When the applicant built the house, it really made the neighborhood so much nicer; it’s a beautiful home and the fence is beautiful and very high- quality with the lattice section that can be seen through, and I hate to see that be changed to something else; definitely not a solid fence. I have no issues with the way the fence is now, nor anyone in my family. Kevin Chesney I’ve owned the house on 2 Charles Street since 1994. The applicant is a wonderful and kind neighbor, so I hate to come up here and talk about how dangerous that fence is. A neighbor and I both said that fence is dangerous, and we both asked the applicant to make changes to it, and we’ve talked about it for over a year. As a vehicle is coming out from Charles Street and turning right, they can’t see to the left. Basically, if the Town leaves the fence there, I am going to sue you, because it is dangerous, and the Town is doing something that puts me at risk. I have spoken with the applicant about changes that could be made, and if he can make those changes, I am totally fine. He needs to move it back 2-4 feet, or he needs to drop some of those things down, but if he doesn’t make those changes, the Town will be liable, and there are three neighbors who see it as extremely dangerous. Firouz Pradhan (Applicant/Appellant) I understand that Kevin has a problem, and we have spoken about lowering those two or three sections at the corner. Our concern is safety, because when the grandkids are playing there, it is a 26-inch fence and somebody can walk across. There have been two incidents where someone literally knocked on the doors of the front bedroom, so safety and security are a concern. I also totally understand that visibility is a concern. Today I drove from Whole Foods to Charles Street to see if there are other such cases, and I came across nine homes on the corner of Los Gatos Boulevard and side streets that had fences about 3 feet and solid, and on Page 13 PAGE 10 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 Charles itself all other three corners have the same issue, but I am willing to work with people and resolve this issue. Closed Public Comment. Commissioners discussed the matter. Opened Public Comment Applicant answered Commissioner’s questions. Closed Public Comment. Commissioners discussed the matter. MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Barnett to continue the public hearing for 10 Charles Street to a date certain, with direction that the Appellant confer with staff with respect to addressing the right-of-way issue and the safety issue, and the application shall be brought back to the Planning Commission if staff is not prepared to decide on its own. Commissioners discussed the matter. Commissioner Raspe requested the motion be amended to include recommendations as part of a continuance: redesign the corner at the intersection of Los Gatos Boulevard and Charles Street such that a possible resolution would be a 45-degree angle instead of a 90-degree angle; as part of the conditions of approval there would be no changes in material to the fence; plantings would not be allowed to grow along the fence line; and there would be a redesign of the fence at the driveway section of 264 Los Gatos Boulevard to improve safety. The maker of the motion accepted the amendment to the motion. Seconded by Commissioner Stump. Commissioners discussed the matter. Chair Thomas requested the motion be amended to include recommendations as part of a continuance: taking into consideration that there are existing trees and it is understood it might be necessary to engineer around those trees. The maker of the motion accepted the amendment to the motion. Page 14 PAGE 11 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 Commissioner Barnett amended the motion to adopt the Town’s visibility-at-corners standard as one to be considered before the application is brought back to the Planning Commission or staff for approval. The continuance date certain was determined to be April 23, 2025. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. 4. 119 Harwood Court Architecture and Site Application S-24-040 APN 527-56-027 Applicant: Gary Kohlsaat Property Owners: Donal and Maire Conroy Project Planner: Suray Nathan Consider a request for approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and construction of a new single-family residence, remove large, protected trees, and site work requiring a Grading Permit on property zoned HR-2½. Categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Suray Nathan, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Opened Public Comment. Gary Kohlsaat (Applicant) This property was created from an SB 9 application and is unique because it has frontage on two sides. Before we did the SB 9 application it was clear we would end up with a property that had very little LRDA; thirty percent of this home is actually out of the LRDA. We are demolishing the house, but it is more of a technical demolition with a good portion of the existing structure left behind and banked into the hillside with the garage, and we are adding onto that garage. We have angled the home from the existing garage construction to respond to the contours as best as we could to create a modern home that had a significant covered exterior entertainment area, which is in the LRDA as opposed to putting it up on the hill in the back and cutting into the hillside and asking for more exceptions. This home is very low profile, not visible, asks for no exceptions, is well under the FAR, and has neighbor support. The wall exception is minor, as it is behind the home and not visible. Gary Kohlsaat (Applicant) To sum it up again, this home is low-profile, banked into the hillside, is well under the FAR, we’re only removing two trees, one of which is only because of the required cut for the Page 15 PAGE 12 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 retaining walls and our OSHA cut, and one tree will not survive construction. We have the support of our neighbors. We are also adding another home to the housing stock of Los Gatos. Closed Public Comment. Commissioners discussed the matter. MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Raspe to approve an Architecture and Site Application for 119 Harwood Court. Seconded by Commissioner Burnett. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS REPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Joel Paulson, Director of Community Development • The Town Council met on 3/4/25: o Approved the Los Gatos Lodge project, which was a forwarded recommendation from the Planning Commission. o Remanded the 45 Reservoir Road project back to the Planning Commission. • CAL FIRE has released updated Local Responsibility Area fire severity maps that are on the front page of the Town’s website, and other places. They are looking for public feedback as they go through the process with the Council ultimately adopting a new LRA map for the Town specifically. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COMMISSION MATTERS Historic Preservation Committee Commissioner Burnett - HPC met 2/26/25 to consider three items. o A home on Wild Way that came back to the HPC because they wanted to replace the windows. o Another home with a total windows change. o A home with a garage redo on the exterior. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Commissioner Raspe - CDAC met 3/12/25 to consider one matter. o 235 Oak Meadow, a proposal to demolish an existing structure and construct a six- story, multi-family residence. Commission Matters Commissioner Stump Page 16 PAGE 13 OF 13 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2025 - Four Commissioners attended the Planning Commissioners Academy in Santa Rosa. Particularly of interest was CEQA instruction, and a complete legislative update for 2025. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:52 p.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the March 12, 2025 meeting as approved by the Planning Commission. _____________________________ /s/ Vicki Blandin Page 17 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 18 PREPARED BY: Jocelyn Shoopman Senior Planner Reviewed by: Planning Manager, Community Development Director, and Town Attorney 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 03/26/2025 ITEM NO: 2 DATE: March 21, 2025 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider a Request for Approval to Construct a New Single-Family Residence and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Vacant Property Zoned HR-1. Located at 16497 S. Kennedy Road. APN 532-17-038. Architecture and Site Application S-24-037. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. Property Owner: Robert Nicol. Applicant: Chris Spaulding. Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman. RECOMMENDATION: Consider a request for approval to construct a new single-family residence with site improvements requiring a Grading Permit on vacant property zoned HR-1, located at 16497 S. Kennedy Road. PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Hillside Residential Zoning Designation: HR-1, Hillside Residential (40,000 square feet minimum) Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines; and Hillside Specific Plan Parcel Size: 111,843 square feet (2.56 acres) Surrounding Area: Existing Land Use General Plan Zoning North Residential Low Density Residential R-1:10 South Residential Hillside Residential HR-1 East Residential Hillside Residential HR-1 West Residential Low Density Residential R-1:10 Page 19 PAGE 2 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 CEQA: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction. FINDINGS:  As required, the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction.  The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations).  As required, that other than the exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and building located outside of the least restrictive development area (LRDA), the project complies with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G).  As required, the project complies with the Hillside Specific Plan (HSP). CONSIDERATIONS:  As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application. ACTION: The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed within ten days. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located south of Kennedy Road and accessed via Vivian Drive, a private road serving several lots east of the property (Exhibit 1). The subject property is vacant and approximately 2.56 acres (111,843 square feet) with an average slope of 45 percent. On February 27, 2023, the Town approved a Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) Urban Lot Split (ULS) for the property located at 16491 S. Kennedy Road, submitted by the current applicant for this Architecture and Site application. The ULS divided a 4.276-acre lot into two parcels: a 74,531- square foot lot developed with a 6,189-square foot single-family residence and 1,170-square foot garage; and the subject property, a 111,843-square foot vacant lot. The subject property is zoned HR-1 and complies with the minimum lot area and lot width. The Architecture and Site application has been referred to the Planning Commission based on the applicant’s request for exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and the LRDA. Page 20 PAGE 3 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood The subject property is located south of Kennedy Road and accessed via Vivian Drive, a private road serving several lots east of the property (Exhibit 1). Single-family residential development surrounds the property. Due to the existing topography of the site, the few areas of LRDA are concentrated in the southwest portion of the property, adjacent to existing easements. B. Project Summary The applicant proposes construction of a two-story residence with an attached two-car garage. The project includes areas of below-grade square footage that would not count toward the size of the residence. The proposed residence and attached garage would be located outside of the LRDA due to site and access constraints. The proposed residence would not be visible from any of the Town’s established viewing platforms, pursuant to the HDS&G. The project requires a Grading Permit for site improvements for earthwork quantities exceeding 50 cubic yards. The project also requires exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and LRDA. C. Zoning Compliance A single-family residence is permitted in the HR-1 zone. The proposed residence is in compliance with the zoning regulations for allowable floor area, height, setbacks, and on- site parking requirements for the property. DISCUSSION: A. Architecture and Site Analysis The applicant proposes construction of a new 4,194.2-square foot, two-story residence with an attached two-car garage (Exhibit 13). The applicant has provided a Letter of Justification detailing the project and the requested exceptions to the requirements of the HDS&G (Exhibit 5). In addition to the 4,194.2 square feet of countable FAR, the residence includes 800.1 square feet of below-grade square footage. The residence also includes an attached 663.4-square foot garage. A summary of the floor area for the proposed residence is included in the table on the following page. Page 21 PAGE 4 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 Proposed Square Footage Counts Towards Floor Area First Floor 1,854.1 sf 1,854.1 sf Second Floor 1,211.6 sf 1,211.6 sf Lower Floor * 1,745.2 sf 865.1 sf Attached Garage ** 663.4 sf 263.4 sf Total 5,474.3 sf 4,194.2 sf * Pursuant to Sec. 29.10.020, floor area means the entire enclosed area of all floors that are more than four feet above the proposed grade, measured from the outer face of exterior walls or in the case of party walls from the centerline. ** Pursuant to the HDS&G garages up to 400 square feet in area are not included in the floor area ratio calculation. The proposed residence would be sited at the southernmost portion of the lot, adjacent to Vivian Drive (Exhibit 1). The residence and attached garage are proposed outside of the LRDA due to the existing topography and closest vehicular access to Vivian Drive, the private road providing access to the property. The maximum height of the proposed residence is 25 feet, where a maximum of 25 feet is allowed by the HDS&G for nonvisible homes. The maximum high-to-low height of the proposed residence is 34 feet, eight inches, where a maximum of 35 feet is allowed by the HDS&G for nonvisible homes. The project requires a Grading Permit for site improvements for earthwork quantities exceeding 50 cubic yards. The project also requires exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and LRDA. B. Building Design The applicant proposes a traditional style residence with subdued colors to blend with the surrounding hillside environment. Proposed exterior materials include: a dark bronze standing seam metal roof; smooth coat stucco siding; wood clad windows; and painted metal railings (Exhibit 4). The proposed exterior materials comply with the HDS&G standard for nonvisible homes, each having a light reflectivity value (LRV) less than 30. The Town’s Consulting Architect reviewed the proposed residence and noted that the very constrained hillside parcel is surrounded by large homes on much larger parcels (Exhibit 6). The Consulting Architect identified two issues and concerns and provided two recommendations for changes. In response to these recommendations, the applicant made modifications to the design of the residence and submitted a letter responding to the recommendations (Exhibit 7). The Consulting Architect’s issues and recommendations are provided below, followed by the applicant’s response in italics. 1. Increase the roof overhang to provide a stronger eave shadow line to mitigate the two- story façade. The eaves have been lengthened over the area with the two-story façade. Page 22 PAGE 5 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 2. There may be two ways to address the issue of the two-story flat downhill façade section: a. Leave it as proposed given the amount of downhill landscaping that is currently a buffer to views from the home below and the applicant’s commitment to plant screen landscaping at the lower property line. b. Extend the balcony across the façade connecting the currently proposed balcony and deck. The middle floor has been cantilevered out 18 inches between the balconies to break up the two-story section. C. Neighborhood Compatibility Based on Town and County records, the residences in the immediate neighborhood range in size from 2,149 square feet to 5,978 square feet. The FAR ranges from 0.05 to 0.25. The applicant is proposing 4,194 square feet of countable FAR for the home on a 111,843- square foot parcel (0.04 FAR). Pursuant to the Town Code, the maximum allowable floor area for the subject property is 6,000 square feet for the residence and 400 square feet for the garage. The following table reflects the current conditions of the homes in the immediate area and the proposed project. D. Site Design The vacant property is approximately 111,843 square feet, located south of Kennedy Road and accessed via Vivian Drive, a private road serving several lots east of the property (Exhibit 1). Address Zoning House SF Garage SF Lot Size House FAR No. of Stories 16515 S. Kennedy Rd. HR-1 4,590 720 46,528 0.10 2 16505 S. Kennedy Rd. HR-1 4,496 630 51,710 0.09 2 16491 S. Kennedy Rd. HR-1 5,268 1,408 74,201 0.07 2 16575 Kennedy Rd. HR-1 5,978 1,572 57,692 0.10 2 16565 Kennedy Rd. HR-1 3,530 1,152 53,125 0.07 2 16555 Kennedy Rd. HR-1 4,604 707 47,922 0.10 2 16450 Kennedy Rd. HR-1 2,500 583 43,716 0.06 2 16510 Kennedy Rd. HR-1 2,660 480 49,979 0.05 2 16566 Kennedy Rd. R-1:10 2,149 460 14,914 0.14 1 16570 Kennedy Rd. R-1:10 2,961 720 18,943 0.16 1 101 Bond Ct. R-1:10 2,738 380 10,815 0.25 2 100 Pinta Ct. R-1:10 2,424 504 12,043 0.20 1 101 Pinta Ct. R-1:10 2,624 440 13,726 0.19 1 16497 S. Kennedy Rd. (P) HR-1 4,194 663 111,843 0.04 2 Page 23 PAGE 6 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 The property has an average slope of 45 percent with steep topography and is encumbered with easements (Sheet A3, Exhibit 13). Due to the existing topography of the site, the few areas of LRDA are concentrated in the southwest portion of the property, adjacent to existing easements. The proposed residence and attached garage are located outside of the LRDA due to site constraints and placement of the proposed structure adjacent to the existing access off of Vivian drive. The front yard area includes the proposed driveway, guest parking spaces, and a firetruck turnaround. The required turnaround is located downslope of the residence and requires construction of retaining walls with a maximum height of 11 feet, five inches. The proposed site design requires approval of several exceptions to the HDS&G, including:  Grading depths shall not exceed four feet of cut and/or three feet of fill;  Retaining wall heights should not be higher than five feet;  Retaining walls should not run in a straight continuous direction for more than 50 feet without a break, offset, or planting pocket; and  Buildings shall be located within the LRDA. Grading Depths: The HDS&G limits grading depths outside of the footprint of a primary residence to four feet of cut and three feet of fill. The proposed site work includes cut depths of four feet for the residence and up to 10 feet for the attached garage to bench the structure into the hillside. The required firetruck turnaround requires cut depths up to five feet to accommodate the proposed retaining walls. The proposed turnaround is required by the Santa Clara County Fire Department due to the configuration of the private road, Vivian Drive (Exhibit 1). The applicant also notes that the due to the existing slope and limited areas of LRDA, there is no way for the proposal to comply with the HDS&G grading limits while also meeting the Santa Clara County Fire Department requirements (Exhibit 5). This application has been reviewed and approved by the Town’s Engineering Division and the Santa Clara County Fire Department. The project also includes site improvements with grading quantities exceeding 50 cubic yards, which requires approval of a Grading Permit. The Town’s Parks and Public Works Engineering staff have included a condition of approval requiring submittal and evaluation of a Grading Permit in parallel with the required Building Permits (Exhibit 3). Retaining Wall Heights: The HDS&G includes a guideline that retaining walls should not exceed a height of five feet and that when additional retained heights are needed due to extreme site conditions, the use of multiple terraced retaining walls is preferred. The proposed on-site firetruck turnaround is required for construction of the single-family residence. The Santa Clara Page 24 PAGE 7 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 County Fire Department requires a fire engine turnaround area that does not exceed five percent slope. Due to the numerous constraints of the site and the dimension and slope requirements of a turnaround, the applicant proposes retaining walls on the north portion of the proposed driveway with approximate heights between seven feet, three inches and eight feet; and along the southern portion of the property driveway with approximate heights between five feet, two inches and 11 feet, five inches. There is limited space available to provide a turnaround due to existing easements; therefore, the use of terraced retaining walls is not feasible. The applicant’s Letter of Justification describes the exception request and existing site constraints necessitating the request (Exhibit 5). The applicant proposes to paint the retaining walls a darker earth tone, consistent with the proposed residence to blend with the landscape. The landscape plans propose groundcover and plantings adjacent to the proposed retaining walls to provide screening and reduce the visual impact. These proposed plantings are located greater than 30 feet from residence and are required to be consistent with the HDS&G requirement that plant species in this zone be native and indigenous. Retaining Wall Length: The HDS&G includes a guideline that retaining walls should not run in a straight continuous direction for more than 50 feet without a break, offset, or planting pocket to break up the long flat horizontal surface. The applicant’s Letter of Justification describes the exception request, stating that the retaining walls in excess of 50 feet are only being proposed to support the required firetruck turnaround and to provide access to the proposed residence with a driveway slope that complies with the HDS&G and Santa Clara County Fire Department requirements (Exhibit 5). The applicant proposes to paint the retaining walls a darker earth tone, consistent with the proposed residence to blend with the landscape. The landscape plans proposed groundcover and plantings adjacent to the proposed retaining walls to provide screening and reduce the visual impact. These proposed plantings are located greater than 30 feet from residence and are required to be consistent with the HDS&G requirement that plant species in this zone be native and indigenous. Buildings Outside of the LRDA: The HDS&G includes a standard requiring that buildings be located in the LRDA. Due to the existing topography of the site, the few areas of LRDA are concentrated in the southwest portion of the property, adjacent to existing easements (Sheet A3, Exhibit 13). The proposed residence and attached garage would be located outside of the LRDA due to site and access constraints. In their Letter of Justification, the applicant describes the limited LRDA and that there is not enough area to allow the construction of a new residence. Due to site constraints, the applicant requests an exception to allow the building to be located outside of the limited LRDA (Exhibit 5). Page 25 PAGE 8 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 E. Tree Impacts The development plans were reviewed by the Town’s Consulting Arborist who inventoried 29 protected trees within the project area and made recommendations for their preservation (Exhibit 8). The project proposes removal of 17 protected trees to accommodate the new residence and driveway. Tree protection measures are included on Sheet A-2 of the development plans (Exhibit 13). In response to the Consulting Arborist’s recommendations, the applicant adjusted the location of trenching and drainage facilities to minimize the impact on any existing trees to remain. The Landscape Plans indicate that 53, 24-inch box trees will be planted on site to offset the proposed tree removal. If the project is approved, tree protection measures would be implemented prior to construction and maintained for the duration of construction activity. Arborist recommendations for tree protection have been included in the Conditions of Approval to mitigate impacts to protected trees (Exhibit 3). F. CEQA Determination The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Story poles and project signage were installed on the site by February 21, 2025, in anticipation of the March 26, 2025, Planning Commission hearing. The applicant’s neighborhood outreach is included in Exhibit 9. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, March 21, 2025, are included as Exhibit 11. The applicant’s response to public comments is included in Exhibit 12. CONCLUSION: A. Summary The applicant is requesting approval of an Architecture and Site application to construct a new a single-family residence and site improvements requiring a Grading Permit on a vacant property. The residence is well designed and compatible with the immediate area. The project is consistent with the Zoning and General Plan Land Use Designation for the property. Due to the constraints of the site, the applicant is requesting exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and LRDA, and has provided a Letter of Justification discussing these requested exceptions (Exhibit 5). Aside from the requested exceptions, the project complies with the Zoning Code, Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, and Hillside Specific Plan. Page 26 PAGE 9 OF 9 SUBJECT: 16497 S. Kennedy Road/S-24-037 DATE: March 21, 2025 B. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the request and, if merit is found with the proposed project, take the following steps to approve the Architecture and Site application: 1. Make the finding that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt, pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction (Exhibit 2); 2. Make the finding that the project complies with the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) (Exhibit 2); 3. Make the finding that due to the constraints of the site, exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and building located outside of the LRDA are appropriate, and the project is otherwise in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (Exhibit 2); 4. Make the finding that the project complies with the Hillside Specific Plan (Exhibit 2); 5. Make the considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application (Exhibit 2); and 6. Approve Architecture and Site Application S-24-037 with the conditions contained in Exhibit 3 and the development plans in Exhibit 13. C. Alternatives Alternatively, the Planning Commission can: 1. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction; or 2. Approve the application with additional and/or modified conditions; or 3. Deny the application. EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map 2. Required Findings and Considerations 3. Recommended Conditions of Approval 4. Color and Materials Board 5. Letter of Justification 6. Consulting Architect’s Report 7. Applicant’s Response to Consulting Architect’s Report 8. Consulting Arborist’s Report 9. Applicant’s Neighborhood Outreach 10. Site Photos 11. Public Comments Received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, March 21, 2025 12. Applicant’s Response to Public Comments 13. Development Plans Page 27 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 28 KENNEDY R D S K E N N E D Y R D VIV IAN DR PINTA CT OLDE DR VIA SANTA MARIANINA CT KE N N E D Y K N O L L S L N BOND CT LONGMEADOW DRROBIN WY16497 S. Kennedy Road 0 0.250.125 Miles ° Update Notes:- Updated 12/20/17 to link to tlg-sql12 server data (sm)- Updated 11/22/19 adding centerpoint guides, Buildings layer, and Project Site leader with label- Updated 10/8/20 to add street centerlines which can be useful in the hillside area- Updated 02-19-21 to link to TLG-SQL17 database (sm)- Updated 08-23-23 to link to "Town Assessor Data" (sm) EXHIBIT 1Page 29 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 30 C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp63DE.tmp PLANNING COMMISSION – March 26, 2025 REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR: 16497 S. Kennedy Road Architecture and Site Application S-24-037 Consider a Request for Approval to Construct a New Single-Family Residence and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Vacant Property Zoned HR-1. APN 532- 17-038. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. Property Owner: Robert Nicol Applicant: Chris Spaulding Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman FINDINGS Required finding for CEQA: ■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction. Required compliance with the Zoning Regulations: ■ The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations). Required compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines: ■ The project complies with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines except for the exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, retaining wall length, and buildings located outside of the least restrictive development area. Required compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan: ■ As required, the project complies with the Hillside Specific Plan. CONSIDERATIONS Required considerations in review of Architecture and Site applications: ■ As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project. EXHIBIT 2 Page 31 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 32 PLANNING COMMISSION – March 26, 2025 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 16497 S. Kennedy Road Architecture and Site Application S-24-037 Consider a Request for Approval to Construct a New Single-Family Residence and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Vacant Property Zoned HR-1. APN 532- 17-038. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction. Property Owner: Robert Nicol Applicant: Chris Spaulding Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: Planning Division 1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval and in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans and/or business operation shall be approved by the Community Development Director, Development Review Committee, or the Planning Commission depending on the scope of the changes. 2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested. 3. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security. 4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for any trees to be removed, prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. 5. EXISTING TREES: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site. 6. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement, at their cost, all recommendations identified in the Arborist’s report for the project, on file in the Community Development Department. These recommendations must be incorporated in the building permit plans and completed prior to issuance of a building permit where applicable. 7. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing and other protection measures consistent with Section 29.10.1005 of the Town Code 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. Include a tree protection plan with the construction plans. 8. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties. 9. LANDSCAPE SPECIES: All landscape species to be consistent with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. EXHIBIT 3 Page 33 10. FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the front yard must be landscaped. 11. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review. 12. STORY POLES/PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE: Story poles and/or project identification signage on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of approval of the Architecture & Site application. 13. EXTERIOR COLORS: The exterior colors of all structures shall comply with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines. 14. DEED RESTRICTION: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office that requires all exterior materials be maintained in conformance with the Town’s Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines. 15. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall execute a five-year maintenance agreement with the Town that the property owner agrees to protect and maintain the trees shown to remain on the approved plans, trees planted as part of the tree replacement requirements, and guarantees that said trees will always be in a healthy condition during the term of the maintenance agreement. 16. NESTING BIRDS: To avoid impacts to nesting birds, the removal of trees and shrubs shall be minimized to the greatest extent feasible. Construction activities that include any tree removal, pruning, grading, grubbing, or demolition shall be conducted outside of the bird nesting season (January 15 through September 15) to the greatest extent feasible. If this type of construction starts, if work is scheduled to start or if work already occurring during the nesting season stops for at least two weeks and is scheduled to resume during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction surveys for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding each work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The Page 34 qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g. defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. 17. SPECIAL-STATUS BATS: Approximately 14 days prior to tree removal or structure demolition activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, in trees within 50 feet of the development footprint, and within and surrounding any structures that may be disturbed by the project. These surveys will include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within the project site, construction access routes, and 50 feet around these areas. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed. Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked. If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and no further measures are required. If bats or roosting sites are found, a letter report and supplemental documents will be prepared prior to grading permit issuance and the following monitoring, exclusion, and habitat replacement measures will be implemented: a. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), they will be evicted as described under (b) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they will be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats will be evicted as described under (b) below. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the CDFW) will be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance will occur until after the nursery season. b. If a non-breeding bat hibernaculum is found in a tree or snag scheduled for removal or on any structures scheduled to be disturbed by project activities, the individuals will be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist. If pre-construction surveys determine that there are bats present in any trees to be removed, exclusion structures (e.g. one-way doors or similar methods) shall be installed by a qualified biologist. The exclusion structures shall not be placed until the time of year in which Page 35 young are able to fly, outside of the nursery season. Information on placement of exclusion structures shall be provided to the CDFW prior to construction. If needed, other methods conducted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist could include: carefully opening the roosting area in a tree or snag by hand to expose the cavity and opening doors/windows on structures, or creating openings in walls to allow light into the structures. Removal of any trees or snags and disturbance of any structures will be conducted no earlier than the following day (i.e., at least one night will be provided between initial roost eviction disturbance and tree removal/structure disturbance). This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours, which increases their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation. 18. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HUMAN REMAINS: a. In the event that archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50- meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community Development Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native Americans. c. If the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a preliminary archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing monitoring are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native American and for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5( e). If the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program will be prepared and submitted to the Community Development Director for consideration and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. d. A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant archaeological site, and/or when Native American remains are found on the site. The final report will include background information on the completed work, a description and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, any testing, other recovered information, and conclusions. 19. DUSKY-FOOTED WOODRATS: This project will implement the following standard measures to minimize impacts on woodrats and active woodrat nests on the project site. a. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY. A qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat nests within 30 days of the start of work activities. If active woodrat nests are determined to be present in, or within 10 feet of the impact areas, the conditions below (Avoidance and/or Nest Relocation) will be implemented, as appropriate. If no active woodrat nests are present on or within 10 feet of impact areas, no further conditions are warranted. Page 36 b. AVOIDANCE. Active woodrat nests that are detected within the work area will be avoided to the extend feasible. Ideally, a minimum 10-foot buffer will be maintained between project activities and woodrat nests to avoid disturbance. In some situations, a small buffer may be allowed if, in the opinion of a qualified biologist, nest relocation (below) would represent a greater disturbance to the woodrats than the adjacent work activities. c. NEST RELOCATION. If avoidance of active woodrat nests within and immediately adjacent to (within 10 feet of) the work areas is not feasible, then nest materials will be relocated to suitable habitat as close to the project site as possible (ideally, within or immediately adjacent to the project site). Relocation efforts will avoid the peak nesting season (February-July) to the maximum extent feasible. Prior to the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist will disturb the woodrat nest to the degree that all woodrats leave the nest and seek refuge outside of the construction area. Disturbance of the woodrat nest will be initiated no earlier than one hour before dusk to prevent the exposure of woodrats to diurnal predators. Subsequently, the biologist will dismantle and relocate the nest material by hand. During the deconstruction process, the biologist will attempt to assess if there are juveniles in the nest. If immobile juveniles are observed, the deconstruction process will be discontinued until a time when the biologist believes the juveniles will be capable of independent survival (typically after 2 to 3 weeks). A no-disturbance buffer will be established around the nest until the juveniles are mobile. The nest may be dismantled once the biologist has determined that adverse impacts on the juveniles would not occur. 20. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement (“the Project”) from the Town shall defend (with counsel approved by Town), indemnify, and hold harmless the Town, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding (including without limitation any appeal or petition for review thereof) against the Town or its agents, officers or employees related to an approval of the Project, including without limitation any related application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, compliance or failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and/or processing methods (“Challenge”). Town may (but is not obligated to) defend such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at applicant’s sole cost and expense. Applicant shall bear any and all losses, damages, injuries, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, staff time and in-house attorney’s fees on a fully-loaded basis, attorney’s fees for outside legal counsel, expert witness fees, court costs, and other litigation expenses) arising out of or related to any Challenge (“Costs”), whether incurred by Applicant, Town, or awarded to any third party, and shall pay to the Town upon demand any Costs incurred by the Town. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in such Challenge as Town, in its sole Page 37 discretion, determines appropriate, all the applicant’s sole cost and expense. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the applicant’s indemnity obligation. 21. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. Building Division 22. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Building Permit is required for the construction of the new single- family residence and attached garage. An additional Building Permit will be required for the PV System required by the California Energy Code. 23. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2023, are the 2022 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12, including locally adopted Reach Codes. 24. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. 25. BUILDING & SUITE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new building addresses to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process. 26. SIZE OF PLANS: Minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”. 27. SOILS REPORT: A 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 report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics. 28. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth, or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations. 29. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall 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 that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations have been prepared according to the 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. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations 30. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be directly printed onto a plan sheet. 31. TOWN RESIDENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: New residential units shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61: Page 38 a. Wood backing (2” x 8” minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers, and bathtubs, located 34 inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars if needed in the future. b. All passage doors shall be at least 32-inch-wide doors on the accessible floor level. c. The primary entrance door shall be a 36-inch-wide door including a 5’x 5’ level landing, no more than 1 inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level and with an 18-inch clearance at interior strike edge. 32. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.40.020. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole. 33. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies. 34. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located in a Wildland-Urban Interface High Fire Area and must comply with Section R337 of the 2022 California Residential Code, Public Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code Section 51182. 35. PROVIDE DEFENSIBLE SPACE/FIRE BREAK LANDSCAPING PLAN: Prepared by a California licensed Landscape Architect in conformance with California Public Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code Section 51182. 36. PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION: Provide a letter from a California licensed Landscape Architect certifying the landscaping and vegetation clearance requirements have been completed per the California Public Resources Code 4291 and Government Code Section 51182. 37. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, 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 and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 38. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 39. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 e. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit issuance. Page 39 TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering Division THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE ADDRESSED OR NOTED ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS SUBMITTED FOR ANY BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME. 40. PAYMENT OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS (“PPW”) ENGINEERING PLAN CHECK FEE AND INSPECTION FEE: At the time of the first construction submittal, the Applicant shall submit to the Town Engineer for approval a detailed construction project cost estimate prepared and stamped by the Applicant’s civil engineer. The cost estimate shall break out on-site and off-site improvements separately. This cost estimate will be used to determine the Engineering Plan Check Fee. A final construction cost estimate shall be provided once the project plans are approved. This cost estimate will be used to determine the Engineering Inspection Fee. The Engineering Inspection Fee must be paid prior to the issuance of any construction related permit. 41. STORM DRAINAGE FEE: The Applicant shall pay Storm Drainage Fees in accordance with the Town’s Adopted Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect at the date of application for the future construction of drainage facilities serving new buildings, improvements, or structures to be constructed which substantially impair the perviousness of the surface of land. The estimated fee, based on the site area of 4.28 acres, is $5,041.00. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the Town Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The Applicant shall pay this fee to PPW prior to issuance of the first building permit. 42. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES: The project is subject to the Town’s Traffic Impact Fee for the generation of an estimated 9.43 net new average daily trips based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers recommendations for trip generation. The Town’s Fee Schedule currently in effect indicates a fee of $1,104 per additional average daily trip. This results in an estimated total amount due of $10,410.72. The actual fee due will be based on the fee schedule adopted at the time the fee is paid. Payment of this Impact Fee is required prior to the issuance of the first building permit issuance. 43. CONSTRUCTION ACTITIVITIES MITIGATION FEE (ORDINANCE 2189): Per the Town’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule, the project is subject to the Town’s Construction Activities Mitigation Fee based on the square footage of new buildings. The fee is $1.43 per square foot of new residential and non-residential building area. The fee shall be calculated based on the square footage total for all units shown on the construction plans to the approval of the Town Engineer. The plans indicate 5,074.3 SF of total square footage of the proposed new building. This results in an estimated total amount due of $7,256.25. Payment of this fee shall pe paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. 44. GRADING PERMIT: A grading permit is required for all site grading and drainage work that is outside the perimeter of a building, retaining wall footing, or other structure authorized by a valid building permit. The Applicant must submit a grading permit application after Page 40 the appeal period of the entitlement approval process has passed. Submittals are accepted through Accela only. The grading permit application shall include detailed grading plans and associated required materials. Plan check fees are based on the scope of onsite work. Prior to approval of the grading permit, the Applicant shall pay all fees due and provide faithful performance and payment securities for the performance of the work described and delineated on the approved grading plan, final erosion and sedimentation control plan, and interim erosion and sedimentation control plan (if required), in an amount to be set by the Town Engineer (but not to exceed one hundred (100) percent) of the approved estimated cost of the grading and erosion and sedimentation control measures. The form of security shall be one or a combination of the following to be determined by the Town Engineer and subject to the approval of the Town Attorney: (1) Bond or bonds issued by one or more duly authorized corporate sureties on a form approved by the Town; (2) Deposit with the Town, money, or negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing deposits of public monies; or (3) other instrument of credit from one or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the State or Federal Government wherein such financial institution pledges funds are on deposit and guaranteed for payment. The grading permit shall be issued prior to the issuance of the building permit unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. The permit shall be limited to work shown on the grading plans approved by the Town Engineer. In granting a permit, the Town Engineer may impose any condition deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to prevent the creation of a nuisance or hazard to public or private property, and to assure proper completion of the grading including but not limited to: (1) Mitigation of adverse environmental impacts; (2) Improvement of any existing grading or correction of any existing grading violation to comply with Town Code; (3) Requirements for fencing or other protection of grading which would otherwise be hazardous; (4) Requirements for dust, erosion, sediment, and noise control, hours of operation and season of work, weather conditions, sequence of work, access roads, and haul routes; (5) Requirements for safeguarding watercourses from excessive deposition of sediment or debris in quantities exceeding natural levels; (6) Assurance that the land area in which grading is proposed and for which habitable structures are proposed is not subject to hazards of land slippage or significant settlement or erosion and that the hazards of seismic activity or flooding can be eliminated or adequately reduced; (7) Temporary and permanent landscape plans. 45. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: Prior to the issuance of any building permit and prior to any work being done in the Town's right of way, the Applicant must submit Public Improvement Plans for review and approval. All public improvements shall be made according to the Town’s latest adopted Standard Plans, Standard Specifications, and Engineering Design Standards. The Applicant is required to confirm the location of existing utility lines along the project frontage by potholing. Prior to any potholing, Applicant shall submit an Encroachment Permit application with a pothole plan for Town review and approval. The Applicant shall provide the pothole results to the Town Engineer prior to final design. All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and, if necessary, relocated as approved by the Town Engineer. No private facilities are permitted within the Town right of way or within any easement unless otherwise approved by the Town Page 41 Engineer. The Applicant shall have Public Improvement Plans prepared, stamped, and signed by a California licensed civil engineer. a. Once the Public Improvement Plans have been approved, the Applicant shall submit an application for an Encroachment Permit. The Encroachment Permit requires the Applicant to post the required bonds and insurance and provide a one (1) year warranty for all work to be done in the Town's right of way or Town easement. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any new concrete installed that is damaged shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense. Prior to issuance of the encroachment permit, the Applicant shall submit a temporary traffic control plan (“TTCP”) inclusive of all modes of travel for any lane or sidewalk closures. Special provisions such as limitations on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required. The TTCP shall comply with the State of California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (“MUTCD”) and standard construction practices. b. The project engineer shall notify the Town Engineer in writing of any proposed changes. Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the approval of the Town. The Applicant shall not commence any work deviating from the approved plans until such deviations are approved. Any approved and constructed changes shall be incorporated into the final “as-built” plans. c. Right-of-way improvements shall include, at a minimum, the following items: i. STREET WIDENING - The Applicant shall widen Vivian Drive as conceptually shown on the approved entitlement plans and ultimately as approved by the Town Engineer. ii. STREET MARKINGS - The Applicant shall install necessary street markings of a material and design approved by the Town Engineer and replace any that are damaged during construction. These include but are not limited to all pavement markings, painted curbs, and handicap markings. All permanent pavement markings shall be thermoplastic and comply with Caltrans Standards. Color and location of painted curbs shall be shown on the plans and are subject to approval by the Town Engineer. Any existing painted curb or pavement markings no longer required shall be removed by grinding if thermoplastic, or sand blasting if in paint. iii. SEWER CLEAN-OUT - The Applicant shall install a sewer lateral clean-out on private property just behind the property line in accordance with the West Valley Sanitation District standards. Sewer clean-out(s) shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the first building. iv. WATER METER - The Applicant shall install the water meter on private property just behind the property line in accordance with the San Jose Water Company standards. Water meters shall be installed prior to occupancy of the first building. 46. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: The Applicant shall apply and obtain a Tree Removal Permit from the Parks and Public Works Department for the removal of existing trees on-site or in the public right-of-way prior to the issuance of a building permit or demolition building permit, whichever is issued first. Tree removals shall be consistent with the arborist report and approved entitlement plans. 47. CONSTRUCTION PHASE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: The Grading Permit Plans and Page 42 Public Improvement Plans (together referred to as “Improvement Plans”) shall be submitted as a set to Parks and Public Works Department along with a title report dated no older than 30 days from the date the Improvement Plans are submitted. The Improvement Plans shall be submitted at the same time as the Building Plans are submitted to the Building Department. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Federal law, State law, Los Gatos Town Code, and the Los Gatos Standard Specifications and Details. a. Construction drawings shall comply with Section 1 (Construction Plan Requirements) of the Town’s Engineering Design Standards, which are available for download from the Town’s website. The Improvement Plans shall include: b. A cover sheet with at least the proposed development vicinity map showing nearby and adjacent major streets and landmarks, property address, APN, scope of work, project manager and property owner, a “Table of Responsibilities” summarizing ownership, access rights, and maintenance responsibilities for each facility (streets, utilities, parks, landscaping, etc.), a sheet index including a sequential numeric page number for each sheet (i.e. “Sheet 1 of 54”), the lot size, required and proposed lot setbacks by type, proposed floor areas by type for each building, average slope, proposed maximum height, and required and proposed parking count and type. c. The Approved Conditions of Approval printed within the plan set starting on the second sheet of the plan set. d. An Existing Site Plan showing existing topography, bearing and distance information for all rights-of-way, easements, and boundaries, any existing easements proposed to be quit-claimed, existing hardscape, existing above ground utility features, and existing structures. The Improvement Plans shall identify the vertical elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor responsible for the data presented. e. A Proposed Site Plan showing proposed topography, boundaries, proposed and existing to remain easements, hardscape, above ground utility features (hydrants, transformers, control cabinets, communication nodes, etc.), and structures. Include top and bottom elevations of every inflection point of each wall. Show proposed public right-of-way improvements. Distinguish proposed linework from existing linework using heavier line type for proposed. f. A Grading and Drainage Plan clearly showing existing onsite and adjacent topography using labeled contour lines, drainage direction arrows with slope value, and break lines. Proposed and existing to remain hardscape elevations must be provided in detail including slope arrows. g. A Utility Plan showing appropriate line types and labels to identify the different types of utilities and pipe sizes. Utility boxes, hydrants, backflow preventers, water meters, sanitary sewer cleanouts, etc. shall be located on private property unless h. A Landscaping Plan for the project site and the full width of the public right-of-ways adjacent to the project. The plans shall clearly identify public and private utilities and points of demarcation between the two. i. General Notes found in the Town of Los Gatos General Guidelines. Page 43 j. A statement in the general notes indicating the need to obtain a Caltrans Oversized/Overweight Vehicles Transportation Permit if oversized or overweight vehicles are expected to be used A statement that all utility boxes in vehicular pathways shall be traffic-rated. 48. STANDARD PLAN COMPLIANCE: The project shall comply with the Town’s Standard Plans to the approval of the Town Engineer. Street improvements, all street sections, the design of all off-site storm drainage facilities shall be in accordance with most current Town Standard Specifications and Standard Plans approved by the Town Engineer. Improvements deemed necessary by the Town Engineer shall be shown on the Improvement Plans. 49. EXISTING FACILITY PROTECTION AND REPAIR: All existing public utilities shall be either protected in place, relocated, or repaired. The Applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal, and all new improvements that are damaged during construction or removed because of the Applicant’s operations. This includes sidewalk, curb and gutter, streetlights, valley gutters, curb ramps, and any other existing improvements in the area that are not intended to be removed and replaced. The Applicant shall request a walk-through with the PPW construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. Said repairs shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of the project. 50. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES: All new services to the development shall be placed underground in accordance with the various utility regulations. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the Town and approved by the Town Engineer prior to installation. 51. UTILITY RESPONSIBILITIES: The Applicant is responsible for the maintenance of existing stormwater drainage facilities, including piped and open channel stormwater conveyances in private areas. The Applicant is responsible for all expenses necessary to connect to the various utility providers. Currently, the public storm sewer system is owned and maintained by the Town of Los Gatos, the water system in Los Gatos is owned and maintained by San José Water Company, and the sanitary sewer system in Los Gatos is owned and maintained by West Valley Sanitation District. Any alterations of the approved utilities listed must be approved by the Town prior to any construction. 52. UTILITY COMPANY COORDINATION: The Applicant shall negotiate any necessary right-of- way or easements with the various utility companies in the area, subject to the review and approval by the Town Engineer and the utility companies. Prior to the approval of the site plan for construction, the Applicant shall submit “Will Serve” letters from PG&E, San José Water, West Valley Sanitation District, West Valley Collections and Recycling, and AT&T (or the current “Carrier of Last Resort”) with a statement indicating either a list of improvements necessary to serve the project or a statement that the existing network is sufficient to accommodate the project. Coordination of the stormwater conveyance system will be addressed during the Grading Permit review. 53. DEVELOPER STORM WATER QUALITY RESPONSIBILITY: The Applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors including subcontractors are aware of all stormwater quality measures and implement such measures. The Applicant shall perform all construction activities in accordance with approved Improvement Plans, Los Gatos Town Code Chapter 12 – Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control, and the National Pollutant Discharge Page 44 Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit. Failure to comply with these rules and regulations will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or a project stop order. 54. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drains (public or private) directly connected to public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate “NO DUMPING - Flows to Bay” NPDES required language using methods approved by the Town Engineer on all storm inlets surrounding and within the project parcel. Furthermore, storm drains shall be designed to serve exclusively stormwater. Dual-purpose storm drains that switch to sanitary sewer are not permitted in the Town of Los Gatos. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of an adjacent, downstream or down slope property. 55. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE: The Applicant shall not alter any existing drainage patterns without an approved Grading Permit. 56. GRADING & DRAINAGE WINTER MORATORIUM: All grading activity shall comply with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit and Chapter 12 of the Town Code. There shall be no earthwork disturbance or grading activities between October 15th and April 15th of each year unless approved by the Town Engineer. In order to be considered for approval, the Applicant must submit a Winterization Erosion Control Plan certified by a California certified QSD to the Town Engineer for review and approval. If grading is allowed during the rainy season, a maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on the exposed area. The submission of a certified plan does not guarantee approval. Any approved and executed plan must be kept on-site while the project is in construction. 57. EROSION CONTROL: The Applicant shall prepare and submit interim and final erosion control plans to the Town Engineer for review and approval. The interim erosion control plan(s) shall include measures carried out during construction before final landscaping is installed. Multiple phases of interim erosion control plans may be necessary depending on the complexity of the project. Interim erosion control best management practices may include silt fences, fiber rolls, erosion control blankets, Town approved seeding mixtures, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. The Applicant shall install, maintain, and modify the erosion control measures as needed to continuously protect downstream water quality. In the event an emergency modification is deemed necessary, the Applicant must implement necessary measures to protect downstream waterways immediately and then submit the changes made within 24-hours to the Town Engineer for review and approval. The erosion control plans shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the most current Santa Clara County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). Any fees or penalties assessed against the Town in response to the Applicant’s failure to comply with the Permit must be paid by the Applicant. The Applicant must permit Town staff onsite to conduct periodic NPDES inspections throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulations. 58. SITE TRIANGLE AND TRAFFIC VIEW AREA: Fencing, landscaping, and permanent structures shall not visually obstruct line of sight between three-feet and 7.5-feet in height if located Page 45 within the driveway view area, traffic view area, or corner sight triangle. The driveway and intersection site triangles are represented on Town Standard Drawing ST-231. The traffic view area and corner sight triangle are shown on Town Standard Drawing ST-232. This includes all above ground obstructions including utility structures, for example electric transformers. The various clearance lines shall be shown on the site plan to demonstrate compliance. 59. GEOLOGICAL REVIEW: Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant’s Engineering Geologist registered in the State of California shall submit a geological report of the site, including a comprehensive landslide investigation evaluating the landslide hazard (including seismic) and associated risk to the proposed development. The Geologic Consultant shall characterize the existing landslide mapped at the site and elaborate on possible future landslide hazards in accordance with Special Publication 117A. The Geologic Consultant shall map and evaluate existing cut and fill slopes and provide an accurate characterization of the subsurface materials at the site including all bedrock exposures near the proposed development. The Geologic Consultant should prepare and submit a Geologic Map and Cross Section(s) through the landslide and proposed improvements. If potential landslide conditions exist or an estimated risk greater than “low” is identified, supplemental investigation and mitigation will be required. The Geologic Consultant should also evaluate the proposed drywell and infiltration structures and provide recommendations to ensure that downslope erosion and slope instability are not an issue. 60. SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: The Applicant’s Geotechnical Consultant should review the Applicant’s Geologic Investigation report. The Geotechnical Consultant should then address the following items: a. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the feasibility of the proposed development given the results of the Geologic Investigation report, and if warranted, develop recommendations to mitigate the static and seismic landslide hazards. The mitigation should conform with the standards and practices in the Town. Potential solutions include supporting the landslide with a properly design retaining wall or removing the landslide. b. The Geotechnical Consultant should discuss the proposed basement and provide suitable vehicle surcharge loading for the basement walls supporting cuts adjacent to the garage and driveway. The Geotechnical Consultant should provide foundation and drainage recommendations for the basement. c. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide temporary shoring recommendations related to the proposed deep cuts for the basement and driveway. The Geotechnical Consultant shall analyze the proposed site grading. d. The Geotechnical Consultant should verify if the lot was previously developed with a single-family residence. The report will require a peer review by the Town’s geological and geotechnical consultant. A deposit and fee for the peer review will be required per the Town’s current fee schedule, unless there are any remaining deposit funds from the entitlement phase. Additional deposit and fees may become due. The Town will route the report to the Town’s peer review consultant once the report is submitted and deposit and fee are available. Once approved, the Applicant’s geotechnical engineer Page 46 shall review the grading and drainage plan and proposed pavement and foundation design to verify that the design is in accordance with their recommendations. The Applicant’s Geotechnical Engineer’s approval shall be conveyed to the Town either by letter or by signing and stamping the plans. All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall be per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. The Applicant shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan. 61. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OBSERVATION: All grading activities shall be conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A report shall be filed with the Town of Los Gatos for each phase of construction stating that all grading activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s design level geotechnical report. The Applicant shall submit a Final Geotechnical Construction Observation and Testing Summary in an “as-built” letter/report prepared and submitted to the Town prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The Applicant shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan. 62. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING: After the issuance of any Grading or Encroachment permit and before the commencement of any on or off-site work, the Applicant shall request a pre-construction meeting with the PPW Inspector to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance, and other construction matters. At that meeting, the Applicant shall submit a letter acknowledging that: a. They have read and understand these project Conditions of Approval; b. They will require that all project sub-contractors read and understand these project Conditions of Approval; and, c. They ensure a copy of these project Conditions of Approval will be posted on-site at all times during construction. 63. DRIVEWAY ACCESS EASEMENT: The Applicant shall show proof that the proposed driveway and parking areas are completely within the recorded easement agreement area. If any of the proposed driveway is found to be outside of the easement agreement area, the Applicant shall acquire a new or modified easement agreement inclusive of all land used for such purposes. Said new or modified easement shall be approved by both affected property owners. The easements shall be approved by the Town Engineer, recorded with the County Recorder’s Office, and a recorded copy of the document returned to the Town prior to the release of the first building permit. The easement may also be designated on any associated parcel or subdivision map. 64. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT: Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, it shall be the sole responsibility of the project to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or permissions necessary to perform any work on neighboring private property herein proposed. Proof of agreement/approval is required prior to the issuance of any Permit. 65. RECORD DRAWINGS: The Applicant shall submit a scanned PDF set of stamped record drawings and construction specifications for all off-site improvements to the Department of Parks and Public Works. All underground facilities shall be shown on the record drawings as constructed in the field. The Applicant shall also provide the Town with an electronic copy of the record drawings in the AutoCAD Version being used by the Town at the time of completion of the work. The Applicant shall also submit an AutoCAD drawing Page 47 file of all consultants composite basemap linework showing all public improvements and utility layouts. This condition shall be met prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. 66. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The Applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed during construction. Improvements such as, but not limited to curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, streetlights, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired or replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the PPW Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the PPW Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Applicant shall request a walk- through with the PPW Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 67. PAVEMENT RESTORATION: Due to construction activities, new utility cuts along the project frontage, and the anticipated project’s truck traffic, the Applicant shall grind and provide a 2.5” overlay with asphalt concrete the south side of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road along the entire property length between the center median island and the property frontage. Prior to overlay, any base failure repair or required dig-outs identified by the PPW Inspector shall be completed. The Town Engineer shall approve the roadway repair prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME 68. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SETUP: All storage and office trailers will be kept off the public right-of-way. 69. PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION NOTICE: The contractor shall notify the PPW Inspector at least ten (10) working days prior to the start of any construction work. At that time, the Contractor shall provide an initial project construction schedule and a 24-hour emergency telephone number list. 70. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE: The contractor shall submit the project schedule in a static PDF 11”x17” format and Microsoft Project, or an approved equal. The Contractor shall identify the scheduled critical path for the installation of improvements to the approval of the Town Engineer. The schedule shall be updated monthly and submitted to the PPW Inspector in the same formats as the original. 71. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HANDOUT: The Contractor shall provide to the Town Engineer an approved construction information handout for the purpose of responding to questions the Town receives regarding the project construction. 72. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION: The Contractor shall always provide a qualified supervisor on the job site during construction. Page 48 73. PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION: All work shown on the Improvement Plans shall be inspected to the approval of the Town Engineer. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Town Engineer. 74. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HOURS: Construction activities related to the issuance of any PPW permit shall comply with Town Code Section 16.20.035 which restricts construction to the weekday between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. No work shall be done on Sundays or on Town Holidays unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer. Please note that no work shall be allowed to take place within the Town right-of-way after 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. In addition, no work being done under Encroachment Permit may be performed on the weekend unless prior approvals have been granted by the Town Engineer. The Town Engineer may apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school commute routes. Onsite project signage must state the project construction hours. The permitted construction hours may be modified if the Town Engineer finds that the following criteria is met: a. Permitting extended hours of construction will decrease the total time needed to complete the project without an unreasonable impact to the neighborhood. b. Permitting extended hours of construction is required to accommodate a construction requirement such as a large concrete pour or major road closure. Such a need would be presented by the project's design engineer and require approval of the Town Engineer. c. An emergency situation exists where the construction work is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition resulting in obvious and eminent peril to public health and safety. If such a condition exists, the Town may waive any of the remaining requirements outlined below. d. The exemption will not conflict with any other condition of approval required by the Town to mitigate significant environmental impacts. e. The contractor or property owner will notify residential and commercial occupants of adjacent properties of the modified construction work hours. This notification must be provided three days prior to the start of the extended construction activity. f. The approved hours of construction activity will be posted at the construction site in a place and manner that can be easily viewed by any interested member of the public. g. The Town Engineer may revoke the extended work hours at any time if the contractor or owner of the property fails to abide by the conditions of extended work hours or if it is determined that the peace, comfort, and tranquility of the occupants of adjacent residential or commercial properties are impaired because of the location and nature of the construction. h. The waiver application must be submitted to the PPW Inspector ten (10) working days prior to the requested date of waiver. 75. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BMPs: All construction activities shall conform to the latest requirements of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinances, the project specific temporary erosion control plan, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities. Page 49 76. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EXCAVATION: The following provisions to control traffic congestion, noise, and dust shall be followed during site excavation, grading, and construction: a. All construction vehicles should be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers that meet State standards. b. Travel speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to fifteen (15) miles per hour. c. Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing 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. d. 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 by the Town, or a minimum 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 ensure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. e. Watering on public streets and wash down of dirt and debris into storm drain systems is prohibited. Streets will be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the PPW Inspector, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on- site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. Recycled water shall be used for construction watering to manage dust control where possible, as determined by the Town Engineer. Where recycled water is not available potable water shall be used. All potable construction water from fire hydrants shall be coordinated with the San José Water Company. f. 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 Construction Inspector. g. Construction grading activity shall be discontinued in wind conditions in excess of 25 miles per hour, or that in the opinion of the PPW Inspector cause excessive neighborhood dust problems. h. Site dirt shall not be tracked into the public right-of-way and shall be cleaned immediately if tracked into the public right-of-way. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris shall not be washed into the Town’s storm drains. i. Construction activities shall be scheduled so that paving and foundation placement begin immediately upon completion of grading operation. j. All aggregate materials transported to and from the site shall be covered in accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code during transit to and from the site. k. Prior to issuance of any permit, the Applicant shall submit any applicable pedestrian or traffic detour plans to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer for any lane or sidewalk closures. The temporary traffic control plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans and in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and standard construction practices. The Traffic Control Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right-of-way. Page 50 l. During construction, the Applicant shall make accessible any or all public and private utilities within the area impacted by construction, as directed by the Town Engineer. m. The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The Applicant shall require the soils engineer submit to daily testing and sampling reports to the Town Engineer. 77. MATERIAL HAULING ROUTE AND PERMIT: For material delivery vehicles equal to, or larger than two-axle, six-tire single unit truck size as defined by FHWA Standards, the Applicant shall submit a truck hauling route that conforms to Town of Los Gatos Standards for approval. Note that the Town requires a Haul Permit be issued for any hauling activities. The Applicant shall require contractors to prohibit trucks from using “compression release engine brakes” on residential streets. The haul route for this project unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer, shall be: Kennedy Rd to Los Gatos Blvd to Los Gatos- Saratoga Rd to Highway 17. A letter from the Applicant confirming the intention to use the designated haul route shall be submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of any Town permits. All material hauling activities including but not limited to, adherence to the approved route, hours of operation, staging of materials, dust control and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 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 between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the Town Engineer. The Applicant must provide an approved method of cleaning tires and trimming loads on site. All material hauling activities shall be done in accordance with applicable Town ordinances and conditions of approval. 78. PROJECT CLOSE-OUT: Prior to requesting a Final Inspection, the Applicant shall submit to the Town Engineer a letter indicating that all project conditions have been met, and all improvements are complete. All work must be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and Town Engineer prior to the first occupancy. All public improvements, including the complete installation of all improvements relative to streets, fencing, storm drainage, underground utilities, etc., shall be completed and attested to by the Town Engineer before approval of occupancy of any unit. Where facilities of other agencies are involved, including those for water and sanitary sewer services, such installation shall be verified as having been completed and accepted by those agencies. In addition, the Applicant shall submit an itemized final quantities list of all public improvements constructed on-site and within the public right-of-way. The final quantities list shall be prepared by the project engineer and be to the approval of the Town Engineer. The final quantities list shall be broken out into on-site and off-site improvements based on the format provided by the Town. Until such time as all required improvements are fully completed and accepted by Town, the Applicant shall be responsible for the care, maintenance, and any damage to such improvements. Town shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements required for this project prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Applicant. Page 51 79. CONSTRUCTION WORKER PARKING: The Applicant shall provide a Construction Parking Plan that minimizes the effect of construction worker parking in the neighborhood and shall include an estimate of the number of workers that will be present on the site during the various phases of construction and indicate where sufficient off-street parking will be utilized and identify any locations for off-site material deliveries. Said plan shall be approved by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of Town permits and shall be complied with at all times during construction. Failure to enforce the parking plan may result in suspension of the Town permits. 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 (§15.40.070). 80. SITE WATER DISCHARGE: In accordance with the Town Code, Prohibition of Illegal Discharges (Los Gatos Town Code Section 22.30.015), the Town Engineer may approve in coordination West Valley Sanitation District the discharge of uncontaminated pumped ground waters to the sanitary sewer only when such source is deemed unacceptable by State and Federal authorities for discharge to surface waters of the United States, whether pretreated or untreated, and for which no reasonable alternative method of disposal is available. Following the verification of the applicable local, state and/or federal approvals, a Discharge Plan will be approved and monitored by the Town Engineer. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES THAT THE USE PERMITTED BY THIS ENTITLEMENT OCCUPIES THE PREMISES 81. POST CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP): Post construction storm water pollution prevention requirements shall include: a. The Applicant shall be charged the cost of abatement for issues associated with, but not limited to, inspection of the private stormwater facilities, emergency maintenance needed to protect public health or watercourses, and facility replacement or repair if the treatment facility is no longer able to meet performance standards or has deteriorated. Any abatement activity performed on the Applicant’s property by Town staff will be charged to the Applicant at the Town’s adopted fully-loaded hourly rates. b. Maintenance of the storm drain inlets “No Dumping – Drains to Bay” plaques to alert the public to the destination of storm water and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. Template ordering information is available at www.flowstobay.org. c. All process equipment, oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, fertilizers, pesticides, and similar chemical products, as well as petroleum based wastes, tallow, and grease planned for storage outdoors shall be stored in covered containers at all times. d. All public outdoor spaces and trails shall include installation and upkeep of dog waste stations. e. Garbage and recycling receptacles and bins shall be designed and maintained with permanent covers to prevent exposure of trash to rain. Trash enclosure drains shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. Page 52 f. It is the responsibility of the property owner(s)/homeowners association to implement a plan for street sweeping of paved private roads and cleaning of all storm drain inlets. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 82. GENERAL: Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access, water supply and may include specific additional requirements as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits. 83. NOTE: The subject property is located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) of the Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) 4290, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is required to “…adopt regulations implementing minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space” applicable to “the perimeters and access to all residential, commercial, and industrial building construction.” In 2018, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB 901 (Dodd), which expanded the applicability of the regulations promulgated under PRC 4290 to land in the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. All comments below that result from PRC 4290 are identified by **. Where a conflict exists between local & 4290 requirements, the more stringent requirement shall apply. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.08. 84. GRADES**: (a) At no point shall the grade for all roads and driveways exceed 16 percent. (b) The grade may exceed 16%, not to exceed 20%, with approval from the local authority having jurisdiction and with mitigations to provide for same practical effect. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, §1273.03. PRC 4290 request of exception approved #PC 24-4493. A copy of the PRC 4290 request of exception application form, with approval signature shall be made part of the building permit drawing set, to be routed to Santa Clara County Fire Department for final approval. 85. RADIUS**: (As noted on Sheet A1) (a) No road or road structure shall have a horizontal inside radius of curvature of less than fifty (50) feet. An additional surface width of four (4) feet shall be added to curves of 50 -100 feet radius; two (2) feet to those from 100-200 feet. (b) The length of vertical curves in roadways, exclusive of gutters, ditches, and drainage structures designed to hold or divert water, shall be not less than one hundred (100) feet. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.04. 86. TURNAROUND**: (As Noted on Sheet A2) (a) Turnarounds are required on driveways and dead-end roads. (b) The minimum turning radius for a turnaround shall be forty (40) feet, not including parking, in accordance with the figures in 14 CCR §§ 1273.05(e) and 1273.05(f). If a hammerhead/T is used instead, the top of the “T” shall be a minimum of sixty (60) feet in length. (c) Driveways exceeding 150 feet in length, but less than 800 feet in length, shall provide a turnout near the midpoint of the driveway. Where the driveway exceeds 800 feet, turnouts shall be provided no more than 400 feet apart. (d) A Page 53 turnaround shall be provided on driveways over 300 feet in length and shall be within fifty (50) feet of the building. (d) Each dead-end road shall have a turnaround constructed at its terminus. Where parcels are zoned five (5) acres or larger, turnarounds shall be provided at a maximum of 1,320 foot intervals. (e) Figure A. Turnarounds on roads with two ten- foot traffic lanes. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.05. 87. MODIFIED FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet A1 and enhanced NFPA 13D will be installed) Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12 whichever is the more restrictive and Sections 903.2.14 through 903.2.21. For the purposes of this section, firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas shall be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and shall be without openings or penetrations. A copy of the Alternate Means/Methods application PC 24-4493, with approval signature shall be made part of the building permit drawing set, to be routed to Santa Clara County Fire Department for final approval. 88. FIRE DEPARTMENT (ENGINE) DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet A2) Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 40 feet outside. Maximum grade in any direction shall be a maximum of 5%. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. CFC Sec. 503. 89. FIRE HYDRANT SYSTEMS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet A1 and private hydrant will be installed) Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, onsite fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. Exception: For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3, the distance requirement shall be not more than 600 feet. [CFC, Section 507.5.1] 90. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: (Letter received) The minimum require fireflow for this project is 1000 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fireflow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.3] 91. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7. 92. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: New and existing buildings shall have approved address Page 54 numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 6 inches high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. 93. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33. 94. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located within the designated Wildland- Urban Interface Fire Area. The building construction shall comply with the provisions of California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. Check with the Planning Department for related landscape plan requirements. 95. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) ACCESS DRIVEWAY REQUIRED: (As Noted on Geo letter) An access driveway shall be provided having an all-weather surface of either asphalt, concrete or other engineered surface capable of supporting 75,000 pounds and approved by a civil engineer. It shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 12 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum turning radius of 40 feet outside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet D-1. 96. GENERAL: This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction. A permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the fire code or other such laws or regulations shall not be valid. Any addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be approved in advance. [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6]. Page 55 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 56 FROM THE OFFICE OF CHRIS SPAULDING ARCHITECT 801 CAMELIA STREET, SUITE E BERKELEY CA 94710 MATERIAL & COLOR BOARD 16497 S KENNEDY RD LOS GATOS CALIFORNIA ROOFING & GUTTERS: TAYLOR METAL PRODUCTS STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING COLOR: DARK BRONZE - LRV 22 WINDOW FRAMES COLOR: BLACK METAL RAILINGS COLOR: BLACK SMOOTH STUCCO SIDING COLOR: SHERMAN WILLIAMS 'CHATURA GRAY' LRV 30 EXHIBIT 4 Page 57 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 58 9-18-24 Letter of Justification: Proposed Residence at 16497 S. Kennedy Road General: As is illustrated in the whole property LRDA plan (Sheet A3), there are only tiny areas that are within the building envelope that are not encumbered by easements, over 30% slope and/or heavily wooded. The building site identified in the Tentative Map process is the most appropriate location for the new residence, as it does not require cutting any significant trees, requires the least amount of retaining wall, and is the least visible location from any public way. Retaining Walls: The proposed retaining walls are all under 5’ tall, except only at the required fire-apparatus turnaround. It is impossible to fit the required turnaround onto this property without larger walls. Furthermore, terraced walls are not possible, as the property or easement lines are within 2’ of the walls at the both the uphill and downhill edges of the turnaround. It is important to note that the location of the turnaround on this site will not be visible from any public way, nor very visible from the private drive (Vivian Drive). The proposed retaining walls conform to the HDS&G requirement to not run in a straight line for more than 50’, except at the fire-apparatus turnaround, which is required to be 75’ long. The walls will be painted a darker earth tone in order to better blend with the landscape. As explained above, the retaining walls cannot meet both the HDS&G standards for combined cut and fill depths and the Fire Department requirements for access and turnaround. Instead, the proposed design meets the Fire Department requirements with the least length and height of wall that is possible. Note that the total length of walls could be reduced if the requirements for four off-street parking spaces and three foot shoulders on the driveway were relaxed. Grading Depths: The required maximum combined cut / fill grading depths are only exceeded at the driveway and fire apparatus turnaround. Due to the slope and constricted site width at the turnaround location, there is no way to meet the HDS&G requirements while also meeting the Fire Department requirements. EXHIBIT 5Page 59 Therefore, the Fire Department requirements are followed, using the smallest cut / fill depths as possible. Decks & balconies: The proposed decks and balconies look out to the west and north. There is only one adjacent residence to the west, and none to the north. The adjacent residence to the west is over 150 feet away and 30’ lower than the proposed house, and there are considerable mature oak trees between the two homes. Furthermore, as shown in the Landscape Plans, considerable additional screen planting is proposed along the common property line between these two houses. The undersides of the decks and balconies are proposed to be enclosed to the extent possible, and otherwise cantilevered without any support posts. The cantilevered balconies will be protected with fire-resistive construction as required by the new Wildland-Urban Interface Zone requirements. Page 60 July 5, 2024 Ms. Jocelyn ShoopmanCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 16497 South Kennedy Drive I reviewed the drawings and evaluated the neighborhood context. My comments and recommendations on the design are as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The site is located on a very constrained hillside parcel which is surrounded by large homes on much larger parcels. Photos of the site and its surrounding neighborhood are shown on the following page. EXHIBIT 6Page 61 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 2 Aerial View of the Building Site Looking down the new driveway entry Looking down at the Building Site from Road Above Looking up Vivian Drive at new driveway entrance Page 62 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 3 PROPOSED PROJECT Proposed Vivian Drive Elevation Proposed Elevation from below Proposed Side Elevation Proposed Side Elevation Page 63 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 4 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The proposed home is small in footprint compared to nearby homes. The living spaces are divided among three floors with the upper floor set back from the lower two floors in accordance with the Town’s Hillside De- velopment Standards and Design Guidelines. The main floor level is formed to follow the hillside profile, and the overall height of the structure, combined with a proposed low roof slope, allows it to fit into its hillside site without significant impacts on nearby neighbors. The plans are initially a little difficult to understand in terms of the building massing. The illustrations below show the extent of each level and their composite arrangement. Site Cross Section Page 64 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 5 Lower Level Floor Plan Main Living Level Floor Plan Upper Level Floor Plan Page 65 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 6 In my review I saw only two issues that staff may wish to explore further. 1. The roof overhangs at the second level are smaller than the upper level. 2. There is a portion of the southwest downhill facade that has a two story flat face which would appear to be inconsistent with both the Town’s Hillside Development Standards and Design Guidelines and the Town’s Single Family Residential Design Guidelines. COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN Page 66 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Increase the roof overhang to provide a stronger eave shadow line to mitigate the two story facade. 2. There may be two ways to address the issue of the two story flat downhill facade section: A. Leave it as proposed given the amount of downhill landscaping that is currently a buffer to views from the home below and the applicant’s commitment to plant screen landscaping at the lower property line. B. Extend the balcony across the facade connecting the currently proposed balcony and deck. Jocelyn, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are any issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon Page 67 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 68 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 6 In my review I saw only two issues that staff may wish to explore further. 1.The roof overhangs at the second level are smaller than the upper level. 2.There is a portion of the southwest downhill facade that has a two story flat face which would appear to be inconsistent with both the Town’s Hillside Development Standards and Design Guidelines and the Town’s Single Family Residential Design Guidelines. COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN ARCHITECT'S RESPONSE MEMO 9-17-24 EXHIBIT 7 Page 69 16497 South Kennedy Drive Design Review Comments July 5, 2024 Page 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Increase the roof overhang to provide a stronger eave shadow line to mitigate the two story facade. 2. There may be two ways to address the issue of the two story flat downhill facade section: A. Leave it as proposed given the amount of downhill landscaping that is currently a buffer to views from the home below and the applicant’s commitment to plant screen landscaping at the lower property line. B. Extend the balcony across the facade connecting the currently proposed balcony and deck. Jocelyn, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are any issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon The middle floor has been cantilevered out 18" to between the balconies to break up the 2-story section The eaves have been lengthened over the area with the 2-story facade Page 70 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 1 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Assessment of Twenty-Nine (29) Protected-Size Trees At and Adjacent to 16497 S. Kennedy Rd. Los Gatos, California Prepared for: Ms. Jocelyn Shoopman, Associate Planner Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Field Visit: Walter Levison, Contract Town Arborist (CTA) 7/18/2024 Report by CTA 8/5/2024 EXHIBIT 8 Page 71 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 2 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Table of Contents 1.0 Summary - Table and Paragraph Formats _________________________________________________ 3 2.0 Assignment & Background ____________________________________________________________ 11 3.0 Town of Los Gatos – What Trees are Protected? ___________________________________________ 12 4.0 Recommendations ___________________________________________________________________ 14 5.0 Tree Protection and Maintenance Directions per Town Code _________________________________ 20 6.0 Tree Replacement Standards – Los Gatos Town Code ______________________________________ 23 7.0 Author’s Qualifications ________________________________________________________________ 26 8.0 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ____________________________________________________ 27 9.0 Certification ________________________________________________________________________ 28 10.0 Digital Images _____________________________________________________________________ 29 11.0 Tree Data Table ____________________________________________________________________ 43 12.0 Tree Location & Protection Fence Map Mark-up __________________________________________ 54 13.0 Attached: CTA Tree Appraisal Worksheet per 10th Edition Guide for Plant Appraisal ______________ 54 Page 72 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 3 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 1.0 Summary - Table and Paragraph Formats a.Below is a matrix style overview of protected-size trees (non-exempt species, 4-inches diameter at 4.5 feet above grade). In the table, the CTA(Contract Town Arborist) has outlined expected impacts to each tree, along with suggestions for adjustments to the plan set (if applicable) that will optimizetree survival over the long term. Mitigation replacement rate and size is noted for each tree in the case that removal or damage to trees occurs. Note: Only trees within relatively close proximity of proposed work are included in this tree study (e.g. tree trunks located between approximately zero and30 linear feet of current proposed new grading, utility trenching, excavation, haul routes, landscaping, etc. as shown on proposed plans, and regulatedspecies/size trees with canopy driplines that encroach over the applicant’s property lot line. Trees Located Off-Site Large dimension canopy native oak specimens #21 and #26 were for the purposes of this arborist report considered to be “off-site” specimens locatedoutside of the various lot lines shown on tree map basis sheet A2 (applicant site plan proposed). The canopies of both of these trees extend far into theproposed project area, as is rendered by the light dashed clouding rendered by the applicant’s architect (and as rendered by the CTA as heavy blackclouding on the tree map markup included in this CTA arborist report). The ownership status of these trees is not verified at the time of writing, and actualownership may be the project owner/applicant. Town Staff may want to verify tree ownership status of these two trees before the project moves forwardinto build phase. All privet and fruit tree “exclusion” species specimens were excluded by the CTA from this study, as their mainstem diameters were not large enough to beconsidered protected-size specimens. UNKNOWN ITEM / STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM: There is one “to be determined” item related to this proposed residential plan: the proposed storm drain pipe pipe line trench and outfall, which is shown extending in a northwestward direction at the left end of sheet A2, with an indication of “TO RETENTION AREA” shown on the applicant plan sheet A2 at the end of the proposed storm drain alignment. There are multiple coast live oak specimens off-sheet beyond the area of forested site shown at the left edge of the applicant’s sheet A2, and therefore it is possible that the proposed storm drain pipe line trench and associated outfall or rock dissipater area at the northwest end of the system could have significant or severe negative impacts on multiple regulated size coast live oak tree specimens that are outside of the scope of this initial arborist report (the CTA was directed to only assess trees within the immediate area of proposed new work, which limited the CTA’s tree study to 29 trees in closest proximity to the proposed residence, deck, and driveway buildout areas). Town Planning Division Staff may want to query the applicant regarding the proposed storm drain pipe line extent and grading/excavation associated with any outfall/dissipater at the northwest end of the storm drain water conveyance system. Page 73 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 4 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved New Staff Protocols 2021 Onward / High Risk Trees & Extreme Risk Trees & Dead Trees Per my communications with Town Planning Division Staff in 2021, all trees with a TRAQ risk rating of “high” or “extreme”, and all trees in “dead” (i.e. 0 to 5% overall condition ratings) are allowed to be removed as no-fee removals, without any canopy replacement fees or plantings required, when a site is undergoing entitlement review. The reference for this no-fee/no-replacement removal standard is tree ordinance section 29.10.0985. Table 1.0(a) (REFER TO THE CTA’S TREE MAP MARKUP WHEN REVIEWING THIS MATRIX) Note that there are zero (0) protected-size trees expected to be removed as part of the applicant’s site plan project work. Line Number Tree Tag Number Common Name Large Protected Tree (LPT)? Appraised Value Site plan changes or restrictions required to reduce impacts to “less than significant” Replacement Rate Per Canopy Lost Replacement Size Tree 1 1 Coast live oak YES $9400. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 4 24” box 2 2 European olive $5,400. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 4 24” box 3 3 Coast live oak $2,260. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 3 24” box 4 4 Coast live oak $3,790. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 4 24” box 5 5 Coast live oak $2,900. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 3 24” box 6 6 Coast live oak $2,060. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 3 24” box 7 7 European olive $11,100. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 6 24” box 8 8 California toyon $2,890. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 9 9 Coast live oak $980. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box Page 74 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 5 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Line Number Tree Tag Number Common Name Large Protected Tree (LPT)? Appraised Value Site plan changes or restrictions required to reduce impacts to “less than significant” Replacement Rate Per Canopy Lost Replacement Size Tree 10 10 Coast live oak $2,070. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 11 11 Coast live oak $600. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 2 24” box 12 12 European olive $2,410. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 13 13 Coast live oak $700. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 2 24” box 14 14 Coast live oak $670. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 15 15 Coast live oak $940. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 2 24” box 16 16 Coast live oak $1,610. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 17 17 Coast live oak 1,530. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 18 18 Coast live oak $1,050. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 19 19 Coast live oak $1,940. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 20 20 Coast live oak $1,700. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 21 21 Coast live oak YES $32,500. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline (i.e. tightlined along the proposed new driveway and retaining wall eastern edge). 10 24” box Page 75 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 6 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Line Number Tree Tag Number Common Name Large Protected Tree (LPT)? Appraised Value Site plan changes or restrictions required to reduce impacts to “less than significant” Replacement Rate Per Canopy Lost Replacement Size Tree 22 22 California toyon $1,070. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 23 23 Coast live oak $1,340. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 24 24 Coast live oak YES $12,500. Erect chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. Note the proposed driveway build will likely require greater vertical airspace clearance than current. The current canopy hangs to 10 feet above dirt road grade elevations. Pruning will likely be required to clear airspace between 10 feet and 18 feet (??) above grade to allow for tall machinery access onto the site (verify with build team). This work would not necessary harm the tree to a severe degree, and is expected to be only a moderate impact to overall tree health and structure. Note also the proposed road edge construction will be approximately 8 feet from the mainstem edge of tree #24: a location that is within the calculated 12 foot offset radius “critical root zone minimum offset distance” for construction on a single side of a tree root system, which means that proposed work as shown on sheet A2 will violate the suggested offset radius for new construction to some degree (i.e. new work will be 4 feet within the suggested CRZ offset). If possible, new roadway work should be pushed 4 to 6 additional feet westward from the locations as proposed on plan sheet A2, to allow for the entire CRZ of 12 feet radius to be fenced off and preserved entirely, during the road work. 6 24” box Page 76 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 7 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Line Number Tree Tag Number Common Name Large Protected Tree (LPT)? Appraised Value Site plan changes or restrictions required to reduce impacts to “less than significant” Replacement Rate Per Canopy Lost Replacement Size Tree Tree #24, looking northward down the existing dirt road which is roughly 10 feet vertical below the elevation of the lowest canopy live wood and foliage. Pruning to clear the canopy will likely be required to gain an additional +/- 6 to 8 feet of vertical airspace clearance to clear large machinery ingress/egress. Note also that the proposed roadway as currently shown will encroach to approximately 8 feet west of the mainstem edge: a location that is 4 feet inside of the suggested critical root zone offset radius minimum. Optimally, the roadway should be built at 4 to 6 additional feet west of the proposed roadway footprint edge indicated on sheet A2 currently being reviewed for this arborist report assignment. Page 77 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 8 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Line Number Tree Tag Number Common Name Large Protected Tree (LPT)? Appraised Value Site plan changes or restrictions required to reduce impacts to “less than significant” Replacement Rate Per Canopy Lost Replacement Size Tree 25 25 Coast live oak YES $4,200. This tree is a large protected tree when the sum total of all multiple mainstems is derived (>24” diameter). Tree will be severely impacted by proposed roadway construction if the footprint is built out to the west edge of roadway as shown on sheet A2. Potentially severe root loss and required pruning to clear roadway footprint as currently shown on sheet A2 proposed site plan. 3 24” box 26 26 Coast live oak YES $25,600. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. Note that this tree appears to be an off-site specimen that is not actually located on this private lot. Construction will skirt around the canopy dripline and fencing protection. 6 24” box 27 27 Coast live oak $1,000. TO BE REMOVED PER APPLICANT’S PLAN. 3 24” box 28 28 Coast live oak $750. No changes necessary. Build as proposed, and keep chain link fencing erected per the CTA’s tree map markup at canopy dripline. 2 24” box 29 29 Coast live oak $1,110. Proposed new driveway construction with associated baserock, edging, etc. appears to encroach to roughly 3 or 4 feet east of the tree mainstem edge: a location that is within the existing canopy dripline and within the suggested critical root zone CRZ of roughly 6 feet offset radius. Suggest use trunk buffer plus chain link fencing protection, and verify the lower elevation of proposed baserock base section excavation preparation in relation to existing grade (i.e. verify whether new work will involve excavation below existing soil grade elevations). Note: the current set of plans under review by the CTA does not show elevations for baserock base excavation for this roadway, and therefore the degree of root zone impacts to tree #29 from this work cannot be verified as of the date of writing until the applicant shows us a side cut detail of the access road work extent along this section of the property. 3 24” box Page 78 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 9 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 2017 Town of Los Gatos In-lieu fee equivalent = $250 per each required 24” box mitigation tree planting not installed on the site. (This project is on a lot that is greater than 10,000 square feet, and is therefore not allowed to use 15 gallon size trees for on-site replacement plantings). 1.0 (b) Summary of tree disposition and tree issues, based on the set of plans submitted to planning division: 1.0b (i) OVERVIEW 29 total trees #1 through #29 were assessed by the CTA in close proximity to proposed work. Total value of all 29 study trees: $136,070. PROTECTION 12 trees are expected to be retained and protected in place (PIP): #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 21, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29. Trees #21 and #26 appear to be “off-site” trees, but may be on-site private trees. Total value of these 12 trees being protected in place: $102, 470. REMOVAL Value of 17 trees being removed: $33,600. MITIGATION FEES Mitigation in-lieu fees required for removal of 17 trees #7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 27 based on canopy spread: Installation of fifty-one (51) 24” box size replacement tree plantings, or payment to Town of Los Gatos tree fund in the amount of 51 x ($250/tree equivalency established by Town) = $12,750. Town Staff and applicant team will need to discuss mitigation fees versus plantings. Page 79 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 10 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 1.0b (ii) IMPACTS TO TREES BEING PROTECTED IN PLACE / MITIGATION OF IMPACTS • DRIVEWAY VS. TREE #24: Proposed driveway appears to encroach within the tree #24 canopy dripline area and root zone radius. The roadway will encroach to 8 feet from mainstem edge, which is 4 feet beyond the recommended 12 foot offset radius minimum recommended area to be fenced off as a work exclusion zone. Pruning to clear airspace for motor vehicles and machinery will likely require removal of live wood and foliage between 10 feet elevation and +/- 16 to 18 feet elevation above existing soil grade. Overall impact of this clearance pruning is expected to be moderate only. The roadway is suggested to be adjusted to 12 feet offset radius from the mainstem edge, which will require moving the footprint 4 additional feet westward from its current location, or simply narrowing the roadway profile by 4 feet. • DRIVEWAY VS. TREES #25 AND #29: Proposed driveway work will potentially cause severe damages to the root system and canopies of trees #25 and #29. Clearance pruning will necessarily be significant to severe. Actual loss of roots during road work will depend on whether baserock base section excavation is required to occur below existing soil grade or not (the applicant’s proposed set of plans does not contain this information and does not show a side cut detail of the roadway area in question near this tree, and therefore the author cannot verify the degree of root zone impacts that would occur during road development. Consult with the applicant’s project team to determine bottom elevation of proposed baserock base section excavation in relation to existing road surface elevations alongside trees #25 and #29. • UNKNOWN FACTOR / STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM PROPOSED: the westmost end of the proposed storm drain pipeline trench indicated on applicant sheet A2 as “to retention area” is an unknown factor. Town Staff will need to query the applicant team regarding this item, given that the area west of the west edge of sheet A2 was not surveyed by the CTA (the CTA was directed by Town Staff to survey only those site areas in immediate vicinity of proposed work. Therefore, all existing native oak specimens west of trees #1 and #2 have not yet been assessed to determine impacts related to proposed site work, as of the date of this CTA arborist report writing). It is likely that there is a proposed stormwater retention basin and/or proposed storm drain pipe outfall with rock dissipater not being shown on the applicant’s set of plans as of the date of writing, proposed to be built in the (as yet unassessed) native oak forest area west of the west edge of plan sheet A2. 1.0b (iii) SECURITY BONDING: The new 2015 iteration of the Town tree ordinance section 29.10.1000 (c)3 includes wordage that requires that all trees being retained on a development site need to be appraised for dollar value at the applicant’s expense prior to building or grading permits being issued by the Town. Part ‘f’ of this same tree ordinance section states that the Town may condition a security bond prior to issuance of a permit, in the sum of $5,000 per each tree being preserved, or $25,000, whichever is less. In the case of this site, with 12 protected-size trees being retained on and off site (12 x $5,000 = $60,000.), the minimum $25,000 bond amount would kick in as the bond for this project. Page 80 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 11 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 2.0 Assignment & Background Walter Levison, Contract Town Arborist (CTA) was directed to tag and assess all Protected-Size (4 inch diameter and greater) trees in relatively close proximity to the proposed site plan project. The trees were tagged with numeric tags “1” through “29” by the CTA, affixed to the mainstem of each tree at roughly eye-level. These tag numbers are noted on the CTA’s tree map markup attached to the end of this written report. The CTA summarized the tree situation from a long-term site manager’s perspective, both in table form and in written form above, in section 1.0. Specific recommendations for tree maintenance and protection are outlined below in section 4.0. Digital images of the trees archived by the CTA are included below in this report for reference of existing pre-project conditions. The tree data table with detailed tree information based on the CTA’s field assessment July, 2024 makes up section 11.0 of this report. The CTA used a forester’s D-tape to determine trunk diameter at 4.5 feet above grade, or at a narrow point below a mainstem fork if the fork occurs at 4.5 feet above grade. The D-tape converts actual trunk circumference into diameter in inches and tenths of inches. Tree heights were measured using a digital Nikon forestry pro 550 hypsometer. Tree canopy spread was visually estimated. The attached tree map mark-up prepared by the CTA was created using the applicant’s site plan sheet A2 iteration 6/12/2024 received by the CTA in July, 2024. This tree map was marked up with various highlight coloration as discussed in section 12.0. Page 81 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 12 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 3.0 Town of Los Gatos – What Trees are Protected? Per the most recent (2015) iteration of the Town of Los Gatos tree ordinance (Town Code Chapter 29 – Zoning Regulations, Article 1), the following regulations apply to all trees within the Town’s jurisdiction (wordage adjusted): 1. All trees with at least a single mainstem measuring four (4) inches diameter or greater at 4.5 feet above grade are considered “Protected Trees” when removal relates to any development review. 2. 12 inch diameter (18 inch multistem total) trees on developed residential property not currently subject to development review. 3. 8 inch diameter (8 inch multistem total) blue oak (Quercus douglasii), black oak (Quercus kellogii), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) on developed residential lots not currently subject to development review. 4. 8 inch diameter (8 inch multistem total) trees on developed residential property not currently subject to development review, on lots in the designated Hillside Area per the official Town map. 5. All trees with a single mainstem or sum of multiple mainstems totaling 48 inches diameter or greater at 4.5 feet above grade are considered “Large Protected Trees” (LPT). 6. All oak species (Quercus spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) with one or more mainstems totaling 24 inches diameter or more at 4.5 feet above grade are considered “Large Protected Trees” (LPT). 7. Section 29.10.0965. Prohibitions: A permit is required to prune, trim, cut off, or perform any work, on a single occasion or cumulatively, over a three-year period, affecting 25% or more of any Protected Tree (including below ground root system). 8. Section 29.10.0965. Prohibitions: A permit is required to prune, trim, or cut any branch or root greater than four (4) inches in diameter of a Large Protected Tree. 9. Section 29.10.0965. Prohibitions: A permit is required to conduct severe pruning on any protected tree. Severe pruning is defined in section 29.10.0955 as “topping or removal of foliage or significant scaffold limbs or large diameter branches so as to cause permanent damage and/or disfigurement of a tree, and/or which does not meet specific pruning goals and objectives as set forth in the current version of the International Society of Arboriculture Best Management Practices-Tree Pruning and ANSI A300-Part 1 Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management-Standard Practices, (Pruning).” 10. Exceptions: Severe Pruning Exception in Town Code section 29.10.1010(3) “…..except for pollarding of fruitless mulberry (Morus alba) or other species approved by the Town Arborist….”. Page 82 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 13 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Protected Tree Exceptions: a. Edible fruit or nut bearing trees less than 18 inches diameter (multistem total or single stem) b. Acacia melanoxylon (blackwood acacia) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) c. Liriodendron tulipifera (tulip tree) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) d. Ailanthus altissima (tree of heaven) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) e. Eucalyptus globulus (Tasmanian blue gum) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) f. Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River red gum) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) g. Other eucalyptus species (E. spp.) not noted above, less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) (REMOVAL O.K. ONLY AT HILLSIDE AREA LOCATIONS PER OFFICIAL TOWN MAP): www.losgatosca.gov/documentcenter/view/176 h. All palm species (except Phoenix canariensis) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) i. Ligustrum lucidum (glossy privet) less than 24 inches (multistem total or single stem) Note that per the exception in part ‘a’ above, fruiting olive trees with stems totaling less than 18 inches are considered non-protected. Page 83 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 14 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 4.0 Recommendations 1. Project Arborist (“PA”): Initial Signoff It is suggested that a third party ASCA registered consulting arborist or ISA Certified Arborist with good experience with tree protection during construction be retained by the applicant, to provide pre-project verification that tree protection and maintenance measures outlined in this section of the arborist report are adhered to. Periodic (e.g. monthly) inspections and summary reporting, if required as a project condition of approval, are suggested in order to verify contractor compliance with tree protection throughout the site plan project. This person will be referred to as the project arborist (“PA”). The PA should monitor soil moisture within the root protection zones of trees being retained, using a Lincoln soil moisture probe/meter or equivalent. If required, inspection reports shall be sent to Ms. Jocelyn Shoopman, Associate Planner, at: jshoopman@losgatosca.gov Sample wordage for a condition of approval regarding monitoring of tree protection and tree condition: “The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the project. Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in a monthly site activity report sent to the Town. A mandatory Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent at least once monthly to the Town planner associated with this project (jshoopman@losgatosca.gov) beginning with the initial tree protection verification approval letter”. The project arborist (PA) (not Walter Levison, Contract Town Arborist) is suggested to work with the project team to directly monitor a portion of the following items such as: 1a. Trenching for storm drain (SD) pipe line work and retention basin and/or outfall and rock energy dissipater work (the extent of which is not known as of the date of writing, shown at the lower left side (i.e. west end) of the applicant’s sheet A2). 1b. Pruning of trees #24, 25, and #29 for vertical and horizontal airspace clearance (actual extent of pruning and sizes of trees to be pruned are “to be determined”. Page 84 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 15 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 2.Project Team Pre-Project Clarifications or Changes Requested: It is suggested that Town Staff request clarification from the applicant, or request special work methods, materials, and specifications for the followingitems that may reasonably be expected to occur as part of the applicant’s planned site work: 2a. DRAINAGE PIPE / RETENTION BASIN / OUTFALL/ ENERGY DISSIPATER (ASSUMED): Verify with the applicant the full extent of any proposed stormwater conveyance systems, including all storm drain pipe trenching alignments and cut depths, the outfall location, and any energy dissipater and/orretention basins proposed at the end of the system. If the system encroaches to within 20 to 30 linear feet of any regulated size trees at the west end ofthe lot proposed to be developed, then the CTA may need to analyze impacts to those trees from proposed stormwater system development as a followupscope of work that is outside this initial arborist report preparation assignment. 2b. DRIVEWAY APPROACH VS. TREES #24, 25, 29: It is suggested that planning staff determine if there is any possibility of narrowing the width of the approach driveway such that trees #24, 25, and/or #29 canopies and root systems are impacted to a lesser degree than under the site plan as currently proposed (e.g. proposed plan as shown on applicant set of sheets will require that up to 50% of the canopies of trees #25 and #29 are pruned back to clear the road airspace, which may cause severe decline and/or death of the tree(s), and tree #24 root system may be severely impacted). 2c. DRIVEWAY APPROACH / CUT DEPTH VS. ROOT SYSTEMS OF TREES #24, 25, 29: It is suggested that planning staff verify with the applicantwhether the proposed driveway approach build: (a) will require scarification and recompaction of the existing soil driveway, such that the root systems of these three study trees may be negatively impacted to varying degrees between “moderate” and “severe”, or (b) will be built up entirely over existing grade, such that new baserock base section installation and asphalt or other surfacing installation will occur OVER existing soil grade, thereby allowing the existing root systems of these three study trees to remain protected in place without being severed or cut or damaged. Current plan set of sheets does not include a driveway build side cut detail, and therefore these details are “to be determined”. 3.Security Bond: It is suggested that Town Staff condition this project on receiving security bond monetary funds from the applicant in the amount of $25,000, as a hedge against potential decline or death of one or more of the survey trees to remaining on-site or off-site in close proximity to the proposed site plan project. Staff may choose to reduce this fee to a lesser amount. See table 1.0(a) for individual tree appraised values. Page 85 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 16 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 4.Chain Link Fencing Type I and/or Type II Root Protection Zone (RPZ): Prior to commencing site demolition, erect chain link fencing panels set on moveableconcrete block footings. Wire the fence panels to iron layout stakes pounded 24 inchesinto the ground at the ends of each fence panel to keep the fence route stabilized and inits correct position. Do not wire the fence panels to the trunks of the trees. Pre-construction fence: Per the red dashed lines on the tree map mark-up in the CTA’s arborist report(routes may be subject to change, depending on the finalized alignments of workitems). Protective fencing shall be at the farthest possible offset distances from trees beingretained. This fencing must be erected prior to any heavy machinery traffic or construction material arrival on site. The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. No materials, tools, excavated soil, liquids, substances, etc. are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, inside the root protection zone or “RPZ”. No storage, staging, work, or other activities will be allowed inside the RPZ exceptwith PA monitoring. Side Note: For the fencing around trees #3 and #4 at the steep slope section, useadditional materials to make the RPZ fencing more robust. Silt fencing with the lower edgeburied under soil, and straw wattles pinned down over the bottom edge of the silt fencingmaterial using wooden dowels are typically the two materials used on steep slopes to“rigidify” the RPZ fence. See image at right for an example of how this was set up on apast project in Belmont. Page 86 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 17 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 5.Signage: The RPZ fencing shall have one sign affixed with UV-stabilized zip ties to the chain link at eye level for every 15 linear feet of fencing,minimum 8”X11” size each, plastic laminated, with wordage that includes the Town Code section that refers to tree fence protection requirements(wordage can be adjusted): TREE PROTECTION ZONE FENCE ZONA DE PROTECCION PARA ARBOLES -NO ENTRE SIN PERMISO- -LLAME EL ARBOLISTA- REMOVAL OF THIS FENCE IS SUBJECT TO PENALTY ACCORDING TO LOS GATOS TOWN CODE 29.10.1025 PROJECT ARBORIST: TELEFONO CELL: EMAIL: NOTE: THE CTA IS NOT THE “PROJECT ARBORIST”. The project arborist is a private arborist contracted by the applicant or applicant’s team of professionals who then monitors the project and reports to Town of Los Gatos planning division on a monthly basis with tree condition and tree protection inspection reports. Page 87 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 18 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 6. Water Spray: Spray off foliage of all trees within 20 feet of construction activity using a very high power garden hose or a pressure washer system set on low pressure to wash both the upper and lower surfaces of foliage. This helps keep the gas portals (stomata) unclogged for better gas exchange which is crucial for normal tree function. Spray should be applied approximately once-monthly, or when ambient airborne dust concentration is unusually high. Page 88 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 19 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 7. Pruning / Above-Ground Clearance: Retain an ISA certified arborist to perform or directly supervise pruning (on-site) per the following specifications and per all of the most current ANSI-A300 pruning standards: 7.1. Tree #24: Provide minimum vehicle airspace clearance as well as any additional clearance for ingress/egress of tall machinery and work vehicles. It is expected that at least 14’ to 18’ of total vertical airspace will be required to be achieved (to be determined). Perform length reduction pruning to remove outermost ends of branches and limbs, per the sample spec image at right (exerpted from Gilman, Structural Pruning). Sizes of parts and actual extent of pruning is “to be determined” as indicated above. 7.2. Trees #25 and #29: Remove entire east sides of canopies (approx. 50% of canopy live wood and foliage) to clear proposed driveway approach airspace for both horizontal and vertical clearance. It is the Town’s understanding that this work may cause severe decline in condition of and/or premature death of the trees, in which case the applicant will be responsible for additional tree removal fees and any associated “in lieu fees” per the standard canopy replacement table ratios indicated in this arborist report summary section 1.0(a). Alternatively, planning staff may choose to add either of these two trees to the list of “removals” and require that the applicant pay in lieu fees up front as part of the project conditions of approval, given that the extent of pruning required to clear the project buildout may be the cause of severe decline or premature death of the trees. Page 89 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 20 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 8. Tree Removal In-Lieu Fees: As indicated in summary section 1.0 of this arborist report, the applicant is proposing to remove 17 trees #7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 27. The total in lieu fee required for removal of these 17 regulated trees has been determined by the CTA in table 1.0(a) as 51 times $250/tree not actually planted on site = 51 x $250 = $12,750. If the applicant ends up installing new 24” box size native oaks on this property with irrigation system supplemental water, then Town planning staff may choose to reduce the required in-lieu fee total due to the Town accordingly. Note that there are additional tree removal application permit fees, etc. that are also due in addition to the in-lieu fee calculation noted above (Town staff will determine these additional fees). 5.0 Tree Protection and Maintenance Directions per Town Code The following is excerpted directly from the 2015 iteration of the Town of Los Gatos tree ordinance sections which provide specific tree protection directions and limitations on root pruning and above-ground pruning: Sec. 29.10.1000. New property development. (a) A tree survey shall be conducted prior to submittal of any development application proposing the removal of or impact to one or more protected trees. The development application shall include a Tree Survey Plan and Tree Preservation Report based on this survey. The tree survey inventory numbers shall correspond to a numbered metal tag placed on each tree on site during the tree survey. The tree survey plan shall be prepared by a certified or consulting arborist, and shall include the following information: (1) Location of all existing trees on the property as described in section 29.10.0995; (2) Identify all trees that could potentially be affected by the project (directly or indirectly- immediately or in long term), such as upslope grading or compaction outside of the dripline; (3) Notation of all trees classified as protected trees; (4) In addition, for trees four (4) inches in diameter or larger, the plan shall specify the precise location of the trunk and crown spread, and the species, size (diameter, height, crown spread) and condition of the tree. (b) The tree survey plan shall be reviewed by the Town’s consulting arborist who shall, after making a field visit to the property, indicate in writing or as shown on approved plans, which trees are recommended for preservation (based on a retention rating of high/moderate/low) using, as a minimum, the Standards of Review set forth in section 29.10.0990. This plan shall be made part of the staff report to the Town reviewing body upon its consideration of the application for new property development; (c) When development impacts are within the dripline of or will affect any protected tree, the applicant shall provide a tree preservation report prepared by a certified or consulting arborist. The report, based on the findings of the tree survey plan and other relevant information, shall be used to determine the health and structure of existing trees, the effects of the proposed development and vegetation removal upon the trees, recommendations for specific precautions necessary for their preservation during all phases of development (demolition, grading, during construction, landscaping); and shall also indicate which trees are proposed for removal. The tree preservation report shall stipulate a required tree protection zone (TPZ) for trees to be Page 90 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 21 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved retained, including street trees, protected trees and trees whose canopies are hanging over the project site from adjacent properties. The TPZ shall be fenced as specified in section 29.10.1005: (1) The final approved tree preservation report shall be included in the building permit set of development plans and printed on a sheet titled: Tree Preservation Instructions (Sheet T-1). Sheet T-1 shall be referenced on all relevant sheets (civil, demolition, utility, landscape, irrigation) where tree impacts from improvements may be shown to occur; (2) The Town reviewing body through its site and design plan review shall endeavor to protect all trees recommended for preservation by the Town’s consulting arborist. The Town reviewing body may determine if any of the trees recommended for preservation should be removed, if based upon the evidence submitted the reviewing body determines that due to special site grading or other unusual characteristics associated with the property, the preservation of the tree(s) would significantly preclude feasible development of the property as described in section 29.10.0990; (3) Approval of final site or landscape plans by the appropriate Town reviewing body shall comply with the following requirements and conditions of approval: a. The applicant shall, within ninety (90) days of final approval or prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, secure an appraisal of the condition and value of all trees included in the tree report affected by the development that are required to remain within the development using the Tree Value Standard methodology as set forth in this Chapter. The appraisal of each tree shall recognize the location of the tree in the proposed development. The appraisal shall be performed in accordance with the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers (CTLA) and the Species and Group Classification Guide published by the Western Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture. The appraisal shall be performed at the applicant's expense, and the appraisal shall be subject to the Director's approval. b. The site or landscape plans shall indicate which trees are to be removed. However, the plans do not constitute approval to remove a tree until a separate permit is granted. The property owner or applicant shall obtain a protected tree removal permit, as outlined in section 29.10.0980, for each tree to be removed to satisfy the purpose of this division. (d) Prior to acceptance of proposed development or subdivision improvements, the developer shall submit to the Director a final tree preservation report prepared by a certified or consulting arborist. This report shall consider all trees that were to remain within the development. The report shall note the trees' health in relation to the initially reported condition of the trees and shall note any changes in the trees' numbers or physical conditions. The applicant will then be responsible for the loss of any tree not previously approved for removal. For protected trees, which were removed, the developer shall pay a penalty in the amount of the appraised value of such tree in addition to replacement requirements contained in section 29.10.0985 of this Code. The applicant shall remain responsible for the health and survival of all trees within the development for a period of five (5) years following acceptance of the public improvements of the development or certificate of occupancy. (e) Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading or building permit, the applicant or contractor shall submit to the Building Department a written statement and photographs verifying that the required tree protection fence is installed around street trees and protected trees in accordance with the tree preservation report. (f) If required by the Director and conditioned as part of a discretionary approval, a security guarantee shall be provided to the Town. Prior to the issuance of any permit allowing construction to begin, the applicant shall post cash, bond or other security satisfactory to the Director, in the penal sum of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) for each tree required to be preserved, or twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00), whichever is less. The cash, bond or other security shall be retained for a period of one (1) year following acceptance of the public improvements for the development and shall be forfeited in an amount equal to five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) per tree as a civil penalty in the event that a tree or trees required to be preserved Page 91 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 22 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved are removed, destroyed or severely damaged. (g) An applicant with a proposed development which requires underground utilities shall avoid the installation of said utilities within the dripline of existing trees whenever possible. In the event that this is unavoidable, all trenching shall be done using directional boring, air-spade excavation or by hand, taking extreme caution to avoid damage to the root structure. Work within the dripline of existing trees shall be supervised at all times by a certified or consulting arborist. (h) It shall be a violation of this division for any property owner or agent of the owner to fail to comply with any development approval condition concerning preservation, protection, and maintenance of any protected tree. (Ord. No. 2114, §§ I, II, 8-4-03) Sec. 29.10.1005. Protection of trees during construction. (a) Protective tree fencing shall specify the following: (1) Size and materials. Six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two-inch diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven into the ground to a depth of at least two (2) feet at no more than 10-foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and when stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base. (2) Area type to be fenced. Type I: Enclosure with chain link fencing of either the entire dripline area or at the tree protection zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or consulting arborist. Type II: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain link fence around the entire planter strip to the outer branches. Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout only (such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with 2-inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. (3) Duration of Type I, II, III fencing. Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction permits are issued and remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence. (4) Warning sign. Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an 8.5 x 11-inch sign stating: "Warning—Tree Protection Zone-this fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025". (b) All persons, shall comply with the following precautions: (1) Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the dripline, or tree protection zone (TPZ) when specified in an approved arborist report, around any tree and/or vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and prohibit any storage of construction materials or other materials, equipment cleaning, or parking of vehicles within the TPZ. The dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of the construction. (2) Prohibit all construction activities within the TPZ, including but not limited to: excavation, grading, drainage and leveling within the dripline of the tree unless approved by the Director. (3) Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within the dripline of or in drainage channels, swales or areas that may lead to the dripline of a protected tree. (4) Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree. Page 92 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 23 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved (5) Design utility services and irrigation lines to be located outside of the dripline when feasible. (6) Retain the services of a certified or consulting arborist who shall serve as the project arborist for periodic monitoring of the project site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The project arborist shall be present whenever activities occur which may pose a potential threat to the health of the trees to be preserved and shall document all site visits. (7) The Director and project arborist shall be notified of any damage that occurs to a protected tree during construction so that proper treatment may be administered. (Ord. No. 2114, §§ I, II, 8-4-03) Sec. 29.10.1010. Pruning and maintenance. All pruning shall be in accordance with the current version of the International Society of Arboriculture Best Management Practices—Tree Pruning and ANSI A300-Part 1 Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management—Standard Practices, (Pruning) and any special conditions as determined by the Director. For developments, which require a tree preservation report, a certified or consulting arborist shall be in reasonable charge of all activities involving protected trees, including pruning, cabling and any other work if specified. (1) Any public utility installing or maintaining any overhead wires or underground pipes or conduits in the vicinity of a protected tree shall obtain permission from the Director before performing any work, including pruning, which may cause injury to a protected tree. (e.g. cable TV/fiber optic trenching, gas, water, sewer trench, etc.). (2) Pruning for clearance of utility lines and energized conductors shall be performed in compliance with the current version of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 (Part 1)- Pruning, Section 5.9 Utility Pruning. Using spikes or gaffs when pruning, except where no other alternative is available, is prohibited. (3) No person shall prune, trim, cut off, or perform any work, on a single occasion or cumulatively, over a three-year period, affecting twenty-five percent or more of the crown of any protected tree without first obtaining a permit pursuant to this division except for pollarding of fruitless mulberry trees (Morus alba) or other species approved by the Town Arborist. Applications for a pruning permit shall include photographs indicating where pruning is proposed. (4) No person shall remove any Heritage tree or large protected tree branch or root through pruning or other method greater than four (4) inches in diameter (12.5” in circumference) without first obtaining a permit pursuant to this division. (Ord. No. 2114, §§ I, II, 8-4-03) 6.0 Tree Replacement Standards – Los Gatos Town Code (Excerpted from Town Code 29.10.0985 and 29.10.0987) (1) Two (2) or more replacement trees, of a species and size designated by the Director, shall be planted on the subject private property. Table 3-1 The Tree Canopy—Replacement Standard shall be used as a basis for this requirement. The person requesting the permit shall pay the cost of purchasing and planting the replacement trees. (2) If a tree or trees cannot be reasonably planted on the subject property, an in-lieu payment in an amount set forth by the Town Council by resolution shall be paid to the Town Tree Replacement Fund to: Page 93 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 24 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved a. Add or replace trees on public property in the vicinity of the subject property; or b. Add or replace trees or landscaping on other Town property; or c. Support the Town’s urban forestry management program. (Ord. No. 2114, §§ I, II, 8-4-03) Table 3-1 - Tree Canopy - Replacement Standard Canopy Size of Removed Tree 1 (Staff is using 24” box size as the Replacement Standard for single family residential Projects as of 2016) 2,4 Single Family Residential Replacement3,4 10 feet or less Two 24 inch box trees Two 15 gallon trees More than 10 feet to 25 feet Three 24 inch box trees Three 15 gallon trees More than 25 feet to 40 feet Four 24 inch box trees; or Two 36 inch box trees Four 15 gallon trees More than 40 feet to 55 feet Six 24 inch box trees; or Three 36 inch box trees Not Available Greater than 55 feet Ten 24 inch box trees; or Five 36 inch box trees Not Available Notes 1To measure an asymmetrical canopy of a tree, the widest measurement shall be used to determine canopy size. 2Often, it is not possible to replace a single large, older tree with an equivalent tree(s). In this case, the tree may be replaced with a combination of both the Tree Canopy Replacement Standard and in-lieu payment in an amount set forth by Town Council resolution paid to the Town Tree Replacement Fund. Page 94 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 25 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 3Single Family Residential Replacement Option is available for developed single family residential lots under 10,000 square feet that are not subject to the Town’s Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. All 15-gallon trees must be planted on-site. Any in-lieu fees for single family residential shall be based on 24” box tree rates as adopted by Town Council. 4Replacement Trees shall be approved by the Town Arborist and shall be of a species suited to the available planting location, proximity to structures, overhead clearances, soil type, compatibility with surrounding canopy and other relevant factors. Replacement with native species shall be strongly encouraged. Replacement requirements in the Hillsides shall comply with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines Appendix A and Section 29.10.0987 Special Provisions--Hillsides. Sec. 29.10.0987. Special Provisions—Hillsides The Town of Los Gatos recognizes its hillsides as an important natural resource and sensitive habitat which is also a key component of the Town’s identity, character and charm. In order to maintain and encourage restoration of the hillside environment to its natural state, the Town has established the following special provisions for tree removal and replacement in the hillsides: (1) All protected trees located 30 or more feet from the primary residence that are removed shall be replaced with native trees listed in Appendix A Recommended Native Trees for Hillside Areas of the Town of Los Gatos Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G). (2) All protected trees located within 30 feet of the primary residence that are removed shall be replaced as follows: (a) If the removed tree is a native tree listed in Appendix A of the HDS&G, it shall only be replaced with a native tree listed in Appendix A of the HDS&G. (b) If the removed tree is not listed in Appendix A, it may be replaced with a tree listed in Appendix A, or replaced with another species of tree as approved by the Director. (c) Replacement trees listed in Appendix A may be planted anywhere on the property. (d) Replacement trees not listed in Appendix A may only be planted within 30 feet of the primary residence. (3) Replacement requirements shall comply with the requirements in Table 3-1 Tree Canopy Replacement Standard of this Code. (4) Property owners should be encouraged to retain dead or declining trees where they do not pose a safety or fire hazard, in order to foster wildlife habitat and the natural renewal of the hillside environment. Page 95 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 26 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 7.0 Author’s Qualifications • Continued education through The American Society of Consulting Arborists, The International Society of Arboriculture (Western Chapter), and various governmental and non-governmental entities. • Contract Town Arborist, Town of Los Gatos, California Community Development Department / Planning Division 2015-present • Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (ISA TRAQ Course Graduate, Palo Alto, California) • Millbrae Community Preservation Commission (Tree Board) 2001-2006 • ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 • ASCA Arboriculture Consulting Academy graduate, class of 2000 • Associate Consulting Arborist Barrie D. Coate and Associates 4/99-8/99 • Contract City Arborist, City of Belmont, California Planning and Community Development Department 5/1999-5/2020 (21 years) • ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A • Peace Corps Soil and Water Conservation Extension Agent Chiangmai Province, Thailand 1991-1993 • B.A. Environmental Studies/Soil and Water Resources UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California 1990 UCSC Chancellor’s Award, 1990 (My full curriculum vitae is available upon request) Page 96 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 27 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 8.0 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised and evaluated as through free and clean, under responsible ownership and competent management. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinance, statutes, or other government regulations. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. Unless required by law otherwise, the possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any other purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. Unless required by law otherwise, neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the prior expressed conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any initiated designation conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant’s/appraiser’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report, being intended for visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys unless expressed otherwise. The reproduction of any information generated by engineers, architects, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of said information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Walter Levison to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information. Unless expressed otherwise: a. information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the conditions of those items at the time of inspection; and b. the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. Arborist Disclosure Statement: Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or to seek additional advice. Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Tree are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborist cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like any medicine, cannot be guaranteed. Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist’s services such as property boundaries, property ownership, site lines, disputes between neighbors, and other issues. Arborists cannot take such considerations into account unless complete and accurate information is disclosed to the arborist. An arborist should then be expected to reasonably rely upon the completeness and accuracy of the information provided. Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate the trees. Page 97 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 28 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 9.0 Certification I hereby certify that all the statements of fact in this report are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. Signature of Consultant DIGITAL BADGES: ISA CERTIFIED ARBORIST CREDENTIAL: https://certificates.isa-arbor.com/f1918723-df46-48cc-ace2-c12625530fec?record_view=true ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED (TRAQ): https://certificates.isa-arbor.com/d180515f-ab75-440b-9c66-106005e3cf10?record_view=true#gs.hpb30w Page 98 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 29 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 10.0 Digital Images WLCA archived new digital images of the trees in July, 2024 Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 1 2 Page 99 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 30 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 3 4 (No Image) Page 100 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 31 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 5 6 Page 101 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 32 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 7 8 Page 102 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 33 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 9 10 Page 103 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 34 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 11 12 Page 104 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 35 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 13 14 to 18 Page 105 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 36 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 14 through 18 upper elevations Page 106 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 37 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 19 20 Page 107 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 38 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 21 22 Page 108 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 39 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 23 24 Page 109 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 40 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 24 25 Page 110 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 41 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 26 27 Page 111 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 42 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Image Tree Tag Image 28 29 Tree 29 is the oak specimen with canopy covering the left 3/4 of the above image (foreground). Page 112 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 43 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 11.0 Tree Data Table NOTE 1: Fruit and nut trees measuring less than 18” diameter (total of all mainstems) both on the site and on adjacent neighbor properties were excluded from this study as “exemption trees” per the Town tree ordinance. NOTE 2: Tree Conservation suitability ratings (TCS) were determined using the applicant’s currently- proposed site plan layout. If the site plan layout can be adjusted to provide greater offset distances between trees and work, the TCS ratings may improve compared to the TCS ratings stated in the below table. Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 1 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak Est. 33 -- -- Est. 33 40/35 20/20 20% Very Poor X Poor At least 90% of the tree’s basal mainstem cross sectional area is visibly decayed. Tree may be categorized as a high risk of total tree failure and impact with residence (once the proposed residence is built out). Note the proposed stormwater conveyance pipe line trench and “retention area” noted at left side of applicant sheet A2. The extent of this proposed drainage work is not known. Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. Possible additional tree survey and analysis of impacts to trees from proposed stormwater conveyance work will be required, once applicant confirms the extent of their proposed water retention area buildout. TPZ/RPZ Page 113 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 44 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 2 Olea europaea European olive 10 9 8 Total of four stems 37” 35/35 60/50 55% Fair X Mod Same issue of the “unknown” extent of stormwater conveyance work proposed for this left side of site plan area (west end of property). Planning staff will need to query the applicant regarding this proposed work to verify the nature of what is proposed. Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. Possible additional tree impact analysis required, related to the applicant’s proposed stormwater conveyance work. TPZ/RPZ 3 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 11.0 - - 11.0 28/15 70/55 62% Good X Mod Severe sycamore bark moth larvae feeding damage. Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ 4 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 10.4 9.8 - 20.2 26/30 60/50 55% Fair X Mod 6” diameter cavity at grade (non-significant issue). Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ Page 114 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 45 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 5 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 11.6 - - 11.6 35/20 85/60 74% Good X Good Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ 6 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 11.0 - - 11.0 29/16 50/50 50% Fair X Mod South Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ 7 Olea europaea European olive 14 10 10 Total 6 stems 52” 30/45 75/65 70% Good X n/a n/a n/a 8 Heteromeles arbutifolia California toyon 5 4 4 Total 6 stems 23” 20/13 65/45 53% Fair X n/a Tree located on a slope that is almost vertical (extreme angle). n/a n/a 9 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 7.5 - - 7.5 25/12 75/45 60% Fair X n/a Bark inclusion fork (defect) at 5 feet above grade. n/a n/a 10 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 9.5 - - 9.5 30/16 75/70 72% Good X n/a n/a n/a Page 115 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 46 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 11 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 4.9 - - 4.9 19/7 80/75 78% Good X n/a n/a n/a 12 Olea europaea European olive 5 4 4 Total 8 stems 26” 23/25 80/70 75% Good X n/a n/a n/a 13 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 4.4 3.3 - 7.7 17/10 65/65 65% Good X n/a n/a n/a 14 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 6.5 - - 6.5 26/11 65/55 60% Fair X n/a n/a n/a 15 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 6.4 5.1 - 11.5 24/8 60/40 50% Fair X n/a Bark inclusion fork (defect) at 4 feet. n/a n/a 16 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 8.1 - - 8.1 25/13 75/75 75% Good X n/a West West n/a n/a 17 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 9.2 - - 9.2 24/12 75/45 60% Fair X n/a West West n/a n/a 18 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 8.3 - - 8.3 27/16 55/40 48% Fair X n/a Bark inclusion fork (defect) at 5 feet. n/a n/a Page 116 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 47 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 19 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 9.3 - - 9.3 27/15 75/65 70% Good X n/a n/a n/a 20 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 8.7 - - 8.7 28/17 80/65 75% Good X n/a n/a n/a 21 Quercus agrifolia NEIGHBOR TREE Coast live oak 38.6 - - 38.6 40/60 80/60 64% Good X Good Bark inclusion fork at 2.5 to 4.5 feet elevation above grade (defect). Owner of this tree = unknown. Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ 22 Heteromeles arbutifolia California toyon 5.1 - - 5.1 20/20 70/70 70% Good X n/a S-trunk form. n/a n/a 23 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 7.5 - - 7.5 25/20 80/70 75% Good X n/a n/a n/a Page 117 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 48 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 24 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 24.5 - - 24.5 35/45 60/60 60% Fair X Mod Tree overhangs the roadway proposed footprint, with live wood and foliage hanging down to approx. 10 feet above grade elevation. Tree will require pruning to clear at least 16 to 18 vertical feet above the roadway (as airspace clearance for expected tall machinery ingress/ egress as necessary to perform planned construction Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. Prune out canopy as necessary to gain additional airspace clearance vertical feet, above the existing canopy height of 10 feet above soil grade elevations. TPZ/RPZ, P. Page 118 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 49 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 25 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 6 6 6 Total 7 stems 35” 20/23 80/65 75% Good X Poor Tree hangs down to 4 feet above grade over the proposed roadway asphalting and baserock base section plan area. The entire east side of canopy may need to be pruned out to clear the roadway. Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. Prune to clear roadway, with the understanding that this degree of pruning will be “severe” and may cause irreversible decline of tree vigor, and/or death. TPZ/RPZ 26 Quercus agrifolia NEIGHBOR TREE Coast live oak 37.7 - - 37.7 32/50 60/50 55% Fair X Mod or Good Tree appears to be located “off-site” on a neighboring lot. No apparent conflicts between proposed work and the canopy, if fencing is erected per the CTA’s tree map markup. Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ 27 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 7.5 - - 7.5 21/12 80/45 60% Fair X n/a Two codominant mainstems with bark inclusion fork at 5 feet (defect). n/a n/a Page 119 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 50 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Tag Number Genus & Species Common Name Trunk1 Diameter Trunk2 Diameter Trunk3 Diameter Sum of All Trunk Diameters Height & Canopy Spread (Ft.) Health & Structural Rating (100% Each) Overall Condition Rating (0 to 100%) (R)emove Tree (S)ave Tree (D)isposition Unclear Tree Conservation Suitability Ratings (TCS) Lopsided Canopy (note direction) Trunk Lean (note direction) Girdling Roots Root Flares Buried in Fill Soil Pests and Disease Presence, and Other Notes SUGGESTED ROOT PROTECTION FENCE RADIUS (Ft.) MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION CODES 28 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 6.0 - - 6.0 25/9 75/60 66% Good X Mod Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. TPZ/RPZ 29 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 6 4 4 14 20/16 80/40 46% Fair X Poor Same situation as oak #25, which is that proposed roadway work will require that the entire east side of the canopy is pruned out to clear the roadway and any associated retaining wall and/or edging, etc. along the west side of the roadway (see applicant sheet A2, and see the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report). Note multiple bark inclusion forks in this mainstem system (structural defects). Erect chain link root protection zone fencing along the red dashed lines per the CTA’s tree map markup attached to this report. Prune to clear roadway, with the understanding that this degree of pruning will be “severe” and may cause irreversible decline of tree vigor, and/or death. TPZ/RPZ Page 120 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 51 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Overall Tree Condition Ratings / Breakdown of Numeric Ranges (New, Per Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition): 00 - 05% = Dead 06 - 20% = Very Poor 21 – 40% = Poor 41 – 60% = Fair 61 – 80% = Good 81 – 100% = Exceptional Page 121 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 52 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Conservation Suitability (TCS) Ratings1 A tree’s suitability for conservation is determined based on its health, structure, age, species and disturbance tolerances, proximity to proposed cutting and filling, proximity to proposed construction or demolition as shown on the most current plan sheet iterations, and potential longevity, using a scale of good, fair, or poor (Fite, K, and Smiley, E. T., 2016). The following list defines the rating scale. Note that if proposed site work can be offset to farther linear distances from a tree’s trunk edge, a tree’s TCS rating may be elevated by one rating tier, given that there would be a corresponding reduction in expected future root zone impacts. TCS Ratings Range of values Good 80-100 Trees with good health, good structural stability and good expected longevity after construction. Moderate 60-79 Trees with fair health and/or structural defects that may be mitigated through treatment. These trees require more intense management and monitoring, before, during, and after construction, and may have shorter life expectancy after development. Poor <59 Trees are expected to decline during or after construction regardless of management. The species or individual may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site. TCS Ratings Worksheet Factors (Total Possible: 100 Points) Health (1-15) Root Cut/Fill Distance from Trunk (1-15) Structure Defects (1-15) Construction Tolerance of the tree species (1-15) Age relative to typical species lifespan (1-10) Location of construction activity (1-10) Soil quality/characteristics (1-10) Species desirability (1-10) 1 Derived from Fite and Smiley, 2016. Best Management Practices: Managing Trees During Construction, 2nd Edition. International Society of Arboriculture. Page 122 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 53 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved Tree Maintenance and Protection Codes Used in Data Table: RPZ / TPZ: Root protection zone or “Tree Protection Zone” fence, chain link, with 2" diameter iron posts driven 24" into the ground, 6 to 8 feet on center max. spacing. Alternative material: chain link fence panels set over concrete block-type footings, with the fence panels wired to steel pins pounded 24 inches into the ground at both ends of each panel. RB: Root buffer consisting of wood chip mulch lain over existing soil as a 12 inch thick layer, overlain with 1 inch or greater plywood strapped together with metal plates. This root buffer or soil buffer should be placed over the entire width of the construction corridor between tree trunks and construction. RP: Root pruning. Prune woody roots measuring greater than or equal to 1 inch diameter by carefully back-digging into the soil around each root using small hand tools until an area is reached where the root is undamaged. Cleanly cut through the root at right angle to the root growth direction, using professional grade pruning equipment and/or a Sawzall with wood pruning blade. Backfill around the cut root immediately (same day), and thoroughly irrigate the area to saturate the uppermost 24 inches of the soil profile. BDRP: Back-dig root pruning: Hand-dig around the broken root, digging horizontally into the open soil root zone until a clean, unbroken, unshattered section of the root is visible. Proceed as per ‘root pruning’. RCX: Root crown excavation. Retain an experienced ISA-Certified arborist to perform careful hand-digging using small trowels or other dull digging tools to uncover currently-buried buttress root flares. Digging shall occur between trunk edge and at least two (2) feet horizontal from trunk edge. The final soil elevation will be at a level such that the tree’s buttress roots visibly flare out from the vertical trunk. TB: Trunk buffer consists of 20-40 wraps of orange plastic snow fencing to create a 2 inch thick buffer over the lowest 8 feet of tree trunk (usually takes at least an entire roll of orange fencing per each tree). Lay 2X4 wood boards vertically, side by side, around the entire circumference of the trunk. Secure buffer using duct tape (not wires). F: Fertilization with slow-release Greenbelt 22-14-14 tree formula, as a soil injection application using a fertilizer injection gun. This brand and formulation is commonly used by reputable tree care companies in the Bay Area. Apply at label rate and injection hole spacing. M: 4-inch thick layer of chipper truck type natural wood chips (example source: Lyngso Garden Supply, self pick-up). Do not use bark chips or shredded redwood bark. W: Irrigate using various methods to be determined through discussion with General Contractor. Irrigation frequency and duration to be determined through discussion and/or per directions in this report. Native oak species typically require 1x/month irrigation, while other tree species tend to prefer 2x/month or 4x/month moderate to heavy irrigation during construction. P: Pruning per specifications noted elsewhere. All pruning must be performed only under direct site supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist, or performed directly by an ISA Certified Arborist, and shall conform to all current ANSI A300 standards. MON: A Project Arborist must be present to monitor specific work as noted for each tree. Page 123 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A cell (415) 203-0990 / walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com 54 of 54 Site Address: 16497 S. Kennedy Rd., Los Gatos, CA Version: 8/5/2024 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2024 All Rights Reserved 12.0 Attached: Tree Location & Protection Fence Map Mark-up The CTA marked up the applicant’s sheet A2, attached to this report. The markups added to the applicant’s document include: • Trunk plot dots, enlarged, at approximate locations of the trees. • Numeric tree tag numbers 1 through 29 noted in large font size (the CTA added additional trees to the plot sheet that were not originally identified on any of the applicant’s plan sheets). • Approximate canopy driplines shown in true scale, in relation to proposed new work, using “black clouding” (placed directly over the applicant architect’s line dashed line rendering of canopy driplines, which were found to be roughly accurate when ground-truthed by the CTA. • Red dashed heavy lines = the CTA’s suggested root protection zone (RPZ) chain link fence routing for protection of horizontally-extended woody roots. Note that the routing around trees #24, #25, and #26 is tightlined along the assumed lot lines of this private property. The CTA assumed that fencing would not be allowed to be placed anywhere on the joint-use driveway right of way, and that the only locations available for fence erection would be the eastmost property lines where the private lot adjoins the existing joint-use roadway. • NOTE: The area indicated by applicant as “to retention area” is highlighted in magenta. The extent of the applicant’s proposed storm drain pipe trenching, and any associated rock dissipaters, outfalls, and retention area excavation is completely unknown as of the date of this CTA arborist report writing. 13.0 Attached: CTA Tree Appraisal Worksheet using 10th Edition of Guide for Plant Appraisal as basis Page 124 SHEETS SHEET OF SCALE: DATE: DRAWN: JOB: PERMIT SET CONSTRUCTION SET PRELIMINARY SET PLAN CHECK SET DESIGN REVIEW SET REVISIONS BY A R C H I T E C T CHRIS SPAULDING (510) 527-5997 FAX (510) 527-5999 BERKELEY CALIFORNIA 94710 801 CAMELIA STREET SUITE E DRAWINGS PREPARED BY LOS GATOS CALIFORNIACS/DB NICOL 6-12-2024 9 16497 S KENNEDY RDAS NOTEDA PROPOSED NEW HOME FORNICOL RESIDENCEPROPOSED 2-STORY HOUSE W/ BASEMENT ENLARGED SITE PLAN 1" = 10' - 0" BSMT 528.0'1ST FLR 539.05'2ND FLR 549.1' 400 AMP. ELECTRICAL SERVICE W/ UFER GROUND 20' REQUIRED SETBACK2 0 ' - 5 3 4" D E C K D E C K 30'- 0 " R E Q U I R E D F R O N T S E T B A C K 3 0 ' - 0 " R E Q U I R E D F RO N T S E T B A C K 2 0 ' - 0 3 4" R E Q U I R E D SI D E S E T B A C K 20'-0" REQUIREDSIDE SETBACKCOV'D PORCH 75'- 0 " BALCONY 30'- 0 " P R O P O S E D F R O N T S E T B A C K20'-0 " R EQU IR EDSIDE S E TBACK 20'-0" REQU IREDSIDE SETBACK 20'-0" RE QUI RED SIDE SETBA CK20'-534" PROPOSEDSIDE SE TBACK 25'-0"20'- 0 " HATCH = HAMMER HEAD TURN AROUND A .C . D R I V E W A YT.O.S. @ GARAGEDOOR 538.97'A2AA1 2 3 4 65 7 8 9 10 13 11 12 6" OAK 2" 8" 7" OAK 21'-914" SIDE SETBACK9" OAK OAK OAK 9"20 21 34" OAK 18146"8" 15 8" 8" 8" 10" 16 17 19 8" 8" 22 23 30" OAK LI N K O F I T A L I A N C Y P R E S S 25" OAK 24 4' MAX. HIGH REDWOOD 12'-0"CLEAR15" OAK 25 STOR M D R AI N LI N E TO RE T E N TI O N A R E A TO METER @ SOUTH KENNEDY112" WATERDOTTED HATCH REPRESENTS 2ND FLOOR PERIMETER GRADING & DRAINAGE NOTESFINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS TOBE PREPARED BY A CIVIL ENGINEER ALL SITE DRAINAGE TO BE COLLECTED IN TIGHT LINES AND DISTRIBUTED THROUGH RETENTION DEVICES TO LANDSCAPED AREAS AT WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE T R E E T A B L ENUMBERSPECIESSIZE1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 7" 9" 2" 8" 6" 6" 8" 10" 9" 34" 25" 15" REMOVED/REMAINTO REMAIN TO REMAIN TO REMAIN TO REMAIN TO REMAIN TO REMAIN TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED OAK OAK TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED OAK OAK OAK 8" 8" 8" TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED TO REMAIN TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED TO REMAIN TO BE REMOVED OAK TO REMAIN TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED OAK 8" 8" OAK TO REMAIN TO REMAIN INGRESS, EGRESS, & UTILITY EASEMENT 4" S A N I T A R Y S E W E R 4" SANITARY SEWER UNDE R G R O U N D ELEC, T E L , T V T.W. 546 . 5 B.W. 539 . 0 T.W. 549 . 0 B.W. 539 . 5 T.W. 548 . 0 B.W. 539 . 5 T.W. 544 . 0 B.W. 540 . 5 T.W. 546 . 0 B.W. 542 . 0 T.W. 546 . 0 B.W. 544. 0 T.W. 549 . 0 B.W. 548 . 0 T.W. 537 . 7 B.W. 536 . 0 T.W. 537 . 0 B.W. 531 . 5 T.W. 537 . 0 B.W. 526 . 5 T.W. 538 . 5 B.W. 534 . 5 T. W . 5 4 2 . 0 B. W . 5 3 9 . 0 T. W . 5 4 2 . 0 B. W . 5 3 9 . 0 HOUSE FOOTPRINT CUT (CY)MAX CUT HEIGHT (SF)FILL (CY)MAX FILL DEPTH (SF) IMPORT/ EXPORT (CY) ATTACHED GARAGE ACCESSORY BUILDING POOL DRIVEWAY / ACCESS LANDSCAPE / OUTDOOR CELLAR AREA DESCRIPTION TABLE OF PROPOSED EARTHWORK QUANTITIES TOTAL 62 1.5 242 242 14 847 174 965 6 4 118 9 8.5 95 14 101 11 112 10.5 43443413 Page 125 Line 9Line 10 Line 11Tree Tag #Name (Initials)WCISA Speces Group Classification Booklet PageHealth (Weighted 0.15)Structure(Weighted 0.70)Form(Weighted 0.15)Overall Condition Rating (OCR) "Weighted Method" Diameter Inches at 4.5 ft. Above GradeFunctional LimitationsExternal LimitationsWCISA Species Group NumberTrunk Square Inches for Replacement-Size Specimen of This SpeciesAverage SF Bay Area Cost of 24 Inch Box Tree (2019)(UTC) Unit Tree Cost per Sq Inch (M Divided by L)Trunk Area (TA) ((dia. x dia.) x 0.785)Basic Functional Replacement Cost (BFRC) = (OxN)Depreciated Functional Replacement Cost (DFRC) = PxGxIxJRounded-off Appraised Values1Qa 30 0.2 0.2 0.6 26% 33 80% 80% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 854.87 56,241$ 9,359$ $9,4002Oe 22 0.6 0.5 0.6 53% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 240.0015,789$ 5,356$ $5,4003Qa 30 0.7 0.55 0.5 57%11 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 94.996,249$ 2,260$ $2,2604Qa 30 0.6 0.5 0.6 53% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 170.0011,184$ 3,794$ $3,7905Qa 30 0.85 0.6 0.7 65%11.6 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 105.636,949$ 2,902$ $2,9006Qa 30 0.5 0.5 0.6 52%11 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 94.996,249$ 2,060$ $2,0607Oe22 0.75 0.65 0.65 67% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 395.0025,987$ 11,060$ $11,1008Ha 18 0.65 0.45 0.6 50% multi stem total 80% 80% 12.09$250.00 $119.62 75.008,971$ 2,885$ $2,8909Qa30 0.75 0.45 0.65 53%7.5 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 44.162,905$ 976$ $98010Qa 30 0.75 0.7 0.6 69%9.5 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 70.854,661$ 2,066$ $2,07011Qa 30 0.8 0.75 0.7 75%4.9 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 18.851,240$ 595$ $60012Oe 22 0.8 0.7 0.7 72% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 80.005,263$ 2,408$ $2,41013Qa30 0.65 0.65 0.75 67% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 25.001,645$ 700$ $70014Qa30 0.65 0.55 0 48%6.5 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 33.172,182$ 674$ $67015Qa30 0.6 0.4 0.7 48% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 47.003,092$ 940$ $94016Qa30 0.75 0.75 0.7 74%8.1 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 51.503,388$ 1,610$ $1,610Valuation Appraisal Worksheet Based on Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition , 2nd Printing (2019) "Functional Replacement Method / Trunk Formula Technique"16497 S. Kennedy Rd, Los Gatos, California 8/5/2024Depreciation FactorsWalter Levison, Consulting Arborist <walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com> Cell: (415) 203-0990 1 of 3Page 126 Line 9Line 10 Line 11Tree Tag #Name (Initials)WCISA Speces Group Classification Booklet PageHealth (Weighted 0.15)Structure(Weighted 0.70)Form(Weighted 0.15)Overall Condition Rating (OCR) "Weighted Method" Diameter Inches at 4.5 ft. Above GradeFunctional LimitationsExternal LimitationsWCISA Species Group NumberTrunk Square Inches for Replacement-Size Specimen of This SpeciesAverage SF Bay Area Cost of 24 Inch Box Tree (2019)(UTC) Unit Tree Cost per Sq Inch (M Divided by L)Trunk Area (TA) ((dia. x dia.) x 0.785)Basic Functional Replacement Cost (BFRC) = (OxN)Depreciated Functional Replacement Cost (DFRC) = PxGxIxJRounded-off Appraised ValuesValuation Appraisal Worksheet Based on Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition , 2nd Printing (2019) "Functional Replacement Method / Trunk Formula Technique"16497 S. Kennedy Rd, Los Gatos, California 8/5/2024Depreciation Factors17Qa 30 0.75 0.45 0.8 55% 9.2 80% 80% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 66.44 4,371$ 1,532$ $1,53018Qa 30 0.55 0.4 0.65 46%8.3 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 54.083,558$ 1,047$ $1,05019Qa30 0.75 0.65 0.75 68%9.3 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 67.894,467$ 1,944$ $1,94020Qa 30 0.8 0.65 0.7 68%8.7 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 59.423,909$ 1,701$ $1,70021Qa30 0.8 0.6 0.8 66%38.6 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 1169.6276,949$ 32,503$ $32,50022Ha 18 0.7 0.7 0.6 69%5.1 80% 80% 12.09$250.00 $119.62 20.422,442$ 1,071$ $1,07023Qa 30 0.8 0.7 0.75 72%7.5 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 44.162,905$ 1,343$ $1,34024Qa30 0.6 0.6 0.8 63%24.5 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 471.2031,000$ 12,499$ $12,50025Qa 30 0.8 0.65 0.75 69% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 145.009,539$ 4,197$ $4,20026Qa30 0.6 0.5 0.7 55%37.7 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 1115.7173,402$ 25,603$ $25,60027Qa 30 0.8 0.45 0.7 54%7.5 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 44.162,905$ 1,004$ $1,00028Qa 30 0.75 0.6 0.65 63%680% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 28.261,859$ 750$ $75029Qa30 0.8 0.4 0.6 49% multi stem total 80% 80% 33.8$250.00 $65.79 54.003,553$ 1,114$ $1,110Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist <walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com> Cell: (415) 203-0990 2 of 3Page 127 Line 9 Line 10 Line 11 Tree Tag #Name (Initials)WCISA Speces Group Classification Booklet PageHealth (Weighted 0.15)Structure (Weighted 0.70)Form (Weighted 0.15)Overall Condition Rating (OCR) "Weighted Method" Diameter Inches at 4.5 ft. Above GradeFunctional LimitationsExternal LimitationsWCISA Species Group NumberTrunk Square Inches for Replacement-Size Specimen of This SpeciesAverage SF Bay Area Cost of 24 Inch Box Tree (2019)(UTC) Unit Tree Cost per Sq Inch (M Divided by L)Trunk Area (TA) ((dia. x dia.) x 0.785)Basic Functional Replacement Cost (BFRC) = (OxN)Depreciated Functional Replacement Cost (DFRC) = PxGxIxJRounded-off Appraised Values Valuation Appraisal Worksheet Based on Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition , 2nd Printing (2019) "Functional Replacement Method / Trunk Formula Technique"16497 S. Kennedy Rd, Los Gatos, California 8/5/2024Depreciation Factors Total Appraised Value of the Study Trees Assessed by the CTA (Trees #1 Through #29). $136,070Notes: 1. OVERALL CONDITION RATING RANGE per the new 10th edition, 2nd Printing, of Guide for Plant Appraisal (2019): Excellent: 81-100%Good: 61-80%Fair: 41-60%Poor: 21-40%Very Poor: 6-20%Dead: 0-5%2. MULTI STEM TREES: For trees with multiple mainstems, the sum total of all mainstem cross sectional areas was used as the "trunk area" calculation. 3. NEIGHBOR TREES: For neighbor-owned trees that were not accessible by the CTA, the trunk diameter was estimated from a distance to the best of the CTA's ability. 4. CONDITION RATINGS / APPRAISAL TABLE VS. DATA TABLE: Because of the new appraisal methods outlined in the 2019 edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th edition 2nd printing, the condition ratings calculated in the "Overall Condition Rating / Weighted Method" column, and the data noted in the health and structure columns of this spreadsheet (with calculations embedded), may in some cases be slightly different from data in the CTA's arborist report tree data table. 5. "APPARENTLY OFF-SITE" TREES INDICATED AS YELLOW HIGHLIGHT ALONG ENTIRE ROW (OWNERSHIP NOT VERIFIED. MAY BE ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE).Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist <walterslevisonjr@yahoo.com> Cell: (415) 203-0990 3 of 3Page 128 Hi Jocelyn, Here is a summary of my neighborhood outreach. 16505 S Kennedy Rd. I met with one of the of the home owner of this property in mid January 2025. I described the scope of the project and I gave them a print out of the proposed plans. 16515 S Kennedy Rd. I spoke with in December 2024 about my plans on building a home on my property that is directly above her property. She was very supportive and wished me good luck building! Then, on January 27th I asked her for permission for my geologist to walk her property and she granted us access the following day. They have been given a printed set of plans as well. 16491 S Kennedy Rd. I have spoken with multiple times about my plans of building a home and he has been very understanding and supportive throughout the entire process. 16555 S Kennedy I stopped by multiple times to and they weren’t home any of the times I tried to knock on their door. I believe they live in most of the time. 16565 S Kennedy Rd. I have spoken with multiple times for several hours about all of his concerns. My General Contractor has answered many questions of his in detail. And I also offered to him to have my geologist provide his expert opinion about the stone wall in question that isn’t on my property. And we agreed that there would be planting of trees near the stone wall to cover the exterior of my new proposed residence. He also was concerned with the height of the story poles and it blocking his view. So, I laid down on the road and demonstrated to him from laying on the pavement that I couldn’t see the orange netting from the height of the pavement. 16575 S Kennedy Rd. I spoke to yesterday (3-20-25) and he was concerned about the size of the home and I explained to him that the proposed size was much less than the maximum allowed. And he was also concerned about the stone wall which I also explained wasn’t on my property. EXHIBIT 9Page 129 And that if construction from my property caused any damage to the wall I would repair the wall. He made it very clear he didn’t want to see a home in that location from his property. Page 130 FROM THE OFFICE OF CHRIS SPAULDING ARCHITECT 801 CAMELIA STREET, SUITE E BERKELEY CA 94710 PHOTO BOARD 1 16497 S KENNEDY RD LOS GATOS CALIFORNIA AERIAL VIEW OF BUILDING SITE LOOKING UP VIVIAN DRIVE AT THE NEW DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE LOCATION EXHIBIT 10 Page 131 FROM THE OFFICE OF CHRIS SPAULDING ARCHITECT 801 CAMELIA STREET, SUITE E BERKELEY CA 94710 PHOTO BOARD 2 16497 S KENNEDY RD LOS GATOS CALIFORNIA LOOKING DOWN VIVIAN DRIVE WHERE NEW DRIVEWAY WILL ENTER LOOKING DOWN THE NEW DRIVEWAY ENTRY TOWARDS THE BUILDING SITE Page 132 FROM THE OFFICE OF CHRIS SPAULDING ARCHITECT 801 CAMELIA STREET, SUITE E BERKELEY CA 94710 PHOTO BOARD 3 16497 S KENNEDY RD LOS GATOS CALIFORNIA FIRE APPARATUS TURN-AROUND LOCATION LOOKING DOWN AT THE BUILDING SITE FROM THE ROAD ABOVE Page 133 FROM THE OFFICE OF CHRIS SPAULDING ARCHITECT 801 CAMELIA STREET, SUITE E BERKELEY CA 94710 PHOTO BOARD 4 16497 S KENNEDY RD LOS GATOS CALIFORNIA THE FIRST HAIRPIN TURN ON THE OLD DRIVEWAY FROM KENNEDY ROAD THE OLD DRIVEWAY FROM KENNEDY ROAD Page 134 FROM THE OFFICE OF CHRIS SPAULDING ARCHITECT 801 CAMELIA STREET, SUITE E BERKELEY CA 94710 PHOTO BOARD 5 16497 S KENNEDY RD LOS GATOS CALIFORNIA THE OLD DRIVEWAY FROM KENNEDY ROAD THE OLD DRIVEWAY FROM KENNEDY ROAD Page 135 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 136 EXHIBIT 11Page 137 o Reposition or eliminate direct-facing second- and third-story windows that look into our private areas. o Reduce the proposed height of the project o Restrict balcony access or redesign the balconies to prevent direct views into our yard. 2. Mandate an enhanced landscape screening plan that includes: o Mature, fast-growing evergreen trees (e.g., Italian Cypress, Podocarpus, or similar species) of at least 14–16 feet at installation to provide immediate and lasting privacy. o Dense tree and hedge placement along the property line to fully block sightlines. o A privacy compliance requirement ensuring screening remains in place and effective long-term, with required maintenance and replacement as necessary. o Strategic tree placement specifically to block second- and third-story views into our property, not just at ground level. 3. Conduct a formal review of neighborhood compatibility and evaluate whether the bulk and height of this project violate the town’s privacy and neighborhood character guidelines. We urge the Planning Commission to carefully review this development through the lens of neighborhood privacy protection and require the necessary adjustments to safeguard our property and quality of life. This project, in its current form, is fundamentally intrusive, and without major modifications, will create a permanent loss of privacy for multiple adjacent properties. We would appreciate the opportunity to discuss these concerns further in the upcoming hearing. Sincerely, Rohit and Apoorva Bakshi Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 From: Rohit Bakshi <> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2025 3:23 PM To: Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Cc: Apoorva Bakshi <> Subject: Re: Concerns Regarding Nicol Residence Project at 16497 South Kennedy Rd Hello Jocelyn, It was a pleasure meeting you! Thanks for taking the time today. - I looked up the plans and my concerns are more elevated after that. I believe this entire face of the home (pic below ) is looking downhill from our home . For most part they have huge windows , wall to ceiling sliding doors and balconies all overlooking our homes backyards , pool and our master bedroom - From their landscaping plan it seems like all they will plant are Tyon plant , grossly insufficient to protect privacy . And for most of the periphery of the property there are no plans at all Page 141 Page 142 Dear Jocelyn Shoopman, We are here to support and represent the ownership of as the sons of the owners. The property to be constructed in front of which is 16497 South Kennedy Road is way too big. The plans call for a 4,844 sq ft structure along with a 663 sq ft garage totaling close to 5,500 sq ft. The structure is going to interfere with the general living experience of its neighbors. The building is going to destroy the wall which is historic alongside the current access road to the said property and destroy the embankment. There is a fire problem, mudslide problem and a flooding problem. The building is going to be a gigantic eye soar. It is not appropriately sized for the type of downslope lot and size of its lot .This lot is extremely sloped. There is a home below it , It is small, and can have grading issues which could create concern for its neighbors. . I urge you not to grant approval for such a massive non- conforming structure in what for over 100 years has been empty and what appears to be not suitable for such a huge unnecessary home. Matthew Ebrahimoon _ _________________________ ____________ Jonathan Ebrahimoon _ _________________________ ____________ Nathaniel Ebrahimoon ___________________________ ____________ Docusign Envelope ID: 1FC63A8F-5BC9-432D-97A5-A86D3980439C 3/17/2025 3/17/2025 3/18/2025 Page 143 From: Ken Miller <> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 12:35 PM To: Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Proposed Nichol residence at 16491 SOUTH KENNEDY RD. With the threat of a fire on the hillside/wooded property, major insurance companies are refusing to renew fire insurance policies, or even offer a policy. When policies can be obtained, they are of limited coverages, or exorbitant rates. Homeowners often are required to obtain fire insurance coverages, even though there is no reasonable risk. Hillside property in this semi-rural town setting is apparently deemed an unreasonable insurance risk. New homes, remodels and homes for resale may be reevaluated and deemed an unreasonable risk. With fewer fire insurance policies issued, there is a negative wealth pressure. Homes without fire insurance leads to home sale price reduction, more expensive mortgages, and denial of reasonable mortgages. Self-insurance is problematic. Flat landers, with homes possibly surrounding a hillside fire, should insist that fire abatement standards be required for all new homes. Think L.A. I have a home in wooded San Mateo county. Clearing the land and notifying a county court was part of my building project. I have to notify the a county court twice a year, that part of my property is absent of combustible material. For over 45 years, I alone have been tending to this problem on this rural hillside land at 16497 South Kennedy. Not including firewood, I have removed an average of 12.5 tons of combustible material every year. No longer. I have been recently been told that months ago the fire department notified Mr. Nicols of the need for fire abatement. It is not apparent anything has been done. Failure to do so, the fire department may proceed, and present their bill. This land is quite sprawling, and it is easy to forget responsibilities to protect the neighbors when the land extends along Kennedy road to Long meadow. I propose that owners of this land have yearly fire department evaluation, with reasonable recommendations. This should be included in deed form. Future new homes on wooded hillside property should have this requirement. It is a county fire department, but a town planning commission. We live in new times, and we need to respond to different challenges. Ken Miller, Contact JShoopman@LosGatosCA.gov The planning meeting is 3/26/25 7PM Page 144 From: Rohit Bakshi <> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2025 4:35 PM To: Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Cc: Apoorva Bakshi <> Subject: Concerns Regarding Nicol Residence Project at 16497 South Kennedy Rd Dear Jocelyn , I hope this email finds you well. My name is Rohit Bakshi, and along with my wife, Apoorva Bakshi, and our children, we reside at , Los Gatos. We are writing to express our concerns regarding the Nicol Residence project currently under review by the Los Gatos building department. We would also like to talk about our concerns at the planning meeting scheduled for Mar 26th and 7 pm Concern 1 - Embankment Wall The property’s old stone walls show multiple structural issues, including cracks, missing stones, and prior repairs. A previous repair along the driveway was made years ago by the Stephen family and Mr. Athow, whom I recently spoke with. Despite these efforts, a new break has emerged and was temporarily fixed. This wall is critical for hillside stability, and its deterioration threatens my home which is downhill from this property. To prevent collapse, the building department must enforce reinforcement to meet safety standards. The financial responsibility for maintaining the wall should be recorded in deed form and remain with the landowners under the department’s supervision. We believe the wall and embankment are at risk of sliding, potentially causing catastrophic damage to our home and family. Immediate action is necessary, and a recorded easement should hold present and future owners fully responsible for remediation, conducted under the Los Gatos building department’s direction. Concern 2 - Privacy We also seek assurances regarding the preservation of privacy for our home. Several large oak and olive trees that currently provide privacy screening border the property. It is essential that these mature trees remain intact, especially those with overhanging arbors. Furthermore, we request that additional trees be planted to enhance privacy. The management of these trees and the broader landscape should be conducted under the oversight of the building department. Additionally, the current size, orientation, and height of the proposed project present significant privacy concerns. The design of the structure directly overlooks our bedrooms and recreational spaces, including backyard pools and lounging areas. To mitigate these issues, we request the following measures: • A reduction in the overall height of the building • Maintenance of existing privacy screening vegetation • Addition of new trees and other landscaping features to further protect the privacy of neighboring homes Page 145 We kindly request that these concerns be thoroughly reviewed and appropriately addressed as part of the approval process for the Nicol Residence project. We appreciate your attention to these matters and look forward to working collaboratively to ensure a safe and harmonious neighborhood environment. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Rohit Bakshi and Apoorva Bakshi - Los Gatos, CA Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2025 2:35 PM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Online Form Submission #15627 for Community Development Contact Form Community Development Contact Form First Name Carol Last Name Tinsley Email Address (Required) Phone Number Tell Us About Your Inquiry (Required) Comment Regarding A Planning Project Address/APN you are inquiring About (Required) Message (Required) I was just reviewing the pending building proposal for 16497 S. Kennedy Road. I live at and share the driveway with this location and yet I am not listed as a neighbor. We certainly should be as we share the driveway and have access and utility easements to use the other access driveway pictured in the photos. Not sure how or why this happened, but can you make sure that it is rectified? Add An Attachment if applicable Field not completed. Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. Page 150 Response letter to the neighborhood comments about 16497 S. Kennedy Rd. 1.The stone wall above the site is 20ft away from the proposed building site and it is on the neighbor’s side of the property line. The construction of the new house will not involve any pile driving or other soil impacts. The biggest tremors will be caused by the trucks and excavators, which should be relatively minor. In the end, when the retaining walls and drainage are in place, the new house will actually shore up the hillside and reduce the long term creep that would endanger the stone wall. And, after having a discussion with the neighbors I have agreed that adding landscaping along the stone wall will be a compromise for the neighbors and myself. I will also take photos of the stone wall prior to beginning to construction and will repair it if construction from building my home causes the damage to the wall. As for the walls along the old road that comes up from the intersection of Kennedy Rd. and South Kennedy Rd, no construction traffic will be using that road, except perhaps to dig the trenches for the utilities. 2.The size of the house: It is not at the maximum allowed. A good portion of it is below grade, and is still counted as floor area. 3.The views: As is plainly evident by the story poles, the house does not block anyone’s view. 4.Fire protection: The house will be built to the latest fire-resistant construction requirements, and you will be providing a private fire hydrant, which will provide extra protection for everyone on Vivian Drive. Also, the entrance to Vivian drive will be enlarged for fire apparatus access, and the lower portion of Vivian drive will be improved for better traction for the fire trucks. All of this benefits the neighbors at no cost to them. 5.Screening: The house is barely visible from Vivian Drive and will not be visible from South Kennedy (or any other public way). The house below is really the only house affected by the new house, and the new upper floor windows and balconies will be screened by the mature oak trees on the downhill neighbor’s property (so they have control over the screening). For the lower level, there will be a line of screen trees planted to screen the gap between the ground and the underside of the oak canopy. EXHIBIT 12 Page 151 P A R C E L M A P 9 5 6 M 3 2 R E C O R D O F S U R V E Y 1 4 9 M 5 3 PARCEL 3 PARCEL 2 PARCEL C PARCEL B P A R C E L M A P 9 5 6 M 3 2 LOT 1 LOT 2 RETAINING WALL Page 152 6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-2411-18-202412-18-2024P R O J E C T D A T AOWNER: ROBERT NICOLADDRESS: 16497 S. KENNEDY ROADPROJECT DESCRIPTION:- NEW 2-STORY HOUSE W/ BASEMENT- NEW DRIVEWAY W/ FIRE-APPARATUS TURN-AROUND- REMOVE 14 TREESAPN: PORTION OF 532-17-035ZONING: HR-1FLOOD ZONE: XCONSTRUCTION TYPE: V - B, SPRINKLEREDOCCUPANCY GROUP: R3 / UGROSS LOT SIZE 1: 111,843 SQ. FT.NET LOT SIZE: 82,400 SQ.FT.AVERAGE LOT SLOPE: 45%LOT SIZE FOR FAR:0.4 x 111,843 = 44,737ALLOWABLE FAR: 6,000 + 400 (GARAGE CREDIT)FLOOR AREA (ALL NUMBERS IN SQ.FT.)1ST FLOOR 1,854.1GARAGE (in excess of 400 sq.ft.) 263.42ND FLOOR 1,211.6BASEMENT COUNTED TOWARDS FAR 865.1TOTAL 4,194.2BASEMENT AREA 880.1(NOT COUNTED TOWARDS FAR)COVERED PORCH 34PARKING SPACES:(2) COVERED + (2+) UNCOVEREDLOT COVERAGE:BUILDING FOOTPRINT = 2,677.5 ≈ 3.2 %VICINITY MAP$SITE PLAN1" = 40' - 0"SEE THISENLARGED SITEPLAN ON SHEET A2PROJECTLOCATION5' WATER LINEEASEMENT30'-0"INGRESSEGRESS & P.U.EASEMENT5'-0"5' GAS LINEEASEMENT10.2' P.S.EASEMENT[E] NEIGHBOR[E] NEIGHBORA A [E] NEIGHBOR16491165051651520' SET BA CK LIN E 20' SETBACK LINE20' SETBACK LINE20' SETBACK LINE20' SET B A C K LI N E 20' SET B A C K LI N E 20' SETBACK LINE20' SET B A C K LI N EVIVIAN DRDRIVEWAY PROFILE1" = 20' - 0"EDGE SOUTHKENNEDY ROAD0+501+001+502+002+503+003+504+004+505+005+50GARAGE 5+8975'-0" FIRE APPARATUS TURN AROUND7.7%16.2%18%19.9%17.1%15.8%[E] NEIGHBOR16575[E] NEIGHBOR1656516.6%14.7%13.1%8.9%12.1%14.8%14.0%5.4%5% MAX IN ANY DIRECTION550540530520510500490480550540530520510500490480TRIANGULARINGRESS, EGRESSAND PUBLICUTILITY EASEMENTINGRESS, EGRESSAND PUBLICUTILITY EASEMENT21'-1114"21'-1112"20'-714"20'-2"21'-9"NOTESA SEPARATE PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR THEPV SYSTEM THAT IS REQUIRED BY THECALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE PERFORMANCEOR PRESCRIPTIVE STANDARDS. THESEPARATE PV SYSTEM PERMIT MUST BEFINALED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OFCERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCYTHIS RESIDENCE WILL COMPLY WITH THETOWN'S ALL ELECTRIC APPLIANCE,ELECTRIC VEHICLE, AND ENERGY STORAGESYSTEM REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCEWITH TOWN CODE.189' [N] DRIVEWAYAddress Identification: New and existing buildings shall have approvedaddress numbers, building numbers or approved building identificationplaced in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the streetor road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with theirbackground. Where required by the fire code official, addressnumbers shall be provided in additional approved locations tofacilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabicnumbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 6inches high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm).Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannotbe viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign ormeans shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shallbe¬maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1R=20'R=20' R=50'R=70'FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTESFire Sprinklers Required: Approved automaticsprinkler systems in new and existing buildingsand structures shall be provided in the locationsdescribed in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1through 903.2.12 whichever is the morerestrictive and Sections 903.2.14 through903.2.21. For the purposes of this section,firewalls and fire barriers used to separatebuilding areas shall be constructed in accordancewith the California Building Code and shall bewithout openings or penetrations. INSTALL ANENHANCED NFPA 13D SPRINKLER SYSTEM1. Make a note on building permit setcoversheet that an approved PRC 4290request of exception is included as acondition of approval, specifics on thematerials & performances of the surfaceimprovements to Vivian Dr, and that modifiedsprinkler system will be installed.2. A copy of the Alternate Means/Methodsapplication form, with approval signature shallbe made part of the building permit drawingset, to be routed to Santa Clara County FireDepartment for final approval.3. A copy of this comment letter shall bemade part of the building permit drawing set.4.Provide a sign at the entrance from S.Kennedy Rd to Vivian Dr indicating that a firedepartment turn out is located on the subjectparcel. Provide a sign at the fire departmentturnaround indicating the turnaround and noparking within the turnaround.Wildland-Urban Interface: This project is located within thedesignated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The buildingconstruction shall comply with the provisions of California BuildingCode (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be incompliance with CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project finalapproval. Check with the Planning Department for related landscapeplan requirements.Construction Site Fire Safety: All construction sites must complywith applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our StandardDetail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations onsubsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp.33Water Supply Requirements: Potable water supplies shall beprotected from contamination caused by fire protection watersupplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractorsand subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the siteof such project, and to comply with the requirements of thatpurveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design ofany water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppressionwater supply systems or storage containers that may be physicallyconnected in any manner to an appliance capable of causingcontamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record.Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not begranted by this office until compliance with the requirements of thewater purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as havingbeen met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Healthand Safety Code 13114.7.Fire Hydrant Systems Required: Where a portion of the facility orbuilding hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdictionis more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus accessroad, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of thefacility or building, onsite fire hydrants and mains shall be providedwhere required by the fire code official. Exception: For Group R-3and Group U occupancies, equipped throughout with an approvedautomatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3, the distance requirementshall be not more than 600 feet. INSTALL A PRIVATE HYDRANTLOCATED AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. THERE SHALL BE NOCOMBUSTIBLE CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO HYDRANT INSTALLATIONFIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES, CONTINUEDEXISTING ROADADDITIONAL FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTESPROPOSED NEWPRIVATE FIREHYDRANTLOCATION (FINALLOCATION TO BEDETERMINED BYTHE WATERCOMPANY ANDFIRE DISTRICT)R=70'R=50'WIDEN ROADWAY ENTRYTO 50' RADIUS(NEW PAVEMENT SHADED)DEFERRED SUBMITTALA PRIVATE FIRE HYDRANT SHALLBE PROVIDED. THE PLANS ANDLOCATION OF THE HYDRANTSHALL BE A DEFERREDSUBMITTAL TO THE FIREDISTRICT. NOTE THAT THERESHALL BE NO COMBUSTIBLECONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO THEHYDRANT INSTALLATION.y,//dϭϯPage 153 6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024PROPOSED 2-STORYHOUSE W/ BASEMENTENLARGED SITE PLAN1" = 10' - 0"BSMT528.0'1ST FLR539.05'2ND FLR549.1'20' REQUIRED SETBACK20'-534"DECKDECK30'-0" REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK30'-0" RE QUIRE D FR ONT S ETB ACK 20'-034" REQUIRE D SIDE SETBA CK20'-0" REQUIREDSIDE SETBACKCOV'DPORCH75'-0"BALCONY30'-0" PROPOSED FRONT SETBACK20'-0" RE Q UI R E D SIDE SET B A C K 20'-0" REQUI R E D SIDE SETBAC K 20'-0" REQUIREDSIDE SETBACK20'-5 34" PROPO S E D SIDE S ET B A C K 25'-0"20'-0"HATCH = HAMMERHEAD TURN AROUNDA.C. DRIVEWAYT.O.S. @ GARAGEDOOR 538.97'$A A 21'-914" SIDE SETBACKLINE OF ITALIAN CYPRESS4' MAX. HIGHREDWOOD12'-0"CLEARSTORM DRAIN LINETO RETENTION AREATO WATER METER@ SOUTHKENNEDYDOTTED HATCHREPRESENTS 2NDFLOOR PERIMETERGRADING & DRAINAGE NOTESREFER TO THE GRADING & DRAINAGEPLANS PREPARED BY LE ENGINEERINGTREE TABLENUMBERSPECIESSUM OF Ø33"37"11"20.2"REMOVED/REMAINTO REMAINTO REMAINTO REMAINTO REMAINTO REMAINTO REMAINTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO REMAINTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO REMAINCOAST LIVE OAKEUROPEAN OLIVETO BE REMOVEDTO REMAINTO BE REMOVEDTO BE REMOVEDTO REMAINTO REMAININGRESS, EGRESS, &UTILITY EASEMENTT.W. 546.5B.W. 539.0T.W. 549.0B.W. 539.5T.W. 548.0B.W. 539.5T.W. 544.0B.W. 540.5T.W. 546.0B.W. 542.0T.W. 546.0B.W. 544.0T.W. 549.0B.W. 548.0T.W. 537.7B.W. 536.0T.W. 537.0B.W. 531.5T.W. 537.0B.W. 526.5T.W. 538.5B.W. 534.5T.W. 542.0 B.W. 5 3 9.0T.W. 542.0B.W. 539.012'-0"8'-0"3'-0"T.W. 543B.W. 538T.W. 544B.W. 542T.W. 547B.W. 542T.W. 541.5B.W. 536.0T.W. 540B.W. 539.5CONCRETE RETAININGWALL W/ SMOOTHSTUCCO FINISH,TYPICALR=20'R=20'PLANTERPOCKET400 AMP. ELECTRICALSERVICE W/ UFERGROUNDCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKEUROPEAN OLIVECALIFORNIA TOYONCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCALIFORNIA TOYONCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKCOAST LIVE OAKTO BE REMOVEDTREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYPICAL11.6"11.0"23"7.5"9.5"4.9"26"7.7"6.5"11.5"8.1"9.2"8.3"9.3"8.7"38.6"5.1"7.5"24.5"35"37.7"7.5"6"14"TO REMAINTO REMAINTO REMAIN52"TREE PROTECTION NOTESThe required protective fencing shall remain in placeuntil final landscaping and inspection of the project.Project arborist approval must be obtainedand documented in a monthly site activity report sentto the Town. A mandatory Monthly Tree ActivityReport shall be sent at least once monthly to theTown planner associated with this project(jshoopman@losgatosca.gov) beginning with the initialtree protection verification approval letter.TREE PROTECTIVE FENCINGTHIS SYMBOL INDICATES THE LOCATIONOF 6' TALL CHAIN LINK TREE PROTECTIONFENCINGTREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYPICALTREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYPICALTREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYPICAL[N] FIRE HYDRANTJOINT TRENCH TOSOUTH KENNDY WITH4" SEWER, 6" HPDEWATER LINE, ELECTIC,CABLE AND TELEPHONEPage 154 6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024LRDA DIAGRAM 1" = 30' - 0"$WITHIN TREE DRIPLINES (TREES OVER 14" TRUNK Ø)WITHIN SETBACKS AREAL E G E N DWITHIN EASEMENTSLEAST RESTRICTIVE DEVELOPMENT AREA (UNDER 30%)AREA OVER 30% SLOPELRDALRDALRDALRDALRDAPage 155 6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024DECKROOF RIDGE ELEV: 561.42'GRADE ELEV BELOW: 542.5'VERTICAL HEIGHT DIFF: 18.92'RIDGE561.42'LOWER ROOF EAVE(SOUTHWESTFACING) 548.38'LOWER ROOF EAVE(NORTH FACING)553.9'RIDGE560.54'RIDGE561.0'RIDGE560.62'EAVE559.34'EAVE558.9'EAVE558.25',TYPICAL,U.N.O.ROOF RIDGE ELEV: 560.62'GRADE ELEV BELOW: 541.5'VERTICAL HEIGHT DIFF: 19.12'EAVE ELEV: 548.38'GRADE ELEV BELOW: 526.75'VERTICAL HEIGHT DIFF: 21.63'EAVE ELEV: 548.38'GRADE ELEV BELOW: 527.25'VERTICAL HEIGHT DIFF: 21.13'EAVE ELEV: 557.31'GRADE ELEV BELOW: 534.0'VERTICAL HEIGHT DIFF: 23.31'$BUILDING HEIGHT STUDY 1" = 10' - 0"LOWEST POINT @PERIMETER 527.0'DATE ALTITUDE AZIMUTHSOLAR SHADOW TABLEDEC 21TIMEDEC 21JUN 21JUN 2114 429 AM14 423 PM47 779 AM47 773 PMDEC 21 3 PMJUN 21 3 PMDEC 21 9 AMJUN 21 9 AMSHADOW STUDY 1"=10'-0"DEC 21, 9 AMSHAD O WDEC 21, NOONSHADOW (CROSSHATCH)DEC 21, 3 PM SHADOW APPROXIMATELOCATION OFADJACENT HOUSEAPPROXIMATELOCATION OFADJACENT HOUSEJUNE 21,9 AMSHADOW(LIGHTSHADE)JUNE 21,3 PMSHADOW(LIGHTSHADE)JUN 21, NOONSHADOW (DARKERSHADE)Page 156 063&$BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN1/4"=1'-0"0 5 10 15BEDROOM 5HALLWAYSTORAGEEQUIPMENTW.I.CLO1/2BATHCLOSITTING ROOMLANDINGELEVATORHALLELEVATOR13'-0"9'-0"10'-5"15'-7"4'-3"12'-0"23'-0"13'-0"10'-8"25'-0"116°22'-512"17'-4"7'-8"6'-8" 15'-912"7'-9"7'-8"5'-514"6'-0"12'-0"13'-0"6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024535.05' CONTOUR LINEFLOOR ELEVATIONABOVE 539.05'AREA W/ FLOORLEVEL 4' ABOVE[E] GRADECOUNTEDTOWARDS FARAREA DOESNOT COUNTTOWARDS FAR2'-6"8'-412"12'-0"BEDROOM 4BEDROOM 3'JACK & JILL'BATHCLOCLOBBA ACD DD'SODOR' DWE532610EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGENDLED RECESSED LIGHTING WITH MOTION &PHOTOCELL SENSOR HALO RL460WH9304" WITH RETROFIT BAFFLE TRIM, 3000KPLANSYMBOL IDFIXTURENAME/MODELIMAGEQUANTITYLUMENSDARK SKYCOMPLIANT4560YES063&2530YES063&Page 157 063&063&063&063&063&063&063&063&063&063&063&$1ST FLOOR PLAN1/4"=1'-0"0 5 10 15FAMILY ROOMLIVING ROOMDINING ROOMBUTLER'SPANTRYDECKPANTRYMUDROOM2-CAR GARAGE1/2 BATHLAUNDRYELEVATORHALLCLOENTRYCOVEREDPORCHKITCHENELEVATOR27'-0"9'-0"2'-6"7'-9"2'-0"13'-0"4'-0"22'-0"1'-0"8'-0"13'-0"7'-11"6'-0"11'-11"20'-1014"18'-6"25'-0"7'-0"48'-0"2'-0"2'-0"4'-3"6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-20245'-6"3'-3"3'-9"3'-1112"13'-2"DECKBALCONY30'-0"14'-3"1'-4"20'-612"27'-812"15'-8"25'-2"BB1'-6"12'-0"5'-8"A ACD DDSLOPED CEILINGSLOPED CEILINGSLOPED CEILINGSLOPED CEILINGSLOPED CEILINGHALLPage 158 $ROOF PLAN 1/8"=1'-0"151050LOW RETAINING WALL2ND FLOOR PLAN1/4"=1'-0"0 5 10 15MASTERCLOSETMASTER BATHMASTER BEDROOMBEDROOM 2HALLWAYLINENCLOBATH 2CLOELEVATOR9'-0"18'-0"2'-0"2'-0"14'-6"2'-6"5'-6"9'-0"7'-0"7'-9"2'-0"2'-9"18'-0"17'-0"11'-0"2'-0"4'-6"5'-6"11'-6"5'-6"11'-0"6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-20243'-3"ROOF SLOPE = 212 : 12, TYPICALROOFING: STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFPEAKED CEILINGPEAKED CEILINGBALCONY3'-0"10'-0"9"PV PANELS LOCATIONPV PANELS LOCATIONBBA ACD DDCC8'-814" PLATE9'-0" PLATE9'-0" PLATE9'-0" PLATE 9'-0" PLATE8'-034" PLATE9'-938" ± PLATE9'-0" PLATE9'-0" PLATE9'-0" PLATE9'-0" PLATE9'-0" PLATEPage 159 $1A812212, TYPICAL6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-202410'-0"9'-0"9'-0"1ST FLOOR539.05'BSMT FLR528.0'2ND FLOOR549.1'SOUTHWEST ELEVATION1/4"=1'-0"051015NORTHEAST ELEVATION1/4"=1'-0"051015STANDING SEAMMETAL ROOFINGCOLOR: DARK BRONZERECESSED WOOD-CLAD WINDOWS[E] & [F] 527.3'T.O.W. 539.05'[F] 527.33'[E] 530.5'[E] 529.0'[F] 527.33'[E] & [F] 541.5'[E] & [F] 550.3'1ST FLOOR539.05'BSMT FLR528.0'2ND FLOOR549.1'[E] & [F] 549.18'[E] 549.0'[E] 547.0'[F] 548.0'[E] 547.0'[E] & [F] 546.5'CONTEMPORARYMETAL RAILINGPROPOSED MAX. HEIGHT FROM LOWEST POINT @ BUILDING PERIMETER = 34'-8"LOWEST POINT @PERIMETER 527.0'ALL EXTERIOR WINDOWSSHALL BE TEMPERED GLASSTO REDUCE GLARE25'-0"10'-8"10'-8"18'-8" FROM FARTHEST POINTOF DECK TO [E] GRADE10'-8"11" (3 FT. MAX.ALLOWED)WINDOW JAMBNTS112" PLYWOOD78" STUCCO'MARVIN' CLADWINDOWEXTERIOR(2) 2x612" GYP. BOARD(2) 2x4INTERIORREFER TO THE BUILDINGHEIGHT STUDY ON SHEET A4FOR EXACT HEIGHTS ABOVEEXISTING GRADESMOOTH STUCCO SIDINGCOLOR: SHERMAN WILLIAMS'CHATURA GRAY'LRV 30Page 160 $6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024SOUTHEAST ELEVATION1/4"=1'-0"NORTHWEST ELEVATION 1/4"=1'-0"BSMT FLR 528.0'1ST FLR 539.05'2ND FLR 549.1'T.O.S. @ GARAGEDOOR 538.97'[F] 538.97'[E] & [F] 527.3'[E] 529.0'[E] 527.33'BSMT FLR 528.0'1ST FLR 539.05'2ND FLR 549.1'[E] & [F] 529.0'[E] & [F] 541.5'[E] & [F] 541.5'[E] & [F] 550.3'T.O.W. 539.05'[F] 527.83'[E] 532.4'PROPOSED MAX. HEIGHT FROM LOWEST POINT @ BUILDING PERIMETER = 34'-2"CONTEMPORARYBLACK METAL ANDGLASS GARAGEDOORALL EXTERIOR WINDOWSSHALL BE TEMPERED GLASSTO REDUCE GLARE10'-758"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"THIS PORTION OFROOF IS IN THEBACKGROUND - SEENORTHWESTELEVATION HEIGHTLINEREFER TO THE BUILDINGHEIGHT STUDY ON SHEET A4FOR EXACT HEIGHTS ABOVEEXISTING GRADEPage 161 $0510156+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024SECTION C-C1/4"=1'-0"BSMT FLR 528.0'1ST FLR 539.05'T.O.S. @ GARAGEDOOR 538.97'051015SECTION D-D 1/4"=1'-0"051015SECTION A-A 1/4"=1'-0"051015SECTION B-B 1/4"=1'-0"KITCHENLAUNDRYSLOPED CEILINGFAMILY ROOMENTRYCOVEREDPORCHKITCHENSLOPED CEILINGSLOPED CEILINGHALLANGLED SECTION LINESLOPED CEILINGVENTED ATTICGARAGELAUNDRYELEVATOR SHAFTMUDROOMVENTED ATTICFAMILY ROOMSLOPED CEILINGDECKMASTER BEDROOMPEAKED CEILINGMASTER BEDROOMPEAKED CEILINGMASTER BATHBEDROOM 2PEAKED CEILING2ND FLR 549.1'2ND FLR 549.1'1ST FLR 539.05'1ST FLR 539.05'1ST FLR 539.05'BSMT FLR 528.0'BSMT FLR 528.0'BSMT FLR 528.0'SITTING ROOMSTORAGEEQUIPMENTBEDROOM 5HALLWAYSTORAGE10'-0"9'-0"9'-0" PLATEPROPOSED MAX. HEIGHT FROM LOWEST POINT @ BUILDING PERIMETER = 34'-8"DECKHALLWAYBEDROOM 3SITTING ROOM10'-0"10'-0"9'-0" PLATE8'-814" PLATE9'-938" PLATEPage 162 $CROSS SITE SECTION A-A3/32"=1'-0"6+((766+((72)6&$/('$7('5$:1-2%3(50,76(7&216758&7,216(735(/,0,1$5<6(73/$1&+(&.6(7'(6,*15(9,(:6(75(9,6,216%<$5&+,7(&7&+5,663$8/',1*  )$;  %(5.(/(<&$/,)251,$&$0(/,$675((768,7(('5$:,1*635(3$5('%</26*$726&$/,)251,$CS/DBNICOL6-6-2024296.(11('<5'AS NOTED$352326('1(:+20()251,&2/5(6,'(1&(9-18-24 11-18-202412-18-2024BSMT FLR 528.0'1ST FLR 539.05'2ND FLR 549.1'⅊⅊16565 S. KENNEDY RD[E] 1 STORY HOUSE16515 S. KENNEDY RD[E] 2 STORY HOUSEPage 163 Page 164 Page 165 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANSPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE:NTSSHEET OF1REV.: SEPT. 2016GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/24111Page 166 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/24REVISIREVISIONSONSBYBYDATEDATEDATTDATE 0808DATE/14/24/24/142Page 167 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/243Page 168 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/244111Page 169 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/245222Page 170 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/246222Page 171 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/24712Page 172 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/24822Page 173 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/249Page 174 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/2410Page 175 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS16497 SOUTH KENNEDY ROADGRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO.REVISIONSBYDATEPROJECT NO.:SCALE:ENGR:CHECK:DRAWN:DESIGN:DATE: 08/14/24HPHVHVHP11SHEET OF1 REVISED PER ROUND 1 COMMENTSNC 11/18/242 REVISED PER ROUND 2 COMMENTSHP 12/24/2411Page 176  !"#$%&'()*+,)-./+01%20..-3*42.,*5*678+**-9 !"#$%&'()*+,)-./+01%20..-3*42.,*5*678+**-:98%;%6.-!"#$%&3*42.,*5*678+**-<9=%.-7>0?*@.A<:=%.-7>0?*@.A<"=%.-7>0?*@.A)DPLO\5RRP: !"#$%&'=*+,0-%,,0B*67.20-.-3*42.,*5*678+**5HVLGHQFHQG)ORRU/LYLQJ5RRP&DU*DUDJH(QWU\ !"#$$%!&'(%)*+!,$'(%( !-$%.)%607 67)/5 1')/5 /0!1(2(345#(!67*.(!$2!,*#42$%4*!8$# !-(*!8%*'(#9*#.$:;<=!<#(.>%4.!?(>(%9 !"#$%&'=*+,0-%,,0B*67.20-.-3*42.,*5*678+**-;<=!@(>*44+!A*##C+%4*+7;>06*:!8%;%6.-!"#$%&3*42.,*5*678+**-/B/CD0!EA//FCBG0!9A/BHCI0!EA///CDG0!9A//GCI0!EA//C/I0!9A;<=!"(.(C+%4*+7;>06*: !"#$%&'()*+,)-./+01%20..-3*42.,*5*678+**-C+%4*+7;>06*I0JHK/0JHKH0JHK'ULYHZD\;<=!6L*#(;<=!M4N!$2!O>*#4*!,:7%(33A*>(%!M4(!>$!?(>(%!P!6$Q>)!R(( :6>$%S!1%*4!M4(!>$!@(>(>4$!T%(*'HFN'HFN;<=!&*N!E%((C+%4*+7;>06*  !"#"  IUR P  + R X V H  R U  % XLO G L Q J 6 W U X F W X U H  !"$" IURP+RXVHRU%XLOGLQJ6WUXFWXUH !"$"  IURP + R X V H  R U  % X L O G L Q J  6 W U X F W X U H <!D)+%4*.6@20?*<E=%.-7>0?*@.A<=%.-7>0?*@.A<FD)+%4*.6@20?*7%$*+*5%?*B<G8%;%67%$*+*5%?*B<:H=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<I=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<::=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<:!D)+%4*.6@20?*7%$*+*5%?*BUID!,$*3>!M4'(!&*N!>$!5(!%(S$'( UH!,$*3>!M4'(!&*N!>$!5(!%(S$'( <:"=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<:E=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<:I=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<:F=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<:=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B<:G=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*BU!,*#42C!E$:$!>$!5(!%(S$'( UD!,$*3>!M4'(!&*N!>$!5(!%(S$'( <!:=%.-7>0?*@.A<!"=%.-7>0?*@.A<:"=%.-7>0?*@.A7%$*+*5%?*B:"8%;%6.-!"#$%&3*42.,*5*678+**-                                        ! "#        $        %&     '(          %) * +,* + * +!* ---* --.& /'0         #* -1     $ & /' 1     * ++* +-   2 & /' 3              2      % %4 5    6 + 7         2  %3 80. 9          %7 : 6  ; < 6; = "  <6    ,  7:6/> ((       7      /67? "     -     )              /    %       %  . 7   % )         %                                      !"#$%&!!"'&(!)(* "+! )* ,"-.!/!&"012"/&"34!)*/*)5(* 36""8+**C+%7*,70%6J*6,06/ 3*1*+>KE1%+-4*,010,.70%6-'8+**C+%7*,70%6J*6,06/ 3*1*+>KE1%+-4*,010,.70%6-'8+**C+%7*,70%6J*6,06/ 3*1*+>KE1%+-4*,010,.70%6-'-%$7(%>:!M4(I0JHKI!IVKIKDD0JHK'HFN0?*<!D)+%XUHXF H XLO#'HFNLQ XV U ! IUR RX 6 UX A UR&<=!:<:6PA*4A)4))*/* %;%;.-*/<9=.-0?>4N=M*+4                                                       A>  337%( .DUHQ$LWNHQ $VVRFLDWHV                                           !             "              #          $     # $   $      %                          %    & '    && %&!!"%5,"7899 ":59!.!9;!.!4<5)!9! (".5(*"/"=>?"@A"#"853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5=FE&4!5 "<*;!"C"G<!5"!E&45!5H853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5>853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*52853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5I853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5JFE&4!5 "<*;!"C"G<!5"!E&45!5"KFLIM85<*/& *5"(N "C"O!(!&9!<!3"5&PE(*/<*5""KFLHQ853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5"KFLH#$853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5"KFLH##853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5"KFL=#=""FE&4!5 "<*;!"C"G<!5"!E&45!5KFLH#H853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFL=#>853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH#2853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFL=#I853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH#J853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH#M"853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH#Q853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH=$853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH=#853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5==85<*/& *5"(N "C"O!(!&9!<!3"5&PE(*/<*5"KFLH=H853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH=>853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5=2853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5=I853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5=J853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5KFLH=M853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5=Q853("<*;!"5B"C"DE!&)E3"5,&*/<*5%(5<"2#"%.FF".F'0R8FSF:%"%R@0F2H1"=>?"@A".!4<5)!9! ("%&!!3"'&43!T.F'0R8FSF:%"L'F8UFL"8OR.% @75A:7/@A:B766;/7A697:67 A75C/A6-!3!55  D  .1,!,  5  *!!(.&0,-'-0!,!01# E@77  1,&2/:/;95A6/A:A'$7(6&$/('5$:1-2%()*+,,-,.  30. 6@  59D7 ,1  /'!5AA 5;A/;:B5A 97A"A: 97:6&$/(´ ¶´/0!1(2(345#(!67*.(!$2!,*#42$%4*!8$# !-(*!8%*'(#0    +  / 1 2       *     2  ,  / *  3       &%4*%+*04)/4)&,+4*)5&       /               6       & %    $#7!1      8!!9#Page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´ ¶´0    +  / 1 2       *     2  ,  / *  3        9  /0!1(2(345#(!67*.(!$2!,*#42$%4*!8$# !-(*!8%*'(#Page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´ ¶´4%%41+4*)B,C7UHH5LQJ,UULJDWLRQ'ULSOLQHZGULSHPLWWHUVSODFHGHYHU\LQ,QQHUULQJIURPSODQW2XWWHUULQJIURPSODQW3ODFHWLHGRZQHYHU\ LQORDPDQG LQFOD\OE (!&"U81#$#1=210+'ULS&RQWURO=RQH.LW,&9*OREH9DOYHZLWK+<ILOWHUV\VWHP3UHVVXUH5HJXODWLRQSVL)ORZ5DQJH*30PHVKVWDLQOHVVVWHHOVFUHHQOE (!&"X&*4<* !"OX01$I1#=18Y"+XQWHU'ULSOLQHZ*3+HPLWWHUVHYHU\LQ'ULSOLQHODWHUDOVVSDFHGDWDSDUW,QVWDOOZLWK+XQWHU3/'EDUEHGRU3/'/2&ILWWLQJV,UULJDWLRQ/DWHUDO/LQHLQ39&&ODVV,UULJDWLRQ0DLQOLQHLQ39&6FKHGXOH3LSH6OHHYH39&&ODVV7\SLFDOSLSHVOHHYHIRULUULJDWLRQSLSH3LSHVOHHYHVL]HVKDOODOORZIRULUULJDWLRQSLSLQJDQGWKHLUUHODWHGFRXSOLQJVWRHDVLO\VOLGHWKURXJKVOHHYLQJPDWHULDO([WHQGVOHHYHVLQFKHVEH\RQGHGJHVRISDYLQJRUFRQVWUXFWLRQOE (!&"O+L1#2$)ORZ6HQVRUIRUXVHZLWK$&&FRQWUROOHU6FKHGXOH6HQVRU%RG\9$&DPSOE (!&"R881#=$$6WDWLRQ2XWGRRU0RGXODU&RQWUROOHU1R0RGXOH5HTXLUHG+LJK(QG&RPPHUFLDO8VH0HWDO&DELQHW&OE (!&"LGU0180UZ7KH6RLO&OLNSUREHXVHVSURYHQWHFKQRORJ\WRPHDVXUHPRLVWXUHZLWKLQWKHURRW]RQH:KHQWKHSUREHVHQVHVWKDWWKHVRLOKDVUHDFKHGLWVGHVLUHGPRLVWXUHOHYHOLWZLOOVKXWGRZQLUULJDWLRQSUHYHQWLQJZDWHUZDVWH&&1&OE (!&"L<5&1LN )"[LL1LF:"6RODUUDLQIUHH]HVHQVRUZLWKRXWGRRULQWHUIDFHFRQQHFWVWR+XQWHU3&&3UR&DQG,&RUH&RQWUROOHUVLQVWDOODVQRWHG,QFOXGHV\HDUOLWKLXPEDWWHU\DQGUXEEHUPRGXOHFRYHUDQGJXWWHUPRXQWEUDFNHW:LUHOHVVV5(!"Y5<;!"1",QVRODWLRQ6KXWRII9DOYHOE (!&"U8Y1V3ODVWLF(OHFWULF5HPRWH&RQWURO9DOYHV*OREH&RQILJXUDWLRQOE (!&"L'.RK"'.L>$"#=\"1"H$\"&5T*E3"7XUI6SUD\SVLUHJXODWHG3RS8SIRUODZQDWJUDGHZSYFUDLVHU  IRUZLOGIORZHUV$GMXVWORFDWLRQVDQG5DGLXVWRSUHYHQWRYHUVSUD\O]:%F."O8"+0G["SF%F."#?1HZ,UULJDWLRQ:DWHU0HWHU[*<B* 3"QJ2"^0=""#?/HDGIUHH5HGXFHG3UHVVXUH%DFNIORZ3UHYHQWHU2%1&2%Page 179 .DUHQ$LWNHQ $VVRFLDWHV                                           !             "              #          $     # $   $      %                           @75A:7/@A:B766;/7A697:67 A75C/A6-!3!55  D  .1,!,  5  *!!(.&0,-'-0!,!01# E@77  1,&2/:/;95A6/A:A'$7(6&$/('5$:1-2% 30. 6@  59D7 3'  /'$/55/D7/;:B 97:/:DA7/96Page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`"UU`"UUU"+F:8U:VW")(1&,1*6+$//%((5(&7('%()25('(02/,7,21*5$',1*25&216758&7,213(50,76$5(,668('$1'5(0$,1,13/$&(817,/7+(:25.,6&203/(7('&2175$&7256+$//),5672%7$,17+($33529$/2)7+(352-(&7$5%25,67215(&25'35,25725(029,1*$75((3527(&7,21)(1&(->6"[R.:U:V"LUV:W"($&+75(()(1&(6+$//+$9(3520,1(17/<',63/$<('$1(,*+7$1'21(+$/),1&+%<(/(9(1,1&+6,*167$7,1*:$51,1*75((3527(&7,21=21(7+,6)(1&(6+$//127-@6"R00"'F.LG:L`"LOR00"8GS'0K"[U%O"%OF"+G00G[U:V"'.F8R]%UG:L_  35,25727+(&200(1&(0(172)&216758&7,21,167$//7+()(1&($77+('5,3/,1(2575((3527(&7,21=21( 73= :+(163(&,),(',1$1$33529('$5%25,675(3257$5281'$1<75(($1'259(*(7$7,2172%(5(7$,1(':+,&+&28/'%($))(&7('%<7+(&216758&7,21$1'352+,%,7$1<6725$*(2)&216758&7,210$7(5,$/62527+(50$7(5,$/6(48,30(17&/($1,1*253$5.,1*2)9(+,&/(6:,7+,17+(73=7+('5,3/,1(6+$//127%($/7(5(',1$1<:$<62$672,1&5($6(7+((1&52$&+0(172)7+(&216758&7,21  352+,%,7$//&216758&7,21$&7,9,7,(6:,7+,17+(73=,1&/8',1*%87127/,0,7('72(;&$9$7,21*5$',1*'5$,1$*($1'/(9(/,1*:,7+,17+('5,3/,1(2)7+(75((81/(66$33529('%<7+(',5(&725  352+,%,7',6326$/25'(326,7,1*2)2,/*$62/,1(&+(0,&$/62527+(5+$50)8/0$7(5,$/6:,7+,17+('5,3/,1(2)25,1'5$,1$*(&+$11(/66:$/(625$5($67+$70$</($'727+('5,3/,1(2)$3527(&7('75((  352+,%,77+($77$&+0(172):,5(66,*1625523(672$1<3527(&7('75((  '(6,*187,/,7<6(59,&(6$1',55,*$7,21/,1(672%(/2&$7('2876,'(2)7+('5,3/,1(:+(1)($6,%/(  5(7$,17+(6(59,&(62)$&(57,),('25&2168/7,1*$5%25,67:+26+$//6(59($67+(352-(&7$5%25,67)253(5,2',&021,725,1*2)7+(352-(&76,7($1'7+(+($/7+2)7+26(75((672%(35(6(59('7+(352-(&7$5%25,676+$//%(35(6(17:+(1(9(5$&7,9,7,(62&&85:+,&+0$<326($327(17,$/7+5($7727+(+($/7+2)7+(75((672%(35(6(59('$1'6+$//'2&80(17$//6,7(9,6,76  7+(',5(&725$1'352-(&7$5%25,676+$//%(127,),('2)$1<'$0$*(7+$72&&85672$3527(&7('             )(1&,1*$5281'75((6'85,1*&216758&7,21$7(0325$5<)(1&(6+$//%((5(&7('$5281'($&+75((72%(5(7$,1('7+()(1&(6+28/'%(/2&$7('$77+('5,3/,1(25$0,1,0802))5207+(7581.:+,&+(9(5,6*5($7(57+()(1&(6+28/'%((5(&7('62,7:,//127%(($6<)25&216758&7,21:25.(56725(029(255(/2&$7(7+,6)(1&,1*0867%((5(&7('%()25($1<&216758&7,21(48,30(17(17(567+(6,7($1'0867127%(5(029('817,/),1$//$1'6&$3(*5$',1*,6&203/(7(62,/&203$&7,21$1'75(1&+,1*7+528*+5227=21(6$5(7+(0$-25&$86(62)75((675(66,17+(&216758&7,213(5,2',76+28/'%((;3/$,1('&/($5/<72$//&2175$&7256$1':25.(56216,7(7+$77+(6()(1&(6$5(,03257$17$1'$5(12772%(5(029('75(1&+,1*2)$1<6257$1')25$1<5($6210867%(3/$11('72$92,'75$9(56,1*$5($6:,7+,17+(75(('5,3/,1(6$//75((0$,17(1$1&($1'&$5(6+$//%(3(5)250('%<$48$/,),('$5%25,67:,7+$&'&$/,)251,$&2175$&7256/,&(16(75((0$,17(1$1&($1'&$5(6+$//%(63(&,),(',1:5,7,1*$&&25',1*72$0(5,&$11$7,21$/67$1'$5')2575((&$5(23(5$7,21675((6+58%$1'27+(5:22'<3/$170$1$*(0(1767$1'$5'35$&7,&(63$5767+528*+$1'$'+(5(72$16,=6$)(7<67$1'$5'6$1'/2&$/5(*8/$7,216$//0$,17(1$1&(,672%(3(5)250('$&&25',1*72,6$%(670$1$*(0(1735$&7,&(6$//75((0$,17(1$1&($1'&$5(6+$//%(3(5)250('%<$48$/,),('$5%25,67:,7+$&'&$/,)251,$&2175$&7256/,&(16(75((0$,17(1$1&($1'&$5(6+$//%(63(&,),(',1:5,7,1*$&&25',1*72$0(5,&$11$7,21$/67$1'$5')2575((&$5(23(5$7,21675((6+58%$1'27+(5:22'<3/$170$1$*(0(1767$1'$5'35$&7,&(63$5767+528*+$1'$'+(5(72$16,=6$)(7<67$1'$5'6$1'/2&$/5(*8/$7,216$//0$,17(1$1&(,672%(3(5)250('$&&25',1*72,6$%(670$1$*(0(1735$&7,&(6.F+F."%G"%.FF"U:YF:%G.K`"RLLFLLSF:%"R:X'.G%F8%UG:".F'G.%"'.F'R.FX"@K".U8OR.X"VFLL:F.`R]V]L%"=I`"=$=$"G:"LOFF%L"R.1#"%G"R.1>W%.FF"'.G%F8%UG:":G%FL"%.FF"'.G%F8%UG:"XF%RU0"-%K'F"U6%.FF"'.G%F8%UG:"LUV:L".DUHQ$LWNHQ $VVRFLDWHV                                           !             "              #          $     # $   $      %                          0GL"VR%GL"%G[:"8GXFLF8W"=QW#$W#$$2W"'.G%F8%UG:"G+"%.FFLX].U:V"8G:L%.]8%UG: @75A:7/@A:B766;/7A697:67 A75C/A6-!3!55  D  .1,!,  5  *!!(.&0,-'-0!,!01# E@77  1,&2/:/;95A6/A:A'$7(6&$/('5$:1-2% 30. 6@  59D7 ,1/'85AA 5;A/;:A7/96Page 181 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 182 PREPARED BY: Suray Nathan Assistant Planner Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 03/26/2025 ITEM NO: 3 DATE: March 21, 2025 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish an Existing Single-Family Residence and Construct a New Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1:8. Located at 14341 Browns Lane. APN 409-14-035. Architecture and Site Application S-24-017. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Property Owners: Roberto E. Flamenco. Applicant: Gordon Wong. Project Planner: Suray Nathan. RECOMMENDATION: Consider a request for approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new single-family residence on property zoned R-1:8, located at 14341 Browns Lane. PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Zoning Designation: R-1:8 – Single-Family Residential (8,000 square-foot minimum) Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan, Residential Design Guidelines Parcel Size: 9,502 square feet Surrounding Area: CEQA: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Existing Land Use General Plan Zoning North Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8 South Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8 East Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8 West Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8 Page 183 PAGE 2 OF 7 SUBJECT: 14341 Browns Lane/S-24-017 DATE: March 21, 2025 FINDINGS:  The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.  As required by Section 29.10.09030 (e) of the Town Code for the demolition of an existing residence.  The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations.  The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single-family residences not located in the hillside area. CONSIDERATIONS:  As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project. ACTION: The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed within ten days. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the west side of Browns Lane, approximately 130 feet north of Wedgewood Avenue (Exhibit 1). The property is 9,502 square feet and developed with an existing 832-square foot single-story residence and a 240-square foot shed (Exhibit 12). Surrounding properties are developed with predominantly one-story single-family residences. On June 4, 2024, the applicant applied for an Architecture and Site Application for a proposed 2,580-square foot two-story residence with an attached 507-square foot garage, and an attached 385-square foot Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). The proposed project meets the technical requirements of the Town Code for floor area, setbacks, building coverage, parking, and height. The project is being referred to the Planning Commission based on concerns related to neighborhood compatibility, as the proposed residence will be the largest in terms of floor area ratio (FAR) in the immediate neighborhood, and the applicant has not addressed all of the Consulting Architect’s recommendations. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood The subject property is located on the west side of Browns Lane, approximately 130 feet north of Wedgewood Avenue (Exhibit 1). All surrounding properties are zoned for single- family residential development. Page 184 PAGE 3 OF 7 SUBJECT: 14341 Browns Lane/S-24-017 DATE: March 21, 2025 B. Project Summary The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 832-square foot single-story residence and construct a new 2,580-square foot two-story residence with a 507-square foot attached garage and an attached 385-square foot ADU (Exhibit 12). C. Zoning Compliance A single-family residence is permitted in the R-1:8 zone. The project meets the objective standards of the zoning code for floor area, setbacks, building coverage, parking, and height. DISCUSSION: A. Architecture and Site Analysis The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residence and construct a new 2,580- square foot two-story single-family residence with a 507-square foot attached garage and a 385-square foot attached ADU. The site is a flat lot, and the proposed building is contained within the building envelope. The height of the proposed residence is 28 feet, seven inches, where a maximum of 30 feet is allowed. Consistent with state law, the proposed ADU is not the subject of this application and requires a ministerial building permit. A summary of the floor area for the proposed residence is included in the table below. Floor Area Summary Proposed SF Maximum Allowed SF Second Floor 1,541 -- First Floor 1,039 -- Total 2,580 2,946 Garage 507 827 ADU 385 1,200 The applicant provided a Project Description and a Letter of Justification summarizing the project (Exhibits 4 and 5), a Materials and Color Board (Exhibit 6), and Development Plans (Exhibit 12). B. Neighborhood Compatibility The immediate neighborhood consists of predominantly one-story single-family residences. Based on Town and County records, the residences in the immediate area range in size from 704 square feet to 2,585 square feet. The FAR ranges from 0.09 to 0.19. The proposed residence would be 2,580 square feet with a FAR of 0.27. The proposed residence would be the largest home in the immediate neighborhood in terms of FAR and the second largest in terms of square footage. Pursuant to Town Code, the maximum allowable square footage Page 185 PAGE 4 OF 7 SUBJECT: 14341 Browns Lane/S-24-017 DATE: March 21, 2025 for the 9,502-square foot lot is 2,946 square feet with a maximum FAR of 0.31. The table below reflects the current conditions of the immediate neighborhood: Address Zoning House Floor Area Garage Floor Area Total Floor Area Lot Size House FAR No. of Stories 14341 Browns Ln (E) R-1:8 832 0 832 9,502 0.09 1 14341 Browns Ln (P) R-1:8 2,580 507 3,087 9,502 0.27 2 14331 Browns Ln R-1:8 1,262 0 1,262 9,478 0.13 1 14340 Browns Ln R-1:8 748 440 1,188 6,893 0.11 1 14330 Browns Ln R-1:8 2,487 625 3,112 13,041 0.19 1 17311 Wedgewood Ave R-1:8 1,649 345 1,994 8,576 0.19 1 17291 Wedgewood Ave R-1:8 2,585 774 3,359 12,225 0.21 2 17275 Wedgewood Ave R-1:8 704 418 1,122 7,800 0.09 1 The applicant’s justification states that despite having the largest FAR, the proposed home will not be the largest in terms of square footage and the owners require greater space for their large family (Exhibit 5). C. Building Design The proposed residence is designed in a traditional architectural style, with white Hardie Board vertical cement siding, straight-edged shingles at the entryway and on the dormer window above the garage, ebony-colored fiberglass-clad wood double-hung windows with simulated divided lites, and a white cedar wood garage door at the front façade (Exhibit 6). The proposed gable roof is to be fitted with cinder black composite shingles. The design also proposes a 96-square foot second-floor balcony and 26-square foot first-floor covered porch at the rear elevation. The Town’s Consulting Architect initially reviewed the proposed residence on June 11, 2024, and was supportive of the design, stating that it was well designed in a traditional architectural style (Exhibit 7). The Consulting Architect recommended that the stone façade and divided lite windows introduced at the front façade be carried consistently on all façades to meet Residential Design Guidelines 3.2.2 and 3.7.4. The applicant removed the stone façade and applied simulated divided light windows throughout all sides to meet the recommendations of the Consulting Architect. The Consulting Architect provided a second review on October 28, 2024, due to substantial changes to the initial design (Exhibit 8). The applicant stated the design changes were primarily precipitated by shifting the proposed garage 17 feet back to meet the Santa Clara County Fire Department turnaround standards (Exhibit 12, Sheet G000). However, the Consulting Architect noted in the report that the revised design conflicts with the previous design and other homes in its immediate neighborhood. The Consulting Architect made three recommendations to increase compatibility with the Residential Design Guidelines Page 186 PAGE 5 OF 7 SUBJECT: 14341 Browns Lane/S-24-017 DATE: March 21, 2025 and the immediate neighborhood. The Consulting Architect’s issues and recommendations are provided below, followed by the applicant’s response in italics (Exhibit 9). 1. Restore the previously proposed garage/bedroom wing roof slopes and match its ridge and first-floor eave heights to those of the main part of the house. We lowered the roof over the garage to the first-floor eave line and reduced the size of the second-floor gabled dormer. We are insistent on keeping the pitch of the shed dormer since this affects the waterproofing of the roof and the alignment of fascia boards/materials. 2. Widen the roof dormer to provide more interior volume in the bedrooms. We have reduced the overall footprint of the second floor. This enabled us to bring back the gable over the garage to maintain the strong first-floor eave line. 3. Match the dormer roofing material to the nearby main structure roofing. The overall height of the building has been reduced by one-foot, two and one-half inches. The roofing material remains consistent between the shed dormer for the bay over the garage and the shed dormer for the entrance to the main residence. The applicant implemented recommendation number three, but has not implemented recommendations one and two of the Town’s Consulting Architect. D. Tree Impacts The Town’s Consulting Arborist prepared a report for the site and made recommendations for the project (Exhibit 10). The subject property contains four protected trees: two Coast Redwoods; one Pecan; and one Plum tree. No trees are proposed for removal, and the Town’s Consulting Arborist recommendations for tree protection have been included in the Conditions of Approval (Exhibit 3). E. Parking Pursuant to Section 29.10.150(c)(1) of the Town Code, a single-family residence requires two on-site parking spaces. The applicant has satisfied this requirement by including an attached two-car garage (Exhibit 12, Sheet A 101). F. Neighbor Outreach The applicant has been in communication with the surrounding neighbors regarding the proposed project. A summary of their outreach efforts is included as Exhibit 11. At the time of preparation of this report, no public comment has been received. Page 187 PAGE 6 OF 7 SUBJECT: 14341 Browns Lane/S-24-017 DATE: March 21, 2025 Aspects of the communication with a neighbor include concerns regarding privacy from the second-story windows and balcony placement at the rear of the house (Exhibit 12, Sheet G004). The applicant addressed the rear neighbors’ privacy concerns by incorporating the following into the proposed design:  Obscured/frosted glass on the second-story bedroom windows located at the rear elevation facing the neighbors at 14344 Rinconada Drive and 14330 Rinconada Drive; and  Inset the proposed rear balcony by five feet, three inches from 26 feet, five inches to 31 feet, two inches from the property line, and increased the balcony railing height to 46 inches. G. CEQA Determination The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Story poles are not required for this project pursuant to the Town’s Story Pole Policy (Resolution 2024-017), and project signage was installed on the subject property prior to the mailing of notices for the public hearing. Written notice was sent to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property. At the time of preparation of this report, no public comment has been received. CONCLUSION: A. Summary The applicant is requesting approval of an Architecture and Site application to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new single-family residence on property zoned R-1:8. The project is consistent with the property's zoning and General Plan Land Use designation. The project complies with the objective standards of the Town Code related to allowable floor area, setbacks, building coverage, parking, and height. The proposed residence would be the largest home in the immediate neighborhood in terms of FAR and the second largest in terms of floor area. The project was reviewed by the Town’s Consulting Architect who provided three recommendations to increase the consistency of the project with the Residential Design Guidelines. The applicant responded to the Consulting Architect’s feedback by implementing one of the three recommendations. The project is being referred to the Planning Commission based on concerns related to neighborhood compatibility, as the proposed residence will be the largest in terms of FAR in Page 188 PAGE 7 OF 7 SUBJECT: 14341 Browns Lane/S-24-017 DATE: March 21, 2025 the immediate neighborhood, and the applicant has not addressed all of the Consulting Architect’s recommendations. B. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the request and, if merit is found with the proposed project, take the following steps to approve the Architecture and Site application: 1. Find that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures (Exhibit 2); 2. Make the findings as required by Section 29.10.09030 (e) of the Town Code for the demolition of existing structures (Exhibit 2); 3. Make the finding that the project complies with the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) (Exhibit 2); 4. Make the finding required by the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines (Exhibit 2); 5. Make the considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application (Exhibit 2); and 6. Approve Architecture and Site application S-24-017 with the conditions contained in Exhibit 3 and the development plans in Exhibit 12. C. Alternatives Alternatively, the Planning Commission can: 1. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction; 2. Approve the application with additional and/or modified conditions; or 3. Deny the application. EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map 2. Required Findings 3. Recommended Conditions of Approval 4. Project Description 5. Letter of Justification 6. Materials and Color Board 7. Consulting Architect’s Report, dated June 11, 2024 8. Consulting Architect's Report, dated October 28, 2024 9. Applicant’s Response to the Consulting Architect's Report, dated February 20, 2025 10. Consulting Arborist’s Report, dated July 17, 2024 11. Summary of Applicant’s Neighborhood Outreach 12. Development Plans Page 189 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 190 SB HI G H W A Y 8 5 WEDGEWOOD AV NB HI G H W A Y 8 5 BROWNS LNLA RINCONADA DR14341 Browns Lane 0 0.250.125 Miles ° Update Notes:- Updated 12/20/17 to link to tlg-sql12 server data (sm)- Updated 11/22/19 adding centerpoint guides, Buildings layer, and Project Site leader with label- Updated 10/8/20 to add street centerlines which can be useful in the hillside area- Updated 02-19-21 to link to TLG-SQL17 database (sm)- Updated 08-23-23 to link to "Town Assessor Data" (sm) EXHIBIT 1Page 191 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 192 N:\DEV\PLANNING PROJECT FILES\Browns Ln\14341\S-24-017\Public Meeting Documents\Planning Commission\ PLANNING COMMISSION – March 26, 2025 REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR: 14341 Browns Lane Architecture and Site Application S-24-017 Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish an Existing Single-Family Residence and Construct a Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1:8. APN 409-14-035. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Property Owners: Roberto E Flamenco Applicant: Gordon Wong Project Planner: Suray Nathan FINDINGS Required finding for CEQA: ■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303(a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Required finding for the demolition of a single-family residence: ■ As required by Section 29.10.09030 (e) of the Town Code for the demolition of existing structures: 1. The Town's housing stock will be maintained as the single-family residence will be replaced. 2. The existing structure has no architectural or historical significance; 3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structures as they exist; and 4. The economic utility of the structures was considered. Required compliance with the Zoning Regulations: ■ The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations). Required compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines: ■ The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single-family residences not located in hillside areas. EXHIBIT 2 Page 193 N:\DEV\PLANNING PROJECT FILES\Browns Ln\14341\S-24-017\Public Meeting Documents\Planning Commission\ CONSIDERATIONS Required considerations in review of Architecture and Site applications: ■ As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project. Page 194 PLANNING COMMISSION – March 26, 2025 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 14341 Browns Lane Architecture and Site Application S-24-017 Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish an Existing Single-Family Residence and Construct a Single-Family Residence on Property Zoned R-1:8. APN 409-14-035. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (a): New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Property Owners: Roberto E Flamenco Applicant: Gordon Wong Project Planner: Suray Nathan TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division 1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval and in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans and/or business operation shall be approved by the Community Development Director, Development Review Committee, or the Planning Commission depending on the scope of the changes. 2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested. 3. STORY POLES/PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE: Story poles and/or project identification signage on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of approval of the Architecture and Site application. 4. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security. 5. EXISTING TREES: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site. 6. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement, at their cost, all recommendations identified in the Arborist’s report for the project, on file in the Community Development Department. These recommendations must be incorporated in the building permit plans and completed prior to issuance of a building permit where applicable. 7. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing and other protection measures 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. Include a tree protection plan with the construction plans. 8. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties. 9. FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the front yard EXHIBIT 3 Page 195 must be landscaped. 10. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review. 11. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement (“the Project”) from the Town shall defend (with counsel approved by Town), indemnify, and hold harmless the Town, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding (including without limitation any appeal or petition for review thereof) against the Town or its agents, officers or employees related to an approval of the Project, including without limitation any related application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, compliance or failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and/or processing methods (“Challenge”). Town may (but is not obligated to) defend such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at applicant’s sole cost and expense. Applicant shall bear any and all losses, damages, injuries, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, staff time and in-house attorney’s fees on a fully-loaded basis, attorney’s fees for outside legal counsel, expert witness fees, court costs, and other litigation expenses) arising out of or related to any Challenge (“Costs”), whether incurred by Applicant, Town, or awarded to any third party, and shall pay to the Town upon demand any Costs incurred by the Town. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all the applicant’s sole cost and expense. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the applicant’s indemnity obligation. 12. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. Building Division 13. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Demolition Permit is required for the demolition of the existing single-family residence. A separate Building Permit is required for the construction of the new single-family residence. An additional Building Permit will be required for the PV System if the system is required by the California Energy Code. 14. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2023, are the 2022 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12, including locally adopted Reach Codes. 15. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and Page 196 submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. 16. SIZE OF PLANS: Minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”. 17. REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURE: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application from the Building Department Service Counter. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures obtained, and written verification from PG&E that all utilities have been disconnected, return the completed form to the Building Department Service Counter with the Air District’s J# Certificate, PG&E verification, and three (3) sets of site plans showing all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and PG&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town. 18. SOILS REPORT: A 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 report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics. 19. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth, or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations. 20. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall 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 that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations have been prepared according to the 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. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations 21. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be blue-lined (sticky-backed), i.e., directly printed, onto a plan sheet. 22. TOWN RESIDENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: New residential units shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61: a. Wood backing (2” x 8” minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers, and bathtubs, located 34 inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars if needed in the future. b. All passage doors shall be at least 32-inch-wide doors on the accessible floor level. c. The primary entrance door shall be a 36-inch-wide door including a 5’x 5’ level landing, no more than 1 inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level and with an 18-inch clearance at interior strike edge. d. A door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance. Page 197 23. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.50.025. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole. 24. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies. 25. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, 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 and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 26. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 27. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 e. Local School District: The Town will 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 SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering Division THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE ADDRESSED OR NOTED ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS SUBMITTED FOR ANY BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME. 28. PAYMENT OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS (“PPW”) ENGINEERING PLAN CHECK FEE AND INSPECTION FEE – At the time of the first construction submittal, the Applicant shall submit to the Town Engineer for approval a detailed construction project cost estimate prepared and stamped by the Applicant’s civil engineer. The cost estimate shall break out on-site and off-site improvements separately. This cost estimate will be used to determine the Engineering Plan Check Fee. A final construction cost estimate shall be provided once the project plans are approved. This cost estimate will be used to determine the Engineering Inspection Fee. The Engineering Inspection Fee must be paid prior to the issuance of any construction related permit. Page 198 29. STORM DRAINAGE FEE – The Applicant shall pay Storm Drainage Fees in accordance with the Town’s Adopted Schedule of Fees and Charges in effect at the date of application for the future construction of drainage facilities serving new buildings, improvements, or structures to be constructed which substantially impair the perviousness of the surface of land. The estimated fee, based on the site area of 0.22 acres, is $1,109.02. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the Town Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The Applicant shall pay this fee to PPW prior to issuance of the first building permit. 30. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES MITIGATION FEE (ORDINANCE 2189) – Per the Town’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule, the project is subject to the Town’s Construction Activities Mitigation Fee based on the square footage of new buildings. The current fee is $1.43 per square foot of new residential and non-residential building area. The fee shall be calculated based on the square footage total for all units shown on the construction plans to the approval of the Town Engineer. The plans indicate a total 3,840 square feet resulting in an estimated preliminary total fee of $5,491.20. Payment of this fee shall pe paid prior to issuance of the first building permit and paid at the fee rate in effect at the time the fee is paid. 31. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT – The Applicant shall apply and obtain a Tree Removal Permit from the Parks and Public Works Department for the removal of existing trees on-site or in the public right-of-way prior to the issuance of a building permit or demolition building permit, whichever is issued first. Tree removals shall be consistent with the arborist report and approved entitlement plans. 32. STANDARD PLAN COMPLIANCE – The project shall comply with the Town’s Standard Plans to the approval of the Town Engineer. Street improvements, all street sections, the design of all off-site storm drainage facilities shall be in accordance with most current Town Standard Specifications and Standard Plans approved by the Town Engineer. Improvements deemed necessary by the Town Engineer shall be shown on the Improvement Plans. 33. EXISTING FACILITY PROTECTION AND REPAIR – All existing public utilities shall be either protected in place, relocated, or repaired. The Applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal, and all new improvements that are damaged during construction or removed because of the Applicant’s operations. This includes sidewalk, curb and gutter, streetlights, valley gutters, curb ramps, and any other existing improvements in the area that are not intended to be removed and replaced. The Applicant shall request a walk-through with the PPW construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. Said repairs shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of the project. 34. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES – All new services to the development shall be placed underground in accordance with the various utility regulations. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the Town and approved by the Town Engineer prior to installation. 35. UTILITY RESPONSIBILITIES – The Applicant is responsible for the maintenance of existing stormwater drainage facilities, including piped and open channel stormwater conveyances in private areas. The Applicant is responsible for all expenses necessary to connect to the Page 199 various utility providers. Currently, the public storm sewer system is owned and maintained by the Town of Los Gatos, the water system in Los Gatos is owned and maintained by San José Water Company, and the sanitary sewer system in Los Gatos is owned and maintained by West Valley Sanitation District. Any alterations of the approved utilities listed must be approved by the Town prior to any construction. 36. UTILITY COMPANY COORDINATION – The Applicant shall negotiate any necessary right-of- way or easements with the various utility companies in the area, subject to the review and approval by the Town Engineer and the utility companies. Prior to the approval of the site plan for construction, the Applicant shall submit “Will Serve” letters from PG&E, San José Water, West Valley Sanitation District, West Valley Collections and Recycling, and AT&T (or the current “Carrier of Last Resort”) with a statement indicating either a list of improvements necessary to serve the project or a statement that the existing network is sufficient to accommodate the project. Coordination of the stormwater conveyance system will be addressed during the Grading Permit review. 37. DEVELOPER STORM WATER QUALITY RESPONSIBILITY – The Applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors including subcontractors are aware of all stormwater quality measures and implement such measures. The Applicant shall perform all construction activities in accordance with approved Improvement Plans, Los Gatos Town Code Chapter 12 – Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control, and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit. Failure to comply with these rules and regulations will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or a project stop order. 38. SITE DRAINAGE – Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drains (public or private) directly connected to public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate “NO DUMPING - Flows to Bay” NPDES required language using methods approved by the Town Engineer on all storm inlets surrounding and within the project parcel. Furthermore, storm drains shall be designed to serve exclusively stormwater. Dual-purpose storm drains that switch to sanitary sewer are not permitted in the Town of Los Gatos. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of an adjacent, downstream or down slope property. 39. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE – The Applicant shall not alter any existing drainage patterns without an approved Grading Permit. 40. GRADING & DRAINAGE WINTER MORATORIUM – All grading activity shall comply with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit and Chapter 12 of the Town Code. There shall be no earthwork disturbance or grading activities between October 15th and April 15th of each year unless approved by the Town Engineer. In order to be considered for approval, the Applicant must submit a Winterization Erosion Control Plan certified by a California certified QSD to the Town Engineer for review and approval. If grading is allowed during the rainy season, a maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on the exposed area. The submission of a certified plan does not guarantee approval. Any approved and executed plan must be kept on-site while the project is in construction. Page 200 41. EROSION CONTROL– The Applicant shall prepare and submit interim and final erosion control plans to the Town Engineer for review and approval. The interim erosion control plan(s) shall include measures carried out during construction before final landscaping is installed. Multiple phases of interim erosion control plans may be necessary depending on the complexity of the project. Interim erosion control best management practices may include silt fences, fiber rolls, erosion control blankets, Town approved seeding mixtures, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. The Applicant shall install, maintain, and modify the erosion control measures as needed to continuously protect downstream water quality. In the event an emergency modification is deemed necessary, the Applicant must implement necessary measures to protect downstream waterways immediately and then submit the changes made within 24-hours to the Town Engineer for review and approval. The erosion control plans shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the most current Santa Clara County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). Any fees or penalties assessed against the Town in response to the Applicant’s failure to comply with the Permit must be paid by the Applicant. The Applicant must permit Town staff onsite to conduct periodic NPDES inspections throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulations. 42. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING – After the issuance of any Grading or Encroachment permit and before the commencement of any on or off-site work, the Applicant shall request a pre-construction meeting with the PPW Inspector to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance, and other construction matters. At that meeting, the Applicant shall submit a letter acknowledging that: a. They have read and understand these project Conditions of Approval; b. They will require that all project sub-contractors read and understand these project Conditions of Approval; and, c. They ensure a copy of these project Conditions of Approval will be posted on-site at all times during construction. 43. OVERHEAD UTILITY CLEARANCE – For projects that have overhead utility lines on-site that travel over new buildings, the Applicant shall obtain a letter from the utility company indicating that there is adequate overhead clearance from the utility to the proposed building. The letter shall be submitted with the first set of improvement plans submitted. The plans shall show the existing utility pole, any necessary proposed pole protection (including overhead clearance warning identification), and shall be confirmed satisfactory with the utility company. The letter shall be to the approval of the Town Engineer. 44. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT – Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, it shall be the sole responsibility of the project to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or permissions necessary to perform any work on neighboring private property herein proposed. Proof of agreement/approval is required prior to the issuance of any Permit. Page 201 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO RELEASE OF UTILITIES, FINAL INSPECTION, OR ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME. 45. RECORD DRAWINGS – The Applicant shall submit a scanned PDF set of stamped record drawings and construction specifications for all off-site improvements to the Department of Parks and Public Works. All underground facilities shall be shown on the record drawings as constructed in the field. The Applicant shall also provide the Town with an electronic copy of the record drawings in the AutoCAD Version being used by the Town at the time of completion of the work. The Applicant shall also submit an AutoCAD drawing file of all consultants composite basemap linework showing all public improvements and utility layouts. This condition shall be met prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. 46. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – The Applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed during construction. Improvements such as, but not limited to curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, streetlights, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired or replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the PPW Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the PPW Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Applicant shall request a walk- through with the PPW Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 47. PAVEMENT RESTORATION – Due to construction activities, new utility cuts along the project frontage, and the anticipated project’s truck traffic, the Applicant shall grind and provide a 2.5” overlay with asphalt concrete the south side of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road along the entire property length between the center median island and the property frontage. Prior to overlay, any base failure repair or required dig-outs identified by the PPW Inspector shall be completed. The Town Engineer shall approve the roadway repair prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME 48. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SETUP – All storage and office trailers will be kept off the public right-of-way. 49. PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION NOTICE – The contractor shall notify the PPW Inspector at least ten (10) working days prior to the start of any construction work. At that time, the Contractor shall provide an initial project construction schedule and a 24-hour emergency telephone number list. Page 202 50. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE – The contractor shall submit the project schedule in a static PDF 11”x17” format and Microsoft Project, or an approved equal. The Contractor shall identify the scheduled critical path for the installation of improvements to the approval of the Town Engineer. The schedule shall be updated monthly and submitted to the PPW Inspector in the same formats as the original. 51. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HANDOUT – The Contractor shall provide to the Town Engineer an approved construction information handout for the purpose of responding to questions the Town receives regarding the project construction. 52. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION – The Contractor shall always provide a qualified supervisor on the job site during construction. 53. PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION – All work shown on the Improvement Plans shall be inspected to the approval of the Town Engineer. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Town Engineer. 54. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HOURS – Construction activities related to the issuance of any PPW permit shall comply with Town Code Section 16.20.035 which restricts construction to the weekday between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. No work shall be done on Sundays or on Town Holidays unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer. Please note that no work shall be allowed to take place within the Town right-of-way after 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. In addition, no work being done under Encroachment Permit may be performed on the weekend unless prior approvals have been granted by the Town Engineer. The Town Engineer may apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school commute routes. Onsite project signage must state the project construction hours. The permitted construction hours may be modified if the Town Engineer finds that the following criteria is met: a. Permitting extended hours of construction will decrease the total time needed to complete the project without an unreasonable impact to the neighborhood. b. Permitting extended hours of construction is required to accommodate a construction requirement such as a large concrete pour or major road closure. Such a need would be presented by the project's design engineer and require approval of the Town Engineer. c. An emergency situation exists where the construction work is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition resulting in obvious and eminent peril to public health and safety. If such a condition exists, the Town may waive any of the remaining requirements outlined below. d. The exemption will not conflict with any other condition of approval required by the Town to mitigate significant environmental impacts. e. The contractor or property owner will notify residential and commercial occupants of adjacent properties of the modified construction work hours. This notification must be provided three days prior to the start of the extended construction activity. f. The approved hours of construction activity will be posted at the construction site in a place and manner that can be easily viewed by any interested member of the public. g. The Town Engineer may revoke the extended work hours at any time if the contractor or owner of the property fails to abide by the conditions of extended work hours or if Page 203 it is determined that the peace, comfort, and tranquility of the occupants of adjacent residential or commercial properties are impaired because of the location and nature of the construction. h. The waiver application must be submitted to the PPW Inspector ten (10) working days prior to the requested date of waiver. 55. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BMPs – All construction activities shall conform to the latest requirements of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinances, the project specific temporary erosion control plan, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities. 56. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EXCAVATION – The following provisions to control traffic congestion, noise, and dust shall be followed during site excavation, grading, and construction: a. All construction vehicles should be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers that meet State standards. b. Travel speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to fifteen (15) miles per hour. c. Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing 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. d. 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 by the Town, or a minimum 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 ensure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. e. Watering on public streets and wash down of dirt and debris into storm drain systems is prohibited. Streets will be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the PPW Inspector, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on-site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. Recycled water shall be used for construction watering to manage dust control where possible, as determined by the Town Engineer. Where recycled water is not available potable water shall be used. All potable construction water from fire hydrants shall be coordinated with the San José Water Company. f. 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 Construction Inspector. g. Construction grading activity shall be discontinued in wind conditions in excess of 25 miles per hour, or that in the opinion of the PPW Inspector cause excessive neighborhood dust problems. h. Site dirt shall not be tracked into the public right-of-way and shall be cleaned immediately if tracked into the public right-of-way. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris shall not be washed into the Town’s storm drains. Page 204 i. Construction activities shall be scheduled so that paving and foundation placement begin immediately upon completion of grading operation. j. All aggregate materials transported to and from the site shall be covered in accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code during transit to and from the site. k. Prior to issuance of any permit, the Applicant shall submit any applicable pedestrian or traffic detour plans to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer for any lane or sidewalk closures. The temporary traffic control plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans and in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and standard construction practices. The Traffic Control Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right-of- way. l. During construction, the Applicant shall make accessible any or all public and private utilities within the area impacted by construction, as directed by the Town Engineer. m. The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The Applicant shall require the soils engineer submit to daily testing and sampling reports to the Town Engineer. 57. MATERIAL HAULING ROUTE AND PERMIT – For material delivery vehicles equal to, or larger than two-axle, six-tire single unit truck size as defined by FHWA Standards, the Applicant shall submit a truck hauling route that conforms to Town of Los Gatos Standards for approval. Note that the Town requires a Haul Permit be issued for any hauling activities. The Applicant shall require contractors to prohibit trucks from using “compression release engine brakes” on residential streets. The haul route for this project unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer, shall be: Wedgewood Ave to Wimbledon Dr to Winchester Blvd to Highway 85 North, or to Lark Ave to Highway 17 North or South, or to Los Gatos Blvd to Highway 85 South. A letter from the Applicant confirming the intention to use the designated haul route shall be submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of any Town permits. All material hauling activities including but not limited to, adherence to the approved route, hours of operation, staging of materials, dust control and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 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 between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the Town Engineer. The Applicant must provide an approved method of cleaning tires and trimming loads on site. All material hauling activities shall be done in accordance with applicable Town ordinances and conditions of approval. 58. PROJECT CLOSE-OUT – Prior to requesting a Final Inspection, the Applicant shall submit to the Town Engineer a letter indicating that all project conditions have been met, and all improvements are complete. All work must be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and Town Engineer prior to the first occupancy. All public improvements, including the complete installation of all improvements relative to streets, fencing, storm drainage, underground utilities, etc., shall be completed and attested to by the Town Engineer before approval of occupancy of any unit. Where facilities of other Page 205 agencies are involved, including those for water and sanitary sewer services, such installation shall be verified as having been completed and accepted by those agencies. In addition, the Applicant shall submit an itemized final quantities list of all public improvements constructed on-site and within the public right-of-way. The final quantities list shall be prepared by the project engineer and be to the approval of the Town Engineer. The final quantities list shall be broken out into on-site and off-site improvements based on the format provided by the Town. Until such time as all required improvements are fully completed and accepted by Town, the Applicant shall be responsible for the care, maintenance, and any damage to such improvements. Town shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements required for this project prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Applicant. 59. CONSTRUCTION WORKER PARKING – The Applicant shall provide a Construction Parking Plan that minimizes the effect of construction worker parking in the neighborhood and shall include an estimate of the number of workers that will be present on the site during the various phases of construction and indicate where sufficient off-street parking will be utilized and identify any locations for off-site material deliveries. Said plan shall be approved by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of Town permits and shall be complied with at all times during construction. Failure to enforce the parking plan may result in suspension of the Town permits. 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 (§15.40.070). 60. SITE WATER DISCHARGE – In accordance with the Town Code, Prohibition of Illegal Discharges (Los Gatos Town Code Section 22.30.015), the Town Engineer may approve in coordination West Valley Sanitation District the discharge of uncontaminated pumped ground waters to the sanitary sewer only when such source is deemed unacceptable by State and Federal authorities for discharge to surface waters of the United States, whether pretreated or untreated, and for which no reasonable alternative method of disposal is available. Following the verification of the applicable local, state and/or federal approvals, a Discharge Plan will be approved and monitored by the Town Engineer. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES THAT THE USE PERMITTED BY THIS ENTITLEMENT OCCUPIES THE PREMISES 61. POST CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) – Post construction storm water pollution prevention requirements shall include: a. The Applicant shall be charged the cost of abatement for issues associated with, but not limited to, inspection of the private stormwater facilities, emergency maintenance needed to protect public health or watercourses, and facility replacement or repair if the treatment facility is no longer able to meet performance standards or has Page 206 deteriorated. Any abatement activity performed on the Applicant’s property by Town staff will be charged to the Applicant at the Town’s adopted fully-loaded hourly rates. b. Maintenance of the storm drain inlets “No Dumping – Drains to Bay” plaques to alert the public to the destination of storm water and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. Template ordering information is available at www.flowstobay.org. c. All process equipment, oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, fertilizers, pesticides, and similar chemical products, as well as petroleum based wastes, tallow, and grease planned for storage outdoors shall be stored in covered containers at all times. d. All public outdoor spaces and trails shall include installation and upkeep of dog waste stations. e. Garbage and recycling receptacles and bins shall be designed and maintained with permanent covers to prevent exposure of trash to rain. Trash enclosure drains shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. f. It is the responsibility of the property owner(s)/homeowners association to implement a plan for street sweeping of paved private roads and cleaning of all storm drain inlets. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 62. GENERAL: Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access, water supply and may include specific additional requirements as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits. 63. MODIFIED FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet G000) Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12 whichever is the more restrictive and Sections 903.2.14 through 903.2.21. For the purposes of this section, firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas shall be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and shall be without openings or penetrations. Approved AMMR PC 24-4669 for a modified NFPA 13D system. A copy of the Alternate Means/Methods application form and this comment letter, with approval signature shall be made part of the building permit drawing set, to be routed to Santa Clara County Fire Department for final approval. 64. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: (Letter received) The minimum require fireflow for this project is 500 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fireflow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.3]. 65. FIRE DEPARTMENT (ENGINE) ROADWAY TURNAROUND REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet G005) Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 50 feet outside and 30 feet inside. Maximum grade in any direction shall be 5%. Installations shall Page 207 conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. [CFC Section 503.2.5]. 66. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENT: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water- based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7. 67. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: (As Noted on Sheet A1) New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. 68. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: (As Noted on Sheet A1) All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33. Page 208 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com Project Description for 14341 Browns Lane APN 409-14-035 January 15th, 2025 Suray Nathan, Assistant Planner Community Development Department City of Los Gatos 110 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 Dear Mr. Nathan, On behalf of our client, Roberto Flamenco, we have prepared a written description & justification letter for the proposed residential development at 14341 Browns Lane in Los Gatos. Project Description The proposed project consists of a two-story single family residence with an attached accessory dwelling structure (a total of 3,472 SF of construction). The site is approximately 9,502 SF and consists of one parcel (APN 409-14-035). The project will replace two separate buildings; one of which is a one-story single family residence (~832 SF) and the other is an accessory shed structure (~240 SF). There is only one dwelling unit on the current property and there are no existing ADUs on the property. The proposed single family residence has a first floor footprint of 1,039 SF - with an attached ADU (385 SF) and an attached two-car garage (507 SF). The second floor of the new residence is 1,541 SF and features a private balcony patio. The new residence features 3 bedrooms and 3.5 bathrooms.The attached ADU is contained within the first floor footprint, with its own separate entry, and features 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom and 1 kitchenette. The proposal also includes a new driveway providing access to the new attached garage and some site work to enhance the accessibility of the site. The permeable paver driveway is oversized to meet Santa Clara County Fire Department Turnaround standards. The proposed project will also preserve and retain the plum tree located in the rear yard. In order to promote the privacy of the neighbors, the private 2nd floor balcony is inset and features a 42” high railing. The rear windows shall have opaque or frosted glass. Zoning Conformance & Immediate Neighborhood The property’s net lot area is 9,502 square feet and is located in a R-1-8 zone within the general plan for Low Density Residential. The immediate neighborhood consists of 6 properties that are also zoned as R-1-8. The proposed residence conforms to the R-1-8 zoning requirements. The required zoning requirements are a 25 feet front setback, 20 feet rear setback, 8 feet side setback, and maximum height of 30 feet. The proposed residence is 26.9 feet from the front property line (PL), 20 feet from the rear PL, 28.9 feet from the north side PL, 8.25 feet from the south side PL, and has a height of 28.6 feet. The proposed residence is in the traditional style with a strong first floor eave line that matches the surrounding neighborhood. Despite being taller than the immediate neighbors, the house features steeper sloping roofs to bring the eave line of the residence down to match the immediate neighborhood. The house features a custom garage door with simple panels and wood grain texture to reduce the emphasis of the garage on the front facade. The front facade design is EXHIBIT 4 Page 209 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com articulated so that the garage plane is set further back from the entry plane of the house (Residential Design Guidelines 2.4.1 & 3.4.1). The house’s roofing material includes 3-ply presidential asphalt shingles and standing seam metal with a matte finish. The asphalt composite shingles match the roofing materials used in the immediate neighborhood and only smaller portions of the roof will be covered in the metal material. The house features articulated gable pop outs & shed dormers with one gable along the main axis of the residence (3.5.2). This is also in conformance with the immediate neighborhood since multiple neighboring homes feature gable pop outs. The proposed residence also features a recessed entry under the roof eave which is similar to every neighboring residence (2.3.3). The final feature the house incorporates are the simulated divided windows that are carried across every facade. These windows will have dimensional muntins on both exterior & interior of the glass (3.7.4). We have included specifications for the windows and roof on sheet A400 of our submittal drawings for further review. Front Facade of Proposed Residence @ 14341 Browns Lane Page 210 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com Neighborhood Map Compatibility to Immediate Neighborhood Front Facade of 14340 Browns Lane Single story - Medium Pitch Roof - Gable - Straight Facade Wide - Recessed Entry Under Eave Front Facade of 17291 Wedgewood Ave (Existing Home) Single story - Medium Pitch Roof - Hip - Straight Facade Wide - Recessed Entry Under Eave Front Facade of 17291 Wedgewood Ave (Under Construction) Two story - Medium Pitch Roof - Hip w/ Gable pop outs - Straight Facade Wide - Narrow Porch Entry Page 211 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com Front Facade of 14331 Browns Lane Single story - Medium Pitch Roof - Hip - Straight Facade Wide - Recessed Entry Under Eave Front Facade of 14330 Browns Lane Single story - Medium Pitch Roof - Gable w/ Gable pop outs- Straight Facade Wide - Recessed Entry Under Eave GKW Architects, Inc Gordon K Wong & Joshua Liu Page 212 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com Justication Letter for 14341 Browns Lane APN 409-14-035 March 12th, 2025 Planning Commission City of Los Gatos 110 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 Justification Letter Dear Planning Commissioners, We are the Architectural Firm in charge of this project and are writing on behalf of Roberto Flamenco & Paula Mendez, who are the owners of the property at 14341 Browns Lane. We would like to thank you in advance for taking the time to review this project. We believe you will find that the proposed design not only meets all of the residential design guidelines but has been thoughtfully crafted in consideration of the neighbors. The owner intends to construct a new home on the property rather than remodel the existing residence due to the poor condition of the structure, which was built in 1948. The dilapidated condition of the existing structure is no longer suitable within the context of the immediate neighborhood and is due for an upgrade. A straightforward addition to the existing 832 square feet of space will not suffice to accommodate Roberto’s growing family. The owner envisions this home as his forever home and has dedicated significant effort toward realizing this dream. Furthermore, Roberto hopes to host his long-awaited wedding ceremony at his new home with his wife, an event that has been postponed year after year due to their hectic work schedules. Roberto and his wife have successfully operated a well-established general construction company, completing hundreds of residential projects across the South Bay. They take great pride in their craftsmanship and plan to build this home themselves. Their commitment to detail and professionalism is widely recognized by their clients, who can attest to the high standards of their work. Should they have the opportunity to undertake this project, it is assured that the construction quality will be exceptional and that the finished home will greatly enhance the surrounding neighborhood. The attached ADU is designed not as a rental unit, but as a flexible space for accommodating visits from the owner’s parents or in-laws who reside out of state. The owners have a large family and intend for the home to provide a comfortable environment for spending family time, entertaining friends and neighbors, and offering ample space for relatives and future children to live with them. We have also worked directly with our immediate neighbors to address some concerns that have been brought to our attention. Certain neighbors were concerned about their privacy, especially with the rear 2nd floor windows looking directly into their yard. To address these concerns, we have inset the rear balcony further into the house to create a 31+ ft separation from the rear property line. The railings of the proposed balcony will also be 46” high, which is greater than the standard railing height, to further emphasize this separation. We have also proposed that the 2nd floor windows be frosted or opaque to reduce the visibility into adjacent yards. Some neighbors have also expressed concerns about the overall appearance and size of the house, which we have responded to by reducing the overall height of the house by 1+ ft and reducing the square footage of the house by over 400 square feet. The house will not be the largest home in the neighborhood. Our team has allocated a significant amount of time to balance the roof of the house to: a) EXHIBIT 5Page 213 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com ensure that it will not have any leaks or issues down the line and b) reduce the scale of the house and bring back the strong first floor eave line that was recommended by the Town’s consulting architect. Finally, there were concerns in regards to the oversized driveway at the front yard, which we clarified was for the fire truck turnaround. This will increase the safety of the immediate neighborhood since the fire department can more efficiently maneuver on Browns Lane during emergencies. Despite having the largest FAR in the immediate neighborhood, the proposed home will not be the largest in terms of square footage. Design elements have been implemented into the home to protect the privacy of the neighbors, such as frosted windows and an inset 2nd floor balcony; and the well-being of the neighborhood has been thoroughly considered in the design of the proposed residence. In conclusion, our team has taken all the necessary steps to comply with the Town Residential Design Guidelines, ensure that the privacy of neighbors’ is maintained, and positively contribute to the surrounding community. GKW Architects, Inc Gordon K Wong & Joshua Liu Page 214 21 5 6 3 42 6 7891010 910 1ROOF MATERIAL: 2ROOF MATERIAL: 3FASCIA BOARD COLOR: 4GUTTER COLOR: 5EXTERIOR MATERIAL & COLOR: 6EXTERIOR MATERIAL & COLOR: 7GARAGE DOOR: 8ENTRY DOORS: 9WINDOW: 10TRIM COLOR: CERTAINTEED - LANDMARK PRO 'CINDER BLACK' PAC-CLAD - MTL. STANDING SEAM 'IRON ORE' SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 'SW6258 TRICORN BLACK' BLACK JAMES HARDIE - CEMENT PANEL 'WHITE' JAMES HARDIE - SHINGLE STRAIGHT EDGE 'WHITE' CUSTOM CEDAR PAINTED 'WHITE' SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 'SW6258 TRICORN BLACK' MARVIN - ELEVATE, WOOD-CLAD FIBERGLASS,SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES (SDL) 'EBONY' SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 'SW9542 NATURAL WHITE' 1 FRONT ELEVATION 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 8 MATERIALS & COLOR FLAMENCO-MENDEZ RESIDENCE 14341 BROWNS LN, LOS GATOS, CA 95032 EXHIBIT 6Page 215 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 216 June 11, 2024 Ms. Suray NathanCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 14341 Browns Lane Dear Suray: I reviewed the drawings and evaluated the neighborhood context. My comments and recommendations on the design are as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The site is located on a short and narrow cul-de-sac in an older neighborhood of mostly one and two story homes with a range of traditional architectural styles. Photos of the site and its surrounding neighborhood are shown on the following page. EXHIBIT 7Page 217 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments June 11, 2024 Page 2 View down Browns LaneSite to leftTHE SITE House immediately to the left House immediately to the right Nearby house across Browns LaneHouse immediately across Browns Lane Nearby house Nearby house Page 218 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments June 11, 2024 Page 3 PROPOSED PROJECT Proposed Front Elevation Proposed Rear Elevation Proposed Right Side Elevation Proposed Left Side Elevation Page 219 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments June 11, 2024 Page 4 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The proposed home is well designed in a traditional architectural style. While the proposed two story structure is taller than immediate neighbors, this is an unusual site with a very limited number of parcels along an alley- width street. It is adjacent to similar nearby streets with older homes where I have previously reviewed transi- tions to larger homes over the past few years. The proposed design has a strong first floor eave line consistent with other nearby houses and a portion of the second floor is contained within the garage roof form. I identified only a couple of issues of concern: 1. The stone base and divided light windows are two elements that are proposed on the front facade but not carried consistently around the other home facades. This would not be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.2.2. 3.2.2 Design for architectural integrity • In general, it is best to select a clear and distinctive architectural style rather than utilizing generic design elements or mixing elements from different architectural styles. • Building massing, roof pitches, materials, window types and proportions, design features (e.g., roof dor- mers), and other architectural features should be consistent with the traditions of the selected style. • Carry wall materials, window types and architectural details around all sides of the house. Avoid side and rear elevations that are markedly different from the front elevation. Page 220 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments June 11, 2024 Page 5 2. There is a distinction shown on the drawings for two roof areas on the front and rear facades that have no descriptive notes so it is hard to anticipate their appearance in the context of the other roofs. 3. The garage door material is not described. If it is a glass and metal door, as it appears it might be on the drawings, it may not be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.4.1. 3.4.1 Limit the prominence of garages • Avoid designs that allow the garage to dominate the street facade. Glass and metal garage doors, as shown on the two examples below, would be very much out of character for this neighborhood. Page 221 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments June 11, 2024 Page 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Stone and/or divided light windows utilized on the front facade should be carried around consistently on all facades consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.2.2. If the divided light windows are used, they should be true or simulated divided windows consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.7.4. See example illustrations below. 3.7.4 Design the windows with attention to matching the traditional details of the architectural style • Divided lights (i.e., larger window panes broken up into smaller pieces) are common in many home styles found in Los Gatos. Use either vertical or square proportions for the smaller window elements. Be consistent in the proportions (i.e., the ratio of the horizontal to the vertical dimension) of the smaller panes. Do not use snap in flat grids to simulate divided lights. Use either true divided lights or one of the newer window systems that have dimensional muntins on both the exterior and interior of the glass along with a spacer muntin between the panes of glass. Use consistently for windows on all sides of the house. 2. Clarity the materials for the two roof elements which are currently not clearly described. 3. Clarify the proposed garage door materials. Solid panels are recommended. Suray, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are any issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon Page 222 October 28, 2024 Ms. Suray NathanCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 14341 Browns Lane Dear Suray: I reviewed the drawings, evaluated the neighborhood context and prepared a review letter for staff in June. Substantial changes have been made to a portion of the structure that warrant a second review.. My comments and recommendations on the revised design are as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The site is located on a short and narrow cul-de-sac in an older neighborhood of mostly one and two story homes with a range of traditional architectural styles. Photos of the site and its surrounding neighborhood are shown on the following page. EXHIBIT 8Page 223 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 2 View down Browns LaneSite to leftTHE SITE House immediately to the left House immediately to the right Nearby house across Browns LaneHouse immediately across Browns Lane Nearby house Nearby house Page 224 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 3 PROPOSED PROJECT Front Elevation Rear Elevation Right Side Elevation Left Side Elevation PREVIOUS DESIGN CURRENT DESIGN Page 225 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 4 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The originally proposed home submitted in June was well designed in a traditional architectural style. While the proposed two story structure would be taller than immediate neighbors, the design emphasized one story eave heights and a scale that were compatible with the surrounding smaller homes. Only a few recommen- dations for changes were made. The applicant made changes to the design as recommended, but also made major changes to the garage and second floor bedroom wing that are very much in conflict with the previ- ous design, the overall design of the home and other homes in its immediate neighborhood. Specific changes included the following: 1. The garage and bedroom wing were moved back from the front face of the main house form. Page 226 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 5 2. The roof slopes for the garage/bedroom wing where changed to a much lower slope than the main roof forms which would not be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.5.1. 3.5.1 Unify roof pitches • Utilize the same slope for all primary roofs. • Roof slopes for porches may be lower than the primary roof slope, depending on the architectural style. • Dormer roof slopes may sometimes be steeper than the primary roof slope, depending on the architectural style. 3. The eave heights of the garage/bedroom wing has been raised substantially which has greatly reduced this portion of the home’s integration with the main body of the house. Page 227 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 6 Page 228 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Restore the previously proposed garage/bedroom wing roof slopes and match its ridge and first floor eave heights to those of the main part of the house 2. Widen the roof dormer to provide more interior volume in the bedrooms. 3. Match the dormer roofing material to the nearby main structure roofing. Page 229 14341 Browns Lane Design Review Comments October 28, 2024 Page 8 Suray, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are any issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon Page 230 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com February 20th, 2025 Response Letter to Town of Los Gatos’ Consulting Architect - Cannon Design Group Project address: 14341 Browns Lane, Los Gatos 1.Restore the previously proposed garage/bedroom wing roof slopes and match its ridge and first-floor eave heights to those of the main part of the house. BEFORE AFTER We lowered the roof over the garage to the 1st floor eave line and reduced the size of the 2nd floor gabled dormer. BEFORE AFTER We are insistent on keeping the pitch of the shed dormer since this affects the waterproofing of the roof and the alignment of fascia boards / materials. EXHIBIT 9Page 231 Gkw Architects, Inc., AIA, Architect, LEED GA, CSLB 710 E. McGlincy Lane, Ste. 109, Campbell, CA 95008 408-796-1845 | Gordonkwong@Gkwarchitects.com www.gkwarchitects.com 2. Widen the roof dormer to provide more interior volume in the bedrooms BEFORE AFTER We have reduced the overall footprint of the 2nd floor. This enabled us to bring back the gable over the garage to maintain the strong first floor eave line. 3. Match the dormer roofing material to the nearby main structure roofing. BEFORE AFTER The overall height of the building has been reduced by 1’-2.5”. The roofing material remains consistent between the shed dormer for the bay over the garage and the shed dormer for the entrance to the main residence. Thank you for your comments regarding our revised plans. Please let us know if you have any further questions or comments. GKW Architects, Inc Gordon K Wong & Joshua Liu Page 232 Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Report 17341 Browns Lane Los Gatos, CA 95032 Prepared for: Town of Los Gatos July 17, 2024 Prepared By: EXHIBIT 10Page 233 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Table of Content Summary ...............................................................................................................1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................1 Background ............................................................................................................1 Assignment .............................................................................................................1 Limits of the assignment ........................................................................................1 Purpose and use of the report ................................................................................2 Observations .........................................................................................................2 Tree Inventory .........................................................................................................2 Analysis .................................................................................................................4 Discussion .............................................................................................................4 Condition Rating .....................................................................................................4 Expected Impacts ...................................................................................................5 Tree Protection .......................................................................................................5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................6 Recommendations ...............................................................................................7 Bibliography ..........................................................................................................8 Glossary of Terms .................................................................................................9 Appendix A: Tree Inventory Map and Site Plan ................................................11 A1: Existing Plan and Tree Locations ...................................................................11 A2: Proposed Plan ................................................................................................12 Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Assessment Tables ......................................13 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page 234 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Appendix C: Photographs ..................................................................................14 C1: Coast redwood #167 .....................................................................................14 C2: Plum #168 ......................................................................................................15 C3: Coast redwood #169 .....................................................................................16 C4: Pecan #170 ....................................................................................................17 Appendix D: Tree Protection Guidelines ...........................................................18 D1: Plan Sheet Detail S-X (Type I) ........................................................................18 D2: Plan Sheet Detail S-Y (Type III) ......................................................................19 D3: Section 29.10.1005. - Protection of Trees During Construction ....................20 Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications .................................................20 All persons, shall comply with the following precautions .....................................21 Prohibited Activities ..............................................................................................21 Monitoring ............................................................................................................22 Root Pruning .........................................................................................................22 Boring or Tunneling ...............................................................................................22 Tree Pruning and Removal Operations .................................................................22 Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs ....................................................................23 E1: English ............................................................................................................23 E2: Spanish ...........................................................................................................24 Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions ...................................25 Certification of Performance.............................................................................26 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page 235 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Summary The applicant is requesting approval for demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new two- story single-family residence on property zoned R-1:8. APN 409-14-035. The inventory contains four (4) trees comprised of three (3) different species. There are no Large Protected trees, two (2) Exempt fruit trees, and no Street Trees. Coast redwood #167 is in fair condition while the remaining trees are in good shape. No protected trees are expected to be highly impacted and only Exempt plum #168 is to be removed. Tree protection should consist of exclusion into the side and rear setbacks by placing fence in front of the existing fences at that setback distance. There were two (2) protected trees appraised for a rounded depreciated value of $5,940.00. Introduction Background
 The Town of Los Gatos asked me to assess the site, trees, and proposed footprint plan, and to provide a report with my findings and recommendations to help satisfy planning requirements. Assignment •Provide an arborist’s report including an assessment of the trees within the project area and on the adjacent sites. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter), condition (health, structure, and form), and suitability for preservation ratings. Affix number tags on the trees for reference on site and on plans. •Provide tree protection specifications, guidelines, and impact ratings for those affected by the project. •Provide appraised values using the Trunk Formula Technique. Limits of the assignment •The information in this report is limited to the condition of the trees during my inspection on July 10, 2024. No tree risk assessments were performed. •Tree heights and canopy diameters are estimates. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 1 26 Page 236 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 •The plans reviewed for this assignment were as follows (Table 1). Purpose and use of the report The report is intended to identify all the trees within the plan area that could be affected by a project. The report is to be used by the Town of Los Gatos and the property owners as a reference for existing tree conditions to help satisfy planning requirements. Observations Tree Inventory The inventory consists of trees protected by the Town of Los Gatos located on site and those in close proximity on neighboring properties. Sec. 29.10.0960. - Scope of protected trees. All trees which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch circumference) of any trunk, when removal relates to any review for which zoning approval or subdivision approval is required. (Appendix A and B). Los Gatos Town Ordinance 29.10.0970 Exceptions (1) states the following: “A fruit or nut tree that is less than eighteen (18) inches in diameter (fifty-seven-inch circumference). Table 1: Plans Reviewed Checklist Plan Date Sheet Reviewed Source Existing Site Topographic 04/30/23 G000 Yes GW Architect Proposed Site Plan 04/30/24 G001 Yes GW Architect Erosion Control Grading and Drainage Utility Plan and Hook-up locations Exterior Elevations 04/30/24 A200, A300 Yes GW Architect Landscape Plan Irrigation Plan T-1 Tree Protection Plan Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 2 26 Page 237 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 The inventory contains four (4) trees comprised of three (3) different species. There are no Large Protected trees, two (2) Exempt 1 2 fruit trees, and no Street Trees . 3 Table 2: Tree Inventory and Assessment Tree Species I.D. Number Trunk Diameter (in.) ~ Canopy Diameter (ft.) Condition Status Notes coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 167 30 35 Fair Protected Adjacent property Plum (Prunus domestica)168 10 20 Good Exempt coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 169 20 20 Fair Protected Adjacent property pecan (Carya illinoinensis)170 8, 8 30 Fair Exempt Adjacent property Large protected tree means any oak (Quercus spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), or Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) which has a 24-inch or 1 greater diameter (75-inch circumference); or any other species of tree with a 48-inch or greater diameter (150-inch circumference). A fruit or nut tree that is less than eighteen (18) inches in diameter (fifty-seven-inch circumference). Species listed in 29.10.0970 subsection (2).2 Street tree means a tree in a public place, or along or within a public street or right-of-way.3 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 3 26 Page 238 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Analysis Tree appraisal was performed according to the Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers Guide for Plant Appraisal 10th Edition, 2019 (CLTA) along with Western Chapter International Society of Arboriculture Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004. The trees were appraised using the “Cost Approach” and more specifically the “Trunk Formula Technique” (Appendix B). “Trunk Formula Technique” is calculated as follows: Basic Tree Cost = (Unit tree cost x Appraised trunk area), Appraised Value = (Basic tree cost X functional Limitations (percentage) X Condition (percentage) X External Limitations (percentage)). There were two (2) protected trees appraised for a rounded depreciated value of $5,940.00. Appraisal worksheets are available upon request. Discussion Condition Rating A tree’s condition is a determination of its overall health, structure, and form. The assessment considered all three criteria for a combined condition rating. •100% - Exceptional = Good health and structure with significant size, location or quality. •61-80% - Good = Normal vigor, well-developed structure, function and aesthetics not compromised with good longevity for the site. •41-60 % - Fair = Reduced vigor, damage, dieback, or pest problems, at least one significant structural problem or multiple moderate defects requiring treatment. Major asymmetry or deviation from the species normal habit, function and aesthetics compromised. •21-40% - Poor = Unhealthy and declining appearance with poor vigor, abnormal foliar color, size or density with potential irreversible decline. One serious structural defect or multiple significant defects that cannot be corrected and failure may occur at any time. Significant asymmetry and compromised aesthetics and intended use. •6-20% - Very Poor = Poor vigor and dying with little foliage in irreversible decline. Severe defects with the likelihood of failure being probable or imminent. Aesthetically poor with little or no function in the landscape. •0-5% - Dead/Unstable = Dead or imminently ready to fail. Coast redwood #167 is in fair condition while the remaining trees are in good shape. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 4 26 Page 239 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Expected Impacts Impact level defines how a tree may be affected by construction activity and proximity to the tree, and is described as low, moderate, or high. The following scale defines the impact rating: •Low = The construction activity will have little influence on the tree. •Moderate = The construction may cause future health or structural problems, and steps must be taken to protect the tree to reduce future problems. •High = Tree structure and health will be compromised and removal is recommended, or other actions must be taken for the tree to remain. The tree is located in the building envelope. No protected trees are expected to be highly impacted and only Exempt plum #168 is to be removed. Tree Protection Typically there are three different tree protection schemes which are called Type I (Appendix D1), Type II and Type III (Appendix D2) trunk protection only. The tree protection zone (TPZ) is the defined area in which certain activities are prohibited to minimize potential injury to the tree. There are two tree protection zones determined which include the “calculated” and “specified”. The “calculated” tree protection zone is determined by a multiplication factor based on species tolerance, tree age/vigor/health, and trunk diameter. The “specified” tree protection zone is adjusted in size and shape to accommodate the existing infrastructure, planned construction, and specific site constraints. This “specified” zone includes tree canopy conformation, visible root orientation, size, condition, maturity, and species tolerances (Gilpin, R, Hauer, R, Matheny, N, and Smiley, E.T. 2023). Tree protection should consist of exclusion into the side and rear setbacks by placing fence in front of the existing fences at that setback distance. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 5 26 Page 240 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Conclusion The applicant is requesting approval for demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new two-story single- family residence on property zoned R-1:8. APN 409-14-035. The inventory contains four (4) trees comprised of three (3) different species (two coast redwoods, on plum and one pecan). There are no Large Protected trees, two (2) Exempt fruit trees, and no Street Trees. Coast redwood #167 is in fair condition while the remaining trees are in good shape. No protected trees are expected to be highly impacted and only Exempt plum #168 is to be removed. The applicant is not required to replace the Exempt plum. Tree protection should consist of exclusion into the side and rear setbacks by placing fence in front of the existing fences at that setback distance. There were two (2) protected trees appraised for a rounded depreciated value of $5,940.00. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 6 26 Page 241 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Recommendations 1.Place tree numbers on all the plans. 2.Place tree protection in front of the existing fences and at the rear and side setbacks distances. 3.All tree maintenance and care shall be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Tree maintenance and care shall be specified in writing according to American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management: Standard Practices parts 1 through 10 and adhere to ANSI Z133.1 safety standards and local regulations. All maintenance is to be performed according to ISA Best Management Practices. 4.Refer to Appendix D for general tree protection guidelines including recommendations for arborist assistance while working under trees, trenching, or excavation within a trees drip line or designated TPZ/CRZ. 5.Place all the tree protection fence locations and guidelines on the plans including the grading, drainage, and utility plans. Create a separate plan sheet that includes all three protection measures labeled “T-1 Tree Protection Plan.” 6.Provide a copy of this report to all contractors and project managers, including the architect, civil engineer, and landscape designer or architect. It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure all parties are familiar with this document. Arrange a pre-construction meeting with the project arborist or landscape architect to verify tree protection is in place, with the correct materials, and at the proper distances. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 7 26 Page 242 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Bibliography Gilpin, R, Hauer, R, Matheny, N, and Smiley, E.T. Managing trees during construction, Third edition. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 2023. ISA. Guide For Plant Appraisal 9th Edition. Savoy, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 2000. Print. ISA. Guide For Plant Appraisal 10th Edition. Savoy, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 2018. Print. ISA. Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004 Western Chapter Regional Supplement. Western Chapter ISA Matheny, Nelda P., Clark, James R. Trees and development: A technical guide to preservation of trees during land development. Bedminster, PA: International Society of Arboriculture 1998. Smiley, E, Matheny, N, Lilly, S, ISA. Best Management Practices: Tree Risk Assessment: International Society of Arboriculture, 2017. Print Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 8 26 Page 243 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Glossary of Terms calculated tree protection zone: A TPZ calculated using the trunk diameter and a multiplication factor based on species tolerance to construction and tree age. It is often plotted on a plan as a circle or other arbitrary shape and can be used as a guide for establishing the specified TPZ. critical root zone: a conceptual soil area containing the minimal amount of all the essential parts of the root zone needed to sustain tree health and structural integrity. There are no universally accepted methods to calculate the CRZ. basic Tree Cost: The cost of replacement for a perfect specimen of a particular species and cross sectional area prior to location and condition depreciation. cost Approach: An indication of value by adding the land value to the depreciated value of improvements. defect: An imperfection, weakness, or lack of something necessary. In trees defects are injuries, growth patterns, decay, or other conditions that reduce the tree’s structural strength. diameter at breast height (DBH): Measures at 1.4 meters (4.5 feet) above ground in the United States, Australia (arboriculture), New Zealand, and when using the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th edition; at 1.3 meters (4.3 feet) above ground in Australia (forestry), Canada, the European Union, and in UK forestry; and at 1.5 meters (5 feet) above ground in UK arboriculture. drip Line: Imaginary line defined by the branch spread or a single plant or group of plants. The outer extent of the tree crown. form: Describes a plant’s habit, shape or silhouette defined by its genetics, environment, or management. health: Assessment is based on the overall appearance of the tree, its leaf and twig growth, and the presence and severity of insects or disease mechanical damage: Physical damage caused by outside forces such as cutting, chopping or any mechanized device that may strike the tree trunk, roots or branches. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 9 26 Page 244 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 scaffold branches: Permanent or structural branches that for the scaffold architecture or structure of a tree. specified tree protection zone (specified TPZ): a TPZ that is adjusted in size or shape to accommodate the existing infrastructure, planned construction, and aspects of the site, as well as the tree canopy conformation, visible root orientation, size, condition, maturity, and species response to construction. straw wattle: also known as straw worms, bio-logs, straw noodles, or straw tubes are man made cylinders of compressed, weed free straw (wheat or rice), 8 to 12 inches in diameter and 20 to 25 feet long. They are encased in jute, nylon, or other photo degradable materials, and have an average weight of 35 pounds. structure: Evaluation focused on the crown, trunk, trunk flare, above ground roots and the site conditions contributing to conditions and/or defects that may contribute to failure. Tree Protection Zone (TPZ): Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, especially during construction or development. Tree Risk Assessment: Process of evaluating what unexpected things could happen, how likely it is, and what the likely outcomes are. In tree management, the systematic process to determine the level of risk posed by a tree, tree part, or group of trees. trunk: Stem of a tree. Trunk Formula Technique: Method to appraise the monetary value of trees considered too large to be replaced with nursery or field grown stock. Based on developing a representative unit cost for replacement with the same or comparable species of the same size and in the same place, subject to depreciation for various factors. Contrast with replacement cost method. volunteer: A tree, not planted by human hands, that begins to grow on residential or commercial property. Unlike trees that are b drought in and installed on property, volunteer trees usually spring up on their own from seeds placed onto the ground by natural causes or accidental transport by people. Normally, volunteer trees are considered weeds and removed, but many desirable and attractive specimens have gone on to become permanent residents on many public and private grounds. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 10 26 Page 245 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Appendix A: Tree Inventory Map and Site Plan A1: Existing Plan and Tree Locations Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 11 26 #167 #168 #169 #170 Page 246 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 A2: Proposed Plan
 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 12 26 Page 247 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Assessment Tables Table 3: Inventory and Assessment Summary Tree Species I.D. #Trunk Diameter (in.) ~ Canopy Diameter (ft.) Condition Expected Impact Protection Status Rounded Depreciated Value Calculated Protection Radii (ft.) coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens)167 30 35 Fair Low Protected $3,360.00 20 Plum (Prunus domestica)168 10 20 Good High Exempt N/A 7 coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens)169 20 20 Good Low Protected $2,280.00 13 pecan (Carya illinoinensis)170 8, 8 30 Good Low Exempt N/A 8 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 13 26 Page 248 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Appendix C: Photographs C1: Coast redwood #167
 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 14 26 Page 249 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 C2: Plum #168 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 15 26 Page 250 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 C3: Coast redwood #169 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 16 26 Page 251 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 C4: Pecan #170 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 17 26 Page 252 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Appendix D: Tree Protection Guidelines D1: Plan Sheet Detail S-X (Type I)
 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 18 26 TREE PROTECTION Crown drip line or other limit of Tree Protection area. See tree preservation plan for fence alignment.4'-0"Maintain existing grade with the tree protection fence unless otherwise indicated on the plans. 2" x 6' steel posts or approved equal. Tree Protection fence: High density polyethylene fencing with 3.5" x 1.5" openings; Color- orange. Steel postsinstalled at 8' o.c. 5" thick layer of mulch. Notes: 1- See specifications for additional treeprotection requirements. 2- If there is no existing irrigation, see specifications for watering requirements. 3- No pruning shall be performed except by approved arborist. 4- No equipment shall operate inside the protective fencing including during fence installation and removal. 5- See site preparation plan for any modifications with the Tree Protectionarea. SECTION VIEW KEEP OUT TREE PROTECTION AREA 8.5" x 11" signlaminated in plastic spacedevery 50' along the fence. URBAN TREE FOUNDATION © 2014OPEN SOURCE FREE TO USE Tree protection fence: Fencing shall be comprised of six- foot high chain link mounted on eight- foot tall, 1 7/8-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground. Minimum 4” thick mulch layer Crown diameter drip line distance equal to the outer most limit of foliage.Notes: •All tree maintenance and care shall be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Tree maintenance and care shall be specified in writing according to American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management: Standard Practices parts 1 through 10 and adhere to ANSI Z133.1 safety standards and local regulations. •All maintenance is to be performed according to ISA Best Management Practices. Notes: The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) may vary in radius from the trunk and may or may not be established at the drip line distance. See arborist’s report and plan sheet for specifications of TPZ radii.6’-0”Modified by Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC, 2019 Page 253 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 D2: Plan Sheet Detail S-Y (Type III)
 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 19 26EVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLYNOPARKINGNOPARKINGCLEAN AIRVAN POOLE.V.CLEAN AIRVAN POOLE.V.CLEAN AIRVAN POOLE.V.327 328 329329327328E1E1E1E5E5AE5CC ?W ?W ?WPLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANS GUSHEE STREET PLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANSPLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANSPARKING AND BUILDING BYTEALL MESSER ARCHITECTSEE LIBRARY PLANSPLANTING PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATESSEE LIBRARY PLANSLIBRARY LANDSCAPE PLAN BYJONI JANECKI & ASSOCIATES L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.L.O.W.BULL CREEK FLOWLINEFUTURELIBRARY XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X KIRBY STREETXXXSEE L2.0 MATERIALS PLAN FOR DISCOVERY PARKIMPROVEMENTSSEE L2.0 MATERIALS PLAN FOR DISCOVERY PARKIMPROVEMENTS (E) CHAINLINK FENCE AND GATETO REMAIN APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF WORK (L.O.W.)LEGEND (E) TREE TO BE PROTECTED(E) TREE TO REMAINNOTE:1.SEE C3.0 EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR TREEPROTECTION IN EXISTING RIPARIAN AREA.2.TREE SURVEY PROVIDED BY IFLAND SURVEY, 10/09/18.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL TREES WHICH ARELOCATED WITHIN 10' OF EQUIPMENT MOVEMENT.1L1.0(E) FENCE TO BE REMOVEDARBORIST NOTES:1.ALL TREE MAINTENANCE AND CARE SHALL BEPERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED ARBORIST WITH AC-61/D-49 CALIFORNIA CONTRACTORS LICENSE. TREEMAINTENANCE AND CARE SHALL BE SPECIFIED INWRITING ACCORDING TO AMERICAN NATIONALSTANDARD FOR TREE CARE OPERATIONS: TREE, SHRUBAND OTHER WOODY PLANT MANAGEMENT: STANDARDPRACTICES PARTS 1 THROUGH 10 AND ADHERE TO ANSIZ133.1 SAFETY STANDARDS AND LOCAL REGULATIONS.ALL MAINTENANCE IS TO BE PERFORMED ACCORDING TO ISA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. 2.TREE PRUNING - IF TREE PRUNING FOR OVERHEAD CLEARANCE IS REQUIRED OR NECESSARY PRUNING SPECIFICATIONS SHALL BE IN WRITING PRIOR TO ANY CUTTING. CUTTING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED TREE CARE PROFESSIONAL OR SUPERVISED BY THE PROJECT ARBORIST. NO LIMBS GREATER THAN FOUR INCHES (4”) IN DIAMETER SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT APPROVAL. 3.ROOT MANAGEMENT - PRIOR TO REMOVING ROOTS GREATER THAN TWO INCHES (2”) IN DIAMETER EACH TREE SHALL BE EVALUATED BY THE PROJECT ARBORIST TO HELP DETERMINE ITS LIKELIHOOD OF FAILURE AFTER ROOT LOSS. IF ROOTS OVER TWO INCHES IN DIAMETER ARE ENCOUNTERED THEY SHOULD BE PRUNED BY HAND WITH LOPPERS, HANDSAW, RECIPROCATING SAW, OR CHAIN SAW RATHER THAN LEFT CRUSHED OR TORN. ROOTS SHOULD BE CUT BEYOND SINKER ROOTS OR OUTSIDE ROOT BRANCH JUNCTIONS AND BE SUPERVISED BY THE PROJECT ARBORIST. WHEN COMPLETED, EXPOSED ROOTS SHOULD BE KEPT MOIST WITH BURLAP OR BACKFILLED WITHIN ONE HOUR. NO ROOTS SHALL BE CUT WITHIN SIX TIMES THE TRUNK DIAMETER DISTANCE IN FEET ON ONE SIDE WITHOUT ARBORIST APPROVAL. 4.TRUNK PROTECTION - PREVENTING MECHANICAL DAMAGE TO THE MAIN STEMS FROM EQUIPMENT OR HAND TOOLS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY WRAPPING THE MAIN STEM WITH STRAW WATTLE. 5.SITE OCCUPANCY - HAVE A QUALIFIED ARBORIST PERFORM A LEVEL 2: BASIC TREE RISK ASSESSMENT AS DESCRIBED IN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES: TREE RISK ASSESSMENT: INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE, 2017 TO HELP IDENTIFY ANY NEW RISK FACTORS AFTER CONSTRUCTION UPON NEW SITE OCCUPANCY. DEMOLITION AND TREE PROTECTION PLAN L1.0 1"= 20' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTBASE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREPROJECT TEAMPROJECT NAME & ADDRESSFELTON LIBRARYDISCOVERY PARKGUSHEE STREETFELTON, CA, 95018REVISION#Date Description STAMP SHEET TITLE Scale: Date: Drawn by: Checked by: Project No.: PHASE BID SET No. 5579 Ren. 9/30/2020LICENSED A R C HI TECTST ATEOF CAL I F O R NIAAL ENDACSP 1802 PA / AS NM 04/19/2019 CIVIL ENGINEERMME CIVIL + STRUCTURAL ENGINEERINGSAN FRANCISCO / PORTLANDwww.baselandscape.comIRRIGATION DESIGNRMA IRRIGATIONCLIENTSANTA CRUZ COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS,OPEN SPACE, AND CULTURAL SERVICES 0 feet40 1" = 20' 20 60 80 NORTHSECTION TREE TRUNK 12" Ø STRAWFILLED BURLAPWATTLES TREE PROTECTION WITHOUT FENCE 3/8" = 1'-0"4'-0"ROOT PROTECTIONZONE. SEE SPECS FORREQUIREMENTS 1 SCHEDULE TREES TO BE PROTECTED: 20 TREES TO BE REMOVED: 0 04-19-20191 Planning Review Comments1 SECTION VIEW TRUNK PROTECTION WITH WATTLES-Y 6’-0” Excavation Trenches: 1. When any roots are cut or torn during construction, it is critical that you sharply cut all the ends of any exposed roots immediately. Failure to do so will leave crushed and torn roots. This leads to decay and inhibits growth of new roots. 2. Pile soil on the side of the trench opposite the tree. If this is not possible, place the soil on a plastic tarp, plywood or a thick bed of mulch. 3. Do not compact the backfill on the trench more than its original firmness. 4. Water the backfill to allow the roots to begin healing. Trenching near a tree can kill as much as 40%-50% of the tree’s roots. If the tree you are working around is in a confined space and your equipment will be coming close, it is important for you to protect the trunk. Wrap the tree trunk in old tires or place 2” x 4” studs around the tree and rope or band them together. ROOT PRUNING DETAIL PLEASE KEEP THIS SHEET FOR REFERENCE 2” x 4” or 2” x 2” Dimensional Lumber Sturdy Strap (steel, nylon, or synthetic rope) 2” x 4” ’or 2” x 2” - 6 to 8 Feet Tall Dimensional Lumber Spaced 3” Apart Sturdy Strap (steel, nylon, or synthetic rope) Bridge With 4” - 6” Deep Course Woody Debris or 4” x 4” Dimensional Lumber and 3/4” Plywood or Steel Road Plate. Note: See Local Ordinance Requirements and Arborist’s Report for Additional Protection Specifications and Guidelines. Trunk Protection Vertical Timber Detail 6’ MIN.Page 254 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 D3: Section 29.10.1005. - Protection of Trees During Construction Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications   1.Size and materials: Six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two-inch diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven into the ground to a depth of at least two (2) feet at no more than ten-foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and when stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base. 2.Area type to be fenced: Type I: Enclosure with chain link fencing of either the entire dripline area or at the tree protection zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or consulting arborist. Type II: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain link fence around the entire planter strip to the outer branches. Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout only (such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with two-inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. 3.Duration of Type I, II, III fencing: Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction permits are issued and remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence. 4.Warning Sign: Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an eight and one-half-inch by eleven-inch sign stating: "Warning —Tree Protection Zone—This fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025.” Text on the signs should be in both English and Spanish (Appendix E). 
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 20 26 Page 255 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 All persons, shall comply with the following precautions 1.Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the dripline, or tree protection zone (TPZ) when specified in an approved arborist report, around any tree and/or vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and prohibit any storage of construction materials or other materials, equipment cleaning, or parking of vehicles within the TPZ. The dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of the construction. 2.Prohibit all construction activities within the TPZ, including but not limited to: excavation, grading, drainage and leveling within the dripline of the tree unless approved by the Director. 3.Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within the dripline of or in drainage channels, swales or areas that may lead to the dripline of a protected tree. 4.Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree. 5.Design utility services and irrigation lines to be located outside of the dripline when feasible. 6.Retain the services of a certified or consulting arborist who shall serve as the project arborist for periodic monitoring of the project site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The project arborist shall be present whenever activities occur which may pose a potential threat to the health of the trees to be preserved and shall document all site visits. 7.The Director and project arborist shall be notified of any damage that occurs to a protected tree during construction so that proper treatment may be administered. Prohibited Activities The following are prohibited activities within the TPZ: •Grade changes (e.g. soil cuts, fills); •Trenches; •Root cuts; •Pedestrian and equipment traffic that could compact the soil or physically damage roots; •Parking vehicles or equipment; •Burning of brush and woody debris; •Storing soil, construction materials, petroleum products, water, or building refuse; and, •Disposing of wash water, fuel or other potentially damaging liquids. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 21 26 Page 256 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Monitoring Any trenching, construction or demolition that is expected to damage or encounter tree roots should be monitored by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist and should be documented. The site should be evaluated by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist after construction is complete, and any necessary remedial work that needs to be performed should be noted. Root Pruning Roots greater than two inches in diameter shall not be cut. When roots over two inches in diameter are encountered and are authorized to be cut or removed, they should be pruned by hand with loppers, handsaw, reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left crushed or torn. Roots should be cut beyond sinker roots or outside root branch junctions and be supervised by the project arborist. When completed, exposed roots should be kept moist with burlap or backfilled within one hour. Boring or Tunneling Boring machines should be set up outside the drip line or established Tree Protection Zone. Boring may also be performed by digging a trench on both sides of the tree until roots one inch in diameter are encountered and then hand dug or excavated with an Air Spade® or similar air or water excavation tool. Bore holes should be adjacent to the trunk and never go directly under the main stem to avoid oblique (heart) roots. Bore holes should be a minimum of three feet deep. Tree Pruning and Removal Operations All tree pruning or removals should be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Treatment, including pruning, shall be specified in writing according to the most recent ANSI A-300A Standards and Limitations and performed according to ISA Best Management Practices while adhering to ANSI Z133.1 safety standards. Trees that need to be removed or pruned should be identified in the pre-construction walk through. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 22 26 Page 257 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs E1: English
 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 23 26 Warning Tree Protection Zone This Fence Shall Not Be Removed And Is Subject To Penalty According To Town Code 29.10.1025 Page 258 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 E2: Spanish Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 24 26 Cuidado Zona De Arbol Pretejido Esta valla no podrán ser sacados Y está sujeta a sanción en función de Código Ciudad del 29.101025 Page 259 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles or ownership of properties are assumed to be good and marketable. All property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. All property is presumed to be in conformance with applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other regulations. Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. However, the consultant cannot be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend meetings, hearings, conferences, mediations, arbitration, or trials by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services. This report and any appraisal value expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and the consultant’s fee is not contingent upon the reporting of a specified appraisal value, a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event. Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report are intended for use as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale, and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. The reproduction of information generated by architects, engineers, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is only for coordination and ease of reference. Inclusion of said information with any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation as to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information. Unless otherwise expressed: a) this report covers only examined items and their condition at the time of inspection; and b) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that structural problems or deficiencies of plants or property may not arise in the future. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 25 26 Page 260 17341 Browns Lane Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection Report July 17, 2024 Certification of Performance I Richard Gessner, Certify: That I have personally inspected the tree(s) and/or the property referred to in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation and/or appraisal is stated in the attached report and Terms of Assignment; That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own; That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted Arboricultural practices; That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated within the report. That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any other subsequent events; I further certify that I am a Registered Consulting Arborist® with the American Society of Consulting Arborists, and that I acknowledge, accept and adhere to the ASCA Standards of Professional Practice. I am an International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master Arborist®. I have been involved with the practice of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees since 1998. Richard J. Gessner ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #496 ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® WE-4341B Copyright © Copyright 2024, Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC. Other than specific exception granted for copies made by the client for the express uses stated in this report, no parts of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording, or otherwise without the express, written permission of the author. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 26 26 Page 261 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 262 Neighborhood Notification for 14341 Browns Lane Between April 16th 2024 – March 6th 2025 14331 Browns Lane •Owner Not Home 14330 Browns Lane •Owner Not Home during first visit on April 16th •Owner eventually reached out through a phone call regarding privacy and size of the house. We explained how we updated the design to reduce the overall size of the house, adjust the roofline to reduce the scale, and explained the oversized driveway to fit in the fire truck turnaround. The owner was overall pleased with the changes we proposed to the design. 14340 Browns Lane •Spoke to Kyle (Kathy’s Son) and gave a brief summary of the project •Kathy & Lamar are in support of our project 14361 Browns Lane / 17291 Wedgewood Ave •Owner Not Home 17275 Wedgewood Ave •Owner Not Home 14344 Rinconada Dr •Spoke to Will Maynard & Wife and gave a brief summary of the project •We exchanged emails from our first meeting on April 16th til March 6th, addressing concerns regarding privacy and the size of the house. We described how we are proposing frosted windows on the rear 2nd floor windows, an inset 2nd floor balcony, and reducing the overall size of the house. •We have attached the email conversation we had with the neighbors to this document 14350 Rinconada Dr •Jeremy & Amy Gaustad •We gave a brief overview of the project and Amy told us a bit about her neighborhood 14330 Rinconada Dr •Spoke to Eric, who stated he was a renter •Requested us to put up a new fence at the rear of the property EXHIBIT 11Page 263 Page 264 The below diagram doesn't do an adequate job of illustrating just how much someone standing on the second floor can see, so I'm attaching two photos. I placed a stake in the ground in our yard 20' from the fence line - the distance I estimate a 5' (below average height) person would be able to see the ground at given a 6' fence. I added a line parallel to the fence in red to highlight where the stake meets the ground. One photo faces 14341 Browns Ln, the other faces my house. For the latter, I held my camera above my head with my back against the fence - I'm 6' tall - and took a photo with the stake aligned to the bottom of the frame. This provides a very rough approximation of what someone could theoretically see. A vast majority of our gardens, pool, patio, and grassy areas are exposed. The existing tree is insufficient, especially since it provides no privacy benefit for half of the year (when it has no foliage, as is the case now). Your plan still disregards many of the town's following planning guidelines, as I outlined previously in my first response: 2.3.1. If a two-story house is proposed in this type of a neighborhood, the house shall be designed to blend with the smaller homes. 2.3.2. Avoid structures with height and bulk at the front and side setback lines which are significantly greater than those of adjacent homes 3.11.2 Minimize privacy intrusions on adjacent residences Windows should be placed to minimize views into the living spaces and yard spaces near neighboring homes. Where possible, second floor windows that might intrude on adjacent property privacy should have sill heights above eye level or have frosted or textured glass to reduce visual exposure. Landscaping may be used to mitigate privacy concerns so long as the landscaping does not deny solar access to living spaces and actively used yard areas of neighboring homes. Avoid placing windows in locations that would look into adjacent neighbors’ windows or active private yard spaces I was very detailed in my last reply and I'm disappointed that it doesn't seem like many of my concerns were taken into consideration in good faith. We can talk through this more in a meeting if you want, but my response so far remains unchanged from the last time you asked for my comments. I still oppose this house being a two-story structure. If it is decided to be a two-story structure anyway, the building height needs to be reduced, and the windows facing my property must have sill heights above eye level (over 6') or be otherwise obscured by frosted or textured glass. Sincerely, Will Maynard 408.596.9966 3/11/25, 2:04 PM Gkw Architects Mail - 14341 Browns Lane - Meeting to Discuss https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=28d79d9564&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a:r1652581591675561320&simpl=msg-a:r585154329640083…2/6 Page 265 Page 266 Page 267 Page 268 Page 269 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 270 FRONT YARD REAR YARD NEW CONSTRUCTIONSINGLE FAMILY HOUSE 2,580+ GARAGE 507 SF 2 ROW5' - 0"25' - 0" FRONT SETBACK24' - 10 1/2" PL TO ROOF O.H.E G 1 S200 49' 55"W PL 112.49'N660 08' 47"W PL 88.27' N200 48' 00"E PL 103.00'S720 18' 07"E PL 88.34' RIGHT OF WAY BROWNS LN 3 4 4UESIDE S.B. 8' - 0"SIDE S.B. 8' - 0"REAR S.B.20' - 0"TTL WIDTH OF I&EE & PUE10'-0"EXT. FINISH 9' - 9" PL TO PL TO EXTERIOR FINISH26' - 3 1/2"(P) ADU 385 SFUNDER SEPARATE PERMIT #169 #170 #167 UEUE UE 5 5 6 IEE5'-0"ICC PUE5'-0"C WEDGEWOOD AVEW SS SS7 4 5 W SS#168 PROPERTY LINE TO EXTERIOR FINISH46' - 0"EXTERIOR FINISH26' - 10 1/2" PL TOEXTERIOR FINISH 28' - 11" PL TO EXTERIOR FINISH 30' - 0 1/2" PL TO EXTERIOR FINISH20' - 0" PL TOEXT FINISH 8' - 3" PL TO PROJECT LOCATION WEDGEWOOD AVE WIMBLEDON DRW VA L L E Y F W YLORA DRMULBERRY DRLA RINCONADA DRBROWNS LN1. 2. 3. 4. 5. GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS OF UTILITIES, SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS, STRUCTURES PRIOR TO START OF WORK.IN EVENT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING PRIOR TO STARTING EACH PORTION OF THE WORK.FINISH GRADE AROUND THE STRUCTURE SHALL SLOPE AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION AT A MINIMUM OF 5% FOR AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM THE STRUCTURE. CBC 1804.4NO LANDSCAPING WILL BE INCLUDED AND FRONT YARD WILL BE MULCHED PRIOR TO BUILDING FINALPER THE TOWN'S UNDERGROUNDING REQUIREMENTS, ALL NEW, RELOCATED, OR TEMPORARILY REMOVED UTILITY SERVICES, INCLUDING TELEPHONE, ELECTRIC POWER AND ALL OTHER COMMUNICATIONS LINES SHALL BE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND. PLEASE NOTE THIS ON ALL APPLICABLE SHEETS AND CALLOUT “(N) UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE TO BE INSTALLED” ON ALL SITE PLANS AND DRAWINGS THAT SHOW UTILITIESCONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY RIM AND INVERT ELEVATIONS FOR ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED GRAVITY STRUCTURES, AND EXISTING AND PROPOSED STORM DRAIN AND SANITARY SEWER PIPE DIAMETER, MATERIAL AND SLOPE. CONCRETE MULCH GRAVEL PERMEABLE PAVERS PROPERTY LINE BUILDING FOOTPRINT SETBACK CENTERLINE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL (E) WATER LINE (E) SEWER LINE UE CONCRETE WALKWAY RELOCATED UTILITY SERVICE TO BE UNDERGROUNDED LANDSCAPE, SHRUBS (N) PAINTED REDWOOD FENCE, 3 FT (N) PAINTED REDWOOD FENCE, 6 FT + 1 FT LATTICE DRIVEWAY MATERIAL, PAVERS/ FIRE APPARATUSAPPLICATION & COMMENT LETTER FOR SCCFD ALTERNATE MEANS OF REVIEW ATTACHED ON G005 ARTIFICIAL TURF (N)ELECTRICAL PANEL, 200 AMP GAS METER, RELOCATED (TO BE CONFIRMED W/ BLDG DEPT.) WATER METER, RELOCATED, SEE C7 CLEANOUT, SEE CIVIL PLANS SHEET C7 1 2 SITE PLAN, PROPOSED, KEYNOTES 3 SITE PLAN, PROPOSED, LEGEND 4 5 E G 6 W C W SS 7 /2 G004 /2 G004 S200 49' 55"W PL 112.49'N660 08' 47"W PL 88.27' N200 48' 00"E PL 103.00'S720 18' 07"E PL 88.34' BUILDING FOOTPRINT VEGETATED AREA PERMEABLE PAVERS DOWNSPOUT WITH SPLASH BLOCK, TYP.ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:42:05 PM G000 General, ProjectInfo & Site Plan,Proposed General, Project Info & Site Plan, ProposedSCOPE OF WORK PROJECT LOCATION:14341 BROWNS LN, LOS GATOS, CA 95032 APN:409-14-035 ZONING:R-1-8 GENERAL PLAN:LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL EXISTING USE:SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE:9,502 SF CONSTRUCTION TYPE:VB - MODIFIED SPRINKLERS(ENHANCED NFPA 13D SYSTEM WILL BE INSTALLED AS A DEFERRED SUBMITTAL) MAX. HEIGHT:30 FTPROPOSED HEIGHT28 FT 6.9 IN MAX. LOT COVERAGE:40%(P) LOT COVERAGE:2,018 / 9,502 = 0.212 21.2 % < 40% {OK} (SEE A103 FOR DETAILED BREAKDOWN) MAX. F.A.R.:0.31 FOR RESIDENCE (PER LOS GATOS MUNI CODE SEC. 29.40.075)0.10 FOR ADU (PER SEC. 29.10.320)0.087 FOR GARAGE (PER SEC. 29.40.075)SETBACKS:FRONT:25 FTREAR:20 FTSIDE:8 FT FLOOR AREA BREAKDOWN:EXISTING (SINGLE STORY)(E) RESIDENCE:832 SF(E) SHED:240 SF PROPOSED (SEE A104 FOR DETAILED FLOOR AREA BREAKDOWN) (P) RESIDENCE:1ST FLOOR:1,039 SFADU:385 SF2ND FLOOR:1,541 SF(P) GARAGE:507 SF FAR CALCULATIONSMAX FAR, PRIMARY HOUSE = 0.31 x 9,502 = 2,946 SF MAX DISCOUNTED FAR, ADU = 0.10 x 9,502 = 950 SFMAX FAR, GARAGE = 0.087 x 9,502 = 827 SF(P) PRIMARY HOUSE=2,580 SF< 2,946 SF {OK} (P) ADU=385 SF< 950 SF {OK} (P) GARAGE=507 SF < 827 SF {OK} DEMOLISHEXISTING SINGLE FAMILY (SINGLE STORY RESIDENCE) 832 SF & ACCESSORY STRUCTURE / SHED 240 SFNEW CONSTRUCTIONNEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 2,580 SF - ATTACHED ADU 385 SF, UNDER SEPARATE MINISTERIAL PERMIT- ATTACHED GARAGE 507 SF OWNER:ROBERTO FLAMENCO14341 BROWNS LN, LOS GATOS, CA 95032(831) 566-9040 | ROBEFLAMENCO@YAHOO.COM ARCHITECT:GKW ARCHITECTS INC. 710 E. MCGLINCY LN. STE 109, CAMPBELL CA 95008 (408) 315-2125 | GORDONKWONG@GKWARCHITECTS.COM CIVIL ENGINEER:CIVIO CONSULTING | NGUYEN CAM1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE, SUITE E, SAN JOSE, CA 95121(408) 568-9212 | SNGCAM@YAHOO.COM STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:WESLEY LIU, ENGINEERING, INC.7246 SHARON DRIVE #0, SAN JOSE, CA 95129(408) 973-1839 | WESLEYLIU@YAHOO.COM TITLE 24 CONSULTANT:CARSTAIRS ENERGY INC. | TIMOTHY CARSTAIRS 2238 BAYVIEW HEIGHTS DRIVE SUITE E, LOS OSOS, CA 93402(805) 904-9048 | TITLE24@YAHOO.COM FIRE PROTECTION:SURE FIRE PROTECTION | TIM GERBER JR4141 PESTANA PLACE, FREMONT, CALIFORNIA 94538(510) 766-6679 | TIM@SUREFIREPROTECTION.COM WATER:SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY ELECTRICITY:PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC SANITATION:WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT PROJECT DIRECTORY FLAMENCO-MENDEZ RESIDENCE C A L I F O R N I AL O S G A T O S Sheet NumberSheet Name General G000General, Project Info & Site Plan, Proposed G001General, Notes & Site Plan, Existing G002General, Green Building Checklist 1 G003General, Green Building Checklist 2 G004General, Enlarged Site & Privacy Plan, Proposed G005General, Fire Analysis, Fire Flow Letter & AMMR G006General, Streetscape & Shadow / Sun Study Survey S1Survey, Boundary & Topographic Map Civil C1Civil, Town Notes, General Notes, Legend & Abbreviations C2Civil, Blueprint for a Clean Bay C3Civil, Demolition Plan C4Civil, Site Plan C5Civil, Grading & Drainage Plan C6Civil, Building Cross Sections C7Civil, Utility Plan C8Civil, Erosion Control Plan C9Civil, Erosion Control Details C10Civil, Construction Management Plan Architecture A100Architectural, Floor Plan & Existing Conditions A101Architectural, 1st Floor Plan, Proposed A102Architectural, 2nd Floor Plan, Proposed A103Architectural, Roof Plan, Existing & Proposed, & Area Diagram A200Architectural, Elevations, Existing & Proposed A300Architectural, Sections, Proposed A400Architectural, Exterior Material Specifications BUILDING MODEL PROJECT INFORMATION VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX 1" = 10'-0"1 Site Plan, Proposed TABLE OF BUILDING DISTANCES FROM PROPERTY LINE REAR - WEST EXISTING - BUILDING SETBACK PROPOSED - BUILDING SETBACK 12' - 6" 20' - 0" LEFT - SOUTHRIGHT - NORTHFRONT - EAST 39' - 4 1/2" 26' - 10 1/2" 15' - 10" 8' - 3"28' - 11" 63 - 2" North 0'5' 10' 20'40' 1" = 30'-0"3 Downspout & Splashblock Diagram TABLE OF PROPOSED PERVIOUS AND IMPERVIOUS TOTAL AREA POST-PROJECT (SF) IMPERVIOUS AREA TTL NEW & REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA 2,896 6,606 NEW PROPOSED AREA (SF)EXISTING AREA (SF) 3,069 6,433 0 6,433 2,896 TOTAL SITE AREA 9,502 SFTOTAL SITE AREA DISTURBED= 9,502 SF REPLACED PERVIOUS AREA173 2,896 PARKING BREAKDOWN:EXISTING (G001) (E) 2 EXTERIOR SPACES PROPOSED (G000)(P) 2 INTERIOR SPACES, GARAGE Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 4 Staff Tech Rev #3 2025.01.06 5 Staff Tech Rev #4 2025.02.06 • ••••• 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE APPLICABLE CODES THIS RESIDENCE WILL COMPLY WITH THE TOWN’S ALL ELECTRIC APPLIANCE, ELECTRIC VEHICLE AND ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN CODE A SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR THE PV SYSTEM THAT IS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE PERFORMANCE OR PRESCRIPTIVE STANDARDS. THE SEPARATE PV SYSTEM PERMIT MUST BE FINALED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY • •••• 2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE 2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODETOWN OF LOS GATOS MUNICIPAL CODEALL OTHER STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS 1.2. 3. 4.5. 6.7. 8. 9. 10. 11. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DUST CONTROL AND INSURING AREA ADJACENT TO WORK IS LEFT IN A CLEAN CONDITION.UTILIZE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S), AS REQUIRED BY THE STATE WATER RESOURCES BOARD, FOR ANY ACTIVITY, WHICH DISTURBS SOIL.CONTRACTOR SHALL SCRAPE ALL SMOKE OR FIRE DAMAGED MEMBERS CLEAN. ANY FRAMING MEMBERS THAT LOSE MORE THAN 1/16" OF MATERIAL PER SURFACE MUST BE REPLACED OR REPAIRED. SMOKE DAMAGED MEMBERS MUST BE CLEANED AND SEALED.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TEST, INSPECTIONS AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS PER TOWN OF LOS GATOS.OPERABLE SMOKE DETECTORS MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO RE-OCCUPY DWELLINGS PER TOWN OF LOS GATOS SECTION 17.20.540PLUMBING & ELECTRICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FOR METER RELEASE.ADDITIONS, ALTERATIONS OR REPAIRS SHALL CONFORM TO ANY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE WITHOUT REQUIRING THE EXISTING BUILDING OR STRUCTURE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UBC, PROVIDED THE ADDITION ALTERATION OR REPAIR CONFORMS TO THAT REQUIRED FOR NEW BUILDING OR STRUCTURE PER CBC SECTION 3403.2.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY SIZE & LOCATION OF ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL NEW UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND/ OR UPGRADE EXISTING AS REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND APPROVALS AS REQUIRED BY GOVERNING AGENCIES.CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY DEMOLITION PERMITS AND APPROVALS INCLUDING ASBESTOS ABATEMENT AS PART OF THE BASE BIDPER CGBSC 301.1.1 - RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS UNDERGOING PERMITTED ALTERATIONS, ADDITIONS OR IMPROVEMENTS SHALL REPLACE NONCOMPLIANT PLUMBING FIXTURES WITH WATER-CONSERVING PLUMBING FIXTURES. PLUMBING FIXTURES REPLACEMENT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ISSUNACE OF A CERTIFICATE OF FINAL COMPLETION, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR FINAL PERMIT APPROVAL BY THE LOCAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT.PER CGBSC 301.1.1 - WHERE ADDITION OR ALTERATION INCREASED THE BUILDING'S CONDITIONED AREA, VOLUME, OR SIZE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF CALGreen CHAPTER 4 SHALL APPLY ONLY TO AND WITHIN THE SPECIFIC AREA OF THE ADDITION OR ALTERATION. SITE PLAN & PUBLIC WORK NOTES TABLE OF EXISTING TREES CONDITION COAST REDWOOD (SEQUOIA SEMPERVIRENS) PLUM (PRUNUS DOMESTICA) FAIR GOOD CANOPY DIA. (FT)TRUNK DIA. (IN)I.D. NUMBER 167 168 35 2010 30 COAST REDWOOD (SEQUOIA SEPERVIRENS) PECAN (CARYA ILLINOINENSIS) STATUS LOCATION 169 170 8, 8 20 20 30 FAIR FAIR PROTECTED EXEMPT EXEMPT PROTECTED ADJ. PROP ADJ. PROP ADJ. PROP SUBJECT PROP 5 EXHIBIT 12Page 271 CONCRETE PAD DETAIL REFERENCE Name ElevationDATUM REFERENCEX#OR#KEY NOTE BUILDING SECTION #WALL TYPE INTERIOR ELEVATION APPROXIMATE LINE OF WORK 101ADOOR TYPE 1 REVISION A00WINDOW TYPE REMOVE ROOM TAG1.00 S200 49' 55"W PL 112.49'N660 08' 47"W PL 88.27' N200 48' 00"E PL 103.00'S720 18' 07"E PL 88.34'RIGHT OF WAY5' - 0"FRONT SETBACK25' - 0"RIGHT OF WAY FRONT YARD REAR YARD BROWNS LN 22 (E) SHED 240 SF TO BE DEMOLISHED G E OHOH(E) SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 832 SF TO BE DEMOLISHED #169 SIDE S.B. 8' - 0"REAR SETBACK20' - 0"SIDE S.B. 8' - 0"PL TO EXT. FINISH10' - 6 1/2"PL TO EXT. FINISH12' - 6 1/2"39' - 4 1/2"PL. TO EXT FINISH 15' - 10 1/2" 63' - 2" 30' - 6" #170 #168 #167 TOTAL WIDTH OF I&E.E. & P.U.E.10' - 0"I&E.E & P.U.E.5' - 0"WM WEDGEWOOD AVEW SS SITE PLAN, EXISTING, KEYNOTES 1 1. NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS OF UTILITIES, SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS, STRUCTURES PRIOR TO START OF WORK.IN EVENT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING PRIOR TO STARTING EACH PORTION OF THE WORK. CONCRETE GRASS PROPERTY LINE BUILDING FOOTPRINT SETBACK CENTERLINE OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED OH 2 CONCRETE WALKWAY UTILITY POLE GAS METER, SERVICE TO BE RELOCATED ELECTRICAL PANEL, TO BE UPGRADED SITE PLAN, EXISTING, KEYNOTES G E ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:42:09 PM G001 General, Notes &Site Plan, ExistingGeneral, Notes & Site Plan, ExistingAABVACADADDLAFFASPH B BITUMBKGBLDGBMBRBURBDRBW CCABCBCEMCFCJCLCTLCLGCONC CPT DDDR E(E)EELECEPEXT FFDNFHFIN FFFLFLUORFOCFOFFOSFRFSFSLFTGFURR ABOVEASPHALT CONCRETEAREA DRAINADDITIONALABOVE FINISH FLOORASPHALT BITUMINOUSBACKING BUILDINGBEAMBACKER RODBUILT-UP-ROOFBEDROOMBOTTOM OF WALL CABINETCATCH BASINCEMENTCUBIC FEETCONTROL JOINT CLOSETCENTERLINECEILINGCONCRETECARPET DECKDRAIN EXISTINGEAST ELECTRICALELECTRICAL PANELEXTERIOR FOUNDATIONFIRE HYDRANTFINISHFINISH FLOORFLOW LINEFLUORESCENTFACE OF CONCRETEFACE OF FINISH FACE OF STUDFIRE RATEDFLOOR SINKFIRE SPRINKLERFOOTINGFURRINGGGALVGCGLGNDGWBGYP HHDBDHDRHDWRHDWDHTRHVAC IININCANDINSULINTINV JJSTJT KKKITKP LLOCLT MMBMDFMECHMEMBMETMHMSC MTDMTL GALVANIZEDGENERAL CONTRACTORGLASS GROUNDGYPSUM WALL BOARDGYSUM HARDBOARDHEADERHARDWAREHARDWOODHEATERHEATING, VENT. & A.C. INCHINCANDESCENTINSULATIONINTERIORINVERT JOISTJOINT KIPSKITCHENKICK PLATE LOCATIONLIGHT MACHINE BOLTMEDIUM DENSITY FIBERBOARDMECHANICALMEMBRANEMETALMANHOLEMISCELLANEOUS MOUNTEDMETAL N(N)NNICNOMNPNRNTS O OAOCODOFCI OFOI PPENNPERFPERPPLPLPLASPLBGPLWDPNLPOC PPPREFABPSFPSIPTDPTRPTRWDQ QQTY R RRADRCPRDREFREFLREFRRETREGRO NEWNORTHNOT IN CONTRACTNOMINALNO PARKINGNON-RATEDNOT TO SCALE OVERALL ON CENTEROUTSIDE DIAMETER/ DIMENSIONOWNER FURNISHED CONTRACTOR INSTALLEDOWNER FURNISHED OWNER INSTALL PENETRATIONPERFORATEDPERPENDICULARPLATEPROPERTY LINEPLASTER PLUMBINGPLYWOODPANELPOINT OF CONNECTIONPERMEABLE PAVERSPREFABRICATEDPOUNDS PER SQUARE FOOTPOUNDS PER SQUARE INCHPAINTEDPRESSURE TREATEDPRESSURE TREATED WOOD QUANTITY REVEAL OR RISERRADIUSREINFORCED CONCRETE PIPEROOF DRAINREFERENCEREFLECTEDREFRIGERATORRETAINING OR RETARDANTREGISTERROUGH OPENING ABBREVIATIONS S SCDSCHDSDSECTSEDSFSHRSHTSHTGSIMSJSL SLDSMSMDSOFSOGSPDSPEC/SSQSSSSDSTCSTDSTL STORSTRLSY TT&B T&GTCTOCTOPTOSTRDTW UULUTIL V VCPVERTVTR W WWCWDWDWW/OWPWPTWR SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS SCHEDULESTORM DRAINSECTIONSEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGSSQUARE FOOT OR FEET SHOWERSHEETSHEATHINGSIMILARSEISMIC JOINTSEALANTSEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGSSHEET METALSEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGSSOFFITSLAB ON GRADESEE PLUMBING DRAWINGSSPECIFICATION SQUARESANITARY SEWERSEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGSSOUND TRANSMISSION COEFFICIENTSTANDARDSTEELSTORAGESTRUCTURALSQUARE YARD TOP AND BOTTOMTONGUE AND GROOVETOP OF CURBTOP OF CONCRETETOP OF PAVINGTOP OF STEELTREADTOP OF WALL UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIESUTILITIES VITREOUS CLAY PIPEVERTICALVENT THROUGH ROOF WEST OR WIDTHWATER CLOSETWOODWINDOWWITHOUTWATER PROOFWORKING POINTWATER RESISTANT GRAPHIC SYMBOLS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.17. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SUBCONTRACTORS TO CHECK AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS AND MAKE KNOWN ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING THEIR WORK.ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO NATIONAL, CITY, STATE, LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES WHICH MAY BE IN EFFECT. ALL MATERIALS, INSTALLATION PROCEDURES AND PLANS SHALL BE APPROVED BY ALL APPLICABLE CODE ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION, AND IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR;S RESPONSIBILITY TO OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND APPROVALS FOR THE WORK.THESE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED FOR USE IN A NEGOTIATED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AND THEREFORE, MAY NOT SPECIFICALLY DETAIL OR SPECIFY MATERIAL AND / OR MANUFACTURERS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL SAMPLES AND OR CUTS AS REQUIRED TO ASSIST OWNER OR HIS AGENT IN MAKING MATERIAL SELECTIONS. FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTIMATING, THE CONTRACTORS SHALL USE THE MATERIALS SELECTED BY THE OWNER, OR IN ABSENCE OF SAME. SHALL PROVIDE AN ALLOWANCE AMOUNT AND SO CONDITION ANY COST ESTIMATE. ALL MATERIALS SPECIFIED IN THESE DRAWINGS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN SUCH ESTIMATE.NO GUARANTEE OF QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION IS IMPLIED OR INTENDED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS, AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY OR ALL CONSTRUCTION DEFICIENCIES.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL HOLD HARMLESS, INDEMNIFY AND DEFEND THE ARCHITECT FROM ANY ACTION INITIATED BY THE OWNER OR ANY SUBSEQUENT OWNERS FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFICIENCIES, MODIFICATIONS OR SUCH CONDITIONS WHICH MAY BE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ARCHITECT.ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH AND RECORD THE CONDITIONS OF ALL EXISTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING PAVED AREAS. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE KNOWN ALL EXISTING DAMAGED OR DISREPAIR ITEMS AND CONDITIONS THAT MAY WORSEN DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION. ALL ITEMS IN GOOD CONDITION SHALL BE MAINTAIN IN THEIR PRESENT CONDITION AND ANY REPAIR OR DAMAGE WHICH OCCURS DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.CONTRACTOR SHALL THOROUGHLY EXAMINE THE SITE AND SATISFY HIM OR HERSELF AS OF THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE WORK IS TO BE PERFORMED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AT THE SITE ALL MEASUREMENTS AFFECTING HIS OR HER WORK AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF SAME. NO EXTRA COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE EXPENSES DUE TO HIS OR HER NEGLECT TO EXAMINE OR FAILURE TO DISCOVER CONDITIONS WHICH MAY AFFECT HIS OR HER WORK.ALL WORK SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, ARCHITECTURAL, FIRE PROTECTION AND LIGHTING DRAWINGS APPLYING TO THIS PROJECT PRIOR TO SUBMITTING SHOP DRAWINGS FOR FABRICATION APPROVAL.IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WITH ALL INVOLVED PARTIES AND PREPARE SHOP DRAWINGS.ALL NEW INTERIOR PAINT COLOR, FLOOR, WALLS AND CEILING FINISHES SHALL BE SELECTED BY OWNER AT THE TIME WHEN IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM ALL CUTTING AND PATCHING REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE WORK OR TO MAKE ITS PARTS FIT TOGETHER PROPERLY WITHOUT COMPROMISING THE QUALITY OF THE WORK.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADEQUATE BRACING, SHORING, AND PROTECTING ALL WORK DURING CONSTRUCTION, AGAINST DAMAGE, BREAKAGE, COLLAPSE, DISTORTIONS, AND OFF ALIGNMENTS ACCORDING TO CODES AND STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE.ALL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST ADOPTED CITY STANDARDS. THE STORING OF GOOD AND MATERIALS ON SIDEWALK AND/ OR STREET SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED UNLESS THE CONTRACTOR HAS APPLIED AND SECURED A SPECIAL PERMIT WHICH ALLOW SUCH STORAGE TO BE PLACED.OWNERSHIP OF DRAWINGS: THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF GKW ARCHITECTS -- GORDON WONG, ARCHITECT, THE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE EXCEPT AS APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECT.LIMITATION OF THE WORK: THE LIMITS OF THE WORK ARE ESTABLISHED BY THE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING TRADESMEN WITH THESE LIMITS.ANY EXISTING TO REMAIN SHALL BE IN GOOD CONDITION PRIOR TO THE PLANNING FINAL INSPECTION.NEW LANDSCAPING SHALL COMPLY WITH STATE WATER EFFICIENCY STANDARDS. GENERAL NOTES 1" = 10'-0"1 Site Plan, Existing 0'5' 10' 20'40' TABLE OF EXISTING TREES CONDITION COAST REDWOOD (SEQUOIA SEMPERVIRENS) PLUM (PRUNUS DOMESTICA) FAIR GOOD CANOPY DIA. (FT)TRUNK DIA. (IN)I.D. NUMBER 167 168 35 2010 30 COAST REDWOOD (SEQUOIA SEPERVIRENS) PECAN (CARYA ILLINOINENSIS) STATUS LOCATION 169 170 8, 8 20 20 30 FAIR FAIR PROTECTED EXEMPT EXEMPT PROTECTED ADJ. PROP ADJ. PROP ADJ. PROP SUBJECT PROP North Revision Schedule Number Description Date 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 Page 272 ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:42:18 PM G002 General, GreenBuilding Checklist1General, Green Building Checklist 1Revision Schedule Number Description Date Page 273 ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:42:27 PM G003 General, GreenBuilding Checklist2General, Green Building Checklist 2Revision Schedule Number Description Date Page 274 8' - 0"PER PLAN1' - 0"LATTICE1' - 0"6' - 0" OR 3' - 0" (AS INDICATED ON PLAN)4X4 POST W/ MITER CUT 2X10 PRESSURE TREATED KICKER W/ LAG SCREWS 1X8 BOARDS W/ 1" OVERLAP (8",6" PATTERN) 1X2 LATTICE (2) 1X2 SANDWICHED TOP STRINGER 2X4 TOP CAP POSTS SET IN CONCRETE 12" X 24" W/ MIN. 6" GRAVEL FOOT & BITUTHENE WRAP (2) 1X2 SANDWICHED BOTTOM STRINGER 1.2. NOTES: ALL MATERIAL TO BE ROUGH CON-HEART REDWOOD UNLESS STATEDFASTENERS TO BE GALVANIZED SCREWS FOR STRINGERS & GALVANIZED FINISHING NAILS FOR NAILING & FENCE BOARDS PROPERTY LINELINE O F S I G H T30.00°REQUIRED REAR SETBACK 20' - 0"SETBACK LINE6' - 0"14341 BROWNS LANE 2ND FLOOR BALCONY SETBACK 31' - 2" EXISTING PLUM TREERAILING46" BUILDING EXTERIOR SETBACK 28' - 3 1/2" 5 A103 PL 148.89' PL 169.75'WEDGEWOOD AVEPL 150.00' PL 150.00' PL 119.75'PL 53.50'PL 92.00'PL 70.00'PL 53.50'PL 113.00'PL 114.00'PL 67.21'PL 118.75' 14331 BROWNS LANE409-14-036 1 STORY14341 BROWNS LANE 409-14-035 14340 BROWNS LANE409-14-0101 STORY 14330 BROWNS LANE409-14-0111 STORY 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE409-14-013 2 STORY 17311 WEDGEWOOD AVE409-14-0141 STORY 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE409-14-0091 STORY 14344 RINCONADA DR409-14-0191 STORY 14330 RINCONADA DR409-14-0201 STORY PL 102.99' BROWNS LN20' - 0"20' - 0" CURB TO C U R B 30' - 4" 14361 BROWNS LANE409-14-0351 STORY BROWNS LANE10' - 0"4 G004 FRONT SB25' - 0"SIDE SB 8' - 0"REAR SB20' - 0"SIDE SB 8' - 0" DIST PL 11' - 5" FRONT S B 25' - 0"REAR SB20' - 0"SIDE SB 8' - 0"FRONT SB25' - 0"DIST PL 8' - 0" FRONT S B 25' - 0"REAR SB 20' - 0"SIDE SB8' - 0"SIDE SB8' - 0"REAR SB 20' - 0"SIDE SB8' - 0"SIDE SB8' - 0"REAR SB20' - 0"REAR SB20' - 0"WM W WM WM WM SSSSWSSWSSWSSW SS W C SSE G UEUEUE UE SS2 G004 Sim FRONT SB25' - 0"FRONT SB25' - 0"SIDE SB 8' - 0" SIDE SB 8' - 0"SIDE SB 8' - 0" SIDE SB 8' - 0" SIDE SB 8' - 0" SIDE SB 8' - 0"SIDE SB 8' - 0" REAR SB 20' - 0" FRONT S B 25' - 0" #169 #170 #167 #168 OHOH213' - 3/4"TO EXTERIOR WALL OF RESIDENCE195' - 1/2"TO EXTERIOR WALL OF RESIDENCE3 FT FENCE6 FT FENCE6 FT FENCE 3 FT FENCE6 FT FENCE6 FT FENCE PROPERTY LINE BUILDING FOOTPRINT SETBACK CENTERLINE (P) UNDERGROUND UTILITIES (E) WATER LINE (E) SEWER LINE (E) OVERHEAD LINE, TO BE REMOVED (E) SEWER MANHOLE (E) WATER METER, TO BE RELOCATED UE (N) ELECTRICAL PANEL, 200 AMP GAS METER, RELOCATED (TO BE CONFIRMED W/ BLDG DEPT.) RELOCATED WATER METER, REFER TO C4 CLEANOUT, SEE CIVIL PLANS SHEET C7 ENLARGED SITE PLAN, KEYNOTES ENLARGED SITE PLAN, LEGEND E G W C W SS SS WM OH 14344 RINCONADA DREXTERIOR WALL238' - 11 1/2" BALCONY TO EXTERIOR WALL OF RESIDENCE ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:42:32 PM G004 General, EnlargedSite & PrivacyPlan, Proposed General, Enlarged Site & Privacy Plan, Proposed 1/2" = 1'-0"2 Typ. Fence Detail 1/8" = 1'-0"4Sight-line & Privacy Digram - Balcony 1/16" = 1'-0"1Neighborhood Plan - Utilities & Setbacks North0'8' 16' 32'64' 0'1' 2'4'0'4' 8' 16'32' Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 4 Staff Tech Rev #3 2025.01.06 5 Staff Tech Rev #4 2025.02.06 5 Page 275 PL 88.27'PL 88.35'PL 102.98' PL 112.51'PL 89.22'PL 148.89' PL 169.75'WEDGEWOOD AVEPL 150.00' PL 150.00'PL 60.50'PL 68.00'PL 132.00' PL 119.75' PL 119.75'PL 60.50'PL 53.50'PL 92.00'PL 70.00'PL 53.50'PL 113.00'PL 114.00'PL 108.00'PL 67.21'PL 118.75' PL 138.30' PL 54.00'PL 94.00' PL 81.19'PL 81.47'PL 81.87' 14331 BROWNS LANE409-14-036 1 STORY14341 BROWNS LANE409-14-035 14340 BROWNS LANE409-14-0101 STORY 14330 BROWNS LANE409-14-0111 STORY 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 409-14-013 2 STORY 17311 WEDGEWOOD AVE 409-14-0141 STORY 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE409-14-009 1 STORY 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 409-14-0082 STORY 14344 RINCONADA DR409-14-0191 STORY 14330 RINCONADA DR409-14-0201 STORY 14314 RINCONADA DR 409-14-0412 STORYPL 65.50'PL 266.68'PL 266.68'PL 262.93'PL 112.52'PL 88.27'PL 102.99'PL 88.35'BROWNS LN153'82'15'65'32' 97' 17323 WEDGEWOOD AVE409-14-0151 STORY 100' - 11" 20' - 0" 2 0' - 0" CURB TO C U R B30' - 4" G005 2 Sim 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE1 STORY BROWNS LANE10' - 0"LEGEND FIRE HOSE PULL FIRE HYDRANT FIRE TURNAROUND PER CFC SEC. 503 & SCCFD SDS D-1 00 ' 00 "14341 BROWNS LANE S200 49' 55"W PL 112.49'N660 08' 47"W PL 88.27' N200 48' 00"E PL 103.00'S720 18' 07"E PL 88.34' RIGHT OF WAY BROWNS LN12' - 0"20' - 0"40' - 0"50' - 0"R 2 0 ' - 0 " 70' - 0" BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA SHALL SUPPORT 75,000 LBS TURNAROUND SHALL BE UNOBSTRUCTED 6' - 11"ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:42:39 PM G005 General, FireAnalysis, FireFlow Letter &AMMR General, Fire Analysis, Fire Flow Letter & AMMRADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS 14330 BROWNS BUILDING HEIGHT (FT) 17 FT # OF STORIES 1 14340 BROWNS 15 FT 1 14331 BROWNS 16 FT 1 ADDRESS COMMENTS 14341 BROWNS 28.7 FT 2 26.5 FT 217265 WEDGEWOOD 1" = 30'-0"1 Site Analysis & Neighborhood Plan 17275 WEDGEWOOD 17291 WEDGEWOOD 17311 WEDGEWOOD 14.5 FT 1 28 FT 2 21 FT 1 14314 RINCONADA 29 FT 2 14330 RINCONADA 16.5 FT 1 14344 RINCONADA 16.5 FT 1 *PROPERTIES IN GRAY ARE GIVEN LESS EMPHASIS DUE TO PROXIMITY TO SITE 1/16" = 1'-0"2 Fire Turnaround 0'8' 16' 32'64'North Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 Page 276 7:27 PM June 21 4:53 AM 9:00 AM W S E N 14331 BROWNS LANE 14330 BROWNS LANE 14340 BROWNS LANE 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 7:27 PM June 21 4:53 AM 12:00 PM W S E N 14331 BROWNS LANE 14330 BROWNS LANE 14340 BROWNS LANE 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 7:27 PM June 21 4:53 AM 3:00 PM W S E N 14331 BROWNS LANE 14330 BROWNS LANE 14340 BROWNS LANE 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 4:49 PM December 217:23 AM 9:00 AM W S E N 14331 BROWNS LANE 14330 BROWNS LANE 14340 BROWNS LANE 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS 4:49 PM December 217:23 AM 12:00 PM W S E N 14331 BROWNS LANE 14330 BROWNS LANE 14340 BROWNS LANE 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 4:49 PM December 217:23 AM 3:00 PM W S E N 14331 BROWNS LANE 14330 BROWNS LANE 14340 BROWNS LANE 17265 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE GRADE0' - 0" (E) T.O.P9' - 4" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" (E) T.O.R17' - 0 3/32"PROPOSED HEIGHT28' - 7"17291 WEDGEWOOD28' - 0"17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 14341 BROWNS LN 14331 BROWNS LN Max Bldg Height30' - 0" 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE UNDER CONSTRUCTION 2-STORY RESIDENCE @ 17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE 17291 WEDGEWOOD13' - 5 1/2"EXISTING ELEVATION17311 WEDGEWOOD20' - 9"14331 BROWNS16' - 0 1/2"GRADE0' - 0" (E) T.O.P9' - 4" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" (E) T.O.R17' - 0 3/32" Max Bldg Height30' - 0"PROPOSED HEIGHT28' - 7"14330 BROWNS LN14340 BROWNS LN 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE PROPOSED OUTLINE OF REAR-EAST ELEVATION @ 14341 BROWNS LN 17275 WEDGEWOOD14' - 3"14330 BROWNS17'-2 1/2"EXISTING ELEVATION14340 BROWNS 14' - 10 1/2"14361 BROWNS LN17291 WEDGEWOOD AVE (TAKEN FROM BROWNS LN)14331 BROWNS LN 14330 BROWNS LN 14340 BROWNS LN 17275 WEDGEWOOD AVE (TAKEN FROM WEDGEWOOD)ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:02 PM G006 General,Streetscape &Shadow / SunStudyGeneral, Streetscape & Shadow / Sun Study1 Summer Solstice Study, 9 AM2Summer Solstice Study, 12 PM3Summer Solstice Study, 3 PM 4 Winter Solstice Study, 9 AM5Winter Solstice Study, 12 PM6Winter Solstice Study, 3 PM 1/16" = 1'-0"7Streetscape, Along Subject Property, West 1/16" = 1'-0"8Streetscape, Across Subject Property, East ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS 14330 BROWNS BUILDING HEIGHT (FT) 17 FT # OF STORIES 1 14340 BROWNS 15 FT 1 14331 BROWNS 16 FT 1 ADDRESS COMMENTS 14341 BROWNS 28.6 FT 2 26.5 FT 217265 WEDGEWOOD 17275 WEDGEWOOD 17291 WEDGEWOOD 14.5 FT 1 28 FT 2 Revision Schedule Number Description Date 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 Page 277 Email: koenw@wilsonlandsurveys.com www.wilsonlandsurveys.com Page 278 SCOPE OF WORK1.GRADE DRIVEWAY, HOUSE SITE2.PAVE DRIVEWAY & WALKWAY3.SEED/LANDSCAPE ALL DISTURBED AREASSHEET INDEXC1.TOWN NOTES, GENERAL NOTES,LEGEND & ABBREVIATIONSC2.BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEETC3. DEMOLITION PLANC4.GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANC5.BUILDING CROSS SECTIONS AND IMPERVIOUS AREA EXHIBITSC6.EROSION CONTROL PLANC7.EROSION CONTROL DETAILSC8.CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLANABAGGREGATE BASEACASPHALT CONCRETEA/CAIR CONDITIONERADAREA DRAINAEANCHOR EASEMENTBB BUBBLER BOXBLDGBUILDINGBSL BUILDING SETBACK LINEBW BACK OF WALKBWL BOTTOM OF WALLCATVCABLE TELEVISIONCEDCOBBLE ROCK ENERGY DISSIPATORCG CURB & GUTTERCLCENTERLINECLFCHAIN LINK FENCECO SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTCOP CURB OPENINGCONC CONCRETECSDCOUNTY STANDARD DETAILDE DRAINAGE EMITTERDI DRAINAGE INLETDOCDOCUMENTDS DOWNSPOUTDWYDRIVEWAYEAEASEMENTELEV ELEVATIONEM ELECTRIC METERE(OH) ELECTRIC OVERHEADE(UG) ELECTRIC UNDERGROUNDEP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEVELECTRIC VAULTEX EXISTINGFC FACE OF CURBFD FOUNDFF FINISH ELEVATION OF SUBFLOORFG GROUND FINISH GRADEFH FIRE HYDRANTFLFLOW LINEFMFORCED MAINFSFIRE SERVICEFTFEETG GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION/GAS LINEGPEGENERAL PUBLIC EASEMENTGSBGRADING SETBACKGM GAS METERHP HI POINTIEEINGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENTINV INVERTIPIRON PIPEJPJOINT POLELIP LIP OF GUTTERLRDALEAST RESTRICTIVEDEVELOPMENT AREALS LANDSCAPED AREAMAX MAXIMUMMBOOK OF MAPS AT PAGEMHMANHOLEMIN MINIMUMN&S NAIL AND SILVERNTS NOT TO SCALEOH OVERHEADOG ORIGINAL GROUNDOSOFFSETPPAVEMENT FINISH GRADEPA PATIOPAD PAD ELEVATIONFDCFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONPL PROPERTY LINEPEE PEDESTRIAN EQUESTRIAN EAPERF PERFORATEDPMPARCEL MAPPP POWER POLE PROP PROPOSEDPSDEPRIVATE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTPSE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTPUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTPVMT PAVEMENTPVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDER RADIUSRW RETAINING WALLREROAD EASEMENTREM REMOVER/W RIGHT OF WAYSBSETBACKSD STORM DRAINSDE STORM DRAIN EASEMENTSE SLOPE EASEMENTSS SANITARY SEWER/LATERALSSE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENTSTA STATIONSTD STANDARD DETAILSW SIDEWALKTOB TOP OF BANKTC TOP OF CURBTEMP TEMPORARYTOC TOP OF COVERTOETOE OF BANKTG TOP OF GRATETPF TREE PROTECTION FENCETW TOP OF WALLTYP TYPICALUEUTILITY EASEMENTVG VALLEY GUTTERW WATERWCE WIRE CLEARANCE EASEMENTWEWATER EASEMENTWLK WALKWAYWM WATER METERWOE WIRE OVERHANG EASEMENTWV WATER VALVEWVSDWEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICTOF SANTA CLARA COUNTYABBREVIATIONSGRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE, LOS GATOS, CA 95032GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. .ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 409-14-035TOWN OF LOS GATOS STANDARD GRADING NOTES1.ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, THEADOPTED CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND THE LATEST EDITION OF THE STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION EXCEPT AS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE ON THESEPLANS AND DETAILS.2.NO WORK MAY BE STARTED ON-SITE WITHOUT AN APPROVED GRADING PLAN AND A GRADINGPERMIT ISSUED BY THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTLOCATED AT 41 MILES AVENUE, LOS GATOS, CA 95030.3.A PRE-JOB MEETING SHALL BE HELD WITH THE TOWN ENGINEERING INSPECTOR FROM THE PARKSAND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ANY WORK BEING DONE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLCALL THE INSPECTIONS LINE AT (4080 399-5771 AT LEAST FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS PRIOR TOANY GRADING OR ONSITE WORK. THIS MEETING SHOULD INCLUDE:a.A DISCUSSION OF THE PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, WORKING HOURS, SITEMAINTENANCE AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION MATTERS;b.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN WRITING THAT CONTRACTOR AND APPLICANT HAVE READ ANDUNDERSTAND THE PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND WILL MAKE CERTAIN THAT ALLPROJECT SUB-CONTRACTORS HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THEM PRIOR TO COMMENCINGWORK AND THAT A COPY OF THE PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WILL BE POSTED ONSITE AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION.4.APPROVAL OF PLANS DOES NOT RELEASE THE DEVELOPER OF THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THECORRECTION OF MISTAKES, ERRORS, OR OMISSIONS CONTAINED THEREIN. IF, DURING THE COURSEOF CONSTRUCTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, PUBLIC INTEREST AND SAFETY REQUIRES AMODIFICATION OR DEPARTURE FROM THE TOWN SPECIFICATIONS OR THESE IMPROVEMENT PLANS,THE TOWN ENGINEER SHALL HAVE FULL AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE SUCH MODIFICATION ORDEPARTURE AND TO SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH THE SAME IS TO BE MADE.5.APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN APPLIES ONLY TO THE GRADING, EXCAVATION, PLACEMENT, ANDCOMPACTION OF NATURAL EARTH MATERIALS. THIS APPROVAL DOES NOT CONFER ANY RIGHTSOF ENTRY TO EITHER PUBLIC PROPERTY OR THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF OTHERS AND DOES NOTCONSTITUTE APPROVAL OF ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENTS.6.EXCAVATED MATERIAL SHALL BE PLACED IN THE FILL AREAS DESIGNATED OR SHALL BE HAULEDAWAY FROM THE SITE TO BE DISPOSED OF AT APPROVED LOCATION(S).7.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE OR CONTRACTOR TO IDENTIFY, LOCATE ANDPROTECT ALL UNDERGROUND FACILITIES. PERMITTEE OR CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY USA(UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT) AT 1-800-227-2600 A MINIMUM OF FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURSBUT NOT MORE THAN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING ALL WORK.8.ALL GRADING SHALL BE PERFORMED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDSESTABLISHED BY THE AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR AIRBORNE PARTICULATES.9.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS, CODES, RULESAND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK IDENTIFIED ON THESE PLANS. THESE SHALL INCLUDE,WITHOUT LIMITATION, SAFETY AND HEALTH RULES AND REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED BY ORPURSUANT TO THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OR ANY OTHER APPLICABLE PUBLICAUTHORITY.10.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE QUALIFIED SUPERVISION ON THE JOB SITE AT ALLTIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION.11.HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROLS SHALL BE SET AND CERTIFIED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOROR REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER QUALIFIED TO PRACTICE LAND SURVEYING, FOR THE FOLLOWINGITEMS:a.RETAINING WALL: TOP OF WALL ELEVATIONS AND LOCATIONS (ALL WALLS TO BE PERMITTEDSEPARATELY AND APPLIED FOR AT THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS BUILDING DIVISION).b.TOE AND TOP OF CUT AND FILL SLOPES.12.PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY PERMIT, THE APPLICANT'S SOILS ENGINEER SHALL REVIEW THEFINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS TO ENSURE THAT DESIGNS FOR FOUNDATIONS, RETAININGWALLS, SITE GRADING, AND SITE DRAINAGE ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONSAND THE PEER REVIEW COMMENTS. THE APPLICANT'S SOILS ENGINEER'S APPROVAL SHALL THENBE CONVEYED TO THE TOWN EITHER BY LETTER OR BY SIGNING THE PLANS.SOILS ENGINEER ______________________________________________REFERENCE REPORT NO.______________________, DATED______________LETTER NO. ____________, DATED ______________, 20 ___, SHALL BE THOROUGHLYCOMPLIED WITH. BOTH THE MENTIONED REPORT AND ALL UPDATES/ADDENDUMS/LETTERS AREHEREBY APPENDED AND MADE A PART OF THIS GRADING PLAN.13.DURING CONSTRUCTION, ALL EXCAVATIONS AND GRADING SHALL BE INSPECTED BY THEAPPLICANT'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST FORTY-EIGHT (48)HOURS BEFORE BEGINNING ANY GRADING. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE ON-SITE TO VERIFY THATTHE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ARE AS ANTICIPATED IN THE DESIGN-LEVEL GEOTECHNICAL REPORTAND/OR PROVIDE APPROPRIATE CHANGES TO THE REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS, AS NECESSARY.ALL UNOBSERVED AND/OR UNAPPROVED GRADING SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED UNDERSOILS ENGINEER OBSERVANCE (THE TOWN INSPECTOR SHALL BE MADE AWARE OF ANY REQUIREDCHANGES PRIOR TO WORK BEING PERFORMED).14.THE RESULTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED IN AN"AS-BUILT" LETTER/REPORT PREPARED BY THE APPLICANTS' SOILS ENGINEER AND SUBMITTEDFOR THE TOWN'S REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE BEFORE FINAL RELEASE OF ANY OCCUPANCY PERMITIS GRANTED.15.ALL PRIVATE AND PUBLIC STREETS ACCESSING PROJECT SITE SHALL BE KEPT OPEN AND IN ASAFE, DRIVABLE CONDITION THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. IF TEMPORARY CLOSURE IS NEEDED,THEN FORMAL WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS AND THE TOWN OF LOS GATOSPARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED AT LEAST ONE (1) WEEK INADVANCE OF CLOSURE AND NO CLOSURE SHALL BE GRANTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTENAPPROVAL OF THE TOWN. NO MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT SHALL BE STORED IN THE PUBLIC ORPRIVATE RIGHT-OF-WAY.16.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN FENCES, BARRIERS, LIGHTS AND SIGNS THATARE NECESSARY TO GIVE ADEQUATE WARNING AND/PROTECTION TO THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES.17.OWNER/APPLICANT: ________________________ PHONE: ________________18.GENERAL CONTRACTOR:______________________ PHONE: ________________19.GRADING CONTRACTOR: ______________________PHONE: ________________20.CUT: __________ CYEXPORT: ___________ CYFILL: __________ CYIMPORT: ___________ CY21.WATER SHALL BE AVAILABLE ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES DURING GRADING OPERATIONS TOPROPERLY MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL.22.THIS PLAN DOES NOT APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF TREES. APPROPRIATE TREE REMOVAL PERMITSAND METHODS OF TREE PRESERVATION SHALL BE REQUIRED. TREE REMOVAL PERMITS AREREQUIRED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF ALL PLANS.23.A TOWN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLICRIGHT-OF-WAY. A STATE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ANY WORK WITHIN STATERIGHT-OF-WAY (IF APPLICABLE). THE PERMITTEE AND/OR CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLECOORDINATING INSPECTION PERFORMED BY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.24.NO CROSS-LOT DRAINAGE WILL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT SATISFACTORY STORMWATERACCEPTANCE DEED/FACILITIES. ALL DRAINAGE SHALL BE DIRECTED TO THE STREET OR OTHERACCEPTABLE DRAINAGE FACILITY VIA A NON-EROSIVE METHOD AS APPROVED BY THE TOWNENGINEER.25.IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTOR AND/OR OWNER TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL DIRTTRACKED INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IS CLEANED UP ON A DAILY BASIS. MUD, SILT,CONCRETE AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SHALL NOT BE WASHED INTO THE TOWN'S STORMDRAINS.26.GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES SHALL BE OBSERVED AT ALL TIMES DURING THE COURSE OFCONSTRUCTION. SUPERINTENDENCE OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE DILIGENTLY PERFORMED BY APERSON OR PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO DO SO AT ALL TIMES DURING WORKING HOURS. THESTORING OF GOODS AND/OR MATERIALS ON THE SIDEWALK AND/OR THE STREET WILL NOT BEALLOWED UNLESS A SPECIAL PERMIT IS ISSUED BY THE ENGINEERING DIVISION. THE ADJACENTPUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE KEPT CLEAR OF ALL JOB RELATED DIRT AND DEBRIS AT THEEND OF THE DAY. FAILURE TO MAINTAIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCORDING TO THISCONDITION MAY RESULT IN PENALTIES AND/OR THE TOWN PERFORMING THE REQUIREDMAINTENANCE AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE.27.GRADING SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THEPROJECT STORM WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLAN AND/OR STORM WATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP), THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENTPROGRAM, NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) AND ANY OTHERPERMITS/REQUIREMENTS ISSUED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITYCONTROL BOARD. PLANS (INCLUDING ALL UPDATES) SHALL BE ON-SITE AT ALL TIMES. NODIRECT STORMWATER DISCHARGES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE ALLOWED ONTO TOWNSTREETS OR INTO THE PUBLIC STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WITHOUT TREATMENT BY AN APPROVEDSTORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION DEVICE OR OTHER APPROVED METHODS. MAINTENANCE OFPRIVATE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION DEVICES SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OFTHE OWNER. DISCHARGES OR CONNECTION WITHOUT TREATMENT BY AN APPROVED ANDADEQUATELY OPERATING STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION DEVICE OR OTHER APPROVEDMETHOD SHALL BE CONSIDERED A VIOLATION OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED PERMIT AND THE TOWNOF LOS GATOS STORMWATER ORDINANCE.TOWN OF LOS GATOS NPDES NOTES1.SEDIMENT FROM AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RETAINED ON SITE USINGSTRUCTURAL CONTROLS AS REQUIRED BY THE STATEWIDE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION STORMWATERPERMIT.2.STOCKPILES OF SOIL SHALL BE PROPERLY CONTAINED TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT TRANSPORT FROMTHE SITE TO STREETS, DRAINAGE FACILITIES OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES VIA RUNOFF, VEHICLETRACKING, OR WIND AS REQUIRED BY THE STATEWIDE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION STORMWATERPERMIT.3.APPROPRIATE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) FOR CONSTRUCTION-RELATED MATERIALS,WASTES, SPILL OR RESIDES SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED TO MINIMIZE TRANSPORT FROM THE SITETO STREETS, DRAINAGE FACILITIES, OR ADJOINING PROPERTY BY WIND OR RUNOFF AS REQUIREDBY THE STATEWIDE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT.4.RUNOFF FROM EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE WASHING SHALL BE CONTAINED AT CONSTRUCTION SITESAND MUST NOT BE DISCHARGED TO RECEIVING WATERS OR TO THE LOCAL STORM DRAIN SYSTEM.5.ALL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR AND SUBCONTRACTOR PERSONNEL ARE TO BE MADE AWARE OFTHE REQUIRED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING MEASURES FORTHE PROJECT SITE AND ANY ASSOCIATED CONSTRUCTION STAGING AREAS.6.AT THE END OF EACH DAY OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND WASTEMATERIALS SHALL BE COLLECTED AND PROPERLY DISPOSED IN TRASH OR RECYCLE BINS.7.CONSTRUCTION SITES SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN SUCH A CONDITION THAT A STORM DOES NOTCARRY WASTE OR POLLUTANTS OFF OF THE SITE. DISCHARGES OF MATERIAL OTHER THANSTORMWATER (NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES) ARE PROHIBITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY ANINDIVIDUAL NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT OR THESTATEWIDE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT. POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS INCLUDEBUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: SOLID OR LIQUID CHEMICAL SPILLS; WASTES FROM PAINTS, STAINS,SEALANTS, SOLVENTS, DETERGENTS, GLUES, LIME, PESTICIDES, HERBICIDES, FERTILIZERS, WOODPRESERVATIVES AND ASBESTOS FIBERS, PAINT FLAKES OR STUCCO FRAGMENTS; FUELS, OILS,LUBRICANTS, AND HYDRAULIC, RADIATOR OR BATTERY FLUIDS; CONCRETE AND RELATED CUTTINGOR CURING RESIDUES; FLOATABLE WASTES; WASTES FROM ENGINE/EQUIPMENT STEAM CLEANINGOR CHEMICAL DEGREASING; WASTES FROM STREET CLEANING; AND SUPERCHLORINATED POTABLEWATER FROM LINE FLUSHING AND TESTING. DURING CONSTRUCTION, DISPOSAL OF SUCHMATERIALS SHOULD OCCUR IN A SPECIFIED AND CONTROLLED TEMPORARY AREA ON-SITEPHYSICALLY SEPARATED FROM POTENTIAL STORMWATER RUNOFF, WITH ULTIMATE DISPOSAL INACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS.8.DISCHARGING CONTAMINATED GROUNDWATER PRODUCED BY DEWATERING GROUNDWATER THATHAS INFILTRATED INTO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE IS PROHIBITED. DISCHARGING OF CONTAMINATEDSOILS VIA SURFACE EROSION IS ALSO PROHIBITED. DISCHARGING NON-CONTAMINATEDGROUNDWATER PRODUCED BY DEWATERING ACTIVITIES REQUIRES A NATIONAL POLLUTANTDISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT FROM THE RESPECTIVE STATE REGIONAL WATERQUALITY CONTROL BOARD.302190(831) 566-9040(831) 566-9040(831) 566-9040VICINITY MAPNTSCONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHALL ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITE CONDITIONS DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY; THAT THIS REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BELIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS; AND THAT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD THE OWNER AND THE ENGINEER HARMLESS FROM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY, REAL OR ALLEGED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT, EXCEPTING FORLIABILITY ARISING FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE OWNER OR THE ENGINEER.SHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 TOWN NOTES, GENERAL NOTES, LEGEND AND ABBRIVIATIONSC11TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUITCABLE TELEVISION LINEROADSIDE SIGN & SIGN CODETREE/SHRUBFENCEPULL BOXLIGHTING CONDUITIRRIGATION LINETELEPHONE LINENATURAL GAS LINEELECTRICAL LINESTORM DRAIN LINESANITARY SEWER LINEWATER LINEOVERHEAD LINEPOWER POLESTREET LIGHTFIRE HYDRANTVALVEWATER METERxxxxxxxxR1WTDSOHGIRETVTWOHSGETVR1IRDSTANDARD MONUMENTACCURB AND GUTTERSIDEWALKCENTER LINEPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTBENCH MARKDRIVEWAYSTORM DRAIN INLETMANHOLEPLCLLTSTSLPROPOSEDEXISTINGEASEMENT LINExxxTWOHSGETVR1IRDTSLTO BE REMOVEDJPJPLEGENDLOT LINEWWELECTRICAL METEREEEJPCONTOUR LINES100100WRETAINING WALLPCCSTORM DRAIN MANHOLESANITARY SEWER MANHOLESANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTSCODSCODSCODPLPLCLDESCRIPTION20-1--579--0.5--0.50.5--1--128210.5-0.5--0.50.520-2--71302,8652,86502,8656,4369,501±9,501±3,0696,4326,432204TOTALTABLE OF PROPOSED EARTHWORK QUANTITIESAREA DESCRIPTIONBASEMENTLANDSCAPE/OUTDOORDRIVEWAY/ACCESSPOOLACCESSORY BUILDINGATTACHED GARAGEIMPORT/EXPORT (CY)MAX FILLDEPTH (FT)FILL (CY)MAX CUTHEIGHT (FT)CUT (CY)HOUSE FOOTPRINTTABLE OF PROPOSED PERVIOUS AND IMPERVIOUS AREASPERVIOUS AREATOTAL NEW & REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREAIMPERVIOUS AREATOTAL AREAPOST-PROJECT (SF)NEWREPLACEDPROPOSED AREA (SF)EXISTINGAREA (SF)TOTAL SITE AREA DISTURBED: SF(INCLUDING CLEARING, GRADING OR EXCAVATING)TOTAL SITE AREA:SFPROJECT DATA1PROJECT ADDRESS:14341 BROWNS LANE, LOS GATOS, CA 95032 2PROJECT OWNER:3ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER:409-14-0354EXISTING USE:RESIDENCE5EXISTING ZONING:R-1-86PROPOSED USE:RESIDENCE7PROPOSED ZONING:R-1-88SITE AREA:9,501 SF9APPLICANT/DEVELOPER:ROBERTO FLAMENCO10CONSULTANTS:A. ARCHITECT:B. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING:WESLEY LIU ENGINEERING, INC.7246 SHARON DRIVE #0, SAN JOSE, CA 95129(408) 973-1839C. SURVEYOR:D. CIVIL ENGINEER:CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE, SUITE E, SAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COMTEL (408) - 785 - 893811WATER SUPPLY:SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY12SANITARY SEWER DISPOSAL:WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT (WVSD)13GAS AND ELECTRIC:PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC14TELEPHONE:15CABLE:16STORM DRAIN:WEST VALLEY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM17FIRE PROTECTION:SANTA CLARA COUNTY CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT18DATUM:20BENCHMARK INFORMATIONROBERTO FLAMENCOBASIS OF BEARINGS19GKW ARCHITECTS710 E MCGLINCY LANE, SUITE 109, CAMPBELL, CA 95008TEL: 408-796-1845ROBERTO FLAMENCOROBERTO FLAMENCOROBERTO FLAMENCOGAS METERGGGWILSON LAND SURVEYS261 CARLTON COURT, LOS GATOSTEL: (408) 427-2279USAROFEBEYOU DIGCALLDUNORGREDNUSERVICEALERT 1-800-227-2600 1-800-227-2600Page 279 SHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEANBAYC22 Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)Construction projects are required to implement year-round stormwater BMPs.Materials, Waste, and Sediment ManagementEquipment Management &Spill ControlEarthmovingConcrete Management &DewateringPaving/Asphalt WorkPainting & Paint RemovalPavingPainting Cleanup and RemovalConstruction Entrances and Perimeter‰ Establish and maintain effective perimeter controls, and stabilize all constructionentrances and exits to sufficiently control erosion, sediment discharges andtracking of sediment offsite.‰ Sweep or vacuum immediately any tracking of sediment offsite and securesediment source to prevent further tracking. Never hose down streets orsidewalks.Non-Hazardous Materials and Dust Control‰ Berm and cover stockpiles of sand, dirt or other construction material with tarpswhen rain is forecast or when they are not in use. Weigh down and secure tarpsfor wind protection.‰ Keep materials off the ground (e.g., store bagged materials on wood pallets, storeloose materials on tarps not pavement, etc.).‰ Use captured water from other activities (e.g., testing fire lines) for dust control.‰ Ensure dust control water doesn’t leave site or discharge to storm drains. Onlyuse enough to control dust. Contain and dispose of excess water properly.Hazardous Materials‰ Label all hazardous materials and hazardous wastes (such as pesticides, paints,thinners, solvents, fuel, oil, and antifreeze) in accordance with City, County, Stateand Federal regulations.‰ Store hazardous materials and wastes in watertight containers, store inappropriate secondary containment, and cover them at the end of every workday,during wet weather or when rain is forecast.‰ Follow manufacturer’s application instructions for hazardous materials and donot use more than necessary. Do not apply chemicals outdoors when rain isforecast within 24 hours.‰ Arrange for appropriate disposal of all hazardous wastes. Have all pertinentSafety Data Sheets (i.e., SDS/MSDS/PSDS) onsite.Waste Management‰ Inform trash-hauling contractors that you will accept only watertight dumpstersfor onsite use. Repair/replace any dumpster that is not watertight or leaking.‰ Cover and maintain dumpsters. Check frequently for leaks. Place dumpstersunder roofs or cover with tarps or plastic sheeting secured around the outsideof the dumpster. If the dumpster leaks, place a plastic liner underneath thedumpster to collect leaks. Never clean out a dumpster by hosing it down on theconstruction site – clean with dry methods, clean offsite or replace dumpster.‰ Place portable toilets and hand wash stations away from storm drains. Make surethey are equipped with containment pans (secondary containment) and are ingood working order. Check frequently for leaks.‰ Dispose of all wastes and demolition debris properly per SDS and applicableregulations. Recycle or compost materials and wastes as feasible and appropriate,including solvents, water-based paints, vehicle fluids, broken asphalt andconcrete, wood, and cleared vegetation.‰ Dispose of liquid residues from paints, thinners, solvents, glues, and cleaningfluids as hazardous waste per SDS.‰ Keep site free of litter (e.g., lunch items, water bottles, cigarette butts and plasticpackaging).Prevent litter from uncovered loads by covering loads that are being transportedto and from site.Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines of up to $10,000 per day!Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance‰ Designate an area of the construction siteequipped with appropriate BMPs, well awayfrom creeks or storm drain inlets, for auto andequipment parking and storage.‰ Perform major maintenance, repair jobs, andvehicle/equipment washing offsite.‰ If refueling or vehicle maintenance must be doneonsite, work in a bermed area away from stormdrains and over a drip pan or drop cloths bigenough to collect fluids. Recycle or dispose offluids as hazardous waste.‰ If vehicle or equipment cleaning must be doneonsite, clean with water only in a bermed areathat will not allow rinse water to run into gutters,streets, storm drains, or creeks.‰ Do not clean vehicles or equipment onsite usingsoaps, solvents, degreasers, or steam cleaningequipment, and do not use diesel oil to lubricateequipment or parts onsite.Spill Prevention and Control‰ Always keep spill cleanup materials (e.g.,rags, absorbents, and cat litter) available at theconstruction site.‰ Maintain all vehicles and heavy equipment.Inspect frequently for leaks. Use drip pans tocatch leaks until repairs are made.‰ Clean up leaks, drips and other spillsimmediately using dry cleanup methodswhenever possible (absorbent materials, cat litterand/or rags) and dispose of cleanup materialsproperly.‰ Sweep up spilled dry materials immediately.Never attempt to “wash them away” with wateror bury them.‰ Clean up spills on dirt areas by digging up andproperly disposing of contaminated soil.Report significant spills to the appropriate localspill response agencies immediately. If the spillposes a significant hazard to human health andsafety, property or the environment, report it tothe State Office of Emergency Services at (800)852-7550 (24 hours).Grading and Earthwork‰ Schedule grading and excavation work during dryweather.‰ Prevent sediment from migrating offsite and protectstorm drain inlets, drainage courses and creeksby installing and maintaining appropriate BMPstailored to the site’s specific characteristics andconditions. Examples of such BMPs may includesilt fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls, temporaryswales, compost socks, etc. Ensure that BMPsare installed in accordance with manufacturer’sspecifications and properly maintained throughoutthe duration of construction activities.‰ Stabilize all denuded areas and install and maintaintemporary erosion controls (such as erosion controlfabric or bonded fiber matrix) until vegetation isestablished.‰ Remove existing vegetation only when necessary.Plant temporary vegetation to prevent erosionon slopes or in areas where construction is notimmediately planned.‰ Keep excavated soil and/or transfer it to dumptrucks, onsite, not in the streets.Ensure all subcontractors working onsite areimplementing appropriate BMPs.Contaminated Soils‰ If any of the following conditions are observed,test for contamination and contact the RegionalWater Quality Control Board and the local agency:1) Unusual soil conditions, discoloration, or odor.2) Abandoned underground tanks. 3) Abandonedwells. 4) Buried barrels, debris, or trash.‰ If the above conditions are observed, document anysigns of potential contamination, clearly mark areasand fence/tape them off so they are not disturbed byconstruction activities.Landscaping‰ Protect stockpiled landscaping materials from windand rain by storing them under tarps year-round.‰ Stack bagged material on pallets and under cover.‰ Discontinue application of any erodible landscapematerial within 2 days before a forecast rain eventor during wet weather.‰ Store materials onsite, not in the street.Dewatering‰ Discharges of groundwater or captured runoff fromdewatering operations must be properly managed anddisposed. When possible, send dewatering dischargeto landscaped area or sanitary sewer. If discharging tothe sanitary sewer, obtain permission from the localwastewater treatment plant.‰ Divert water originating from offsite away from allonsite disturbed areas.‰ When dewatering, notify and obtain approval fromthe local municipality before discharging water to astreet gutter or storm drain. Filtration or diversionthrough a basin, tank, or sediment trap may berequired.‰ In areas of known or suspected contamination,call the local agency to determine whether thegroundwater must be tested. Pumped groundwatermay need to be collected and hauled offsite fortreatment and proper disposal.‰ For additional information, refer to the CASQA’sSheet NS-2 “Dewatering Operations.”Concrete Management‰ Store both dry and wet concrete-related materialsunder cover, protected from rainfall and runoff andaway from storm drains or creeks. Store materialsoff the ground on pallets. Protect dry materials fromwind.‰ Avoid pouring concrete in wet weather or whenrainfall is imminent to prevent concrete that has notcured from contacting stormwater runoff.‰ Wash out concrete equipment/mixers/trucks offsite,or onsite only in designated washout containers/areaswhere the water will flow into a temporary linedwaste pit and in a manner that will prevent leachinginto the underlying soils. (See CASQA ConstructionStormwater BMP Handbook for temporary concretewashout facility details).‰ Do not wash sweepings from exposed aggregateconcrete into the street or storm drain. Collect andreturn sweepings to aggregate base stockpile ordispose properly.‰ Make sure that construction waste (e.g., concrete,stucco, cement wastewater, or residual materials)is collected, removed, and disposed of only atauthorized disposal areas. Do not dispose ofconstruction waste in storm drains, ditches, streets,creeks, dirt areas, or the sanitary sewer.‰ Avoid paving and seal coating in wetweather or when rain is forecast toprevent materials that have not cured fromcontacting with stormwater runoff.‰ Cover storm drain inlets and manholeswhen applying seal coat, slurry seal, fogseal, or similar materials.‰ When construction is complete, removeall covers from storm drain inlets andmanholes.‰ Collect and recycle or properly dispose ofexcess abrasive gravel or sand. Do NOTsweep or wash it into gutters, storm drains,streets, dirt areas, or the sanitary sewer.Sawcutting & Asphalt/Concrete Removal‰ Protect storm drain inlets during sawcutting.‰ When making saw cuts, use as little wateras possible.‰ Residue from saw cutting, coring andgrinding operations shall be picked up bymeans of a vacuum device.‰ Shovel, absorb, or vacuum saw cut slurrydeposits and dispose of all waste properlyand as soon as reasonably possible.Sawcutting residue should not be left onpavement surface.‰ If saw cut slurry enters a storm draininlet, clean it up immediately and notifythe local municipality.Copper Architectural FeaturesDischarges to storm drains generated by installing, cleaning, treating or washing copperarchitectural features, is a violation of the municipal stormwater ordinance and may be subjectto a fine. These BMPs must be implemented to prevent prohibited discharges to storm drains:During InstallationIf possible, purchase copper materials that have been pre-patinated at the factory.If patination done on site, implement one or more of the following BMPs:1. Discharge the rinse water to landscaping. Ensure that the rinse water doesnot flow to the street or storm drain. Block off storm drain inlet if needed.2. Collect rinse water in a tank and pump to the sanitary sewer. Contact yourlocal sanitary sewer agency before discharging to the sanitary sewer.3. Collect the rinse water in a tank and haul off-site for proper disposal.Consider coating the copper materials with an impervious coating that prevents furthercorrosion and runoff. This will also maintain the desired color for a longer time,requiring less maintenance.During Maintenance such as, power washing roof, re-patination, or re-application ofimpervious coating:Block storm drain inlets as needed to prevent runoff from entering storm drains.Discharge the wash water to landscaping or to the sanitary sewer (with permission fromthe local sanitary sewer agency). If this is not an option, haul the wash water off-site forproper disposal.February 2024, WVCWA 4/24‰ Never clean brushes or rinsepaintcontainers to landscaping, dirtareas or into a street, gutter, stormdrain, or creek.‰ For water-based paints, paint outbrushes to the extent possible, andthen rinse into a drain connected to thesanitary sewer. Never pour paint downa storm drain inlet.‰ For oil-based paints, paint out brushesto the extent possible, and then cleanwith thinner or solvent in a propercontainer. Filter and reuse thinners andsolvents. Dispose of excess liquids ashazardous waste.‰ Sweep up or collect paint chips anddust generated from non-hazardous drystripping and sand blasting into plasticdrop cloths and dispose of as trash.‰ Chemical paint stripping residue andchips and dust from marine paintsor paints containing lead, mercury,or tributyltin must be disposed of ashazardous waste. Lead- based paintremoval requires a state-certifiedcontractor.Page 280 B R O W N S L A N E ( P R I V A T E S T R E E T )-10" PLUMPL N66°08'47"W 88.27'PL S20°49'55"W 112.49'PL S72°18'07"E 88.34'A5 = 829 SF5' IEE PUE 10' IEE 5' IEE JPA3 = 223 SFA6 = 216 SFA2 = 711 SFA4 = 137 SFA7 = 521 SFSFF = 499.15JPEX JPTO BERELOCATEDEX CONCA1 = 432 SF FF = 501.10EX BLDGEX BLDG30" COAST REDWOOD#167#168#169#1708", 8" PECAN20" COAST REDWOODTREE PROTECTIONFENCE (TYP.)AREA OR ITEM TO BE REMOVEDS = AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE AREA IN PERCENTL = TOTAL LENGTH OF CONTOUR LINES IN FEETA = AREA EXPRESSED IN ACERSS = AWHEREI = CONTOUR INTERVAL 0.0023 x ( I ) x ( L )S = 0.21280.0023 x ( 1 ) x ( 476.8 )= 5.1%AREA OR ITEM TO REMAINEXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING TREE TO REMAINLEGENDTREE PROTECTION FENCESHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 DEMOLITION PLANC33AVERAGE SLOPE CALCULATION1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01020105-APN 409-14-035AREA = 9,501 SQ FT(0.2181 ACRES)FROMTOTREE PROTECTION FENCE DETAILNTSNOTES:1.SIX-FOOT HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCING MOUNTED ON TWO-INCH DIAMETER GALVANIZEDIRON POSTS SHALL BE DRIVEN INTO THE GROUND AT LEAST TWO-FEET DEEP AT NOMORE THAN TEN-FOOT SPACING. WHEN STIPULATED, FOR EXISTING PAVING AREASTHAT WILL NOT BE DEMOLISHED, POSTS MAY BE SUPPORTED BY CONCRETE BASE.2.POSTED EIGHT AND ONE-HALF-INCH BY ELEVEN-INCH SIGN ON EACH TREE FENCESTATING: "WARNING - TREE PROTECTION ZONE - THIS FENCE SHALL NOT BEREMOVED AND IS SUBJECT TO PENALTY ACCORDING TO TOWN CODE 29.10.1025"3.LABELED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INSTALLED FENCING SHALL BE EMAILED TO THEPROJECT PLANNER PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF PERMITS.4.TREE PROTECTION FENCING IS REQUIRED TO REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGHOUTCONSTRUCTION.5.ANY PROTECTED TREE ON-SITE WILL REQUIRE REPLACEMENT ACCORDING TO ITSAPPRAISED VALUE IF IT IS DAMAGED BEYOND REPAIR AS A RESULT OFCONSTRUCTION.6' HIGH STEEL FENCE POSTS6' CHAIN LINK FENCE. POST TO BEAT DRIP LINE OF TREE WHERE EVERPOSSIBLE ON AT LOCATIONS SHOWNON PLANDRIP LINE OF TREEPage 281 B R O W N S L A N E ( P R I V A T E S T R E E T )-10" PLUMPL N66°08'47"W 88.27'PL S20°49'55"W 112.49'PL S72°18'07"E 88.34' 5' IEE PUE 10' IEE 5' IEE ADU(SEPARATE PERMIT)MAIN HOUSE1ST FF = 501.50PERVIOUS DWYB1 = 1,615 SF10.00'20.00'70.00'50.00'40.00'10.00' R=20 .0 0'W E D G E W O O D A V E N U ECL ELECTRIC TRANSMISSIONLINE EA PER 926 M 21-22GARAGEB7 = 2,249 SFEX CONCLANDING501.46PORCH501.46LANDING501.0 LANDING500.46B6 = 86 SFB3 = 93 SFB4 = 11 SFB5 = 144 SFB2 = 426 SFFIRE TRUCK TURNAROUND30" COAST REDWOOD#167#168#169#1708", 8" PECAN20" COAST REDWOODRELOCATE EX. WATER METERSHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 SITE PLANC441 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01020105-APN 409-14-035AREA = 9,501 SQ FT(0.2181 ACRES)PROPOSED BUILDINGPROPOSED PERVIOUS PAVERPROPOSED PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETELEGENDEX CONC TO REMAINFIRE TRUCK TURNAROUNDFROMTOPage 282 B R O W N S L A N E ( P R I V A T E S T R E E T )-10" PLUMPL N66°08'47"W 88.27'PL S20°49'55"W 112.49'PL S72°18'07"E 88.34' 5' IEE PUE 10' IEE 5' IEE 499.8 FG(499.24 OG)(499.0 OG)(499.8 OG)(500.46 OG)C622C68' SB8' SB20' SB 25' SB ADU(SEPARATEPERMIT)MAIN HOUSE1ST FF = 501.50PERVIOUS DWY499.9 P(500.44 P)(500.2 P)(500.44 P)(499.85 P)(500.44 P)GARAGE10' MIN 10' MINC62C62500.0FL/HPBB498.5 TG(SEE DETAILON SHEET C6)499.3 FL499.76 FL499.53 FL499.45 FL499.21 FL499.05 FL498.61 FLBB499.8 TG10'500.25 FG(499.95 OG)499.65 FL499.75 FG(499.5 OG)499.85 FG(499.26 OG)500.5 FG5% MIN (499.0 OG)(499.05 OG)498.55 FL498.66 FL5% MIN1%500.5 FG500.15 FG500.35 FG500.5 P500.5 FG5%MIN500.5 FG500.5 FG499.86 P500.25 PLANDING501.46PORCH501.46500.5 P500.5 P500.29 P500.29 P500.25 P500.35 FG500.35 FGLANDING501.0 500.35 FG500.5 P500.4 FG500.4 FG500.31 FGLANDING500.46500.21 FG500.15 FG500.0 FG5% MIN 5%MIN500.5 FG500.35 FG499.89 FL5%MIN499.02 P5%MIN5%MIN5%MINSWALE S=0.5% MIN (TYP)499.4 P4.17%2%(499.9 P)5%MIN500.1 P(500.15 P)1.32%2.00%EX CONC TO REMAINCONFORM TO EX P10.2'±EX DWY 1.8'MIN12' MIN 5% MIN 5%MIN5%MIN(499.0 OG)499.20 FG(498.94 OG)NEW FENCE (SEE DETAIL ON SHEET C6)30" COAST REDWOOD#167#168#169#1708", 8" PECAN20" COAST REDWOOD500.3 FGSHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC551 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE051052.5-APN 409-14-035AREA = 9,501 SQ FT(0.2181 ACRES)Page 283 4905005104905005100+000+501+001+10PLMAIN HOUSE1ST FF = 501.5ADUFF = 501.55%MINSWALEDWYSEE STRUCTURAL PLANFOR DETAIL (TYP)NEW FENCE(SEE DETAILON SHEET C6)LANDING501.0PL5%MINSWALE5%MINPERVIOUS PAVER2%MIN4905005104905005100+000+501+001+20PL5'IEEPUE10' IEE5'IEEPLGARAGE500.5 P500.29 P500.25 P5%MINNEW FENCE(SEE DETAILON SHEET C6)SWALEBROWN LANEPERVIOUS PAVERGRADE BREAK2%MINCONFORM TO EX PEX CONCNOTES:1.DESIGN, MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES TO FOLLOW INTERLOCKINGCONCRETE PAVEMENT INSTITUTE GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS.2.APPLY WATERPROOF MEMBRANE VERTICALLY AGAINST HOUSE FOUNDATIONPRIOR TO PLACING SUBBASE AND BASE.3.USE SOIL BERMS FOR LONGITUDINAL SOIL SUBGRADE SLOPES EXCEEDING 2%4.CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE CURBS CAN BE WITHOUT PAVERS ON TOP. IN SUCHCASES, CURBS SHOULD BE LEVEL WITH CONCRETE PAVER FIELD.5.THE UPPER PAVEMENT SUBGRADE SOIL AND THE AGGREGATE BASE COURSESHOULD BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM 95 PERCENT OF MAXIMUM DRYDENSITY, AS TESTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.6.THE PAVER SYSTEM DRAINAGE, EDGE RESTRAINTS, BEDDING SAND,MAINTENANCE, AND OTHER ASPECTS OF THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTIONSHOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE PAVER SYSTEMMANUFACTURERTYPICAL PERMEABLE CONCRETE PAVER SECTIONNTSVARY#4 REBAR, 12" OCBOTH WAYCONCRETE WALKWAYNTSVARYGEOTEXTILESOIL SUBGRADE & SCARIFIED12" COMPACTED TO ATLEAST 90% RELATIVEMAXIMUM DENSITYASTM NO. 8, 9, OR 89 JOINT FILLASTM NO. 8 BEDDING 2" THICKCONCRETE PAVERS 3 1/8" THICK3/4" CLEAN CRUSHED ROCK OR CL IIPERMEABLE BASEROCK COMPACTED TOAT LEAST 92% RELATIVE MAXIMUMDENSITY 10" MIN THICKCAST-IN-PLACE CONC.EDGE MIN 4 IN.WIDE-MORTAR ORPOLYMER ADHEREDPAVERS TO TOPSHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 BUILDING CROSS SECTIONSC664" PCC OVER6" CLASS II AB6" PCC OVER6" CLASS II ABCONCRETE DRIVEWAYNTSSECTION 1 - 1SCALE 1" = 5'SECTION 2 - 2SCALE 1" = 5'1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE051052.53" MIN3:1 MAX3: 1 MAXSWALE TYPICAL SECTIONNTSOG/FG18" MINRIVER ROCK (MED.)BUBBLER BOXNOTES:1.RIGID PLASTIC, A.C., C.I., OR STEEL PIPE ALLOWED TO BOX FROM PUMP2.BOX SHALL BE SET WITH ADJACENT GRADES SLOPING AWAY TOPREVENT RAINWATER & LANDSCAPE WATER FROM ENTERING.3.BOX SHALL BE SET IN LANDSCAPED AREA TO FACILITATE PERCOLATION.4.BOX SHALL NOT HAVE CONCRETE BOTTOM TO FACILITATE PERCOLATION.5.BOX MUST BE LOCATE AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM BACK OF SIDEWALKAND 3 FEET MINIMUM AWAY FROM SIDE AND REAR PROPERTY LINES,APPROPRIATELY LOCATED IN SWALE, VEGETATED OR RETENTION AREA.NTS24" 12" 4"GRATE LID 12"x12"GRAVITY FLOWFF34" PLYWOODHANGERMAX FGFG5% MINSEESTRUCTURALPLAN2.5"0.75"AFLASHING ISNEEDED IF A<8"(SEE ARCHITECTURALPLAN FOR DETAIL)DETAIL BAT BUILDING FOUNDATIONNTSFGFLCONCRETE FOOTING2' MINOGSEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANFOR FENCING DETAILS4"x4" POST W/6' SPACING6" MAX 2"x6" PRESSURETREATED REDWOOD5% MINDETAIL AFENCE DETAIL AT PERIMETERNTSPLPage 284 B R O W N S L A N E ( P R I V A T E S T R E E T )-10" PLUMPL N66°08'47"W 88.27'PL S20°49'55"W 112.49'PL S72°18'07"E 88.34' 5' IEE PUE 10' IEE 5' IEE SADU(SEPARATE PERMIT)MAIN HOUSE1ST FF = 501.50GEPERVIOUS DWYJPCOGARAGEEX CONCCONNECTTO EX WW 30" COAST REDWOOD#167#168#169#1708", 8" PECAN20" COAST REDWOODSHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 UTILITY PLANC771 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01020105-APN 409-14-035AREA = 9,501 SQ FT(0.2181 ACRES)NOTE:UTILITY LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION.1Page 285 B R O W N S L A N E ( P R I V A T E S T R E E T )-10" PLUMPL N66°08'47"W 88.27'PL S20°49'55"W 112.49'PL S72°18'07"E 88.34'SEX CONCEX CONC TO REMAIN30" COAST REDWOOD#167#168#169#1708", 8" PECAN20" COAST REDWOODFIBER ROLLSTEMPORARY DRAINAGE INLET PROTECTIONTEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXISTLEGEND:SHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 EROSION CONTROL PLANC88 3/4" CLEANCRUSHED1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01020105-APN 409-14-035AREA = 9,501 SQ FT(0.2181 ACRES)Page 286 ROADWAYLCFLOW PLANFOR PAVED AREAS EXPOSED TO TRAFFICTEMPORARY DRAINAGE INLET PROTECTION CSECTION C-CGENERAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES:4. THIS PLAN IS INTENDED TO BE USED FOR INTERIM EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE USED FOR FINALELEVATIONS OR PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS.5. DEVELOPER WILL SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY/CITY MONTHLY (AT THE FIRST OF EACH MONTH BETWEEN OCT 15TH AND APRIL 15TH)CERTIFICATIONS THAT ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT MEASURES IDENTIFIED ON THE APPROVED EROSION CONTROL PLAN ARE IN PLACE. IFMEASURES ARE NOT IN PLACE, DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE THE COUNTY/CITY WITH A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OF WHY THE MEASURE ISNOT IN PLACE AND WHAT WILL BE DONE TO REMEDY THIS SITUATION.6. OWNER/CONTRACTER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES PRIOR, DURING, AND AFTERSTORM EVENTS.7. REASONABLE CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN HAULING ANY EARTH, SAND, GRAVEL, STONE, DEBRIS, PAPER OR ANY OTHER SUBSTANCE OVERANY PUBLIC STREET, ALLEY, OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE. SHOULD ANY BLOW, SPILL, OR TRACK OVER AND UPON SAID PUBLIC OR ADJACENTPRIVATE PROPERTY, IMMEDIATE REMEDY SHALL OCCUR.8. SANITARY FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON THE SITE.9. DURING THE RAINY SEASON, ALL PAVED AREAS SHALL BE KEPT CLEAR OF EARTH MATERIAL AND DEBRIS. THE SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINEDSO AS TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT LADEN RUNOFF TO ANY STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM, INCLUDING EXISTING DRAINAGE SWALES AND WATERCOURSES.1O. CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT IN SUCH A MANNER THAT EROSION AND WATER POLLUTION WILL BE MINIMIZED. STATEAND LOCAL LAWS CONCERNING POLLUTION ABATEMENT SHALL BE COMPILED WITH.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DUST CONTROL AS REQUIRED BY THE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS. 3. CONTRACTOR: _________________________________________________ADDRESS: __________________________________________________24-HOUR PHONE NUMBER: _______________________________________CONSTRUCTION SUPERINTENDENT: ___________________________________ADDRESS: ___________________________________________________24-HOUR PHONE NUMBER: _________________________________________1. CONTRACTOR/OWNER: __________________________________________ ADDRESS: __________________________________________ PHONE NUMBER:__________________________________________ IT SHALL BE THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION OPERATION AND TO KEEP THE ENTIRESITE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SOIL EROSION CONTROL PLAN.2. CIVIL ENGINEER: _____________________________________________ ADDRESS: ______________________________________________ PHONE NUMBER:______________________________________________MAINTENANCE NOTESEROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES1.THE FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE DESIGNED TO CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENT DURING THE RAINY SEASON, OCTOBER 15 TOAPRIL 15. FACILITIES ARE TO BE OPERABLE PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1 OF ANY YEAR. GRADING OPERATIONS DURING THE RAINY SEASON WHICHLEAVE DENUDED SLOPES SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH EROSION CONTROL MEASURES IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING GRADING ON THE SLOPES.2.THIS PLAN COVERS ONLY THE FIRST WINTER FOLLOWING GRADING WITH ASSUMED SITE CONDITIONS AS SHOWN ON THE EROSIONCONTROL PLAN. PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 15, THE COMPLETION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT SHALL BE EVALUATED AND REVISIONS MADE TO THISPLAN ARE NECESSARY WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY/CITY ENGINEER. PLANS RESUBMITTED FOR THE COUNTY/CITY APPROVALPRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 1 OF EACH SUBSEQUENT YEAR UNTIL ARE TO BESITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE ACCEPTED BY THE COUNTY/CITY.3.CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALL PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF GRADING. ALL CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC ENTERING ONTO THEPAVED ROADS MUST CROSS THE STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE WAYS.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN STABILIZED ENTRANCE AT EACH VEHICLE ACCESS POINT TO EXISTING PAVED STREETS. ANY MUD OR DEBRISTRACKED ON TO PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE REMOVED DAILY AND AS REQUIRED BY THE COUNTY/CITY.5.IF HYDROSEEDING IS NOT USED OR IS NOT EFFECTIVE BY 10/10, THEN OTHER IMMEDIATE METHODS SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED, SUCH ASEROSION CONTROL BLANKETS OR THREE-STEP APPLICATIONS OF 1) SEED, MULCH, FERTILIZER 2) BLOWN STRAW 3) TRICKIFIER ANDMULCH.6.INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT OPEN INLETS TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM ENTERING THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. INLETSNOT USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH EROSION CONTROL ARE TO BE BLOCKED TO PREVENT ENTRY OF7.LOTS WITH HOUSES UNDER CONSTRUCTION WILL NOT BE HYDROSEEDED. EROSION PROTECTION FOR EACH LOT WITH A HOUSE UNDERCONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE TYPICAL LOT EROSION CONTROL DETAIL SHOWN ON THIS SHEET.8.THIS EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN MAY NOT COVER ALL THE SITUATIONS THAT MAY ARISE DURING CONSTRUCTION DUE TOUNANTICIPATED FIELD CONDITION. VARIATIONS AND ADDITIONS MAY BE MADE TO THIS PLAN IN THE FIELD. NOTIFY THE REPRESENTATIVEOF ANY FIELD CHANGES.9.GRADING WORK BETWEEN OCTOBER 15 AND APRIL 15 IS AT THE DISCRETION OF COUNTY/CITY.1.MAINTENANCE IS TO BE PERFORMED AS FOLLOWS:A. REPAIR DAMAGES CAUSED BY SOIL EROSION OR CONSTRUCTION AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAYB. SWALES SHALL BE INSPECTED PERIODICALLY AND MAINTAINED AS NEEDED.C. SEDIMENT TRAPS, BERMS, AND SWALES ARE TO BE INSPECTED AFTER EACH STORM AND REPAIRS MADE AS NEEDED. D. SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED AND SEDIMENT TRAP RESTORED TO ITS ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS WHEN SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED TO A DEPTH OF 1 FOOT.E. SEDIMENT REMOVED FROM TRAP SHALL BE DEPOSITED IN A SUITABLE AREA AND IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IT WILL NOT ERODE.F. RILLS AND GULLIES MUST BE REPAIRED.2.SAND BAD INLET PROTECTION SHALL BE CLEANED OUT WHENEVER SEDIMENT DEPTH IS ONE HALF THE HEIGHT OF ONE SAND BAG.3.EXPOSED SLOPE SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH JUTE NET AND/OR HYDROSEED. HYDROSEED SHALL BE A HOMOGENEOUSLY MIX OF SLURRYCONTAINING NOT LESS THAN 44 LBS OF ORGANIC MULCHING AMENDMENT PLUS FERTILIZER, CHEMICAL ADDITIVES AND SOLIDS FOR EACH100 GALLONS OF WATER.STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXITCASQA DETAIL TC-13CRUSHED AGGREGATE GREATER THAN 3"BUT SMALLER THAN 6"FILTER FABRICORIGINAL GRADEOR FOUR TIMES THE CIRCUMFERENCEOF THE LARGEST CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE TIRE,WHICHEVER IS GREATERWIDTH ASREQUIRED TOACCOMMODATEANTICIPATEDTRAFFICEXISTING PAVED ROADWAY NOTE:CONSTRUCTION SEDIMENT BARRIERAND CHANNELIZE RUNOFF TOSEDIMENT TRAPPPING DEVICETEMPORARY PIPECULVERT AS NEEDEDDITCH 20' R MINFIBER ROLLSCASQA DETAIL SE-514' MAX4' MAXFIBER ROLLS4' MAX4' MAXSLOPEVARIES12" MIN 4" MAX ENTRENCHMENT DETAILNOT TO SCALETYPICAL FIBER ROLL INSTALLATIONNOT TO SCALESHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 EROSION CONTROL DETAILSC99 INSTALL A FIBER ROLL NEARSLOPE WHERE ITTRANSITIONS INTO A STEEPERSLOPENOTE:INSTALL FIBER ROLLALONG A LEVEL CONTOUR.VERTICAL SPACINGMEASURED ALONG THEFACE OF THE SLOPEVARIES BETWEEN 8 FTAND 20FTROBERTO FLAMENCO14341 BROWNS LANE, LOS GATOS, CA 95032(831) 566-9040CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE, SUITE E, SAN JOSE, CA 95121CONCRETE WASTE MANAGEMENTCASQA DETAIL WM-82BBSTAPLE DETAILCONCRETEWASHOUTCONCRETE WASHOUT SIGN DETAIL(OR EQUIVALENT)NOTES:1.ACTUAL LAYOUT DETERMINED IN FIELD.2.3.THE CONCRETE WASHOUT SIGN SHALL BEINSTALLED WITHIN 30FT. OF THE TEMPORARYCONCRETE WASHOUT FACILITY.SECTION B-BNOT TO SCALEPLANNOT TO SCALETYPE "ABOVE GRADE WITH STRAW BALES"BINDING WIRESTRAW BALE10 MIL PLASTIC LININGSTAPLES(2 PER BALE)NATIVE MATERIAL(OPTIONAL)WOOD OR METAL STAKES(2 PER BALE)STRAW BALE(TYP)10 MIL PLASTIC LININGSTAPLE(TYP)10' MINVARIES 4"2"1/8" DIA.STEEL WIREPLYWOOD 48"x24"PAINTED WHITEBLACK LETTERS6" HEIGHT1/2" LAG SCREWSWOOD POST 3"x3"x8'3'3'SEE PLANSECTION A-ANOT TO SCALE12" MIN UNLESS OTHERWISESPECIFIED BY A SOIL ENGINEERGRAVEL BAGSDRAINAGE INLET WITHSEDIMENT CONTROL BAGCURB OR DIKESEDIMENT CONTROL BAGCURB OR DIKEGRAVEL BAGSDRAINAGE INLETGRAVEL BAGSFLOWFLOWROAD WAYFIBER ROLL 8" MIN0.8"x0.8" WOOD STAKESMAX 4 FT SPACINGACACATCH BASINMATCH EXISTING GRADEPage 287 B R O W N S L A N E ( P R I V A T E S T R E E T )-10" PLUMSADU(SEPARATE PERMIT)MAIN HOUSE1ST FF = 501.50PERVIOUS DWYGARAGEEX CONC30" COAST REDWOOD#167#168#169#1708", 8" PECAN20" COAST REDWOODCLEAN UP AREAPORTABLE TOILETDEBRIS BOXCONCRETEWASHOUTCONSTRUCTIONMATERIAL STORAGEAREAPROJECT SCHEDULESECURITY FENCECONSTRUCTION TEMPORARY PARKING BEGIN               ENDDEMOLITION2/04/2025        2/24/2025GRADING & FOUNDATION EXCAVATION2/24/20255/24/2025BUILDING CONSTRUCTION5/24/2025        7/30/2026CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY:ALL CONSTRUCTION SITES MUST COMPLY WITH APPLICABLEPROVISIONS OF THE CFC CHAPTER 33 AND OUR STANDARDDETAILS AND SPECIFICATION S1-7.SHEETOF 10 SHEETSDATEBY REVISIONS DATE: SCALE:AS NOTED DESIGN:XP CHECK:SN PROJECT #:2024-001 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS14341 BROWNS LANE GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CIVIO CONSULTING1669 FLANIGAN DRIVE #ESAN JOSE, CA 95121EMAIL: OFFICE@CIVIOCONSULTING.COM RESPOND TO 2nd ROUND COMMENTSSN11-13-20241 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLANC1010 CONSTRUCTION TEMPORARY PARKING 1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE01020105Page 288 11'-7"17'-5"10'-10 1/2"8'-10"10'-10 1/2" 5'-6"3'-9"5'-5 1/2"5'-6" 11'-6"9'-7 1/2"13'-3"11'-3 1/2" 123 A B C 11' - 9 1/2"16' - 2" 27' - 11 1/2" 2'-2 1/2"3'-11 1/2"2'-8 1/2"36' - 0"22' - 3"13' - 9"- A2003 A200 7 A200 5 A2001 1 9'-3"- FLOOR PLAN, EXISTING, LEGEND (E) WALL TO BE REMOVED (E) WINDOW TO BE REMOVED (E) DOOR TO BE REMOVED (E) WALL TO BE REMAIN (E) WINDOW TO BE REMAIN (E) DOOR TO BE REMAIN ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:03 PM A100 Architectural,Floor Plan &ExistingConditions Architectural, Floor Plan & Existing Conditions 1/4" = 1'-0"1Floor Plan, Existing 1 EXISTING SHED FIRST FLOOR PLAN, EXISTING, KEYNOTES 0'2' 4'8'16' 1.2. GENERAL NOTES: CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING ELEMENTS / DIMENSIONSELEMENTS IN BLUE ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED WHILE ELEMENTS IN BLACK ARE TO REMAIN North Revision Schedule Number Description Date Page 289 U.C.Refr.A2004 A200 A200 A200 8 2 6 123 B C 7' - 3"5' - 3"19' - 3"3' - 0"3' - 6" 3' - 8 1/2"11' - 9 1/2"16' - 2"12' - 1"22' - 7" 69' - 10" 4 5 E 20'-11"12'-6" MIN 20' X 20' 2-CAR GARAGE D F 34' - 9"1.B1.A3.A PA 5'-0"4'-2"4'-0"CL PA 3'-3"10'-0"FAMILYDININGKITCHEN ADU, UNDER SEPARATE MINISTERIAL PERMIT PANTRY SHOWER 3'-8"HALF BATH 2'-2" ENTRY / VEST CL 5'-10" 19' - 0 1/2"15' - 6" 6' - 1"3' - 3 1/2"6' - 1" 5'-1" 1 A300 2 A300 4' - 5 1/2" 3' - 3 1/2" 3' - 3 1/2"4' - 6" LNDYW/D 3' - 6"15' - 6 1/2" 2'-2" KITCHENETTE -G006 7 2 2 1 3 A300 HVAC 19' - 1 1/2"15' - 8"6' - 3 1/2"SIDE SETBACK LINE11' - 11"2' - 9 1/2" 2' - 5 1/2"4' - 2 1/2"10' - 7"3' - 3 1/2"8' - 0 1/2"E2 E2 22'-0"1'-1"3'-6"5'-0"5'-0"5'-7"6'-10"7'-0"UP 6'-7"5'-3" OPEN TO ABOVE2'-2"FRONT SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3 BAR -- -21' - 11"0"REAR SETBACK LINESIDE SETBACK 8'-0" 6'-3" PROPERTY LINE TO EXTERIOR FINISH 8' - 3" - -1'-8" 1'-8" 7'-6 1/2"1'-8"1. 1.2.3. 1. 1. 2. (A) EXTERIOR FINISH JAMES HARDIE (B) W.P. MEMBRANE1. GRADE "D" BLDG. PAPER (2 LAYERS) (C) PLYWD. SHEATHING1. 1/2" CDXPLYWOOD2. 5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM SHEATHING (D) FRAMING/ STUD2X4 WOOD2X6 WOOD2X8 WOOD (E) INSULATIONPER TITLE 24 (F) DRYWALL1/2" GYP. BRD. 5/8" TYPE X GYP. BRD. WALL TYPES: WALL ASSEMBLY:UL LISTING: (A1, B1, C2, D1, E1, F2) ASTM E119 (A1, B1, C2, D2, E1, F2) ASTM E119 (F2, D1, F2) (F2, D2, F2) E1 E2 N1 N2 ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 3/18/2025 1:34:04 PM A101 Architectural, 1stFloor Plan,ProposedArchitectural, 1st Floor Plan, Proposed 1/4" = 1'-0"11st Floor Plan, Proposed 0'2' 4'8'16' 1 SEPARATE ENTRY FOR ADU. 60" x 60" LEVEL LANDING, NO MORE THAN 1 INCH OUT OF PLANE WITH IMMEDIATE INTERIOR FLOOR LEVEL & WITH 18-INCH CLEAR AT INTERIOR STRIKE EDGE COFFERED CEILING LINE OF SECOND FLOOR ABOVE FIRST FLOOR PLAN, PROPOSED, KEYNOTES 1.2.3.4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.11. GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL FIELD MEASUREMENTS.REFER TO ELEVATIONS FOR ALL EXT. ELEMENTS ALIGNMENT.ELEMENTS IN GRAY ARE EXISTING WHILE ELEMENTS IN BLACK ARE PROPOSED.LANDING MINIMUM 36" DEEP LANDING AND NOT MORE THAN 1 1/2" LOWER THAN TRESHOLD FOR OUTSWINING DOORS.WINDOWS HAVE THE BOTTOM OF THE CLEAR OPENING NOT MORE THAN 44 INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR OPENS DIRECTLY TO STREET, PUBLIC ALLEY YARD, OR COURT THAT OPENS TO A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. CRC SECTION R310DOORS AND PANELS OF SHOWER AND BATHTUB ENCLOSURES SHALL BE FULLY TEMPERED, LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS OR APPROVED PLASTIC. CRC SECTION R308.4..5WATER RESISTANT GYPSUM BACKING BOARD SHALL NOT BE USED OVER A VAPOR RETARDER IN SHOWER OR BATHTUB COMPARTMENTS. CRC R307.2 AND R702.4CLEAR SPACE AROUND A TOILET SHALL MEASURE A MNIMUM 15" FROM CENTERLINE OF TOILET TO WALL OR BARRIOR ON EACH SIDE, AND A MINIMUM 24" IN FRONT OF THE TOILET.SHOWER PAN DIMENSIONS MUST BE A MINIMUM AREA OF 1024 SQ. INCHES AND A MINIMUM FINISH DIMENSION OF 30" IN ANY DIRECTION.SHOWER DOORS SHALL OPEN A MINIMUM 22" UNOBSTRUCTED OPENING FOR EGRESS.STAIR RISE (MAXIMUM 7 - 3/4") AND RUN (MINIMUM 10") FROM NOSING TO NOSING. WHERE TREAD DEPTH IS LESS THAN 11", A NOSING OF 3/4" MINIMUM TO 1-1/4" MAXIMUM IS REQUIRED. North 2 3 WALL LEGEND Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 4 Staff Tech Rev #3 2025.01.06 Page 290 A2004 A200 A200 A200 8 2 6 12 C 4 5 E D 1.B1.A3.A B.1 1 A300 2 A300 69' - 10" 3' - 6" 3' - 8 1/2"11' - 9 1/2"12' - 9"15' - 6"22' - 7"32' - 9"7' - 3"5' - 3"20' - 3"BEDRM 4 VESTIBULE M. BEDRM PORCH BATH 2 BATH 3 M BATH WIC 15'-7 1/2" 14'-6" LNDY 16'-4"3'-4"6'-9 1/2"CL 3'-4"14'-6"9'-10 1/2"4'-6"2'-5 1/2"-G006 7 3 A300 2'-10 1/2" 1'-6"ATTICE2 10'-5"3' - 0 1/2"9' - 0"3' - 6" 3'-6" BEDRM 1 DOWN 7'-8 1/2"2'-2"13'-0"SIDE SETBACK LINEFRONT SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3 37' - 8 1/2" CEILING HEIGHT 9'-0" CEILING HEIGHT 10'-0" CEILING HEIGHT 10'-0" CEILING HEIGHT 10'-0" -- -5'-8 1/2"3 REAR SETBACK LINE 2' - 8 1/2"SIDE SETBACK 8'-0" 7' - 6 1/2"8' - 0" 3'-10 1/2" 3'-10 1/2" 7' - 0"1' - 6" 2'-2" ATTIC 10'-1"8'-1"5'-4"5'-10"16'-1 1/2"12'-5"14'-4"5'-5"4 (EG) (OP) (EG) (EG) (OP) (EG) (OP) 5'-6"4'-0"3'-6"5'-0" 4'-0"DECORVAULT FLAT 5'-2"ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:08 PM A102 Architectural, 2ndFloor Plan,ProposedArchitectural, 2nd Floor Plan, Proposed 1/4" = 1'-0"12nd Floor Plan, Proposed 0'2' 4'8'16' 1 2 DECOR COFFERED CEILING LINE OF FIRST FLOOR BELOW 42" RAILING SECOND FLOOR PLAN, PROPOSED, KEYNOTES 1.2.3.4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.11. GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL FIELD MEASUREMENTS.REFER TO ELEVATIONS FOR ALL EXT. ELEMENTS ALIGNMENT.ELEMENTS IN GRAY ARE EXISTING WHILE ELEMENTS IN BLACK ARE PROPOSED.LANDING MINIMUM 36" DEEP LANDING AND NOT MORE THAN 1 1/2" LOWER THAN TRESHOLD FOR OUTSWINING DOORS.WINDOWS HAVE THE BOTTOM OF THE CLEAR OPENING NOT MORE THAN 44 INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR OPENS DIRECTLY TO STREET, PUBLIC ALLEY YARD, OR COURT THAT OPENS TO A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. CRC SECTION R310DOORS AND PANELS OF SHOWER AND BATHTUB ENCLOSURES SHALL BE FULLY TEMPERED, LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS OR APPROVED PLASTIC. CRC SECTION R308.4..5WATER RESISTANT GYPSUM BACKING BOARD SHALL NOT BE USED OVER A VAPOR RETARDER IN SHOWER OR BATHTUB COMPARTMENTS. CRC R307.2 AND R702.4CLEAR SPACE AROUND A TOILET SHALL MEASURE A MNIMUM 15" FROM CENTERLINE OF TOILET TO WALL OR BARRIOR ON EACH SIDE, AND A MINIMUM 24" IN FRONT OF THE TOILET. SHOWER PAN DIMENSIONS MUST BE A MINIMUM AREA OF 1024 SQ. INCHES AND A MINIMUM FINISH DIMENSION OF 30" IN ANY DIRECTION.SHOWER DOORS SHALL OPEN A MINIMUM 22" UNOBSTRUCTED OPENING FOR EGRESS.STAIR RISE (MAXIMUM 7 - 3/4") AND RUN (MINIMUM 10") FROM NOSING TO NOSING. WHERE TREAD DEPTH IS LESS THAN 11", A NOSING OF 3/4" MINIMUM TO 1-1/4" MAXIMUM IS REQUIRED. North 3 Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 4 Staff Tech Rev #3 2025.01.06 4 (T) (EG) TEMPERED EGRESS OPAQUE / FROSTED GLASS(OP) Page 291 3" / 1'-0"10" / 1'-0"10" / 1'-0"10" / 1'-0"10" / 1'-0"6" / 1'-0"6" / 1'-0"6' - 6 1/2"28' - 11 1/2"3' - 9 1/2"41' - 7"1234 4' - 0"17' - 9 1/2"10' - 6"17' - 9"1' - 6 1/2" 10' - 0"4' - 6" 46' - 0 1/2"16' - 0"7' - 0 1/2"19' - 8"13' - 7 1/2"6" / 1'-0"SIDE SETBACK LINEFRONT SETBACK LINE 1' - 0" EAVES 1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 0"0' - 6" EAVES 0' - 6" EAVES1' - 0" 1' - 6"2' - 0" EAVES1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"5' - 0"41' - 10"4' - 3"11' - 0"11' - 0 1/2"5' - 5 1/2"44' - 10"1' - 6" EAVES1' - 6" EAVES6" / 1'-0"REAR SETBACK LINE 14' - 6"6" / 1'-0"10" / 1'-0"10" / 1'-0"6" / 1'-0"6" / 1'-0"1'-1" / 1'-0"6" / 1'-0"1'-1" / 1'-0"69' - 1"2' - 3 1/2" EAVES39' - 4"1' - 6"1' - 1"0' - 11 1/2" EAVES 1' - 6"22' - 0"3' - 0 1/2" EAVES1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 0" EAVES 1' - 6" 31' - 2 1/2" 15' - 11 1/2"15' - 3" 15' - 1 1/2"39' - 1"12' - 0"27' - 1"22' - 10"1 BUILDING AREA SUMMARY (P) PRIMARY HOUSE 2,580 SF - 1ST FLOOR 1,039 SF - 2ND FLOOR 1,541 SF (P) ADU (UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT)385 SF (P) ATTACHED 2-CAR GARAGE 507 SF - FRONT PORCH 43 SF - REAR PORCH 26 SF - ADU ENTRY PORCH18 SF - 2ND FLOOR BALCONY96 SF (P) TOTAL PORCH AREA (NOT COUNTABLE AREA):183SF (P) ATTIC SPACE, COUNTABLE:0 SF (P) LOT COVERAGE: 1039 SF (1ST FLOOR) + 385 SF (ADU) + 507 SF (GARAGE) + 43 SF (FRONT PORCH) + 26 SF (REAR PORCH) + 18 SF (ADU ENTRY PORCH) = 2,018 SF (P) FLOOR AREA: 2,580 SF (PRIMARY HOUS)E + 0 SF( ATTIC, COUNTABLE)= 2,580 SF (P) GARAGE AREA: 507 SF COUNTED SEPARATELY (P) 1ST FLOOR AREA: 1039 SF COUNTABLE AREA (P) REAR PORCH AREA: 26 SF NOT COUNTED (P) SIDE ENTRY, ADU AREA: 18 SFNOT COUNTED (P) FRONT ENTRY AREA: 43 SFNOT COUNTED DELINEATED LINE FOR ADU DELINEATED LINE FOR GARAGE (P) ADU AREA: 385 SF COUNTED SEPARATELY OPEN TO ABOVE(STAIRWELL COUNTED ON 2ND FLOOR) UP (P) 2ND FLOOR AREA: 1541 SFCOUNTABLE AREA (P) 2ND FLOOR PORCH AREA: 96 SFNOT COUNTED (P) ATTIC NOT COUNTED (P) ATTICNOT COUNTED (P) ATTIC, ABOVE FIRST FLOOR NOT COUNTED5 A103 DOWN 7' - 0"(P) ATTIC, ABOVE 2ND FLOOR NOT COUNTABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE 7' - 0"CEILING HEIGHT10' - 0"WIC (P) ATTIC, BEHIND BEDRM NOT COUNTABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE 5' - 3 1/2"6' - 6"ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:13 PM A103 Architectural, RoofPlan, Existing &Proposed, & AreaDiagram Architectural, Roof Plan, Existing & Proposed, & Area Diagram 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Roof Plan, Proposed 0'4' 8' 16'32' 1 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF ROOF PLAN, EXISTING, KEYNOTES 1.2. NOTES CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL FIELD MEASUREMENTS.REFER TO ELEVATIONS FOR ALL EXT. ELEMENTS ALIGNMENT. 1/8" = 1'-0"2 Roof Plan, Existing 0'4' 8' 16'32' 1 2 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 2X TYP. FASCIA GUTTER ROOF PLAN, PROPOSED, KEYNOTES 3 4 1.2. 3. NOTES CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL FIELD MEASUREMENTS.REFER TO ELEVATIONS FOR ALL EXT. ELEMENTS ALIGNMENT.ELEMENTS IN BLUE ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED WHILE ELEMENTS IN BLACK ARE TO REMAIN North North AREA BREAKDOWN TABLE AREA DESCRIPTION 1ST FLOOR 2ND FLOOR TOTAL MAX ALLOWABLE EXISTINGPROPOSED COUNTABLE ATTIC 1,027 SF 1,553 SF 0 SF 2,580 SF 832 SF (+ 240 SF SHED) 0 SF 0 SF 1,072 SF BELOW GRADE SQUARE FOOTAGE (EXEMPT)0 SF0 SF GARAGE507 SF ADU 0 SF 0 SF392 SF 2,946 SF 827 SF 950 SF 1/8" = 1'-0"3First Floor Plan, Floor Area Diagram 1/8" = 1'-0"4Second Floor Plan, Floor Area Diagram 3/16" = 1'-0"5Attic Height, Cross Section AREA BREAKDOWN ROOF PLANS - EXISTING & PROPOSED ADU UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 4 Staff Tech Rev #3 2025.01.06 Page 292 GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"1' - 5"8' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"9' - 0"CL 613 12 2 6" 1'-0" Max Bldg Height30' - 0" 11 1'-1" 1'-0" 6" 1'-0" 6" 1'-0" GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"1' - 7" 9' - 0" 1' - 0" 9' - 0"8' - 0" 1' - 5" (EG) (EG)(T) (T) 4 12 62 3 9 13 10'-6 1/2"9'-0"3'-9" Max Bldg Height30' - 0" 10TYP. (T) GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"1' - 5"8' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 7"(EG)(EG)(EG) (T)(T)(T)(T)(T) 5 162 73 7' - 11"7' - 11"CLCL7' - 11"7' - 10"6' - 3"6' - 3"CL (T) CL 9 12 10" 1'-0" 10" 1'-0" 131 4' - 6" 4' - 6" 14 15'-0 1/2"7'-6 1/2" Max Bldg Height30' - 0" 119 11 GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"1' - 5"8' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 7"5 (T) 13' - 1 1/2"13' - 1 1/2"CL 12 9 11 Max Bldg Height30' - 0" 8 GRADE0' - 0" (E) T.O.P9' - 4" 1st Level FF1' - 7" (E) T.O.R17' - 0 3/32"17' - 0"7' - 8"7' - 9"1' - 7"1E2E GRADE0' - 0" (E) T.O.P9' - 4" 1st Level FF1' - 7" (E) T.O.R17' - 0 3/32"17' - 0"1' - 7" 7' - 9"7' - 8"1E2E 1E2E GRADE0' - 0" (E) T.O.P9' - 4" 1st Level FF1' - 7" (E) T.O.R17' - 0 3/32"17' - 0"7' - 8"7' - 9"1' - 7"1E2E 1E2E GRADE0' - 0" (E) T.O.P9' - 4" 1st Level FF1' - 7" (E) T.O.R17' - 0 3/32"17' - 0"7' - 8"7' - 9"1' - 7"1E 2E ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:31 PM A200 Architectural,Elevations,Existing &Proposed Architectural, Elevations, Existing & Proposed 1/8" = 1'-0"4Right-North Elevation, Proposed 1/8" = 1'-0"8Rear-West Elevation, Proposed 1/8" = 1'-0"6Front-East Elevation, Proposed 1/8" = 1'-0"2Left-South Elevation, Proposed 1/8" = 1'-0"1Left-South, Existing 1/8" = 1'-0"7Rear-West, Existing 1/8" = 1'-0"5Front-East, Existing 1/8" = 1'-0"3Right-North, Existing ELEVATIONS, PROPOSED, KEYNOTES & MATERIALS 2 4 5 6 7 8 (T) (EG) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.6. 7. REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER OR LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR SHALL CERTIFY HEIGHT OF BUILDING DOES NOT EXCEED 26 FEET. THE WRITTEN CERTIFICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL PRIOR TO ROOF SHEATHING INSPECTION AND SHALL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ADDED HEIGHT WITH THE INSTALLATION OF THE ROOFING MATERIALS AND UNDERLAYMENT.GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS. WEEP SCREED A MINIMUM OF 26 GA CORROSION RESISTANT WEEP SCREED W/ A MINIMUM VERTICAL ATTACHMENT FLANGE OF FOUNDATION PLATE LINE ON ALL EXTERIOR STUD WALLS W/ STUCCO. THE SCREED SHOULD BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF 4" ABOVE THE EARTH OR 2" ABOVE PAVED AREAS AND SHALL BE OF A TYPE WHICH WILL TRAPPED WATER TO DRAIN TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING.ADDRESS NUMBERS SHALL BE ARABIC NUMBERS OR ALPHABETICAL LETTERS. NUMBERS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES HIGH WITH A MINIMUM STROKE WIDTH OF 1/2 INCH. NUMBERS SHALL NOT BE SPELLED OUT. THESE NUMBERS SHALL CONTRAST WITH THEIR BACKGROUND (CRC 319.1)FF LEVEL (0' - 0") IS EQUIVALENT TO ASML (228.85). PLEASE SEE CIVIL PLANS SHEET LC4 % LC5 FOR MORE INFORMATION.WEEP SCREED A MINIMUM OF 26 GA CORROSION RESISTANT WEEP SCREED W/ A MINIMUM VERTICAL ATTACHMENT FLANGEOF FOUNDATION PLATE LINE ON ALL EXTERIOR STUD WALLS. THE SCREED SHOULD BE PLACES A MINIMUM OF 4" ABOVE THE EARTH OR 2" ABOVE PAVED AREAS AND SHALL BE OF A TYPE WHICH WILL ALLOW TRAPPED WATER TO DRAIN TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING.ALL PERMANENT EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES SHOULD UTILIZE SHIELDS SO THAT NO BULB IS VISIBLE AND TO ENSURE THAT LIGHT IS DIRECTED TO THE GROUND SURFACE AND DOES NOT SPILL LIGHT ONTO NEIGHBORING PARCELS OR PRODUCE GLARE WHEN SEEN FROM NEARBY HOMES. 1 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF, NON-REFLECTIVE & MATTE FINISH 2X TYP. FASCIA BOARD PRE-PRIMED/ PAINTED 2X DRIP SILL WITH SLOPE ACCORDION DOOR CONCRETE STOOP GUTTER ADDRESS NUMBER (SEE NOTE BELOW) DECORATIVE CORBEL ADVANTAGE PLUS EXTERIOR TRIM EXTERIOR LIGHT, TO HAVE SHIELD SO BULB LIGHT IS DIRECTED TO THE GROUND TEMPERED EGRESS 9 10 0'4' 8' 16'32'0'4' 8' 16'32' 0'4' 8' 16'32'0'4' 8' 16'32' 0'4' 8' 16'32'0'4' 8' 16'32' 0'4' 8' 16'32'0'4' 8' 16'32' NOTES 11 12 13 14 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF TO BE DEMOLISHED JAMES HARDIE SHINGLE SIDING JAMES HARDIE PANEL SIDING W/ VERTICAL BATS ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF, TRIPLE PLY CUSTOM GARAGE DOOR, WOOD GRAIN TEXTURED, RAISED PANEL NOTE: OWNER ALLOWED TO CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANT SPECIFICATION. SEE A400 FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS 1E 2E ELEVATIONS, EXISTING, KEYNOTES & MATERIALS LAP SIDING TO BE DEMOLISHED (1) FRONT YARD - LOOKING AT MAIN HOUSE (2) SIDE YARD - LOOKING AT FRONT GATE(4) SIDE YARD - LOOKING AT MAIN HOUSE (3) REAR YARD - LOOKING AT MAIN HOUSE (E) EXTERIOR PHOTOS 3 Revision Schedule Number Description Date 1 Planning 2024.02.13 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 4 Staff Tech Rev #3 2025.01.06 Page 293 GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"8' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 7"GARAGE BEDRM 2 ATTIC 5698 4 7 Max Bldg Height30' - 0"1' - 5"7"1'-0"1'-1" 1'-0" 1'-1" 1'-0" 6" 1'-0" 6" 1'-0" 6" 1'-0"9'-0"6'-5"10'-7"HEIGHT3' - 11 1/2"GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"1' - 7"9' - 0"1' - 0"9' - 0"8' - 0"GARAGEKITCHEN ADU WCDININGOFFICEKITCHENETTE BEDRM 2LAUNDRYVESTM. BEDRM ATTIC ATTIC CRAWL SPACEMIN 18"1' - 6"2 10 1 8 3 Max Bldg Height30' - 0"1' - 5"CEILING HEIGHT10' - 0"CEILING HEIGHT9' - 0"9'-0"10'-7"HEIGHT2' - 10" HEIGHT3' - 8 1/2"GRADE0' - 0" T.O.R28' - 6 31/32" 1st Level FF1' - 7" T.O.P, Level 110' - 7" 2nd Level FF11' - 7" T.O.P, Level 220' - 7"28' - 7"8' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 7"CRAWL SPACEMIN1' - 6"STAIR WELL 4" SPHERE MAY NOT PASS THROUGH RUN 11"RISE7"11 10" 1'-0" 10" 1'-0"9'-0"18'-8 1/2"8'-8 1/2"ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:36 PM A300 Architectural,Sections,ProposedArchitectural, Sections, Proposed 1/4" = 1'-0"2Section BB 1/4" = 1'-0"1Section AA 0'2' 4'8'16' 0'2' 4'8'16' SECTION, PROPOSED, KEYNOTES 1 FOUNDATION, SEE STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR JOISTS, SEE STRUCTURAL HEADER, SEE STRUCTURAL RADIANT BARRIER ROOF SHEATHING 2X TYP. FASCIA BOARD PRE-PRIMED/ PAINTED STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF TYP. 24 GA. GALV. SHEET METAL GUTTER & DOWN SPOUT FIRE STOP INSULATION @ VAULTED CEILING 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. GENERAL NOTES THE RISER HEIGHT SHALL BE NOT MORE THAN 7 3/4 INCHES. THE RISER SHALL BE MEASURED VERTICALLY BETWEEN LEADING EDGES OF THE ADJACENT TREADS. (CRC - R311.7.5.1)THE TREAD DEPTH SHALL BE NOT LESS THAN 10 INCHES. THE TREAD DEPTH SHALL BE MEASURED HORIZONTALLY BETWEEN THE VERTICAL PLANES OF THE FOREMOST PROJECTION OF ADJACENT TREADS AND AT A RIGHT ANGLE TO THE TREAD'S LEADING EDGE. (CRC - R311.7.5.2)HANDRAILS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 34" 0R MORE THAN 38" IN HEIGHT ABOVE THE STAIR NOSING. HANDRAILS SHALL BE CONTINUOUS PER FLIGHT OF STAIRS. HANDRAILS SHALL BE 1-1/12" CLR. OF ALL ADJACENT FIN. MAT'LS AND ENDS SHALL RETURN TO OR TERMINATE IN NEWEL POSTS OR SAFE TERMINALS. HANDRAILS SHALL BE 1-114-2" IN CROSS-SECTIONAL DIMENSION OR APPROVED EQUAL AND BE SMOOTH WITH NO SHARP EDGES/COR. STAIR & RAILING SUPPLIER SHALL SATISFY ALL BUILDING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PRODUCTS THEY PROVIDE OR INSTALL. THE GURADRAIL CONST. SHALL BE ABLE TO RESIST A LOAD OF 20 LBS PER LIN. FT. APPLIED HORIZONTALLY ALONG THE RAIL.REQUIRED GUARDS SHALL NOT HAVE OPENINGS THAT ALLOW THE PASSAGE OF A SPHERE 4 INCHES IN DIAMETER FROM THE WALKING SURFACE REQUIRED GUARD HEIGHT.FOR OCCUPANCIES IN GROUP R-3, WHERE TOP OF THE GUARD SERVES AS A HANDRAIL ON THE OPEN SIDES OF STAIRS, THE TOP OF THE GUARD SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 34 INCHES AND NOT MORE THAN 38 INCHES MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM A LINE CONNECTING THE LEADING EDGES OF THE TREADS. THE HANDRAIL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE ABLE TO RESIST A LOAD OF 200 LBS APPLIED IN ANY DIRECTIONS AT ANY POINT ALONG THE TOP RAIL WHERE HANDRAILS ARE NOT CONTINUOUS BETWEEN FLIGHTS, THE HANDRAILS SHALL EXTEND HORIZONTALLY NOT LESS THAN 12 INCHES BEYOND THE TOP RISER AND CONTINUE TO SLOPE FOR THE DEPTH OF ONE TREAD BEYOND THE BOTTOM RISER. THE EXTENSIONS OF HANDRAILS SHALL BE IN THE SAME DIRECTION OF THE FLIGHTS OF STAIRS AT STAIRWAYS. 1/4" = 1'-0"3Section CC 0'2' 4'8'16' 11 Revision Schedule Number Description Date 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 5 Staff Tech Rev #4 2025.02.06 5 5 5 Page 294 ATTS LAC E FO ILICENS E D ARCHIT ECTF O RNIAGORD KONW GNO RENEWAL 03/01/2013 4 0 4 53-C Flamenco Residence14341 Browns LaneLos Gatos, CA 95032SCALE AS INDICATEDR E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408) 796-1845 LIC# 34045GKW Architects.comKEVIN YU, JOSHUA LIUPROJECT REPRESENTATIVES710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95121(408)796-184508/31/2025 2/20/2025 2:43:43 PM A400 Architectural,Exterior MaterialSpecifications Architectural, Exterior Material SpecificationsEXTERIOR MATERIALS - STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF EXTERIOR MATERIALS - OUTDOOR WALL SCONCEEXTERIOR MATERIALS - WINDOWS NOTE: OWNER ALLOWED TO CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANT SPECIFICATION. NOTE: OWNER ALLOWED TO CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANT SPECIFICATION.NOTE: OWNER ALLOWED TO CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANT SPECIFICATION. WINDOWS TO BE FIBERGLASS EXTERIOR TRIM MATERIAL - ADVANTAGE PLUS Revision Schedule Number Description Date 2 Staff Tech Rev #1 2024.07.12 3 Staff Tech Rev #2 2024.11.05 Page 295 Page 296 PREPARED BY: Ryan Safty Associate Planner Reviewed by: Planning Manager, Community Development Director, Town Attorney 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 03/26/2025 ITEM NO: 4 DATE: March 21, 2025 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish Existing Commercial Structures, Construct a Mixed-Use Development (30 Multi-Family Residential Units) with Commercial Space on the Ground Floor, a Conditional Use Permit, a Condominium Vesting Tentative Map, and Remove Large Protected Trees Under Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) on Property Zoned C-2. Located at 143 and 151 E. Main Street. APNs 529-28-001 and -002. Architecture and Site Application S-24-007, Conditional Use Permit Application U-24-002, Vesting Tentative Map Application M-24-004, and Mitigated Negative Declaration Application ND-24-003. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Have Been Prepared. Property Owner: David Blatt, CSPN LLC. Applicant: Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners, Inc. Project Planner: Ryan Safty. RECOMMENDATION: Consider a request for approval to demolish existing commercial structures, construct a mixed- use development (30 multi-family residential units) with commercial space on the ground floor, a Conditional Use Permit, a condominium Vesting Tentative Map, and remove large protected trees under Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) on property zoned C-2, located at 143 and 151 E. Main Street. PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Central Business District Zoning Designation: C-2, Central Business District Commercial Zone Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Residential Development Parcel Size: 18,516 square feet (0.425 acres) Page 297 PAGE 2 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 Surrounding Area: CEQA: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have been prepared for this project (Exhibit 1). It has been determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment with adoption of the MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in Exhibit 19, to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level. FINDINGS:  As required by CEQA for adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;  As required that the project is consistent with the General Plan with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act;  As required by Section 66474 of the Subdivision Map Act with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act;  As required by Section 29.20.190 of the Town Code for granting a Conditional Use Permit;  The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act;  The project meets the Town of Los Gatos Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Multi- Family and Mixed-Use Residential Development with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act; and  As required by the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act for granting exceptions pursuant to California Government Code Section 65589.5 (d). CONSIDERATIONS:  As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application. Existing Land Use General Plan Zoning North Religious Institution Medium Density Residential R-M:5-12 South Los Gatos-Saratoga Adult Recreation Center and Hotel Los Gatos Public and Neighborhood Commercial C-1:PD East Los Gatos High School Public R-1:20:PS West Masonic Hall Central Business District C-2 Page 298 PAGE 3 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 ACTION: The Planning Commission will provide a recommendation to the Town Council who will render the final decision on the proposal. BACKGROUND: On June 14, 2023, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed a preliminary proposal at this site for a similar four-story proposal (Exhibit 5). The CDAC was generally supportive of the concept and provided the following summarized direction: preference for good architecture that continues the character of downtown; preference for small units; supportive of underground parking; importance of site landscaping and open space; preference of ownership over rentals; and supportive of mixed-use component near downtown. The applicant has included a response memorandum to the CDAC meeting minutes in Exhibit 6. Senate Bill 330 The Housing Crisis Act of 2019, or Senate Bill 330 (SB 330), became effective on January 1, 2020, and will remain in effect until it sunsets on January 1, 2030. SB 330 provides an expedited review process for housing development projects and offers greater certainty for applicants by allowing an optional vesting opportunity through the Preliminary Application process. Submittal of a Preliminary Application allows an applicant to provide a specific subset of information on the proposed housing development ahead of providing the full amount of information required by the Town for a housing development application. Once the preliminary application is “deemed submitted” and payment of the permit processing fee is made, a vesting date is established, freezing the applicable fees and development standards that apply to the project while the applicant assembles the rest of the materials necessary for a full application submittal. Eligible projects are exempt from discretionary review and must be consistent with objective zoning and design standards. The statute requires that a final decision be made in no more than five public hearings, including appeals. The SB 330 preliminary application for this project achieved a vesting date of May 3, 2024. Housing Accountability Act - Builder’s Remedy The California Legislature adopted the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) to "significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of California's communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects" [Gov. Code § 65589.5 (a)(2)(K)]. It is the policy of the state that the HAA "be interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing" [Gov. Code § 65589.5 (a)(2)(L)]. The "Builder's Remedy" provision of the HAA specifically prohibits a local agency from relying on inconsistency with zoning and general Page 299 PAGE 4 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 plan standards as a basis for denial of a qualifying housing development project unless the agency has adopted a sixth cycle housing element in substantial compliance with state law by January 31, 2023. The Town’s sixth cycle housing element was certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on July 10, 2024. The preliminary application for this project achieved a vesting date of May 3, 2024, prior to certification of the Town’s Housing Element. Therefore, the project qualifies as a Builder's Remedy project and the applicant has invoked the provisions of Builder’s Remedy with this proposed project. Project Site The subject property consists of two lots totaling 0.425 acres located at the intersection of E. Main Street, High School Court, and Church Street, immediately east of the Los Gatos High School (Exhibit 4). The site is currently developed with a commercial structure and a parking lot. The property has a General Plan designation of Central Business District and is zoned Central Business District Commercial (C-2). The preliminary application under SB 330 was deemed submitted on May 3, 2024, establishing the vesting date for the application. Therefore, the applicant vested to the Town’s development standards that were in effect on May 3, 2024. On June 18, 2024, the applicant submitted a formal application, within 180-days of the established vesting date as required by state law. Through the Town’s technical review process, the application was deemed complete on November 27, 2024, within the timelines prescribed by state law. The application includes a Vesting Tentative Map, requiring approval by the Town Council, pursuant to Town Code Section 29.10.020. The applicant seeks a recommendation on the development proposal from the Planning Commission to the Town Council, who will render the final decision on the project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood The subject property consists of two lots totaling 0.425 acres located at the intersection of E. Main Street, High School Court, and Church Street (Exhibit 4). The site is currently developed with a commercial structure occupied by a coffee shop and office uses, as well as a parking lot. A church (Los Gatos United Methodist Church) is located to the north, across Church Street. The Los Gatos-Saratoga Adult Recreation Center and Hotel Los Gatos are located to the south, across E. Main Street. Los Gatos High School is located to the east, across High School Court. The Masonic Hall is located to the west. Page 300 PAGE 5 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 B. Project Summary The applicant proposes demolition of the existing commercial structure and construction of a four-story mixed-use development consisting of 30 attached residential units along all four levels and a 2,416-square foot commercial space at the ground floor along the south- eastern corner of the property (Exhibit 19). Of the 30 units, six of the units (20 percent) would be designated as Below Market Price (BMP) units per the requirement of Builder’s Remedy. The applicant submitted a Project Description Letter (Exhibit 7) and Letter of Justification (Exhibit 8) discussing the project. As noted in the letters, the applicant is proposing two different below-grade options for parking; one with a single level of below- grade parking and the other with two levels. Both options would take vehicular access off of Church Street. C. Zoning Compliance The property is zoned C-2, or Central Business District Commercial. The C-2 zone is intended to encourage a viable and predominantly pedestrian-oriented Central Business District that facilitates a wide variety of retail, service, entertainment, and administrative uses, which are vital to a large trading area. Residential uses are only allowed in the C-2 zone within a mixed-use or live/work development with approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). A CUP was included with the application submittal. As described above, the Builder's Remedy provision of the HAA specifically prohibits a local agency from relying on inconsistency with zoning and general plan standards as a basis for denial of a qualifying housing development project, and there is no limit on the amount of exceptions requested as a part of a Builder’s Remedy project. As noted in the Letter of Justification (Exhibit 8), there are exceptions to Town Code requested with this application, including maximum floor area ratio, maximum building height, minimum required setbacks, and minimum parking requirements. Details on the Town Code requirements, requested exception amounts, and justification are provided in Exhibit 8. DISCUSSION: A. Architecture and Site Analysis The project proposes demolition of existing commercial structures and construction of a four-story, 52-foot tall, mixed-use building with underground parking accessed off of Church Street (Exhibit 19). The building would include 30 multi-family residential units distributed along all four floors of the building, with 2,416 square feet of pedestrian-oriented commercial space. The unit types include one, two, and three bedrooms ranging in size from 743 to 2,188 square feet. Each unit would have private open space in the form of a Page 301 PAGE 6 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 patio or balcony, ranging in size from 66 to 803 square feet. A summary of the unit types, sizes, and commercial space is provided on the floor plans (Exhibit 19, Sheets A2.0 – A2.3). A Project Description Letter discussing the project is included as Exhibit 7. B. Building Design As noted in the Project Description Section of the cover sheet of the plans (Exhibit 19) and the Project Description Letter (Exhibit 7), the proposed building takes its cue from the design of the Los Gatos High School located next door and the many significant brick structures located on Main Street and N. Santa Cruz Avenue. The design is inspired by the work of Architect William Weeks, the surrounding hotel, and the Masonic Hall next door. Example building designs from Architect William Weeks are provided on Sheet A0.1 of Exhibit 19 for added context. Building materials for the first three floors include brick walls, precast concrete façade detailing, iron balconies, metal grid windows, and canvas awnings. The fourth floor is stepped back to reduce the overall mass, and the proposed materials include exterior plaster walls, precast concrete detailing, and a sloped clay tile roof. The building would be four stories and 52 feet tall. Review by the Town’s Consulting Architect is typically required for Architecture and Site applications. For this application, it should be noted that the feedback provided by the Consulting Architect is subjective in nature and should not be used as the basis for a decision since the Town’s review is limited to objective standards only, pursuant to SB 330 and Builder’s Remedy. The Town’s Consulting Architect reviewed the proposed project and provided feedback and recommendations (Exhibit 10). The Consulting Architect noted that although the proposed building is much taller than the preponderance of structures in the site’s context, the presence of the adjacent high school provides a height transition for a taller building on this property. The Consulting Architect noted that the design is well done, but identified a few recommendations to enhance the building’s compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood: 1. Maximize the amount of landscaping along the E. Main Street frontage; 2. Extend the stone cornice and decorative stonework consistently around all sides of the building; 3. Add brick spandrel infill on the four-story wall over the primary E. Main Street entry; and 4. Modify the gable roof form on the rear façade to blend in better with the overall design. The applicant submitted a letter responding to these recommendations and summarizing design changes that were made (Exhibit 11). The applicant also provided a letter explaining how the proposed project complies with applicable sections of the Town’s Commercial Design Guidelines (Exhibit 9). Page 302 PAGE 7 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 The Town’s Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Residential Development (ODS) also contains building design standards related to building form and massing, façade articulation, materials, and roof design. Approximately half of the applicable standards in Section B-Building Design are not proposed and the applicant is requesting exceptions pursuant to Builder’s Remedy. The applicant provided the ODS Checklist in Exhibit 15, which includes reasoning to why certain standards are not proposed. Many of the standards marked as “no” in the ODS Checklist are either partially complied with, or the overall intent of the standard is met, but by using a different design technique. C. Height The proposed building would be four stories tall with a maximum height of 52 feet where 45 feet is the maximum allowed in the C-2 zone. The applicant has requested an exception to maximum building height pursuant to Builder’s Remedy, stating that the minor deviation in height is justified as it allows the project to accommodate 30 residential units and associated amenities. See Exhibit 8 for details on each of the exceptions requested, as well as justification to why each is needed to facilitate the project. D. Subdivision and Site Design The project includes a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes to divide airspace and allow each unit to be sold separately (Exhibit 19, Sheets C-1.0 and C-2.1). The map also shows sidewalk easements along all three street frontages. The proposed building footprint would occupy the majority of the site, with a proposed lot coverage of 72 percent. There is no maximum lot coverage in the C-2 zone. The applicant has requested exceptions to the required front setback (along E. Main Street), streetside setback (along High School Court), and the rear setback (along Church Street) pursuant to Builder’s Remedy. See Exhibit 8 for details on each of the setback exceptions requested, as well as justification to why they are needed to facilitate the project. Additionally, Sheet A1.0 of Exhibit 19 shows the required setbacks (red dashed line) in relation to the proposed setbacks. Parking for the property is proposed below-grade, with the entry ramp to the below-grade parking garage proposed off of Church Street. The applicant has provided two different options for the parking garage, which are discussed in more detail below. A vehicular entry gate is proposed along the entry ramp, with a 20-foot proposed setback from the rear property line to allow room for a car to queue off of the public street. The existing sidewalks along the three street frontages would remain, but would be updated with new landscaping and street trees, which is discussed in more detail below. As identified in the circulation plan (Exhibit 19, Sheet A0.5), the main resident lobby is accessed off E. Main Street, but residents can also enter the building on the High School Court frontage and along the west side property line. Each of the bottom floor units can Page 303 PAGE 8 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 also enter through their private patios, which face the three street frontages. The entrance to the commercial space is at the corner of Main Street and High School Court, recessed from the floors above to create a covered entry way of approximately 200 square feet which is noted as possible outdoor seating (Exhibit 19). Bike parking is proposed, but exceptions to many of the applicable bike-specific ODS are requested pursuant to Builder’s Remedy. A total of eight short-term bike parking spaces are proposed along the E. Main Street and High School Court frontages, where ODS A.2.2 requires 32 for the project. However, an excess of up to 42 long-term bike parking spaces are proposed to help off-set the shortage of short-term spaces, depending on the parking garage option chosen. The location requirements for both types of bike parking are complied with, but many of the minimum size standards would not be. See Exhibit 15 for additional information on the ODS exceptions. The ODS also has standards related to landscaping and open space. As noted on Sheet A0.6 of Exhibit 19, ten percent of the site area would be landscaped. However, due to the limited area of the proposed front setback, only 41 percent of the front setback is landscaped when ODS A.8.1 requires 50 percent. The landscape plan (Exhibit 19, Sheet L3.0) shows that trees, shrubs, and other plantings would be distributed on all four sides of the proposed building. Each unit would have private recreation space in the form of a patio or balcony, but the patio sizes on the first floor would be under the minimum 120-square foot requirement of ODS A.11.1. The private recreation space for floors 2, 3, and 4 would exceed the minimum requirement. Outdoor community recreation space is not proposed due to the size of the proposed building footprint in relation to the lot. See Exhibit 15 for additional information on the ODS exceptions pursuant to Builder’s Remedy. E. Parking Garage Options The applicant has proposed two different below-grade parking garage options for the project and is requesting that the Town approve both options. As noted in the Letter of Justification (Exhibit 8), given the costs and complexities inherent in below-grade construction, this parking optionality is essential for maintaining the project’s financial health, securing necessary construction financing, and ensuring adaptability to an uncertain market. Option 1 is for a two-level parking garage with 47 standard spaces; while Option 2 is a single level parking garage with 39 spaces with the use of parking stackers and tandem spaces, which are not standard in the Town. Consistent with the project’s vesting date, the applicable Town Code requirements for parking in a multi-family residential project are one and one-half spaces for each unit, plus one space per unit for guest parking. Town Code requirements for commercial parking is one space per 300 square feet. This equates to 45 resident parking spaces, 30 guest parking spaces, and nine spaces for the commercial space for a total requirement of 84 spaces. It is also worth noting that the property purchased 12 parking space credits in the Downtown Page 304 PAGE 9 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 Parking Assessment District in 1989, which brings the required parking total down to 72 spaces. Neither Option 1 (47 spaces) or Option 2 (39 spaces) would meet this requirement, and the applicant is requesting an exception pursuant to Builder’s Remedy. F. Tree Impacts There are ten existing trees in the vicinity of the development; three are on the subject property, five are street trees along E. Main Street, and two are on the property to the west along the shared property line. The development plans show that all three on-site trees would be removed, as well as three of the street trees, all of which are protected trees under the Town Code. Based on the canopy size of the protected trees proposed for removal, 17 24-inch box trees would need to be planted onsite to offset the removal. The applicant has the option to request in-lieu payment for any required replacement trees that cannot be accommodated on site. The schematic planting plan shows that 21 new trees are proposed on site, ranging in size from 24-inch box to 48-inch box (Exhibit 19, Sheet L3.0.) The applicant submitted an arborist report for peer review by the Town’s Consulting Arborist. Following the review, the revised arborist report from the applicant was confirmed to meet the Town’s requirements by the Consulting Arborist. The arborist report for the project is included as Exhibit 13 and tree protection details are provided on Sheet T-1.0 of Exhibit 19. If the project is approved, tree protection measures would be implemented prior to construction and maintained for the duration of construction activity. Arborist recommendations for tree protection, as well as compliance with the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance, are included in the MND as Mitigation Measure BIO-2, and compliance with each mitigation measure has been included in the Conditions of Approval (Exhibit 3). G. Public Health and Safety Standards: During the Town’s review process, the Town’s Planning, Building, and Parks and Public Works staff, as well as the Santa Clara County Fire Department, reviewed the application for compliance with applicable objective standards. Although exceptions pursuant to Builder’s Remedy are requested for some of the design and density standards, the proposed application was reviewed and deemed consistent with applicable public health and safety standards with the inclusion of the recommended conditions of approval in Exhibit 3, if approved by the Town Council. As a part of the Initial Study and MND prepared for this application (Exhibit 1), the project was reviewed for CEQA compliance on a number of required topics, including the following which are related to public health and safety: Air Quality; Geology and Soils; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Hydrology and Water Quality; Noise; Page 305 PAGE 10 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 Public Services; Transportation, including review on whether the project would result in inadequate emergency access; Utilities and Service Systems; and Wildfire. As described in the CEQA Determination section of this report below, it was determined that the project would not result in a significant impact in each of the categories either as proposed or with the inclusion of mitigation measures. Each of these mitigation measures are included in the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit 3. Specifically for transportation, a Transportation Study was prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (Exhibit 1, Appendix H) for the proposed project. As noted in the study, Town Council designated the use of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the metric for conducting transportation analyses pursuant to CEQA and establishing the thresholds of significance to comply with Senate Bill 743 (Resolution 2020-045). Consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 150643, the Town of Los Gatos has adopted the following thresholds of significance to guide in determining when a land use project will have a significant transportation impact. First, “project impact”, where a significant impact would occur if the total VMT per service population for the project would exceed a level of 11.3% below the total VMT per service population for the Town of Los Gatos baseline conditions. Second, “project effect”, where a significant impact would occur if the project increases total (boundary) County-wide VMT by 6.5% compared to baseline conditions. The proposed development was determined to not have significant project impact or cumulative project effect. Additionally, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (2021), it is estimated that the proposed project would generate 17 new daily trips, with no new trips during the AM and PM peak hours. Therefore, no offsite traffic operations analysis is necessary. H. Density and Below Market Price (BMP) Units The proposed project includes a total of 30 units, six of which would be designated as affordable units. The Town’s General Plan allows a maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre at this location, which would allow a maximum of 8.49 units on the 0.425-acre property. The proposed 30 units would provide a density of approximately 71 dwelling units per acre. However, as this project has invoked Builder’s Remedy and proposes 20 percent of the units to be designed as affordable for lower income households (six of the thirty units), the General Plan density can be exceeded. The proposed floor plans on Sheets A2.0 through A2.3 of Exhibit 19 show the distribution of the six BMP units along the second and third floors. The BMP units will be restricted to those low-income households whose income is above 50 percent, but no greater than 80 percent of the median area income. Conditions of approval are included in Exhibit 3 pertaining to the provision and sale of the BMP units. Page 306 PAGE 11 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 I. No Net Loss Law Pursuant to Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss Law), the Town must maintain adequate capacity in the Housing Element to accommodate its remaining unmet Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) by each income category at all times throughout the entire planning period. To comply with the No Net Loss Law, as the Town makes decisions regarding zoning and land use, or development occurs, the Town must assess its ability to accommodate new housing within the remaining capacity of the Housing Element. If the Town approves a development of a parcel identified in the Housing Element with fewer units than anticipated, the Town must either make findings that the remaining capacity of the Housing Element is sufficient to accommodate the remaining unmet RHNA by each income level, or identify and make available sufficient sites to accommodate the remaining unmet RHNA for each income category. The Town may not disapprove a housing project on the basis that approval of the development would trigger the identification or zoning of additional adequate sites to accommodate the remaining RHNA. The subject property was not identified in the Sites Inventory of the Housing Element, and therefore, the findings related to the Not Net Loss are not applicable for this project. However, the proposed housing units would count towards fulfilling the Town’s RHNA requirements. The Town is not required to identify additional sites to accommodate the remaining RHNA as a result of this project. J. Neighbor Outreach The applicant has reached out to the Los Gatos High School. A summary of this correspondence is provided in Exhibit 16. K. CEQA Determination An Initial Study was prepared for the project, which included a number of project-level technical studies, including: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Health Risk, and Energy Analysis (CalEEMod Results); Special-Status Species Evaluation; Arborist Report; Emission Factors Model (EMFAC); Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment; Noise Assessment; and Transportation Analysis (Exhibit 1). All technical reports were peer reviewed by the Town or prepared by the Town’s consultants. The Initial Study concluded that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment with adoption of the MND and MMRP to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level. Each of the 13 mitigation measures identified in the MND (AQ-1, AQ-2, BIO-1, BIO-2, CUL-1, CUL-2, GEO-1, GEO-2, GHG-1, HAZ-1, N-1, N-2, and TRANS-1) are included in the MMRP (Exhibit 19) and as Conditions of Approval in Exhibit 3. Page 307 PAGE 12 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 The CEQA mandated 20-day public review period began on February 28, 2025, and ended on March 20, 2025. Exhibit 20 includes a response to comments received on the MND. Exhibit 21 includes a revised MND in response to public comments received during the public review period. The only change to the MND in Exhibit 21 is for a slight modification to the wording of mitigation measure BIO-1, at request of the applicant. Condition of Approval 22 has been updated in Exhibit 3 to reflect this revision. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Project identification signage was installed on the E. Main Street, High School Court, and Church Street frontages by September 4, 2024, consistent with Town policy. Visual simulations were completed by the Town’s consultant and posted to the Town’s website by February 25, 2025 (Exhibit 14). Written notice was sent to property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the subject property and notice of public hearing signage was installed on the street frontages by March 7, 2025, in anticipation of the March 26, 2025, Planning Commission hearing. Staff conducted outreach through the following media and social media resources, for the availability of the visual simulations, public review of the Initial Study and MND, and notice of the public hearing:  The Town’s website home page, What’s New;  The Town’s Facebook page;  The Town’s Twitter account;  The Town’s Instagram account; and  The Town’s NextDoor page. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, March 21, 2025, are included as Exhibit 17. The applicant submitted a response to the public comments, which is included as Exhibit 18. CONCLUSION: A. Summary The applicant is requesting approval of Architecture and Site, Conditional Use Permit, and Subdivision applications to demolish the existing commercial structure, construct a four- story mixed-use development (30 multi-family residential units) with commercial space on the ground floor, a Conditional Use Permit, a condominium Vesting Tentative Map, and remove large protected trees under SB 330 on property zoned C-2, located at 143 and 151 E. Main Street. As detailed above, the application was submitted and is being processed under SB 330, and the applicant has requested a number of exceptions to Town standards pursuant to Builder’s Remedy. Page 308 PAGE 13 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 B. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the request and, if merit is found with the proposed project, forward a recommendation that the Town Council approve the Architecture and Site, Conditional Use Permit, Subdivision, and Mitigated Negative Declaration applications by taking the following actions: 1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND-24-003) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 1, Exhibit 19, and Exhibit 21) and make the finding that the project, with adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, will not have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA; 2. Make the finding that the project is consistent with the General Plan with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act (Exhibit 2); 3. Make the finding that the proposed project complies with Section 66474 of the State Subdivision Map Act with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act and make affirmative findings to approve the subdivision (Exhibit 2); 4. Make the findings as required by Section 29.20.190 of the Town Code for granting a Conditional Use Permit (Exhibit 2); 5. Make the finding that the project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act (Exhibit 2); 6. Make the finding that the project meets the Town of Los Gatos Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Residential Development with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act (Exhibit 2); 7. Make the finding that, as required by California Government Code Section 65589.5(d) of the California Housing Accountability Act, none of the findings for denial of a Builder’s Remedy project can be made (Exhibit 2); 8. Make the considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture and Site application (Exhibit 2); and 9. Approve Architecture and Site Application S-24-007, Conditional Use Permit Application U-24-002, Subdivision Application M-24-004, and Mitigated Negative Declaration Application ND-24-003 with the recommended conditions contained in Exhibit 3 and the development plans in Exhibit 19. Page 309 PAGE 14 OF 14 SUBJECT: 143 and 151 E. Main Street/ S-24-007, U-24-002, M-24-004, and ND-24-003 DATE: March 21, 2025 C. Alternatives Alternatively, the Planning Commission can: 1. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction; or 2. Approve the applications with additional and/or modified conditions; or 3. Deny the applications. EXHIBITS: 1. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration with Appendices A through H (available online at https://www.losgatosca.gov/143EMainStCEQA) 2. Required Findings and Considerations 3. Recommended Conditions of Approval 4. Location Map 5. June 14, 2023, Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 6. Applicant’s Response to Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Comments 7. Project Description Letter 8. Letter of Justification 9. Commercial Design Guidelines Compliance 10. Consulting Architect’s Report 11. Applicant’s Response to Consulting Architect’s Report 12. Consulting Arborist’s Peer Review 13. Final Arborist’s Report 14. Visual Renderings 15. Objective Design Standards Checklist 16. Summary of Neighborhood Outreach 17. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, March 21, 2025 18. Applicant’s Response to Public Comments 19. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 20. Public Comments and Responses Regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration 21. Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration in Response to Public Review Comments 22. Development Plans Page 310 C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpE1C2.tmp PLANNING COMMISSION – March 26, 2025 REQUIRED FINDINGS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR: 143 and 151 E. Main Street Architecture and Site Application S-24-007 Conditional Use Permit Application U-24-002 Vesting Tentative Map Application M-24-004 and Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-24-003 Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish Existing Commercial Structures, Construct a Mixed-Use Development (30 Multi-Family Residential Units) with Commercial Space on the Ground Floor, a Conditional Use Permit, a Condominium Vesting Tentative Map, and Remove Large Protected Trees Under Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) on Property Zoned C-2. APNs 529-28-001 and -002. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Have Been Prepared. Property Owner: David Blatt, CSPN LLC. Applicant: Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners, Inc. Project Planner: Ryan Safty FINDINGS Required finding for CEQA: ■ An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for this project. It has been determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment with adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level. Required finding for consistency with the Town’s General Plan: ■ That the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and its Elements with granting of the requested exceptions to Town maximum allowed density and floor area ratio standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5(d). Required findings to deny a Subdivision application: ■ As required by Section 66474 of the State Subdivision Map Act the map shall be denied if any of the following findings are made: None of the findings could be made to deny the application with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5(d). EXHIBIT 2 Page 311 C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpE1C2.tmp Instead, the Town Council makes the following affirmative findings: a. That the proposed map is consistent with all elements of the General Plan with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5(d). b. That the design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with all elements of the General Plan with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5(d). c. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. d. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e. That the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat with implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Conditions of Approval. f. That the design of the subdivision and type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. g. That the design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Required findings for a Conditional Use Permit: ■ As required by Section 29.20.190 of the Town Code for granting a Conditional Use Permit: The deciding body, on the basis of the evidence submitted at the hearing, may grant a conditional use permit when specifically authorized by the provisions of the Town Code if it finds that: 1. The proposed use is desirable to the public convenience because it provides additional residential dwelling units and commercial space in the Town. 2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity of the zone, in that the proposed use is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-2 zone. 3. The proposed use would not be detrimental to public health, safety, or general welfare, as the conditions placed on the permit and existing regulations would maintain the welfare of the community. 4. The proposed use is in conformance with the Town Code and General Plan with granting of the requested exceptions pursuant to State Builder’s Remedy Law. Required compliance with the Zoning Regulations: ■ The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5(d). Page 312 C:\Users\MeetingsOfficeUser12\AppData\Local\Temp\tmpE1C2.tmp Required compliance with the Town of Los Gatos Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Residential Development: ■ The project meets the Town of Los Gatos Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Multi- Family and Mixed-Use Residential Development with granting of the requested exceptions to Town standards pursuant to the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act, California Government Code Section 65589.5(d). Required findings to deny a project under State Builder’s Remedy Law: As required by California Government Code Section 65589.5(d) of the California Housing Accountability Act, a qualifying housing development project invoking Builder’s Remedy shall not be denied by the Town, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing development project infeasible, including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based on the preponderance of the evidence in the record, as to one of the following: None of the findings could be made to deny the application. 1. The Town did not have an adopted sixth cycle Housing Element by January 31, 2023. 2. The housing development project would not have a specific, adverse impact on the public health or safety. 3. The denial of the housing development project or imposition of conditions is not required in order to comply with specific state or federal law. 4. The housing development project is not proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project. 5. On the date the application for the housing development project was deemed complete, the Town had not adopted a revised housing element that was in substantial compliance with California Government Code Section 65589.5(d) of the California Housing Accountability Act, and the housing development project was inconsistent with both the Town’s Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Land Use Designation. CONSIDERATIONS Required considerations in review of Architecture and Site applications: ■ As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the applicable considerations in review of an Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project. Page 313 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 314 PLANNING COMMISSION – March 26, 2025 DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 143 and 151 E. Main Street Architecture and Site Application S-24-007 Conditional Use Permit Application U-24-002 Vesting Tentative Map Application M-24-004 and Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-24-003 Consider a Request for Approval to Demolish Existing Commercial Structures, Construct a Mixed-Use Development (30 Multi-Family Residential Units) with Commercial Space on the Ground Floor, a Conditional Use Permit, a Condominium Vesting Tentative Map, and Remove Large Protected Trees Under Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) on Property Zoned C-2. APNs 529-28-001 and -002. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Have Been Prepared. Property Owner: David Blatt, CSPN LLC. Applicant: Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners, Inc. Project Planner: Ryan Safty TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: Planning Division 1. APPROVAL: This project is vested to the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect on May 3, 2024, and these conditions of approval conform to those ordinances, policies, and standards. This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval and in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans and/or business operation shall be approved by the Community Development Director, Development review Committee, or the Planning Commission depending on the scope of the changes. 2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested. 3. BELOW MARKET PRICE (BMP) UNIT: The developer shall provide six for sale BMP units (low income) to be sold at a price that is affordable to the target household income range, as required by the Town’s applicable BMP Program Guidelines and the applicable BMP Resolution. A deed restriction shall be recorded prior to the issuance of any building permits for residential units, stating that the BMP unit must be sold and maintained as a below market price unit pursuant to the Town’s BMP Ordinance and Guidelines. 4. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT: Prior to issuance of building permits for residential units, the developer shall enter into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the Town for provision of the required BMP units and to facilitate their sale pursuant to the BMP Program Guidelines and BMP Resolution in place at the time of building permit issuance. EXHIBIT 3 Page 315 5. PHASING OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF BMP UNITS: The BMP units shall be constructed and Certificate of Occupancies secured in proportion with or prior to the construction of the market rate units. 6. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Prior to final inspection, exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security. 7. EXISTING TREES: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site. 8. TREE STAKING: Prior to final inspection, all newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties. 9. LANDSCAPING: Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, all landscaping must be completed. 10. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO), whichever is more restrictive. Submittal of a Landscape Documentation Package pursuant to WELO is required prior to issuance of Building and/or Grading Permits. This is a separate submittal from your Building Permit. A review deposit based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review. A completed WELO Certificate of Completion Appendix C) is required prior to final inspection/certificate of occupancy. 11. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE: Project identification signage on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of final action on the applications. 12. ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT: Prior to final inspection, any new or modified roof mounted equipment shall be fully screened. 13. CC&RS: CC&Rs must be approved by the Town and recorded with the County prior to building permit issuance. 14. SIGN PERMIT: A Sign Permit from the Los Gatos Community Development Department must be obtained prior to any changes to existing signs or installation of new signs. 15. CERTIFICATE OF USE AND OCCUPANCY: A Certificate of Use and Occupancy must be obtained prior to commencement of use. 16. BUSINESS LICENSE: A business license is required from the Town of Los Gatos Finance Department prior to commencement of use. 17. REUSABLE MATERIALS: All reusable materials from residential, commercial, and construction/renovation activities shall be recycled. 18. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement (“the Project”) from the Town shall defend (with counsel approved by Town), indemnify, and hold harmless the Town, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding (including without limitation any appeal or petition for review thereof) against the Town or its agents, officers or employees related to an approval of the Project, including without limitation any related application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, compliance or failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and/or processing methods (“Challenge”). Town may (but is not obligated to) Page 316 defend such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at applicant’s sole cost and expense. Applicant shall bear any and all losses, damages, injuries, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, staff time and in-house attorney’s fees on a fully-loaded basis, attorney’s fees for outside legal counsel, expert witness fees, court costs, and other litigation expenses) arising out of or related to any Challenge (“Costs”), whether incurred by Applicant, Town, or awarded to any third party, and shall pay to the Town upon demand any Costs incurred by the Town. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all the applicant’s sole cost and expense. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the applicant’s indemnity obligation. 19. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MITIGATION MEASURE CONDITIONS: 20. Mitigation Measure AQ-1: The applicant shall prepare a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activities, including tree removal. The Construction Management Plan shall include the following measures to reduce toxic air contaminant emissions during construction: a. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles will have 2010 or newer model year engines, in compliance with the California Air Resources Board’s Truck and Bus Regulation; b. Idling of construction equipment and heavy-duty diesel trucks will be avoided where feasible, and if idling is necessary, it will not exceed three minutes; c. All construction equipment will be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and will be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator; and d. All non-road diesel construction equipment will, at a minimum, meet Tier 3 emission standards listed in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 89, Subpart B, §89.112. Further, where feasible, construction equipment will use alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas, propane, electricity, or biodiesel. 21. Mitigation Measure AQ-2: The project applicant shall ensure that MERV 13 air filtration systems, or an equivalent system, are included in the design and operations of the proposed project. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and specifications demonstrating compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification. These plans shall identify the locations and specifications of the air filtration systems and confirm they meet the performance standards for particulate and airborne pollutant removal. Page 317 The air filtration systems must be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Verification of proper installation and functionality shall be conducted by a licensed professional and documented in a final compliance report, which must be submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for approval. The property owner or operator shall also establish a maintenance plan for the air filtration system to ensure ongoing performance in accordance with manufacturer specifications. 22. Mitigation Measure BIO-1: To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. One survey for active bird nests shall occur within 48 hours prior to ground disturbance. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. The survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos. 23. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Per Town Code Section 26.20.010 and Chapter 29, Article 1, Division 2, the developer shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to the removal of protected trees on private or Town property. The project developer shall abide by any tree replacement ratios and/or in-lieu payments, tree protection measures, and best management practices required by the tree removal permit and/or within the arborist report dated October 24, 2024. Page 318 24. Mitigation Measure CUL-1: The following language shall be incorporated into any plans associated with tree removal, grading, and construction, “In the event that archaeological resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, contractor shall temporarily halt or divert excavations within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated. All potentially significant archaeological deposits shall be evaluated to demonstrate whether the resource is eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources, even if discovered during construction. If archaeological deposits are encountered, they will be evaluated and mitigated simultaneously in the timeliest manner practicable, allowing for recovery of materials and data by standard archaeological procedures. For indigenous archaeological sites, this data recovery involves the hand‐ excavated recovery and non‐destructive analysis of a small sample of the deposit. Historic resources shall also be sampled through hand excavation, though architectural features may require careful mechanical exposure and hand excavation. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance by a qualified Archaeologist. Significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, glass, ceramics, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.” 25. Mitigation Measure CUL-2: The following language shall be incorporated into any plans associated with tree removal, demolition, grading, and construction, “In the event that human remains (or remains that may be human) are discovered at the project site, Public Resource Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. All grading or earthmoving activities shall immediately stop within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find. The Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified immediately, and the coroner shall be permitted to examine the remains as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If human remains are determined as those of Native American origin, the project proponent shall comply with the state relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (Public Resource Code [PRC] § 5097). The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to determine the most likely descendant(s) (MLD). The MLD shall complete his or her inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD will determine the most appropriate means of treating the human remains and associated grave artifacts, and shall oversee the disposition of the remains. In the event the NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being granted access to the site, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity within the project area in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify the MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being allowed access to the site; b) the Page 319 descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.” 26. Mitigation Measure GEO-1: The applicant shall prepare a soils report addressing, but not limited to: foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, and impacts associated with lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. The soils report shall be submitted to the Town Building Division for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. All recommendations outlined in the soils report shall be incorporated into the project design. 27. Mitigation Measure GEO-2: The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit: “If paleontological resources are uncovered during demolition, grading or other on-site excavation activities, construction activities in the area shall be suspended. The developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist to examine the site and identify protective measures to be implemented to protect the paleontological resource. The measures shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director.” 28. Mitigation Measure GHG-1: The project developer shall incorporate the following GHG emissions reduction performance standard into the final project design:  No permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the project plans; no natural gas shall be made available through permanent natural gas infrastructure. The project shall be all electric. Final plans for the development shall be reviewed by the Town Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure this performance standard is incorporated into the project design. Verification of development consistent with this performance standard shall be assured prior to approval of occupancy permits. 29. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: The project developer shall conduct soil vapor testing on the project site prior to issuance of a grading permit. The results of the soil vapor testing shall be reviewed by the Town Engineer and only with approval by the Town Engineer can any grading and earth-moving construction activities take place. If soil vapor testing comes back with concentration levels that exceed safety thresholds for residential uses, the Town Engineer shall determine if Environmental Solutions should provide recommendations for construction of the project. If soil vapor testing comes back with concentration levels below safety thresholds, no further action is necessary. Page 320 30. Mitigation Measure N-1: The project developer shall ensure that no individual piece of construction equipment produce a noise level exceeding 85 dBA at 25 feet. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification.  The project developer shall also ensure that best management practices are incorporated during construction activities. The following shall be placed on all ground-disturbing project plans:  All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and muffled as to minimize noise generation at the source.  Noise‐producing equipment shall not be operating, running, or idling while not in immediate use by a construction contractor.  All noise‐producing construction equipment shall be located and operated, to the extent possible, at the greatest possible distance from any noise‐sensitive land uses.  Locate construction staging areas, to the extent possible, at the greatest possible distances from any noise‐sensitive land uses.  Signs shall be posted at the construction site and near adjacent sensitive receptors displaying hours of construction activities and providing the contact phone number of a designated noise disturbance coordinator. 31. Mitigation Measure N-2: The project developer shall install mechanical ventilation or air conditioning for all residential units so that windows and doors can remain closed for sound insulation purposes. Implementation of this measure is subject to review and approval by the Town Building Department, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. 32. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Project improvements plans shall include the following, subject to review and approval by the Town Engineer, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit: a. Stripe a loading space along the project frontage on E. Main Street; b. Apply 10 feet of No Parking (Red Zone) on both sides of the project driveway on Church Street; and c. Provide adequate landing space at the top and bottom of the garage ramps. Building Division 33. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Demolition Permit is required for the demolition of the existing structure. A separate Building Permit is required for the construction of the new multi- family structure with commercial/retail space, and underground parking. An additional Building Permit will be required for the PV System that is required by the California Energy Code. 34. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2023, are the 2022 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12, including locally adopted Energy Reach Codes. 35. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. Page 321 36. BUILDING & SUITE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new building addresses to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process. 37. SIZE OF PLANS: Minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”. 38. REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURE: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application for the removal of each existing structure. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures obtained, and written verification from PG&E that all utilities have been disconnected, submit the completed form to the Building Department with the Air District’s J# Certificate, PG&E verification, and site plans showing all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and PG&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town. 39. AIR QUALITY: To limit the project’s construction-related dust and criteria pollutant emissions, the following the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)- recommended basic construction measures shall be included in the project’s grading plan, building plans, and contract specifications: a. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 2 minutes. Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. b. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. All non-road diesel construction equipment shall at a minimum meet Tier 3 emission standards listed in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 89, Subpart B, §89.112. c. Developer shall designate an on-site field supervisor to provide written notification of construction schedule to adjacent residential property owners and tenants at least one week prior to commencement of demolition and one week prior to commencement of grading with a request that all windows remain closed during demolition, site grading, excavation, and building construction activities in order to minimize exposure to NOx and PM10. The on-site field supervisor shall monitor construction emission levels within five feet of the property line of the adjacent residences for NOx and PM10 using the appropriate air quality and/or particulate monitor. 40. SOILS REPORT: A 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 report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics. 41. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth, or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations. 42. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall 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 that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and Page 322 elevations have been prepared according to the 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. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations 43. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be blue-lined (sticky-backed), i.e., directly printed, onto a plan sheet. 44. SITE ACCESSIBILITY: At least one accessible route within the boundary of the site shall be provided from public transportation stops, accessible parking and accessible passenger loading zones and public streets or sidewalks to the accessible building entrance that they serve. The accessible route shall, to the maximum extent feasible, coincide with the route for the general public. At least one accessible route shall connect all accessible buildings, facilities, elements and spaces that are on the same site. 45. ACCESSIBLE PARKING: The parking lots, as well as the parking structure, where parking is provided for the public as clients, guests, or employees, shall provide accessible parking. Accessible parking spaces serving a particular building shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible entrance. In buildings with multiple accessible entrances with adjacent parking, accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed and located closest to the accessible entrances. 46. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.40.020. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole. 47. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies. 48. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, 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 and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 49. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 50. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 Page 323 d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 e. Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department: (408) 918-3479 f. Local School District: The Town will 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 SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering Division THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE ADDRESSED OR NOTED ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS SUBMITTED FOR ANY BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME. 51. THIRD-PARTY PLAN CHECK FEE AND INSPECTION FEE – The Town will procure a third-party engineering firm to perform Plan Review and Inspection Services. Applicant shall provide an initial deposit of $50,000 plus a 20 percent fee for staff time to the Town for plan review and inspection services. This deposit and fee are required at the time of the project building permit submittal. Once this deposit is received, the Town will select the consultant and initiate the plan review process. The Applicant’s deposit will be charged on a time and materials basis. A supplemental deposit will be required if the remaining deposit is expected to be exhausted prior to completion of the work. Permitted work will not be allowed to continue without available funds to complete the required inspection services. Third-party engineering services will be required for the duration of the construction and project closeout phases. 52. STORM DRAINAGE FEE – The Applicant shall pay Storm Drainage Fees for the future construction of drainage facilities serving new buildings, improvements, or structures to be constructed which substantially impair the perviousness of the surface of land. The estimated fee, based on the site area of 0.425 acres, is $2,212.13. The Applicant shall pay this fee to PPW prior to issuance of the first building permit. 53. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES – The project is subject to the Town’s Traffic Impact Fee for the generation of new average daily trips. The Town’s Fee Schedule in effect at the time of vesting indicates a fee of $1,104 per additional average daily trip. This results in an estimated total amount due of $19,173.59. Payment of this Impact Fee is required prior to the issuance of the first building permit issuance. 54. CONSTRUCTION ACTITIVITIES MITIGATION FEE (ORDINANCE 2189) – Per the Town’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule in effect at the date of vesting, the project is subject to the Town’s Construction Activities Mitigation Fee based on the square footage of new buildings, 47,580 SF. The fee is $1.43 per square foot of new residential and non- residential building area. Therefore, the fee is calculated to be $68,039.40. Payment of this fee shall pe paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. 55. GRADING PERMIT – A grading permit is required for all site grading and drainage work that is outside the perimeter of a building, retaining wall footing, or other structure authorized by a valid building permit. The Applicant must submit a grading permit Page 324 application after the appeal period of the entitlement approval process has passed. Submittals are accepted through Accela only. The grading permit application shall include detailed grading plans and associated required materials. Plan check fees are based on the scope of onsite work. Prior to approval of the grading permit, the Applicant shall pay all fees due and provide faithful performance and payment securities for the performance of the work described and delineated on the approved grading plan, final erosion and sedimentation control plan, and interim erosion and sedimentation control plan (if required), in an amount to be set by the Town Engineer (but not to exceed one hundred (100) percent) of the approved estimated cost of the grading and erosion and sedimentation control measures. The form of security shall be one or a combination of the following to be determined by the Town Engineer and subject to the approval of the Town Attorney: (1) Bond or bonds issued by one or more duly authorized corporate sureties on a form approved by the Town; (2) Deposit with the Town, money, or negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing deposits of public monies; or (3) other instrument of credit from one or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the State or Federal Government wherein such financial institution pledges funds are on deposit and guaranteed for payment. The grading permit shall be issued prior to the issuance of the building permit unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. The permit shall be limited to work shown on the grading plans approved by the Town Engineer. In granting a permit, the Town Engineer may impose any condition deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to prevent the creation of a nuisance or hazard to public or private property, and to assure proper completion of the grading including but not limited to: (1) Mitigation of adverse environmental impacts; (2) Improvement of any existing grading or correction of any existing grading violation to comply with Town Code; (3) Requirements for fencing or other protection of grading which would otherwise be hazardous; (4) Requirements for dust, erosion, sediment, and noise control, hours of operation and season of work, weather conditions, sequence of work, access roads, and haul routes; (5) Requirements for safeguarding watercourses from excessive deposition of sediment or debris in quantities exceeding natural levels; (6) Assurance that the land area in which grading is proposed and for which habitable structures are proposed is not subject to hazards of land slippage or significant settlement or erosion and that the hazards of seismic activity or flooding can be eliminated or adequately reduced; and (7) Temporary and permanent landscape plans. 56. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to the issuance of any building permit and prior to any work being done in the Town's right-of-way, the Applicant must submit Public Improvement Plans for review and approval. All public improvements shall be made according to the Town’s latest adopted Standard Plans, Standard Specifications, and Engineering Design Standards. The Applicant is required to confirm the location of existing utility lines along the project frontage by potholing. Prior to any potholing, Applicant shall submit an Encroachment Permit application with a pothole plan for Town review and approval. The Applicant shall provide the pothole results to the Town Engineer prior to final design. All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and, if necessary, relocated as approved by the Town Engineer. No private facilities are permitted within the Town right-of-way or within any easement unless otherwise approved by the Town Page 325 Engineer. The Applicant shall have Public Improvement Plans prepared, stamped, and signed by a California licensed civil engineer. Once the Public Improvement Plans have been approved, the Applicant shall submit an application for an Encroachment Permit. The Encroachment Permit requires the Applicant to post the required bonds and insurance and provide a one (1) year warranty for all work to be done in the Town's right-of-way or Town easement. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any new concrete installed that is damaged shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense. Prior to issuance of the encroachment permit, the Applicant shall submit a temporary traffic control plan (“TTCP”) inclusive of all modes of travel for any lane or sidewalk closures. Special provisions such as limitations on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required. The TTCP shall comply with the State of California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (“MUTCD”) and standard construction practices. The project engineer shall notify the Town Engineer in writing of any proposed changes. Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the approval of the Town. The Applicant shall not commence any work deviating from the approved plans until such deviations are approved. Any approved and constructed changes shall be incorporated into the final “as-built” plans. Right-of-way improvements shall include, at a minimum, the following items: a. STREET BEAUTIFICATION - The Applicant shall improve the street frontage as shown on the approved entitlement plan set. b. STREET TREES - The Applicant shall plant seven (7) street trees along the project frontage. The street trees shall be per the entitled set and will include Town Standard tree grates. c. TREE GRATES – The Applicant shall install eight (8) Town Standard Tree Grates as specified in the approved plans. Tree grates shall be 4’x6’, model OT-T24 by Urban Accessories, and shall be black power coated. The tree grates shall be shown on the improvement plans to be located at the back of curb to the approval of the Town Engineer and shall be installed with the street trees prior to the first occupancy. d. STREET MARKINGS - The Applicant shall install necessary street markings of a material and design approved by the Town Engineer and replace any that are damaged during construction. These include but are not limited to all pavement markings, painted curbs, and handicap markings. All permanent pavement markings shall be thermoplastic and comply with Caltrans Standards. Color and location of painted curbs shall be shown on the plans and are subject to approval by the Town Engineer. Any existing painted curb or pavement markings no longer required shall be removed by grinding if thermoplastic, or sand blasting if in paint. e. SIDEWALK - The Applicant shall replace to Town standards all sidewalk surrounding the project site. Sidewalk replacement shall be constructed per the Town Standard Drawings. Sidewalk work in the Villa Hermosa area shall comply with the Villa Page 326 Hermosa Style per Standard Plan Nos. ST-224 and ST-225. f. CURB RAMP(S) - The Applicant shall construct four (4) bulb-out curb ramp(s) in accordance with the latest Caltrans State Standard Drawing. Both north-south curb ramps at the pedestrian crossing of Church Street on the north side of the project as well as both east-west curb ramps for the pedestrian crossing of High School Court on the east side of the project shall be constructed per this condition. The actual ramp "Case" shall be identified on the plans and shall be to the approval of the Town Engineer. g. CURB AND GUTTER - The Applicant shall replace to existing Town standards all curb and gutter surrounding the project site. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per the Town Standard Drawing ST-210 (Vertical) or ST-215 (Rolled). h. DRIVEWAY APPROACH(ES) - The Applicant shall install one (1) Town Standard driveway approach(es) as shown on the approved plans. The new driveway approach shall be constructed per the Town Standard Drawing. The Applicant shall install 10-feet of red curb on both sides of the project driveway to allow vehicles better sight distance when entering and exiting the driveway. i. DRIVEWAY REMOVAL - The Applicant is to remove all existing driveway approach and replace them with sidewalk, curb, and gutter per the Town Standard Drawings. j. LOADING ZONE – The Applicant shall install a loading zone along the project frontage on E. Main Street in accordance with Town Standard as directed by the Town Engineer. k. SEWER CLEAN-OUT - The Applicant shall install the sewer lateral clean-out within three-feet of the right-of-way on private property in accordance with the West Valley Sanitation District standards. Sewer clean-out(s) shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the first building. l. PARKING LOTS – The Applicant shall submit plans for all required off street parking lots showing proper grading, drainage, ramps profile, and parking dimensions in conformance with Town parking standards. The plans shall be approved by the Town Engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit. m. BICYCLE PARKING – The Applicant shall provide both long-term bicycle lockers and short-term bicycle racks on-site, as shown on the approved site plan, to the approval of the Town Engineer. n. STORM WATER CATCH BASIN(S) - The Applicant shall install standard storm water catch basins per approved Improvement Plans and in accordance with the Town Standard Drawing. o. STREETLIGHT(S) - The Applicant shall provide and install three (3) new post top street light(s) per Town Standard Drawing ST-271. The Applicant is responsible for all PG&E service fees and hook-up charges. Any new service point connection required to power the new lights shall be shown on the construction drawings along with the conduit, pull boxes and other items necessary to install the streetlights. An Isometric lighting level needs to be provided by the designer/contractor. A separate light study may be required by the Town Engineer. The Applicant shall provide banded banner brackets, to the approval of the Town Engineer, for each street light pole. The lights shall be shielded from residential units using an internal shielding device provide by Page 327 the manufacturer. The final location and style of street lights and poles are to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer during review of the submitted construction lighting plan. As these lights are a long lead-time item, it is recommended that the Applicant contact the manufacturer early in the construction phase of the project. Private lights shall be metered with billing addressed to the homeowners’ association. Pole numbers, assigned by PG&E, shall be clearly delineated on the plans. 57. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT – The Applicant shall apply and obtain a Tree Removal Permit from the Parks and Public Works Department for the removal of existing trees on-site or in the public right-of-way prior to the issuance of a building permit or demolition building permit, whichever is issued first. An arborist report may be required by the Town Arborist prior to the removal of any tree. 58. CONSTRUCTION PHASE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS – The Grading Permit Plans and Public Improvement Plans (together referred to as “Improvement Plans”) shall be submitted as a set to Parks and Public Works Department along with a title report dated no older than 30 days from the date the Improvement Plans are submitted. The Improvement Plans shall be submitted at the same time as the Building Plans are submitted to the Building Department. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Federal law, State law, Los Gatos Town Code, and the Los Gatos Standard Specifications and Details. Construction drawings shall comply with Section 1 (Construction Plan Requirements) of the Town’s Engineering Design Standards, which are available for download from the Town’s website. The Improvement Plans shall include: a. A cover sheet with at least the proposed development vicinity map showing nearby and adjacent major streets and landmarks, property address, APN, scope of work, project manager and property owner, a “Table of Responsibilities” summarizing ownership, access rights, and maintenance responsibilities for each facility (streets, utilities, parks, landscaping, etc.), a sheet index including a sequential numeric page number for each sheet (i.e. “Sheet 1 of 54”), the lot size, required and proposed lot setbacks by type, proposed floor areas by type for each building, average slope, proposed maximum height, and required and proposed parking count and type. b. The Approved Conditions of Approval printed within the plan set starting on the second sheet of the plan set. c. An Existing Site Plan showing existing topography, bearing and distance information for all rights-of-way, easements, and boundaries, any existing easements proposed to be quit-claimed, existing hardscape, existing above ground utility features, and existing structures. The Improvement Plans shall identify the vertical elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor responsible for the data presented. d. A Proposed Site Plan showing proposed topography, boundaries, proposed and existing to remain easements, hardscape, above ground utility features (hydrants, transformers, control cabinets, communication nodes, etc.), and structures. Include top and bottom elevations of every inflection point of each wall. Show proposed public right-of-way improvements. Distinguish proposed linework from existing linework using heavier line type for proposed. Page 328 e. A Grading and Drainage Plan clearly showing existing onsite and adjacent topography using labeled contour lines, drainage direction arrows with slope value, and break lines. Proposed and existing to remain hardscape elevations must be provided in detail including slope arrows. f. A Utility Plan showing appropriate line types and labels to identify the different types of utilities and pipe sizes. Utility boxes, hydrants, backflow preventers, water meters, sanitary sewer cleanouts, etc. shall be located on private property unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer. g. A Photometric Lighting Plan analyzing the full width of the adjacent right-of-way. The plan shall show the average maintained horizontal illumination in foot-candles and the average to minimum uniformity ratio. Lighting shall comply with the Town’s Standard Specification section 2.38. h. A Traffic Signal Plan (as applicable) shall include a conduit schedule, conduit plan, pole locations, streetlights, intersection striping, power connection and meter locations, and as directed. i. A Landscaping Plan for the project site and the full width of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project. The plans shall clearly identify public and private utilities and points of demarcation between the two. j. A Composite Plan showing civil, landscape, electrical, and joint trench locations combined on one drawing to identify potential conflicts between disciplines. The Composite Plan shall include the size, location, and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters, and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. Show preferred and alternative locations for all utility vaults and boxes if project has not obtained PG&E approval. A licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer shall sign the composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans. (All dry utilities shall be placed underground). A note shall be placed on the joint trench composite plans which states that the plan agrees with Town Codes and Standards and that no underground utility conflict exists. k. General Notes found in the Town of Los Gatos General Guidelines. l. A statement in the general notes indicating the need to obtain a Caltrans Oversized/Overweight Vehicles Transportation Permit if oversized or overweight vehicles are expected to be used m. A statement that all utility boxes in vehicular pathways shall be traffic-rated. 59. STANDARD PLAN COMPLIANCE – The project shall comply with the Town’s Standard Plans to the approval of the Town Engineer. Street improvements, all street sections, the design of all off-site storm drainage facilities shall be in accordance with most current Town Standard Specifications and Standard Plans approved by the Town Engineer. Improvements deemed necessary by the Town Engineer shall be shown on the Improvement Plans. 60. EXISTING FACILITY PROTECTION AND REPAIR – All existing public utilities shall be either protected in place, relocated, or repaired. The Applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal, and all new improvements that are damaged during construction or removed because of the Applicant’s operations. This includes Page 329 sidewalk, curb and gutter, streetlights, valley gutters, curb ramps, and any other existing improvements in the area that are not intended to be removed and replaced. The Applicant shall request a walk-through with the PPW construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. Said repairs shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of the project. 61. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES – All new services to the development shall be placed underground in accordance with the various utility regulations. Transformers and switch gear cabinets within designated Underground Districts shall be placed underground unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the Town and approved by the Town Engineer prior to installation. 62. UTILITY RESPONSIBILITIES – The Applicant is responsible for the maintenance of existing stormwater drainage facilities, including piped and open channel stormwater conveyances in private areas. The Applicant is responsible for all expenses necessary to connect to the various utility providers. Currently, the public storm sewer system is owned and maintained by the Town of Los Gatos, the water system in Los Gatos is owned and maintained by San José Water Company, and the sanitary sewer system in Los Gatos is owned and maintained by West Valley Sanitation District. Any alterations of the approved utilities listed must be approved by the Town prior to any construction. 63. UTILITY COMPANY COORDINATION – The Applicant shall negotiate any necessary right-of- way or easements with the various utility companies in the area, subject to the review and approval by the Town Engineer and the utility companies. Prior to the approval of the site plan for construction, the Applicant shall submit “Will Serve” letters from PG&E, San Jose Water, West Valley Sanitation District, West Valley Collections and Recycling, and AT&T (or the current “Carrier of Last Resort”) with a statement indicating either a list of improvements necessary to serve the project or a statement that the existing network is sufficient to accommodate the project. Coordination of the stormwater conveyance system will be addressed during the Grading Permit review. 64. PREPARATION OF ELECTRICAL PLANS – All street lighting and traffic signal electrical plans shall be prepared by a California registered professional engineer experienced in preparing these types of plans. The Applicant shall submit necessary stamped and signed Traffic Signal Plan with the Improvement Plans. 65. EXTERIOR SITE LIGHTING STANDARDS – The Applicant shall submit a photometric plan for on-site lighting showing lighting levels in compliance with the Town Standard Specifications section 2.38. The plan shall show the minimum maintained horizontal illumination in foot-candles and the uniformity ratio for all areas. This lighting standard is applicable to all parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and accessible grounds contiguous to all buildings. Private, interior courtyards not accessible to the public are not required to meet this standard. The lighting system shall be so designed as to limit light spill beyond property lines and to shield the light source from view from off site. The photometric plan shall be approved by the Town Engineer and shall be addressed on the construction plans submitted for the first building permit. Any subsequent building permits that include any site lighting shall also meet these requirements. 66. STORM DRAINAGE STUDY – The Applicant shall submit a Storm Drainage Study for the Page 330 proposed development stormwater conveyance system evaluating pre- and post- development peak discharge rates for the theoretical 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year (50- percent, 10-percent, and 1-percent annual chance) storm events including supporting hydraulic calculations for proposed pipe network. The study must address sizing and design details for the stormwater treatment systems proposed with the development. The study shall include an evaluation of the project site drainage including topography, natural drainage patterns, and existing man-made diversions (structures, raised pads, fences, etc.). If the study indicates that the theoretical water surface elevation or hydraulic grade line of the proposed development during a 10-year storm event is above ground level at any point, the Applicant shall construct and dedicate to the Town new downstream storm drainage facilities necessary to achieve a connection point water depth no more than 80 percent full during the projected 10-year storm event. The study must evaluate the 100- year storm event base flood elevation, if applicable. The finish floor elevations of all structures must be constructed at least 1-foot above this elevation. The Applicant shall submit the study for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 67. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – The Applicant shall develop a Storm Water Management Plan (“SWMP”) that complies with the California Water Board regulations and delineates site design measures, source control measures, low-impact-development (“LID”) treatment measures, hydromodification management measures, and construction site controls as appropriate. The Plan must indicate erosion protection measures for the inlet structures (e,g., pipe outlets, pump dissipator pipes, and/or bubblers). For the Bay Area Hydrology Model (“BAHM”) analysis, the Applicant must provide pump operations and intended routing during various runoff conditions (i.e., treatment runoff vs. Hydrologic Modification controls) and the rationale for the pump size selected relative to the treatment flow rate. The Applicant shall update the BAHM analysis to conform to project conditions to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and include a summary of the changes made to the BAHM analysis since the entitlement plan review for review by the C3 consultant. The Applicant must select and indicate bioretention area plants capable of withstanding and surviving the higher design ponding conditions. If pumps are proposed, the Applicant must: a. Provide pump discharge rates that receiving bioretention areas are capable of treating, to avoid consistently overwhelming the bioretention areas. b. The Applicant must integrate an X+1 redundancy and generator backups at all required pump locations and include an alarm system that will notify the owner or operator of a pump failure. c. If off-site improvements modify the quantities of regulated and unregulated off-site impervious area, the Applicant must update Section 2, item “d” and Section 8 of the C.3 Data Form to reflect those changes. 68. DEVELOPER STORM WATER QUALITY RESPONSIBILITY – The Applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors including subcontractors are aware of all stormwater quality measures and implement such measures. The Applicant shall perform all construction activities in accordance with approved Improvement Plans, Los Gatos Town Code Chapter 12 – Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control, and the National Pollutant Discharge Page 331 Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit. Failure to comply with these rules and regulations will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or a project stop order. 69. SITE DRAINAGE – No through curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drains (public or private) directly connected to public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate “NO DUMPING - Flows to Bay” NPDES required language using methods approved by the Town Engineer on all storm inlets surrounding and within the project parcel. Furthermore, storm drains shall be designed to serve exclusively stormwater. Dual- purpose storm drains that switch to sanitary sewer are not permitted in the Town of Los Gatos. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of an adjacent, downstream or down slope property. No pump discharge to the Town storm drain system is allowed. 70. CLEAN, INSPECT, AND REPAIR STORM LINE – If the project will connect to the public storm drainage system, the Applicant is required to evaluate the conditions of the existing storm lines along the project frontage by videotaping and providing the result to the Town Engineer. The Applicant shall clean and inspect (via remote TV camera) the storm line from the manhole upstream to the manhole downstream of the project area. The video inspection shall be done by a professional video inspection company and be completed prior to building permit issuance. The video of the inspection shall be reviewed with PPW and any cracked, broken, or otherwise compromised integrity is found, the areas of the line along the project frontage shall be repaired by the Applicant at the applicant’s expense. The Applicant shall include the required repairs on the Improvement Plans submitted. All necessary repairs to the storm line shall be completed and approved prior to the project connecting to the storm drainage system 71. GRADING & DRAINAGE WINTER MORATORIUM – All grading activity shall comply with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit and Chapter 12 of the Town Code. There shall be no earthwork disturbance or grading activities between October 15th and April 15th of each year unless approved by the Town Engineer. In order to be considered for approval, the Applicant must submit a Winterization Erosion Control Plan certified by a California certified QSD to the Town Engineer for review and approval. If grading is allowed during the rainy season, a maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on the exposed area. The submission of a certified plan does not guarantee approval. Any approved and executed plan must be kept on-site while the project is in construction. 72. EROSION CONTROL – The Applicant shall prepare and submit interim and final erosion control plans to the Town Engineer for review and approval. The interim erosion control plan(s) shall include measures carried out during construction before final landscaping is installed. Multiple phases of interim erosion control plans may be necessary depending on the complexity of the project. Interim erosion control best management practices may include silt fences, fiber rolls, erosion control blankets, Town approved seeding mixtures, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. The Applicant shall install, maintain, and modify the erosion control measures as needed to continuously protect downstream water quality. In the event an emergency modification is deemed necessary, the Applicant must implement necessary measures to protect downstream waterways immediately and Page 332 then submit the changes made within 24-hours to the Town Engineer for review and approval. The erosion control plans shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the most current California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP). Any fees or penalties assessed against the Town in response to the Applicant’s failure to comply with the Permit must be paid by the Applicant. The Applicant must permit Town staff onsite to conduct periodic NPDES inspections throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulations. 73. SITE TRIANGLE AND TRAFFIC VIEW AREA – Fencing, landscaping, and permanent structures shall be less than three-feet in height or have a minimum vertical clearance of 7.5-feet if located within the driveway view area, traffic view area, or corner sight triangle. The driveway and intersection site triangles are represented on Town Standard Drawing ST-231. The traffic view area and corner sight triangle are shown on Town Standard Drawing ST-232. This includes all above ground obstructions including utility structures, for example electric transformers. The various clearance lines shall be shown on the site plan to demonstrate compliance. 74. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW – Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant’s Geotechnical Engineer shall submit a design level geotechnical report. The report will require a peer review by the Town’s geological and geotechnical consultant. A deposit and fee for the peer review will be required per the Town’s fee schedule in effect at the time of vesting, unless there are any remaining deposit funds from the entitlement phase. The Town will route the design level geotechnical report to the Town’s peer review consultant once the report is submitted and deposit and fee are available. Once approved, the geotechnical engineer shall review the grading and drainage plan and proposed pavement and foundation design to verify that the design is in accordance with their recommendations. The Applicant’s Geotechnical Engineer’s approval shall be conveyed to the Town either by letter or by signing and stamping the plans. All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall be per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. The Applicant shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan. 75. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OBSERVATION – All grading activities shall be conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A report shall be filed with the Town of Los Gatos for each phase of construction stating that all grading activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s design level geotechnical report. The Applicant shall submit a Final Geotechnical Construction Observation and Testing Summary in an “as-built” letter/report prepared and submitted to the Town prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The Applicant shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan. 76. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING – After the issuance of any Grading or Encroachment permit and before the commencement of any on or off-site work, the Applicant shall request a pre-construction meeting with the PPW Inspector to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance, and other construction matters. At that meeting, the Applicant shall submit a letter acknowledging that: a. They have read and understand these project Conditions of Approval; Page 333 b. They will require that all project sub-contractors read and understand these project Conditions of Approval; and, c. They ensure a copy of these project Conditions of Approval will be posted on-site at all times during construction. 77. FLOOR DRAINS – All floor drains shall be plumbed to connect to the sanitary sewer system only. Site design must facilitate drainage away from building floor drains. 78. GARBAGE/RECYCLE STORAGE AND SERVICE – The Applicant shall provide adequate area within their property for the purposes of storing garbage and recycling collection containers for scheduled servicing by the Town’s solid waste collection provider. New food service buildings and/or multi-family residential complexes shall provide a covered or enclosed area for dumpsters and recycling containers. The area shall be designed to be hydrologically isolated. Areas around trash enclosures, recycling areas, and/or food compactor enclosures shall not discharge directly to the storm drain system. Any drains installed in or beneath dumpsters and compactors shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. Any drains installed in or beneath tallow bin areas serving food service facilities shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system with a grease removal device prior to discharging. The Applicant shall contact the local permitting authority and/or West Valley Sanitation District for specific connection and discharge requirements. The collection containers shall be brought to the service area on the day of service and returned to the storage enclosure by the property owner that same day. The containers are not to be in public view or in the public right-of-way prior to or beyond the scheduled service times. A letter from West Valley Collection and Recycling confirming serviceability and site accessibility shall be provided to the Town Engineer for approval prior to the approval of an occupancy permit. 79. OVERHEAD UTILITY CLEARANCE – For projects that have overhead utility lines on-site that travel over new buildings, the Applicant shall obtain a letter from the utility company indicating that there is adequate overhead clearance from the utility to the proposed building. The letter shall be submitted with the first set of improvement plans submitted. The plans shall show the existing utility pole, any necessary proposed pole protection (including overhead clearance warning identification), and shall be confirmed satisfactory with the utility company. The letter shall be to the approval of the Town Engineer. 80. SITE LANDSCAPING COORDINATION – The Applicant shall coordinate the overall site landscaping and the stormwater treatment area landscaping. Stormwater treatment areas should be identified on the site first, and then site landscaping to make sure the correct plant material is identified for each area. Some site landscaping plant material may not be suitable in stormwater treatment areas due to the nature of the facility. Sanitary sewer facilities cannot be aligned through stormwater treatment facilities. 81. OFF-HOURS MATERIAL DELIVERY – The Applicant shall coordinate with the future site operators so that all site delivery of materials and goods are delivered off-hours and on- site. This will allow the on-site customer parking for the development site to be utilized during business hours and not be impacted by the staging of delivery vehicles. The Applicant shall provide a written plan, to ensure that this condition is satisfied, prior to occupancy of the first site building. The plan shall be to the approval of the Town Engineer. Page 334 82. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (“TDM”) PLAN – The Applicant shall submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan prior to the issuance of any building permit. The TDM plan shall include the measures such as bicycle facility provisions, shower facilities, local shuttle service, transit passes and subsidies, carpool incentive, designated car share parking, and other measures that may be required by the Town Engineer to obtain a goal of a 15 percent vehicle trip reduction. The TDM plan shall also include a TDM Coordinator and identify the requirement for an annual TDM effectiveness report to be submitted the Town of Los Gatos. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP OR PARCEL MAP, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME 83. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT – Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, it shall be the sole responsibility of the project to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or permissions necessary to perform any work on neighboring private property herein proposed. Proof of agreement/approval is required prior to the issuance of any Permit. 84. FINAL MAP – The Applicant shall have a condominium map prepared by a person authorized to practice land surveying in California delineating all parcels created or deleted and all changes in lot lines in conformance with the Los Gatos Town Code and the Subdivision Map Act. Existing buildings shall be demolished prior to the recordation of the map if they will conflict with any newly created lot line. The Town Council must approve all Final Maps. The Town Council meeting will be scheduled approximately fifty (50) days after the Final Map, Public Improvement Plans, Stormwater Treatment Facilities Maintenance Agreement, Landscape Maintenance Agreement, and Subdivision Improvement Agreement are approved by the Town Engineer. The Final Subdivision Map shall be approved by PPW and recorded by the County Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of the first building permit. In lieu of the Town Clerk’s Office coordinating the recordation of the Final Map(s) with the County, the Applicant may submit a map guarantee by the Applicant’s title company for the release of the signed Final Map to the title company for recordation. Prior to the Town’s release of the Final Map, the Town Engineer may require the Applicant to submit to the Town an electronic copy of the map in the AutoCAD Version being used by the Town at the time of recordation. It is the Applicant's responsibility to check with their title company and the County Recorder’s Office to determine the time necessary to have the map recorded after Town approval. 85. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT (“SIA”) – The Applicant shall enter as a contractor into an agreement with the Town per Town Code Section 24.40.020, Gov. Code Section 66462(a), and shall arrange to provide Payment and Performance bonds each for 100 percent of the cost of public infrastructure improvements to be constructed in the public right-of-way. These improvements shall include, but not be limited to, roadway construction, sidewalk, curb and gutter, storm lines, streetlights, and signal equipment. Town Standard insurance shall be provided per the terms of the agreement. The agreement will be forwarded to the Town Council for approval with the project Final Map. The SIA shall be approved by the Town Council prior or at the same time as the Final Map. Page 335 86. MONUMENTS – The Applicant shall arrange for the engineer to have all monuments set per the recorded map. A certificate letter by the Surveyor or Engineer stating the monuments are set per plan shall be provided to the Town Engineer prior to occupancy. 87. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS & RESTRICTIONS (CC&R) – The Applicant shall prepare and submit draft project Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R) for the project. The CC&Rs shall be submitted with the project map for review and approval of the Town Engineer, the Town Attorney, and the Planning Manager. The CC&Rs shall include relevant project Conditions of Approval and shall include language that restricts the Homeowner’s Association from making changes to the CC&Rs without first obtaining approval from the Town. References to the Stormwater Treatment Facilities Maintenance Agreement obligations shall be incorporated. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved prior to the Town Council approval of the Final map. 88. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT/LOT MERGER – It shall be the Applicant's responsibility to have a lot line adjustment/lot merger documentation prepared by a person authorized to practice land surveying in California, delineating all changes in lot lines in conformance with the Los Gatos Town Code and the Subdivision Map Act. The lot line adjustment shall be approved by the Department of Public Works, recorded by the County Recorder’s Office, and a recorded copy of the document returned to the Town prior to the issuance of any Town permits. It is the Applicant's responsibility to check with their title company and the County Recorder’s Office to determine the time necessary to have the lot line adjustment/lot merger recorded after Town approval. 89. PAYMENT OF WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT FEES – All sewer connection and treatment plant capacity fees shall be paid either immediately prior to the recordation of any maps or immediately prior to the issuance of a sewer connection permit, which ever event occurs first. Written confirmation of payment of these fees shall be provided to the Town Engineer prior to map recordation. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO RELEASE OF UTILITIES, FINAL INSPECTION, OR ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME. 90. RECORD DRAWINGS – The Applicant shall submit a scanned PDF set of stamped record drawings and construction specifications for all off-site improvements to the Department of Parks and Public Works. All underground facilities shall be shown on the record drawings as constructed in the field. The Applicant shall also provide the Town with an electronic copy of the record drawings in the AutoCAD Version being used by the Town at the time of completion of the work. The Applicant shall also submit an AutoCAD drawing file of all consultants composite basemap linework showing all public improvements and utility layouts. This condition shall be met prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. 91. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – The Applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed during construction. Improvements such as, but not limited to curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, streetlights, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic Page 336 pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired or replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the PPW Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the PPW Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Applicant shall request a walk- through with the PPW Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 92. PAVEMENT RESTORATION – Due to construction activities, new utility cuts along the project frontage, and the anticipated project’s truck traffic, the Applicant shall grind and provide a 2.5” overlay with asphalt concrete the full width of East Main Street, High School Court, and Church Street along the project frontage. Prior to overlay, any base failure repair or required dig-outs identified by the PPW Inspector shall be completed. The Town Engineer shall approve the roadway repair prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. 93. STORMWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT – The Applicant shall execute and record a Stormwater Treatment Facilities Maintenance Agreement to ensure perpetual maintenance of the regulated project’s treatment facilities. The agreement shall outline the operation and maintenance (O&M) plan for the permanent storm water treatment facilities. The Town-Standard Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement will be provided by PPW upon request. The agreement shall be executed prior to occupancy of the first building and include the following: a. The property owner shall operate and maintain all on-site stormwater treatment facilities in good condition and promptly repair/replace any malfunctioning components. b. The property owner shall inspect the stormwater treatment facilities at least twice per year and submit an inspection report to PPW at PPW_Stormwater@losgatosca.gov no later than October 1st for the Fall report, and no later than March 15th of the following year for the Winter report. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include, at minimum, the following information: i. Site address; ii. Date and time of inspection; iii. Name of the person conducting the inspection; iv. List of stormwater facilities inspected; v. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected; vi. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and vii. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection. c. The property owner shall not make any design changes to the system with the Town’s approval. d. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance and replacement schedule for the stormwater treatment facilities that describes maintenance frequency and responsibility. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved Stormwater Treatment Facilities Maintenance Agreement. e. The property owner(s) shall reimburse the Town for the cost of site inspections Page 337 required under the Municipal Regional Permit. f. The property owner(s) shall authorize Town Staff to perform maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the property owner in the event that maintenance or repair is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to public health or safety. 94. STORMWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES INSPECTION – Prior to final inspection, the Applicant must facilitate the testing of all stormwater facilities by a certified QSP or QSD to confirm the facilities are meeting the minimum design infiltration rate. All tests shall be made at on 20 foot by 20 foot grid pattern over the surface of the completed stormwater facility unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer. All soil and infiltration properties for all stormwater facilities shall be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. Percolation tests (using Double Ring Infiltrometer Testing with appropriate safety factors) at horizontal and vertical (at the depth of the stormwater facility) shall be conducted for each stormwater facility. A 50 percent safety factor shall be applied to the calculated percolation test and shall be used as the basis for design (the design percolation rate). The geotechnical report shall include a section designated for stormwater design, including percolation results and design parameters. Sequence of construction for all stormwater facilities (bioswales, detention/ retention basins, drain rock, etc.) shall be done toward final phases of project to prevent silting of the stormwater treatment facilities. 95. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT – The Applicant shall enter into a Landscape Maintenance Agreement with the Town of Los Gatos in which the property owner agrees to maintain the vegetated areas along the project’s East Main Street, High School Court, and Church Street frontage located within the public right-of-way. The agreement must be executed and accepted by the Town Attorney prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit. 96. EMERGENCY RESPONDER RADIO COVERAGE – All new buildings, including parking garages and hospitals, shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders throughout their interiors. Prior to issuance of the final occupancy permit, the Applicant shall conduct a radio signal survey demonstrating compliance with Section 510 of the California Fire Code and the applicable provisions of NFPA 72 (National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code) and NFPA 1221 (Standard for the Installation, Maintenance, and Use of Emergency Services Communications Systems). Radio coverage must meet a minimum signal strength of -95 dBm, ensuring at least 95 percent coverage throughout general building areas and 99 percent coverage within critical areas, as defined by these standards. If the survey shows inadequate coverage, the Applicant shall install an approved Emergency Responder Radio Coverage System (ERRCS), such as an FCC-certified signal booster or distributed antenna system (DAS), meeting the requirements of the California Fire Code and referenced NFPA standards. All ERRCS installations must include battery backup, monitoring systems, and shall be tested and approved by the Fire Marshal (or designee) prior to occupancy. With approval of the Community Development Director and Police Chief, the requirements in this condition can be waived or modified when such change would not unnecessarily impair the provision of emergency communication as specified in this condition. Page 338 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, OR IF ANOTHER DEADLINE IS SPECIFIED IN A CONDITION, AT THAT TIME 97. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SETUP – All storage and office trailers will be kept off the public right-of-way. 98. PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION NOTICE – The contractor shall notify the PPW Inspector at least ten (10) working days prior to the start of any construction work. At that time, the Contractor shall provide an initial project construction schedule and a 24-hour emergency telephone number list. 99. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE – The contractor shall submit the project schedule in a static PDF 11”x17” format and Microsoft Project, or an approved equal. The Contractor shall identify the scheduled critical path for the installation of improvements to the approval of the Town Engineer. The schedule shall be updated monthly and submitted to the PPW Inspector in the same formats as the original. 100. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HANDOUT – The Contractor shall provide to the Town Engineer an approved construction information handout for the purpose of responding to questions the Town receives regarding the project construction. 101. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION – The Contractor shall always provide a qualified supervisor on the job site during construction. 102. PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION – All work shown on the Improvement Plans shall be inspected to the approval of the Town Engineer. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Town Engineer. 103. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION HOURS – Construction activities related to the issuance of any PPW permit shall be restricted to the weekday between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. No work shall be done on Sundays or on Town Holidays unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer. Please note that no work shall be allowed to take place within the Town right-of-way after 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. In addition, no work being done under Encroachment Permit may be performed on the weekend unless prior approvals have been granted by the Town Engineer. The Town Engineer may apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school commute routes. Onsite project signage must state the project construction hours. The permitted construction hours may be modified if the Town Engineer finds that the following criteria is met: a. Permitting extended hours of construction will decrease the total time needed to complete the project without an unreasonable impact to the neighborhood. b. Permitting extended hours of construction is required to accommodate a construction requirement such as a large concrete pour or major road closure. Such a need would be presented by the project's design engineer and require approval of the Town Engineer. c. An emergency situation exists where the construction work is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition resulting in obvious and eminent peril to public health and safety. If such a condition exists, the Town may waive any of the remaining Page 339 requirements outlined below. d. The exemption will not conflict with any other condition of approval required by the Town to mitigate significant environmental impacts. e. The contractor or property owner will notify residential and commercial occupants of adjacent properties of the modified construction work hours. This notification must be provided three days prior to the start of the extended construction activity. f. The approved hours of construction activity will be posted at the construction site in a place and manner that can be easily viewed by any interested member of the public. g. The Town Engineer may revoke the extended work hours at any time if the contractor or owner of the property fails to abide by the conditions of extended work hours or if it is determined that the peace, comfort, and tranquility of the occupants of adjacent residential or commercial properties are impaired because of the location and nature of the construction. h. The waiver application must be submitted to the PPW Inspector ten (10) working days prior to the requested date of waiver. 104. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BMPs – All construction activities shall conform to the latest requirements of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinances, the project specific temporary erosion control plan, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities. 105. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EXCAVATION – The following provisions to control traffic congestion, noise, and dust shall be followed during site excavation, grading, and construction: a. All construction vehicles should be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers that meet State standards. b. Travel speeds on unpaved areas shall be limited to fifteen (15) miles per hour. c. Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing 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. d. 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 by the Town, or a minimum 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 ensure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. e. Watering on public streets and wash down of dirt and debris into storm drain systems is prohibited. Streets will be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the PPW Inspector, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on-site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. Recycled water shall be used for construction watering to manage dust control where possible, as determined by the Town Engineer. Where recycled water is not available potable water shall be used. All potable construction water from fire hydrants shall be coordinated with the San Jose Water Company. Page 340 f. 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 Construction Inspector. g. Construction grading activity shall be discontinued in wind conditions in excess of 25 miles per hour, or that in the opinion of the PPW Inspector cause excessive neighborhood dust problems. h. Site dirt shall not be tracked into the public right-of-way and shall be cleaned immediately if tracked into the public right-of-way. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris shall not be washed into the Town’s storm drains. i. Construction activities shall be scheduled so that paving and foundation placement begin immediately upon completion of grading operation. j. All aggregate materials transported to and from the site shall be covered in accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code during transit to and from the site. k. Prior to issuance of any permit, the Applicant shall submit any applicable pedestrian or traffic detour plans to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer for any lane or sidewalk closures. The temporary traffic control plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans and in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and standard construction practices. The Traffic Control Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right-of- way. l. During construction, the Applicant shall make accessible any or all public and private utilities within the area impacted by construction, as directed by the Town Engineer. m. The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The Applicant shall require the soils engineer submit to daily testing and sampling reports to the Town Engineer. 106. MATERIAL HAULING ROUTE AND PERMIT – For material delivery vehicles equal to, or larger than two-axle, six-tire single unit truck size as defined by FHWA Standards, the Applicant shall submit a truck hauling route that conforms to Town of Los Gatos Standards for approval. Note that the Town requires a Haul Permit be issued for any hauling activities. The Applicant shall require contractors to prohibit trucks from using “compression release engine brakes” on residential streets. The haul route for this project unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer, shall be: East Main Street to Highway 9 to Interstate 17. A letter from the Applicant confirming the intention to use the designated haul route shall be submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of any Town permits. All material hauling activities including but not limited to, adherence to the approved route, hours of operation, staging of materials, dust control and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. 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 between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the Town Engineer. The Applicant must provide an approved method of cleaning tires and trimming loads on site. All material hauling activities shall be done in accordance with applicable Town ordinances and conditions of approval. Page 341 107. PROJECT CLOSE-OUT – Prior to requesting a Final Inspection, the Applicant shall submit to the Town Engineer a letter indicating that all project conditions have been met, and all improvements are complete. All work must be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and Town Engineer prior to the first occupancy. All public improvements, including the complete installation of all improvements relative to streets, fencing, storm drainage, underground utilities, etc., shall be completed and attested to by the Town Engineer before approval of occupancy of any unit. Where facilities of other agencies are involved, including those for water and sanitary sewer services, such installation shall be verified as having been completed and accepted by those agencies. In addition, the Applicant shall submit an itemized final quantities list of all public improvements constructed on-site and within the public right-of-way. The final quantities list shall be prepared by the project engineer and be to the approval of the Town Engineer. The final quantities list shall be broken out into on-site and off-site improvements based on the format provided by the Town. Until such time as all required improvements are fully completed and accepted by Town, the Applicant shall be responsible for the care, maintenance, and any damage to such improvements. Town shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements required for this project prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Applicant. 108. HOLIDAY CONSTRUCTION MORATORIUM – Due to concerns for business impacts during the holiday season (defined as starting the Monday of Thanksgiving week through January 1), there shall be no construction activities within the right-of-way which would create lane closures, eliminate parking, create pedestrian detours, or other activities that may create a major disturbance as determined by the Town Engineer. 109. CONSTRUCTION WORKER PARKING – The Applicant shall provide a Construction Parking Plan that minimizes the effect of construction worker parking in the neighborhood and shall include an estimate of the number of workers that will be present on the site during the various phases of construction and indicate where sufficient off-street parking will be utilized and identify any locations for off-site material deliveries. Said plan shall be approved by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of Town permits and shall be complied with at all times during construction. Failure to enforce the parking plan may result in suspension of the Town permits. 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 (§15.40.070). 110. SITE WATER DISCHARGE – In accordance with the Town Code, Prohibition of Illegal Discharges (Los Gatos Town Code Section 22.30.015), the Town Engineer may approve in coordination West Valley Sanitation District the discharge of uncontaminated pumped ground waters to the sanitary sewer only when such source is deemed unacceptable by State and Federal authorities for discharge to surface waters of the United States, whether pretreated or untreated, and for which no reasonable alternative method of disposal is available. Following the verification of the applicable local, state and/or federal Page 342 approvals, a Discharge Plan will be approved and monitored by the Town Engineer. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES THAT THE USE PERMITTED BY THIS ENTITLEMENT OCCUPIES THE PREMISES 111. POST CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) – Post construction storm water pollution prevention requirements shall include: a. The Applicant shall be charged the cost of abatement for issues associated with, but not limited to, inspection of the private stormwater facilities, emergency maintenance needed to protect public health or watercourses, and facility replacement or repair if the treatment facility is no longer able to meet performance standards or has deteriorated. Any abatement activity performed on the Applicant’s property by Town staff will be charged to the Applicant at the Town’s adopted fully-loaded hourly rates. b. Maintenance of the storm drain inlets “No Dumping – Drains to Bay” plaques to alert the public to the destination of storm water and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. Template ordering information is available at www.flowstobay.org. c. All process equipment, oils, fuels, solvents, coolants, fertilizers, pesticides, and similar chemical products, as well as petroleum based wastes, tallow, and grease planned for storage outdoors shall be stored in covered containers at all times. d. All public outdoor spaces and trails shall include installation and upkeep of dog waste stations. e. Garbage and recycling receptacles and bins shall be designed and maintained with permanent covers to prevent exposure of trash to rain. Trash enclosure drains shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. f. It is the responsibility of the property owner(s)/homeowners association to implement a plan for street sweeping of paved private roads and cleaning of all storm drain inlets. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 112. GENERAL: Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access, water supply and may include specific additional requirements as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits. 113. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Coversheet) Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12 whichever is the more restrictive and Sections 903.2.14 through 903.2.21. For the purposes of this section, firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas shall be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and shall be without openings or penetrations. 114. FIRE ALARM REQUIREMENTS: As Noted on Coversheet) Refer to CFC Sec. 907 and the Page 343 currently adopted edition of NFPA 72. Submit shop drawings (3 sets) and a permit application to the SCCFD for approval before installing or altering any system. Call (408) 341-4420 for more information. 115. FIRE HYDRANT REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet C-4.0) Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, onsite fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. Exception: For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3, the distance requirement shall be not more than 600 feet. [CFC, Section 507.5.1]. 116. PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANT REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet C-4.0) Provide a public fire hydrant at a final location to be determined jointly by the Fire Department and San Jose Water Company. Maximum distance of 337 feet from the building frontage, 500 ft between hydrants and a maximum of 100 feet from the FDC, with a minimum hydrant flow of 2400 GPM @ 20 psi residual. Fire hydrants shall be provided along required fire apparatus access roads and adjacent public streets. CFC Sec. 507, and Appendix B and associated Tables, and Appendix C. 117. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum require fireflow for this project is 2400 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fireflow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.3] Fire flow shall be met from the new hydrant and a fire flow letter shall be provided. 118. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: (As Noted on Sheet C-4.0) The fire department connection (FDC) shall be installed at the street on the street address side of the building. It shall be located within 100 feet of a public fire hydrant and within ten (10) feet of the main PIV (unless otherwise approved by the Chief due to practical difficulties). FDC's shall be equipped with a minimum of two (2), two-and one-half (2- 1/2”) inch national standard threaded inlet couplings. Orientation of the FDC shall be such that hose lines may be readily and conveniently attached to the inlets without interference. FDC's shall be painted safety yellow. [SCCFD, SP-2 Standard]. 119. BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES ACCESS: (As Noted on Sheet C-6.0) Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or with the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. [CFC, Section 503.1.1]. 120. REQUIRED AERIAL ACCESS: Where required: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. 2. Width: Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925) in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet (9144 mm) in height. 3. Page 344 Proximity to building: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building, as approved by the fire code official. SCCFD SD&S A-1. During building permit, unobstructed aerial access shall be demonstrated include any trees that are along the required access side of the building. 121. PARKING: (As Noted on Sheet C-6.0) When parking is permitted on streets, in both residential/commercial applications, it shall conform to the following: • Parking is permitted both sides of the street with street widths of 36 feet or more • Parking is permitted on one side of the street with street widths of 28 – 35 feet • No parking is permitted when street widths are less than 28 feet NOTE: Fire lane and turnaround striping shall be provided and verified by site inspection. 122. KNOX KEY BOXES/LOCKS WHERE REQUIRED FOR ACCESS: (As Noted on Sheet A2.0) Where access to or within a structure or an area is restricted because of secured openings or where immediate access is necessary for lifesaving or firefighting purposes, the fire code official is authorized to require a key box to be installed in an approved location. The Knox Key Box shall be a of an approved type and shall contain keys to gain necessary access as required by the fire code official. Locks. An approved Knox Lock shall be installed on gates or similar barriers when required by the fire code official. Key box maintenance. The operator of the building shall immediately notify the fire code official and provide the new key when a lock is changed or re-keyed. The key to such lock shall be secured in the key box. [CFC Sec. 506]. 123. GROUND LADDER ACCESS: (As noted on sheet L6.0) Ground-ladder rescue from second and third floor rooms shall be made possible for fire department operations. With the climbing angle of seventy five degrees maintained, an approximate walkway width along either side of the building shall be no less than seven feet clear. Landscaping shall not be allowed to interfere with the required access. CFC Sec. 503 and 1031.2 NFPA 1932 Sec. 5.1.8 through 5.1.9.2. 124. TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM: (As Noted on Coversheet) Two-way communication systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 72 (2022 edition), the California Electrical Code (2022 edition), the California Fire Code (2022 edition), the California Building Code (2022 edition), and the city ordinances where two way system is being installed, policies, and standards. Other standards also contain design/installation criteria for specific life safety related equipment. These other standards are referred to in NFPA 72. 125. EMERGENCY RESPONDER RADIO COVERAGE IN NEW BUILDINGS: (As Noted on Coversheet) All new buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication systems of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building. This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communication systems. CFC Sec. 510.1. 126. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying Page 345 the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2022 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7. 127. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: (As Noted on sheet A3.0) New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. 128. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33. 129. TURNING RADIUS: (As Noted on sheet C-6.0) The minimum outside turning radius is 50 feet. Use of cul-de-sacs is not acceptable where it is determined by the Fire Department that Ladder Truck access is required, unless greater turning radius is provided. Cul-De-Sac Diameters shall be no less than 72 feet. CFC Sec. 503. 130. STANDPIPES REQUIRED: (As Noted on Coversheet) Standpipe systems shall be provided in new buildings and structures where the floor level of the highest story is located more than 30 feet above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access. Fire hose threads used in connection with standpipe systems shall be approved and shall be compatible with fire department hose threads. The location of fire department hose connections shall be approved. Standpipes shall be manual wet type. In buildings used for high-piled combustible storage, fire hose protection shall be in accordance with Chapter 32. Installation standard. Standpipe systems shall be installed in accordance with this section and NFPA 14 as amended in Chapter 47. CFC Sec. 905. 131. GENERAL: This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction. A permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the fire code or other such laws or regulations shall not be valid. Any addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be approved in advance. [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6] Page 346 E MAIN ST VILLA AV CLELAND AV CHURCH ST CHICAGO AVHIGH SCHOOL CTMI L L STPAGEANT WY143-151 E Main Street 0 0.250.125 Miles ° Update Notes:- Updated 12/20/17 to link to tlg-sql12 server data (sm)- Updated 11/22/19 adding centerpoint guides, Buildings layer, and Project Site leader with label- Updated 10/8/20 to add street centerlines which can be useful in the hillside area- Updated 02-19-21 to link to TLG-SQL17 database (sm) EXHIBIT 4Page 347 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 348 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT MINUTES OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING JUNE 14, 2023 The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on June 14, 2023, at 4:00 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM ROLL CALL Present: Chair Jeffrey Barnett, Vice Chair Mary Badame, Mayor Maria Ristow, and Planning Commissioner Susan Burnett, and Planning Commissioner Melanie Hanssen. Absent: None. VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS -None. CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) 1.Approval of Minutes – April 12, 2023 MOTION: Motion by Mayor Ristow to approve the consent calendar. Seconded by Commissioner Burnett. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. Chair Barnett abstained since he did not attend that meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.143-151 E. Main Street Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Application CD-23-002 Requesting Preliminary Review of a Proposal to Demolish an Existing Building and to Construct a Mixed-Use Development with Below Grade Parking, Ground Floor Commercial, and Three Stories of Residential on Property Zoned C-2. APNs 529-28-001 and 529-28-002. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: CSPN LLC PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Armer Project Planner presented the staff report. EXHIBIT 5Page 349 PAGE 2 OF 3 MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 14, 2023 N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2023\06-14-23 Minutes - CDAC.docx Opened Public Comment. Applicant presented the proposed project. Ken Rodriquez, Architect - Their proposal would have a small retail use on the corner; residential units facing the church and school; and residential units facing E. Main Street. The lobby facing E. Main Street would feel open and be two to three stories high. Their project would take its cue from the William Weeks character and style of the High School. All the parking would be underground. The three-story project meets the 45 feet height limit. Closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter and asked the applicant questions. The applicant provided additional comments: Ken Rodriquez, Architect - Most likely there will be a combination of stepped back elements and balconies on all the floors. - The underground parking would be up to the property line. - This would probably not be a Senate Bill (SB) 330 type project. - Residential units will range from 950 to 1100 sf. - The proposal exceeds density. They will look to staff to work out the options. - Parking for the units would be satisfied. - There is not a break-even number of units, but the number allowed by the code would be difficult. - The owner has not yet discussed if the residential units will be for sale or rent. - There would be some impairment of the hill views, but this is an urban project. - The setbacks would be zero, but want to provide relief with landscaping, step backs, planters, vines, etc. - A one-story building with underground parking would not be cost effective. It would be difficult to meet all the requirements. There are no comments from the public. Committee members provided the following comments: • The proposal, like the hotel across the way, should continue the character and feeling of downtown. • Prefer that it be smaller. • Mixed-use in the downtown area is good. The Town will need to be flexible. Page 350 PAGE 3 OF 3 MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 14, 2023 N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2023\06-14-23 Minutes - CDAC.docx • Having three stories, is a big change, but tucking the parking underneath with mixed-use and residential above is good. • Project will be visible because it is on E. Main Street and near the High School. • Many favorite buildings like the Opera house couldn’t be built today. • Want beautiful architecture. • Prefer smaller units. • Like extending the downtown feel to replace the cinderblock buildings and parking lots. • Include some landscaping to soften the building. • The nearby Club and High School currently have parking problems. • The retail there is walkable and would generally serve nearby customers. • Height is not an issue. • Design and architecture should fit in style of the Town, hotel, and High School. • Like the architectural style, step backs, and mixed-use. The density is a bit overly ambitious. Prefer ownership vs. rental, due to upkeep and pride of ownership. Rental doesn’t mean it’s affordable. • Having additional housing, particularly downtown, is a positive. • Having Below Market Price (BMP) units is a plus. • Underground parking is beneficial. • There will be difficulties in meeting the findings to support the variances. • Consider decreasing the number of units. • Would like to see an elegant cleaner style that looks less massive. • Open space, balconies, and personal open space is important. Consider having a community room or rec room instead of a 3-story lobby. OTHER BUSINESS - None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:44 p.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the June 14, 2023 meeting as approved by the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. /s/ Joel Paulson, Community Development Director Page 351 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 352 151 EAST MAIN STREET Updated 10/30/24 RESPONSE TO CDAC COMMENTS FROM THE JUNE 14, 2023 MEETING Committee members provided the following comments: •The proposal, like the hotel across the way, should continue the character and feelingof downtown.The design of this project takes its cue from Los Gatos High School, designed by WilliamWeeks, Architect, and many of the unique brick buildings located in downtown LosGatos. The building design utilizes excellent architectural materials and design. Thecombination of brick, exterior plaster, grid windows, iron balconies and details areconsistent with other early 1900 buildings located in downtown. The fourth floor is steppedback to allow the building to read as a 3-story building. The use of exterior plaster andsloped clay tile roofs along with wood trellis features lightens the upper floor and ties inwith may surrounding buildings. •Prefer that it be smaller.The project is proposed using a state density bonus and is consistent with those standardsin the state bill. •Mixed-use in the downtown area is good. The Town will need to be flexible.A commercial space(s) located on the ground floor, at the corner of Main Street andHigh School Way, will help promote walkable retail along Main Street and neededresidential to downtown. •Having three stories, is a big change, but tucking the parking underneath with mixed- use and residential above is good.Since the CDAC meeting in June of 2023 the General Plan update, which would haveallowed the applicant additional density, was not adopted. The applicant has electedto use one of many of the state density bonus options which allow greater density andheight. The current design while 4-story reads like a 3-story building with the upper floorstepped back. •Project will be visible because it is on E. Main Street and near the High School.Acknowledged •Many favorite buildings like the Opera house couldn’t be built today.Acknowledged. This project helps anchor Main Street with a new mixed-use building.There are no surrounding residential uses which may conflict with scale. The High Schoolis a 3-story design with excellent architecture. EXHIBIT 6Page 353 • Want beautiful architecture. We have proposed a building with excellent architecture and detailing that exceeds even the timeless architecture work of William Weeks Los Gatos High School. The proposed building is designed with enriched details using the highest quality materials. • Prefer smaller units. Smaller units have been incorporated into the plan. The applicant is proposing a range of small and large units for sale. Sizes range from 743SF to 2,188SF. • Like extending the downtown feel to replace the cinderblock buildings and parking lots. Acknowledged • Include some landscaping to soften the building. Landscaping has been proposed along all three street frontages. This landscaping includes raised brick planters with trees, shrubs and annual color for a pedestrian friendly transition between the public sidewalk and the building. • The nearby Club and High School currently have parking problems. All of the project parking is proposed underground and will be adequate to support the residential and commercial uses proposed. • The retail there is walkable and would generally serve nearby customers. We have proposed 2,416SF of commercial uses at the ground floor along Main Street. Acknowledged • Height is not an issue. Acknowledged • Design and architecture should fit in style of the Town, hotel, and High School. Acknowledged. See comment #1. • Like the architectural style, step backs, and mixed-use. The density is a bit overly ambitious. Prefer ownership vs. rental, due to upkeep and pride of ownership. Rental doesn’t mean it’s affordable. Acknowledged, see comment #1. The applicant is proposing for sale units not rentals. • Having additional housing, particularly downtown, is a positive. Acknowledged • Having Below Market Price (BMP) units is a plus. Acknowledged. The applicant is proposing 6 BMR units of the 30 units proposed. Page 354 • Underground parking is beneficial. Acknowledged. • There will be difficulties in meeting the findings to support the variances. No variances are required for this project. The project will be utilizing state density bonus laws. • Consider decreasing the number of units. The project could not be proposed or built with less than the 30 units as proposed. The excellent architecture as proposed, underground parking and for sale units ranging in size from 743SF to 2,188SF could not be built at a lower unit count. • Would like to see an elegant cleaner style that looks less massive. Acknowledged, we believe this style of architecture and high-quality building materials meet this goal. • Open space, balconies, and personal open space is important. Consider having a community room or rec room instead of a 3-story lobby The taller lobby has been eliminated and an amenity room has been added on levels 3 and 4 per this suggestion. Page 355 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 356 Los Gatos Mixed Use Los Gatos, California February 18, 2025 Updated Project Description 1.PROJECT SITES 143 East Main Street APN #529-28-001 151 East Main Street APN #529-28-002 2.VISION AND PROJECT DETAILS 151 east main street is a 4-story mixed use building with underground parking located on 0.425-acre site at the corner of Main Street and High School Court in Los Gatos, California. The ground level includes 2,416 square feet of pedestrian oriented commercial which could be leased to a retail or restaurant tenant. Residential (for sale) units are located on all four levels of the project. The proposed project includes 30 units, 24 market rate units and 6 affordable units ranging from 743 square feet to 2,188 square feet. The units are 1 bedroom up to 3 bedrooms with outdoor patios. There are two (2) options for the underground parking, option 1- a two-level parking garage with 47 individual parking stalls. Option 2 - a one level parking garage with 39 parking stalls that include 29 car stackers , 4 ADA stalls and 6 tandem parking stalls. The proposed exterior elevations take its cue from the design of Los Gatos High School located next door and the many significant brick structures located on Main Street and North Santa Cruz Avenue in downtown Los Gatos. Building materials include brick walls, precast concrete facade detailing, iron balconies, metal grid windows and canvas awnings. These materials can be found in downtown Los Gatos on other key buildings. The fourth floor is stepped back to reduce the overall mass of the proposed project, materials include exterior plaster walls, precast concrete detailing, and a sloped clay tile roof to further reduce the building massing. Outdoor patios with wood trellis features and landscaping provide owners views to the foothills and surrounding buildings. 3.SOLAR ENERGY MEASURES The building will be piped to include future solar panels located on the flat roof section of the roof. There are no provisions to install PV panels at this time. EXHIBIT 7Page 357 4. PARKING OPTIONS The project applicant is proposing 2 parking options to provide flexibility when the project moves into the construction phase. Option 1 This 2-level garage option includes 47 parking stalls on two levels. This option includes 8 standard stalls, which are shared retail/housing used by retail customers, between the hours of 8am and 6pm. The one ADA (VAN) stall will be open to all parking retail or housing. After 6pm and up to 8am the seven stalls will be used for housing. This garage option will provide the most soil off-haul and is being studied in the environmental review document. Option 2 This 1-level garage option includes 39 parking stalls. 29 of these parking stalls are car parking by “car stackers” and 10 are standard stalls as shown on Sheets A2.7 and A5.1. The parking stacker is a “puzzle solution” that is being used throughout the bay area in many residential projects. Parking stalls are easily retrieved by an app on cell phones. Residents can share a stacker with another resident in a different unit because of this “puzzle solution.” Cars can be retrieved without the assistance of another resident. 5. COMMERCIAL RETAIL/RESTAURANT USE A 2,416 SF commercial space(s) has been designed on the street level at the corner of Main Street and High School Way. This space could be a single tenant, or two tenant, commercial use. The tenant could be a retail or restaurant which may operate between the hours of 8am and 6pm. The number of employees would vary between 3-12 depending on the final user(s). At this time the space is not leased to a specific user(s) and specific details are not available. If the entire space (2,416 SF) is leased to a restaurant the projected seating could be 20-40 seats. Page 358 020029.0001 4919-0339-3054.2 Miles Imwalle D (415) 772-5786 mimwalle@coblentzlaw.com February 24, 2025 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department rsafty@losgatosca.gov Re: Application for 143 and 151 East Main Street Response to November 27, 2024 Consistency Letter Dear Ryan: I am writing on behalf of CSPN, LLC (“Applicant”) as part of our response to the Town’s November 27, 2024 Planning Staff Technical Review Letter (“Planning Letter”) and to provide an updated Letter of Justification in support of Applicant’s resubmitted Formal Application for the mixed-use project at 143 and 151 East Main Street that contains 30 units, 6 of which are affordable at the low-income level (“Project”). Below, we discuss and reemphasize the Project’s Builder’s Remedy protections and General Plan/Zoning Ordinance inconsistency justifications, and address the Applicant’s proposed parking optionality request. I.Justifications for General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Inconsistencies Regarding Planning Letter Comment 3, and as discussed in past letters, the Town cannot deny a Builder’s Remedy project due to any inconsistency with the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, Project inconsistencies with the 2020 General Plan Land Use Element and the current Zoning Ordinance do not form a basis for denial under State law protections. We reiterate this as some of the consistency information requested relates to justifying “exceptions” from General Plan and Zoning Ordinance regulations/standards, which we do not believe is appropriate for a Builder’s Remedy application. Despite this, our goal remains to work with the Town and ensure that it has full information in preparation for the upcoming Planning Commission hearing. In that spirit, Table 1 below includes the Town’s list of relevant regulations/standards and Project inconsistencies with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, which we have amended with the Applicant’s justifications. Please note that the Applicant’s latest comments on the Objective Design Standards Checklist were provided within Attachment 6 to the February 18, 2025 submittal and where inconsistency remains, justifications were provided. EXHIBIT 8Page 359 Ryan Safty February 24, 2025 Page 2 020029.0001 4919-0339-3054.2 Table 1 143-151 E. Main St. – General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Justifications Reference Regulation/Standard Proposed/Exception Applicant’s Justification General Plan Land Use Element CB District: 0.6 FAR with a 45-foot height limit 2.57 FAR with 52’ tall The proposed 2.57 FAR and height of 52’ are essential to accommodate the 30 residential units and associated amenities proposed, which contribute to addressing the Town’s housing shortage. CB District: Maintains and expands landscaped open spaces and mature tree growth without increasing setbacks. Does not maintain or expand landscaping. The Project is a redevelopment of the site, which includes redevelopment of the existing landscaping. However, the intent of the landscaping is to enhance and enliven the open space. The Project’s proposed landscaped open spaces provide a tasteful and design-forward addition to the site and the neighborhood, which is consistent with the intent of the General Plan. GP Density Maximum allowed is 20 units/acre per 2020 GP Max is 8.5 units Consistent with the Builder’s Remedy law, the goal of the Project is to maximize residential development, which it does by providing 30 residential units. While this is inconsistent with the existing General Plan density controls, it carries out the goal of the Town’s Housing Element of increasing housing at all affordability levels. Page 360 Ryan Safty February 24, 2025 Page 3 020029.0001 4919-0339-3054.2 Table 1 143-151 E. Main St. – General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Justifications Town Zoning Ordinance 29.60.345 The floor area ratio for all new buildings in a C-2 or central business district commercial zone, or expansion of gross floor area of an existing building, shall not exceed sixty-hundredths. Max is 11,110 sf while 77,5091 sf is proposed The Project’s proposed 2.57 FAR is essential to accommodate the 30 residential units and associated amenities proposed, which contribute to addressing the Town’s housing shortage. 29.60.340 The maximum height of any building in a C-2 or central business district commercial zone is forty-five (45) feet. 52’ proposed The minor deviation in height is justified as it allows the Project to accommodate the 30 residential units and associated amenities. 29.60.335 Front setback (Main St) – 10 ft Side setback (west) – 0 ft Street side setback (High School Ct) – 15’ Rear/Front (Church St) – 15’ Front – 4’-2” Side – COMPLIES Street side – 2’-10” Rear/Front – 3’-4” The Project attempts to maximize residential space on the parcel while also abiding by principles of good urbanism. However, to include the proposed 30 residential units, it was necessary to encroach on the setbacks. Parking 86 spaces required (45 for tenants, 30 for visitors, and 11 for retail/restaurant) Both Parking Options are nonconforming It is not financially feasible to provide the 86 spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance due to the high cost of below grade parking construction. We believe that the parking provided will be sufficient for the uses proposed and better reflect the Project’s prime location in a downtown area. 1 The Plan Set Cover Sheet indicates that the total building square footage is 78,576 square feet (30,996 square feet of total garage area and 47,580 square feet of total housing area). The Project’s underground garage area is not considered “gross floor area” pursuant to the Town Code (Sec. 29.10.020) and is therefore excluded from the FAR calculation. Page 361 Ryan Safty February 24, 2025 Page 4 020029.0001 4919-0339-3054.2 II. Parking As described in the updated and separately enclosed project description (Attachment 5) and Plan Set, the Applicant is proposing two options for parking. Option 1 is a 2-level parking garage with 47 individual parking stalls. (Sheets A2.5, A2.6.) Option 2 is a 1-level parking garage with 39 parking stalls. (Sheet A2.7.) The Applicant reiterates its preference that staff present both parking options to the Planning Commission for consideration and that the Planning Commission approve both options. Given the costs and complexities inherent in below-grade construction, this parking optionality is essential for maintaining the Project’s financial health, securing necessary construction financing, and ensuring adaptability to an uncertain market. This type of development flexibility is consistent with State law’s Builder’s Remedy framework, the purpose of which is to ensure the approval of feasible projects. We also are not aware of anything in the Town Code that prevents this type of flexibility and it is something we have seen done in other jurisdictions, as we previously shared. III. Conclusion The Applicant looks forward to supporting Town staff in preparing for the upcoming Planning Commission hearing. Thank you for your attention to this letter. Very truly yours, Miles Imwalle Cc: Joel Paulson (jpaulson@losgatosca.gov) Gabrielle Whelan (gwhelan@losgatosca.gov) David Blatt (dblatt@capstackpartners.com) Ken Rodrigues (kenr@krparchitects.com) Craig Spencer (cspencer@coblentzlaw.com) Page 362 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 Miles Imwalle D (415) 772-5786 mimwalle@coblentzlaw.com October 30, 2024 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department rsafty@losgatosca.gov Re: Application for 143 and 151 East Main Street Response to October 2 Incomplete Letters Dear Ryan: I am writing on behalf of CSPN, LLC (“Applicant”) as part of our response to the Town’s October 2, 2024 Planning Staff Technical Review Letter (“Planning Letter”) and Parks and Public Works Technical Review Letter (“Public Works Letter”) and to provide an updated Letter of Justification in support of Applicant’s resubmitted Formal Application for the mixed-use project at 143 and 151 East Main Street that contains 30 units, 6 of which are affordable at the low-income level (“Project”). Below, we discuss and reemphasize the Project’s Builder’s Remedy protections, address State law related to application completeness and consistency, and respond to particular comments made in the Planning and Public Works Letters. I. Builder’s Remedy As discussed in our letter accompanying the Builder’s Remedy Preliminary and Formal Applications, the Town cannot deny a Builder’s Remedy project due to any inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or General Plan land use designation of a project site. Therefore, Project inconsistencies with the current zoning ordinance and the 2020 General Plan Land Use Element do not form a basis for denial under State law protections. We reiterate this as some of the information requested relates to consistency with zoning and/or the General Plan, which we do not believe is appropriate for a Builder’s Remedy application. Despite some of these issues, our goal remains to work with the Town and ensure that it has full information, the Applicant has provided the Town with all information requested, other than a few minor items, as noted. II. Application Completeness and Consistency In determining what constitutes a complete application, the Town is subject to the limitations imposed by the Permit Streamlining Act (“PSA”) and Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”). When the Town receives an application for a housing development project, it is required to process the application in compliance with the procedures and timelines stated in the PSA. In particular, the PSA specifies that the Town must provide a complete list of items that were not provided and Page 363 Ryan Safty October 30, 2024 Page 2 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 “[i]n any subsequent review of the application determined to be incomplete, the local agency shall not request the applicant to provide any new information that was not stated in the initial list of items that were not complete” (Government Code, § 65943(a)). That is, a subsequent incomplete letter cannot expand on what was identified as missing in an earlier letter. Additionally, the HAA provides that determinations of consistency are not done during the application completeness determination phase, but must instead occur after the application completeness determination (Government Code, § 65589.5(j)(2)(A), (h)(10)). We do appreciate that the Town has distinguished between completeness issues and consistency issues and that the consistency items are provided for informational purposes only and do not require a response for completeness purposes. Of course, the Project’s status as a Builder’s Remedy project means that consistency with zoning and the General Plan are not grounds for denial, so consistency in this context is less relevant to processing the application. While it is not necessary for us to respond to the consistency items at this time, the Applicant’s response is comprehensive as we seek to move this application forward expeditiously. III. Planning Letter - Completeness Items We provide this background on the limits in the PSA since the Town has asked for new information in the Planning Letter that it did not request previously. For example, Comment 6 in the original July 17, 2024 Planning Letter addressed the Objective Design Standards Checklist and vaguely asked for “specificity for staff to verify the project’s compliance,” but it did not specify what information was missing. Further, the original Comment 16B-3.a only requested “existing” building floor plan dimensions. In the new Planning Letter, however, Comment 6 was marked as resolved and Comment 16B-3.a was amended to identify many places where dimensioned floor plans were missing for not only existing buildings, as asked for previously, but also proposed buildings. Contrary to the PSA, Comment 16B-3.a asks for new information not previously requested. Nonetheless, the Applicant has updated the floor plans as requested in the Planning Letter and all information identified as missing has been provided. However, because this information was not requested previously, it was not proper to request in the latest Planning Letter, so if we happen to not provide some newly requested information, that is not a basis for finding incompleteness on this current resubmittal. The Applicant also responds specifically to the following Town comments: • Comment 16, Item I-7, subsection c, requires that where a traffic impact is determined by the Parks and Public Works Department, specific sections of the General Plan must be identified stating that the type of project will benefit the community. We do not believe that this requirement has been triggered as the Parks and Public Works Department has not, to our knowledge, determined that the Project would have a “traffic impact”. We also do not believe that this finding is relevant to a Builder’s Remedy project since consistency with the Town’s General Plan is not a relevant issue, so we do not believe it Page 364 Ryan Safty October 30, 2024 Page 3 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 appropriate for the Town to request information regarding and assess whether the General Plan identifies that this type of project will be a benefit to the community. Despite these objections, we note that a number of sections of the Town’s Housing Element confirm that this type of project will benefit the community. For example, Goal HE-1 “Facilitate All Types of Housing Production” encourages the production of diverse new housing options to ensure that an adequate supply is available. The 30-unit Project aligns with Goal HE-1 by facilitating housing production and contributes to the Town's efforts to ensure an adequate supply of housing to meet the needs of all residents, both current and future. Policy HE-1.2 “Multi-Family Housing Densities” encourages builders to develop projects on multi-family designated properties at the high end of the applicable density range. The Project’s density exceeds the applicable density, which it is allowed to do as a Builder’s Remedy project, and this policy confirms the benefits of higher density housing, which the Project carries out. Policy HE-1.5 encourages the production of housing “that meets the needs of all economic segments of the Town, including lower and moderate households, to maintain a balanced community,” which the Project does by including 6 low-income units. Similarly, Goal HE-2 “Provide New Affordable Housing” urges the production of more affordable housing. Policy HE-2.3 “Mixed-Use Development” encourages mixed-use development that provides affordable housing close to employment centers and/or transportation facilities. The Project is a mixed-use development with affordable housing that is close to the Town’s downtown area, which provides employment opportunities. • Comment 16, Item I-7, subsection g, requires that applications for conditional use permits address required findings. However, the Town’s July 17, 2024 Planning Letter did not mention subsection g being incomplete and the Town is now barred from raising this issue in a subsequent incomplete letter. Further, these findings are not relevant to a Builder’s Remedy application particularly to the extent they focus on the Project’s consistency with the zoning and General Plan. While we maintain these objections, we also note that the Project is consistent with the required conditional use permit findings (Town Code, § 29.20.190(a)) as it (1) addresses a critical need in the Town for additional housing units, particularly affordable units; (2) is designed to be tasteful and in harmony with the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood and zoning district; (3) is designed with public health, safety, and general welfare in mind; (4) aligns with the objectives of the General Plan’s Housing Element by facilitating mixed-use development and new affordable housing production, consistent with the Housing Element Policies and Goals identified in the prior response; and (5) is not a hazardous waste facility proposal. Page 365 Ryan Safty October 30, 2024 Page 4 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 IV. Planning Letter - Consistency Items The HAA limits the Town’s review of consistency items until after the application completeness determination, which has not been made. Even so, the Applicant has responded to all Town consistency comments, and responds here specifically to the following: • Comment 94 largely repeats the information requested in Comment 16, Item I-7, and as a consistency item, is not required to be addressed as part of the Project’s completeness determination pursuant to the HAA. And while we do not believe these items need to be addressed, we provide the following response. Subsection a recommends that any requested exceptions as part of the Builder’s Remedy application are identified and described, similar to a letter submitted for a prior project outlining waivers and concessions requested pursuant to State Density Bonus Law. In the Builder’s Remedy context, we do not believe density bonus waivers and concessions are necessary, although to the extent the Town finds that they are necessary, we reserve our right to use any such waivers and concessions. We therefore do not believe that it is necessary to review consistency with, or exceptions to, objective standards. We nonetheless have completed the Objective Design Standards Checklist demonstrating compliance and identifying any deviations. Currently, we are not planning on providing further information on consistency, other than the completed Objective Design Standards Checklist and otherwise responding to City comments. Subsection b asks to confirm that the affordability level is consistent with Builder’s Remedy requirements. All 6 of the affordable units proposed (or 20% of the 30 total units) will be provided for low-income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, meaning those whose income does not exceed 80% of the Area Median Income. By including 20 percent low-income units, the project qualifies for certain protections under Government Code section 65589.5(d)(5). This information has also been added to Sheet A0.0 (Cover Sheet) of the Plan Set. Regarding subsection c, (a) a project description is included on the Cover Sheet for the Project’s Plan Set; (b–d) to the extent that each asks how the community will benefit or otherwise what justifies the application, the Project will benefit the community (and is thus justified) by providing needed market-rate and affordable-housing units, as described above; (e) the Project meets the General Plan’s Housing Element needs, as described above; and (g) the Project meets the required findings, as described above. The Housing Element notes that Town housing prices are extremely high – the largest proportion of for-sale homes were valued at more than $2 million – driven by a high demand which the Town’s housing supply has not matched. (Housing Element, pp. 10-2, 10-27, B-2.) In addition, the Town has a higher proportion of detached single-family Page 366 Ryan Safty October 30, 2024 Page 5 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 homes than other jurisdictions in the region, which exacerbates the Town’s housing unaffordability as detached single-family homes are typically more expensive than multi- family units. (Housing Element, p. 10-27.) The Project directly addresses the shortcomings noted in the Housing Element by increasing the housing supply in a market characterized by extremely high home prices and a shortage of affordable housing options. By introducing 30 new housing units, including 6 designated as affordable for low-income households, the Project helps to alleviate the high demand for housing that has driven up prices. Additionally, the focus on multi-family units rather than detached single-family homes contributes to a more diverse and affordable housing stock. V. Public Works Letter – Completeness Item The Applicant has responded to all comments in the Public Works Letter and we respond specifically to the following comment: • Comment 23 addresses the Project’s EV stackers and states that they are “not allowed,” and cites to a “code” provision regarding the removal of vehicles after charging is complete. Regarding EV stackers, as a Builder’s Remedy Project, the Town cannot deny it due to any inconsistency with zoning regulations or the General Plan. This includes any inconsistency with the Town’s parking space standards. Therefore, even if the Town interprets its zoning ordinance as prohibiting the use of parking stackers, the Project cannot be denied on that basis. We are not aware of what code section requires EVs to be moved once charging is complete and are otherwise not aware of such a requirement, particularly for EV spaces designated for residential use, which presumably will be used overnight. It may be that the reference is to Vehicle Code Section 22511.1, which states that a person shall not park a vehicle in a stall or space “designated” pursuant to Section 22511 unless the vehicle is connected for electric charging purposes. To be “designated” pursuant to Section 22511, a specific sign must be posted in a private garage stating that unauthorized vehicles not connected for electric charging will be towed away. That is, Section 22511 creates a mechanism to enforce a requirement that EV spaces be used only by cars that are actively charging, but whether to require active charging is left up to the property owner. Nothing in Section 22511, however, requires EV stalls to be used for active charging. If the reference to the code is a local requirement, for the reasons explained above, it cannot be applied to a Builder’s Remedy project. Page 367 Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP Ryan Safty October 30, 2024 Page 6 VI. Conclusion The Applicant continues to be excited to put forth this updated proposal to revitalize an underutilized Town site and to provide much needed housing. Thank you for your attention to this letter. Very truly yours, HE Lu Miles Imwalle Cc: Joel Paulson (jpaulson@losgatosca.gov) David Blatt (dblatt@capstackpartners.com) Ken Rodrigues (kenr@krparchitects.com) Craig Spencer (cspencer@coblentzlaw.com) 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 Ryan Safty October 30, 2024 Page 6 020029.0001 4893-2793-8291.5 VI. Conclusion The Applicant continues to be excited to put forth this updated proposal to revitalize an underutilized Town site and to provide much needed housing. Thank you for your attention to this letter. Very truly yours, Miles Imwalle Cc: Joel Paulson (jpaulson@losgatosca.gov) David Blatt (dblatt@capstackpartners.com) Ken Rodrigues (kenr@krparchitects.com) Craig Spencer (cspencer@coblentzlaw.com) Page 368 020029.0001 4895-9302-0894.3 Miles Imwalle D (415) 772-5786 mimwalle@coblentzlaw.com August 30, 2024 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department rsafty@losgatosca.gov Re: Application for 143 and 151 East Main Street Response to July 17 Incomplete Letter Dear Ryan: I am writing on behalf of CSPN, LLC (“Applicant”) as part of our response to the Town’s July 17, 2024 Planning Staff Technical Review (“Town Letter”) and to provide a Letter of Justification in support of Applicant’s formal application for the mixed-use project at 143 and 151 East Main Street. As you know, we previously submitted an SB 330 Preliminary Application on January 17, 2024 for a 26 unit, mixed-use project with 4 affordable units and subsequently followed up with formal applications for Architecture and Site Approval (S-24-007), Conditional Use Permit (U-24-002), and Vesting Tentative Map Application (M-24-004) on February 15, 2024. More recently, we submitted a new SB 330 Preliminary Application on May 3, 2024, which was “deemed submitted” as of May 6, 2024, for substantially the same project with the following changes: (1) the unit count was increased to 30 units, and (2) 20 percent of these 30 units, or 6 units, will be affordable at the low-income level (“Project”). The building size, location, circulation, architecture and other details were otherwise unchanged. Reference should be made to the subsequent SB 330 Preliminary Application (PRE24-00443). Below, we discuss the Project’s Builder’s Remedy protections, consistency with the Town’s Objective Design Standards and other Town regulations and standards, CC&R submittal timeframes, and application timing considerations. I. Builder’s Remedy The Applicant submitted this latest Preliminary Application before the Town had a substantially compliant Housing Element for the 6th Regional Housing Needs Assessment Cycle. By including 20 percent low-income units, the Project qualifies for protections under Government Code section 65589.5(d)(5), commonly referred to as the Builder’s Remedy. This letter is accompanied by the Applicant’s resubmission in response to the Town Letter. As discussed in our letter accompanying the Builder’s Remedy Preliminary Application, the Town cannot deny a Builder’s Remedy project due to any inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or General Plan land use designation of a project site. Therefore, Project Page 369 Ryan Safty August 30, 2024 Page 2 020029.0001 4895-9302-0894.3 inconsistencies with the current zoning ordinance and the 2020 General Plan Land Use Element, including density1, height2, and FAR3, among other standards, do not form a basis for denial under State law protections. While we do not believe density bonus waivers and concessions are necessary for a Builder’s Remedy project, to the extent the City finds that they are necessary, we reserve our right to use any such waivers and concessions. Nonetheless, the Applicant has endeavored to respect the Town’s long-term vision for the site by considering the density and development program envisioned in the now rescinded 2040 General Plan Land Use Element. Where feasible, we have also incorporated feedback received during the June 14, 2023 CDAC meeting. II. Objective Design Standards The Applicant aims for Project consistency with the Town’s Objective Design Standards and the completed Objective Design Standards Checklist was included with our prior submission. While inconsistency with these standards is not a basis for denial of the Project, the Project is in significant compliance with them. In response to Comment 6 of the Town Letter asking the Applicant to provide a greater “level of specificity,” we do not believe that additional information is necessary. First, because the Project is subject to the protections of the Builder’s Remedy, compliance with the Objective Design Standards is not necessary, so the Town does not need more information to process the application. Nonetheless, the Applicant has designed the Project with the goal of harmonizing it with the Town’s Objective Design Standards to the maximum extent possible. Further, the prior submittal included a completed Objective Design Standards Checklist, including the sheet numbers where compliance with the various design standards can be identified. Therefore, while not required, if the Town desires to review the Project against those Standards, it has the necessary information. III. Project Consistency With Town Regulations and Guidelines In a similar vein, in response to Comment 71 of the Town Letter, the Applicant is not required to include a description of items proposed that “do not comply with Town regulations and guidelines along with an explanation for each exception request.” Nonetheless, throughout this formal application the Applicant has attempted to provide as much transparency and detail as 1 Current density limit: 20 dwelling units per acre (according to Comment 71 of the Town Letter). Project density: 71 dwelling units per acre. 2 Current height limit: 45 feet. Project height: 52 feet. 3 Current FAR limit: 0.60. Project FAR: 2.52. Page 370 Ryan Safty August 30, 2024 Page 3 020029.0001 4895-9302-0894.3 possible as to ways the Project differs from objective General Plan and zoning ordinance standards.4 IV. CC&R Submittal In response to Comment 16, Item G, of the Town Letter regarding providing CC&Rs and other related documents such as association by-laws, the Applicant is not prepared to provide condominium CC&Rs at this premature stage, before the Project’s completeness determination and well before its first public hearing or approval. In fact, it would not be possible to provide CC&Rs for a project at this stage. The Applicant is prepared to provide CC&Rs at a more appropriate point in the development process that is prior to Project occupancy, which we anticipate will be reflected in a condition of approval.5 On a similar note, Comment 31 from Public Works requests a condominium plan under the Government Code. However, a condo plan is required for compliance with the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, and it is not part of the local process under the Subdivision Map Act. A condo plan will be processed with the Department of Real Estate at the appropriate time, but it is not a document that should be required as part of this application. V. Timing Considerations Finally, based on recent correspondence with the Town Attorney, we did want to confirm one point in response to Comment 1 of the Town Letter regarding the Applicant being afforded a single new “90-day period” for resubmittal. The Town Attorney clarified this point in an email on August 29, 2024 and stated that within 180 days of the Project’s May 6, 2024 Builder’s Remedy Preliminary Application, or November 2, 2024, the Applicant can submit revisions to the formal application, as needed, and that the 90-day period referred to in Comment 1 only limits the time to submit additional information after this initial 180-day period expires. This means that the Applicant is afforded one final 90-period after the City responds with any incomplete items in this formal application. Please let us know if we should discuss this timing framework. VI. Conclusion The Applicant continues to be excited to put forth this updated proposal to revitalize an underutilized Town site and to provide much needed housing. We very much hope that the 4 Applicant’s response here also applies to Comments 2, 22, and 26 of the July 17, 2024 Public Works Technical Review. Regarding Comment 28, the Applicant is prepared to provide a Trash Management Plan at a more appropriate point in the development process prior to Project occupancy, which can be reflected in a condition of approval. 5 Applicant’s response here also applies to Comment 29 of the July 17, 2024 Public Works Technical Review. Page 371 Ryan Safty August 30, 2024 Page 4 020029.0001 4895-9302-0894.3 Town will help achieve these important goals of facilitating new residential units, while also creating a new space in the Town that embraces a vision for good urbanism. Very truly yours, Miles Imwalle Cc: Joel Paulson (jpaulson@losgatosca.gov) David Blatt (dblatt@capstackpartners.com) Ken Rodrigues (kenr@krparchitects.com) Craig Spencer (cspencer@coblentzlaw.com) Page 372 020029.0001 4868-5867-2839.4 Miles Imwalle D (415) 772-5786 mimwalle@coblentzlaw.com June 15, 2024 Jennifer Archer Ryan Safty Community Development Department jarcher@losgatosca.gov rsafty@losgatosca.gov Re: Response to Town’s March 27, 2024 Staff Technical Assistance Letter – 143 and 151 East Main Street Dear Jennifer and Ryan: I am writing on behalf of CSPN, LLC (“Applicant”) as part of our response to the Town’s March 27, 2024 Staff Technical Assistance Letter (“Town Letter”). As you know, we previously submitted an SB 330 Preliminary Application on January 17, 2024 for a 26 unit, mixed-use project with 4 affordable units and subsequently followed up with formal applications for Architecture and Site Approval (S-24-007), Conditional Use Permit (U-24-002), and Vesting Tentative Map Application (M-24-004) on February 15, 2024. More recently, we submitted a new SB 330 Preliminary Application on May 3, 2024, which was “deemed submitted” as of May 6, 2024, for substantially the same project with the following changes: (1) the unit count is increased to 30 units, and (2) 20 percent of these 30 units, or 6 units, will be affordable at the low-income level (“Project”). The building size, location, circulation, architecture and other details were otherwise unchanged. Although this submittal is amending the formal applications referenced above, the submittal is based on this more recent SB 330 Preliminary Application and reference should be made to that application number PRE24-00443. Below, we discuss the Project’s Builder’s Remedy protections, the Project’s consistency with the Town’s Objective Design Standards, relevant amendments to the original Letter of Justification, and Project application timing considerations. I. Builder’s Remedy The Applicant submitted this latest Preliminary Application before the Town has a substantially compliant Housing Element for the 6th Regional Housing Needs Assessment Cycle. By including 20 percent low-income units, the Project qualifies for protections under Government Code section 65589.5(d)(5), commonly referred to as the Builder’s Remedy. This letter is accompanied by amendments to Applicant’s February 15, 2024 formal application in response to both the Town Letter and the May 6, 2024 Builder’s Remedy Preliminary Application. Page 373 June 15, 2024 Page 2 020029.0001 4868-5867-2839.4 As discussed in our letter accompanying Builder’s Remedy Preliminary Application, the Town cannot deny a Builder’s Remedy project due to any inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or General Plan land use designation of a project site. Therefore, Project inconsistencies with the current zoning ordinance and the 2020 General Plan Land Use Element, including density1, height2, and FAR3, among other standards, do not form a basis for denial under State law protections. While we do not believe density bonus waivers and concessions are necessary for a Builder’s Remedy project, to the extent the City finds that they are necessary, we reserve our right to use any such waivers and concessions. Nonetheless, the Applicant has endeavored to respect the Town’s long-term vision for the site by considering the density and development program envisioned in the now rescinded 2040 General Plan Land Use Element. Where feasible, we have also incorporated feedback received during the June 14, 2023 CDAC meeting. II. Objective Design Standards The Applicant also aims for Project consistency with the Town’s Objective Design Standards and the completed Objective Design Standards Checklist is attached. While inconsistency with these objective design standards is not a basis for denial of the Project, the Project is in significant compliance with them. III. Amendments to the Original Letter of Justification Town Letter Comment 16, Item I, on pages 7–8, requests specific updates to the previous “Letter of Justification” for the original Formal Application, which are provided below: • Description of the proposed request: We understand this request to be asking for a traditional project description, which is included on the cover page of the updated Project plans and is copied below for ease of reference: “151 East Main Street is a 4-story mixed use building with underground parking located on 0.425 acre site at the corner of Main Street and High School Court in Los Gatos, California. The ground level includes 2,416 square feet of pedestrian oriented commercial which could be leased to a retail or restaurant tenant. Residential (for sale) units are located on all four levels of the project. The proposed project includes 30 units, 24 market rate units and 6 affordable units ranging from 743 square feet to 2,188 square feet. The units are 1 bedroom up to 3 bedrooms with outdoor patios. There are two (2) options for the underground parking, Option 1 - a two level parking garage with 52 1 Current density limit: 20 dwelling units per acre (according to Comment 71 of the Town Letter). Project density: 71 dwelling units per acre. 2 Current height limit: 45 feet. Project height: 57 feet. 3 Current FAR limit: 0.60. Project FAR: 2.52. Page 374 June 15, 2024 Page 3 020029.0001 4868-5867-2839.4 individual parking stalls. Option 2 - a one level parking garage with 46 parking stalls that includes 17 car stackers that provide 2 parking stalls per stacker. The proposed exterior elevations takes its cue from Los Gatos High School located next door and the many significant brick structures located on Main Street and North Santa Cruz in downtown Los Gatos. Building materials include brick walls, precast concrete facade detailing, iron balconies, metal grid windows and canvas awnings. These materials can be found in downtown Los Gatos in other key buildings. The fourth floor is stepped back to reduce the overall height of the proposed project. Materials include exterior plaster walls, precast concrete detailing, and a sloped clay tile roof to further reduce the building massing. Outdoor patios with wood trellis features and landscaping provide owners views to the foothills and surrounding buildings.” • Traffic impact considerations: The Project has not been the subject of a traffic analysis, and any requirement to justify Project benefits to the community in the event of a traffic impact is not a standard to which Builder’s Remedy projects can be held. Even so, the Project is a benefit to the community as described further below. We have also been working with the Town on a scope of work to engage various consultants, including a traffic consultant. • Conditional Use Permit findings: The Project is not required to meet the Town’s four Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) findings because it is a Builder’s Remedy project. In addition, the Town’s CUP findings are not objective standards under the Housing Accountability Act. Nonetheless, we feel that the Project is consistent with CUP findings as described below: First, the Project is “desirable to the public convenience or welfare” because it provides much-needed housing in a conveniently accessible downtown location, as well as desirable and street-activating retail/commercial uses. Second, the Project “will not impair the integrity and character of the zone” because it is designed to complement nearby Los Gatos High School and enhance the walkability, quality of life, and urban design on Main Street and North Santa Cruz Avenue. Third, the Project will not “be detrimental to public health, safety or general welfare” because the Project has been designed to promote general welfare, a mixed-use project of this scale is appropriate for this location and this use is not expected to have any health or safety impacts. We would also expect that the Town’s standard conditions of approval will address any potential impacts. Finally, the Project is “in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan and the purposes of this chapter” because it provides much-needed housing, coupled with commercial space, in a desirable area of the Town, helping to further enliven and activate the walkable downtown area. Page 375 June 15, 2024 Page 4 020029.0001 4868-5867-2839.4 IV. Timing Considerations Finally, based on some recent conversations we have had with the Town, we did want to clarify one point regarding responding to the Town Letter. In particular, we understand that the Town’s interpretation is that within 180 days of the Project’s Builder’s Remedy Preliminary Application, or November 2, 2024, the Applicant can submit revisions to the formal application, as needed, and that the 90-day period referred to in Comment 1 only limits the time to submit additional information after this initial 180-day period expires. Please let us know if we should discuss this timing framework. Very truly yours, Miles Imwalle Cc: Joel Paulson (jpaulson@losgatosca.gov) David Blatt (dblatt@capstackpartners.com) Ken Rodrigues (kenr@krparchitects.com) Craig Spencer (cspencer@coblentzlaw.com) Page 376 151 EAST MAIN STREET Commercial Design Guidelines Review June 15, 2024 The corner of East Main Street and High School Court has been designed to promote high quality neighborhood-oriented retail of approximately 2,416 SF. The retail space has been designed consistent with the Town’s Commercial Design Guidelines in the following ways: Sections 1.3/1.4/1.5/3.1/3.2/3.3 •Ensure that new development reinforces and supports the special qualities of the Town of Los Gatos by relating small scale retail that is neighborhood serving by designing creative storefaçade, pedestrian scale glazing and architectural detailing while at the same time promoting outdoor seating that takes advantage of the beautiful views to the mountains beyond. •Establish a high level of design quality using rich-historic building materials such as brick, precast detailing, awnings and landscaping that are consistent with other pedestrian scale projectslocated in downtown Los Gatos. •Provide visual continuity along the street frontage by creating corner commercial that ties architecturally to the pedestrian oriented residential entries along East Main Street. The raised planters and seating walls along the street will further promote pedestrian oriented designfeatures that enhance excellent architectural detailing of the proposed building. •Careful attention to architectural and landscape details similar to the Town’s residential structures by designing residential scale details and design features. The brick details are fromperiod architecture found in the early 1900’s consistent with other buildings built in 1900-1940located in downtown Los Gatos. •Rich architectural fabric with interesting details by providing unique 1920’s historic detailing such as, iron balconies and light fixtures. Recessed entries at the ground floor with a strong base ofprecasted concrete. Architectural trim details of brick and precast concrete provide contrast in detailing and scale. Additional guidelines that have been used in the design of this project: •Reinforce the special qualities of the Town’s visual character. •Good design can enhance the viability of a business. •Highest quality architectural, landscape and site development. •High quality materials and craftmanship. •Avoidance of architecturally trendy buildings in favor of more timeless qualities. •Mixed use buildings are encouraged wherever appropriate to the surrounding neighborhood. •Provide a unified design around all sides of buildings. •Integrate the screening for all trash and service areas into the design of buildings. •Screen all roof equipment. •Maintain a high degree of transparency at all window areas. •Utilize colors that are appropriate to the use and surrounding area. •Architecture character and detailing shall be sensitive to historic structures remaining in the CBD. •Diversity of design shall be encouraged with timeless character sought over trendy architectural styles. •Reinforcement of retail lintages along retail–oriented side streets wherever possible. One goodway of accomplishing this is with the use of corner entries and adjacent display windows on both street frontages. •Primary access to any second floor uses shall be from the fronting commercial street. •Maintain transparent storefronts and public right-of-way walls. •Utilize high quality storefront materials. •Install awnings when weather and sun exposure protection are desired. EXHIBIT 9 Page 377 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 378 July 11, 2024 Mr. Ryan SaftyCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 143 + 151 East Main Street Dear Ryan: I reviewed the new drawings in the context of its immediate neighborhood. My comments and recommendations are as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The site is located on East Main Street close to the Town Hall and Library. Other nearby uses are a mix of commercial, institutional and residential uses. Photographs of the site and surrounding context are shown on the following page. EXHIBIT 10Page 379 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 2 THE SITECommercial Building immediately to the left Church immediately across Church Street High School immediately across High School Court Page 380 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 3 Hotel Los Gatos across East Main Street Landscaped High School lawn immediately across High School Court Nearby multifamily residential across East Main Street Nearby commercial building on East Main Street Nearby church across East Main Street Nearby commercial building on East Main Street Page 381 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 4 PROPOSED PROJECT PROPOSED WEST SIDE ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION PROPOSED FRONT FACADE PROPOSED EAST SIDE ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR FACADE Page 382 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 5 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The proposed building is much taller than the preponderance of structures in the site’s immediate context, but the presence of the adjacent high school main building provides some height transition for a taller struc- ture here. Overall the design is well done but there are a few refinements that I would recommend to enhance its compatibility with its neighbors. The following are issues that staff may wish to discuss further with the applicant. 1. The design appears to draw on the traditional formality and details of the adjacent high school structure with its punched window openings in a solid wall facade and classic architectural details. However, the main facades of this proposed building are broken up into smaller segments with a strong vertical ap- pearance which is at odds with the adjacent high school and other nearby buildings. 2. The separation of the facades into elements that are less unified than in traditional architecture also tends to make the facade overly fragmented and more vertical in its appearance. This carries through with the two side elevations having a distinctly different appearance than the front and rear facades. 3. The verticality of the facades which draw attention to its substantial scale difference from its surround- ing context is further emphasized by the four story light colored facade over the main building entry. Page 383 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 6 4. The central gable roof on the rear facade is a form not found elsewhere on the building and seems out of place in the overall unity of the design. 5. There is a small issue with the smaller residential unit entries facing the streets. The entries and stairs are shown graphically different on the floor plan and the elevations. The elevation shows a rather long stretch of concrete steps along the East Main Street sidewalk frontage. Given the reduced setback requested by the applicant along the frontage, it seems like an emphasis on more landscaping might be appropriate. 6. One issue of unit livability that might be an issue is the relatively deep units in some locations where some interior living spaces may be further away from a window than normally expected in high quality housing. Page 384 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Maximize the amount of landscaping along the East Main Street frontage. One example of a similar patio entry along the sidewalk is shown in the photo below. 2. Extend the stone cornice and decorative stone work consistently around all sides of the building. 3. Add brick spandrel infill on the four story tall wall over the primary East Main Street entry to reduce its vertical emphasis. Page 385 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 8 4. Modify the gable roof form on the rear facade to blend in better with the overall building design. Ryan, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are any issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon Page 386 151 EAST MAIN STREET August 30, 2024 COMMENTS FROM CANNON DESIGN GROUP The design is inspired by the work of William Weeks, Architect and the surrounding hotel and 131 Main Street. The use of brick, precast concrete trim and details are consistent with this inspiration. See Sheet A0.1 for additional design imagery of work by William Weeks, Architect. The use of brick, exterior plaster and grid window glass are design features found in Los Gatos. The upper floor is stepped back to reduce its scale and mass. Materials include exterior plaster, clay tile roofing and wood trellis features all similar to The Los Gatos Hotel located across Main Street per comment #4. Response to Cannon Design Comments The current landscape drawings, Site Plan and First Floor Plan have been updated to add additional landscape to the residential entries on Main Street and Church Street as recommended in Item #1. We have extended the cornice treatment around all facades per recommendation comment #2. We have also eliminated the vertical design feature at the Main Street entry and substituted a lower gable roof form similar to the Church Street design element. EXHIBIT 11Page 387 July 11, 2024 Mr. Ryan Safty Community Development Department Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 143 + 151 East Main Street Dear Ryan: I reviewed the new drawings in the context of its immediate neighborhood. My comments and recommendations are as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The site is located on East Main Street close to the Town Hall and Library. Other nearby uses are a mix of commercial, institutional and residential uses. Photographs of the site and surrounding context are shown on the following page. 8/30/24 See response to comments in blue Page 388 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 2 Commercial Building immediately to the left THE SITE Church immediately across Church Street High School immediately across High School Court Page 389 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 3 Hotel Los Gatos across East Main Street Landscaped High School lawn immediately across High School Court Nearby multifamily residential across East Main Street Nearby commercial building on East Main Street Nearby church across East Main Street Nearby commercial building on East Main Street Page 390 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 4 PROPOSED PROJECT PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION PROPOSED WEST SIDE ELEVATION PROPOSED FRONT FACADE PROPOSED REAR FACADE Page 391 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 5 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The proposed building is much taller than the preponderance of structures in the site’s immediate context, but the presence of the adjacent high school main building provides some height transition for a taller struc- ture here. Overall the design is well done but there are a few refinements that I would recommend to enhance its compatibility with its neighbors. The following are issues that staff may wish to discuss further with the applicant. 1. The design appears to draw on the traditional formality and details of the adjacent high school structure with its punched window openings in a solid wall facade and classic architectural details. However, the main facades of this proposed building are broken up into smaller segments with a strong vertical ap- pearance which is at odds with the adjacent high school and other nearby buildings. 2. The separation of the facades into elements that are less unified than in traditional architecture also tends to make the facade overly fragmented and more vertical in its appearance. This carries through with the two side elevations having a distinctly different appearance than the front and rear facades. 3. The verticality of the facades which draw attention to its substantial scale difference from its surround- ing context is further emphasized by the four story light colored facade over the main building entry. Page 392 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 6 4. The central gable roof on the rear facade is a form not found elsewhere on the building and seems out of place in the overall unity of the design. There is a small issue with the smaller residential unit entries facing the streets. The entries and stairs are shown graphically different on the floor plan and the elevations. The elevation shows a rather long stretch of concrete steps along the East Main Street sidewalk frontage. Given the reduced setback requested by the applicant along the frontage, it seems like an emphasis on more landscaping might be appropriate. 5. One issue of unit livability that might be an issue is the relatively deep units in some locations where some interior living spaces may be further away from a window than normally expected in high quality housing. Page 393 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Maximize the amount of landscaping along the East Main Street frontage. One example of a similar patio entry along the sidewalk is shown in the photo below. 2. Extend the stone cornice and decorative stone work consistently around all sides of the building. 3. Add brick spandrel infill on the four story tall wall over the primary East Main Street entry to reduce its vertical emphasis. Currently reviewing this comment. Completed. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. We will not be adding this proposed change to the design drawings. Page 394 143 + 151 East Main Street Design Review Comments July 11, 2024 Page 8 4. Modify the gable roof form on the rear facade to blend in better with the overall building design. Ryan, please let me know if you have any questions or if there are any issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry L. Cannon We have eliminated this feature. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. Page 395 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 396 143 and 151 E. Main Street Arborist’s Review November 5, 2024 November 5, 2024 Jennifer Armer Community Development Department 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Summary and Assignment I was asked to review the plans and the applicant’s arborist report and provide findings and recommendations. I Provided a review on July 16, 2024. The arborist’s report was provided by Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting dated December 20, 2023, revised dated August 21, 2024, and October 24, 2024. The prior deficiencies are now resolved as indicated below: •There are no specific tree protection measures regarding those proposed for retention - Sec. 29.10.1000. New property development. (c). Only the Street Trees could remain to be protected and would require a Type I or Type II protection scheme. Resolved •The table in the report does not indicate the disposition of each tree including “Protected” or “Large Protected”. - 29.10.1000. New property development (a)(3). Nor the report or table indicates which trees are Exempt Sec. 29.10.0970. Exceptions. (1) or (2), needs a column to be more specific as indicated in the ordinance. There is at least one Large Protected coast live oak and two Exempt privet. Resolved •No appraised values were provided - 29.10.1000. New property development. (c)(3). The report provides a total value. Resolved •No specific development plans were indicated as reviewed (remove or retain). However the arborist indicates all trees will be removed with the exception of the Street Trees and the plans confirm this. Resolved •There are no references to the Town’s ordinance and requirements for protection. Boiler plate information was provided as per author’s standard procedures. The Town uses Type I, II, and III protection schemes. Resolved •Correct report artifacts and inconsistencies. Resolved The plan set does not contain the required Tree Preservation Instructions (Sheet T-1) sheet Sec. 29.10.1000. New property development. (c) (1). Although sheet L3.0 Provides replacement tree information. Resolved Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 1 3 EXHIBIT 12Page 397 143 and 151 E. Main Street Arborist’s Review November 5, 2024 Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles or ownership of properties are assumed to be good and marketable. All property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. All property is presumed to be in conformance with applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other regulations. Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. However, the consultant cannot be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend meetings, hearings, conferences, mediations, arbitration, or trials by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services. This report and any appraisal value expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and the consultant’s fee is not contingent upon the reporting of a specified appraisal value, a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event. Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report are intended for use as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale, and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. The reproduction of information generated by architects, engineers, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is only for coordination and ease of reference. Inclusion of said information with any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation as to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information. Unless otherwise expressed: a) this report covers only examined items and their condition at the time of inspection; and b) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that structural problems or deficiencies of plants or property may not arise in the future. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 2 3 Page 398 143 and 151 E. Main Street Arborist’s Review November 5, 2024 Certification of Performance I Richard Gessner, Certify: That I have personally inspected the tree(s) and/or the property referred to in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation and/or appraisal is stated in the attached report and Terms of Assignment; That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own; That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted Arboricultural practices; That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated within the report. That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any other subsequent events; I further certify that I am a Registered Consulting Arborist® with the American Society of Consulting Arborists, and that I acknowledge, accept and adhere to the ASCA Standards of Professional Practice. I am an International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master Arborist®. I have been involved with the practice of Arboriculture and the care and study of trees since 1998. Richard J. Gessner ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #496 ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® WE-4341B Copyright © Copyright 2024, Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC. Other than specific exception granted for copies made by the client for the express uses stated in this report, no parts of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording, or otherwise without the express, written permission of the author. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC - P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 - rick@monarcharborist.com Page of 3 3 Page 399 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 400 ARBORIST REPORT Los Gatos Mixed Use 151 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 December 20, 2023; updated October 15, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting 221 Main St. #83 Los Altos CA 94023 650.935.5822 Prepared for: The Guzzardo Partnership, Inc. Pier 9, The Embarcadero, Suite 115 San Francisco, CA 94111 Prepared by: Deanne Ecklund (Goff), ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #647 24, 2024 EXHIBIT 13 Page 401 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 1 Summary The inventory contains 10 trees comprised of 5 species. Five of these were street trees. The following plan was reviewed to evaluate impacts to trees: •L1.0 Landscape Plan (The Guzzardo Partnership 1/14/24). •Civil plans (Sandis 8/16/24) Two street trees #170 and #176 would be preserved. The remaining trees would be removed to accommodate development. Introduction Assignment Provide an inventory and assessment of the trees located at 151 E. Main St. in Los Gatos, CA. The assessment shall include the species, size (trunk diameter), condition (health, structure, form), and suitability for preservation ratings. Prepare a report with tree preservation guidelines. Limits of the Assignment 1.Information in this report is limited to the condition of trees during my tree assessment on December 8, 2023. 2.Tree risk assessments were not performed. 3.Landscape plans were available for review. Assessment Methods Trees were numbered #170-179. The assessment included all trees within and immediately adjacent to development area. Tree condition was based on three components: health, structure, and form. The assessment considered both the health and structure for a combined condition rating (Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Ed. ISA 2019). 5 (81-100%) - Excellent = High vigor, nearly ideal and free of defects. 4 (61-80%) - Good = Normal vigor, well-developed structure. No significant insect or disease damage. Defects are minor and can be corrected. Function and aesthetics not compromised. 3 (41-60 %) - Fair = Reduced vigor, damage, dieback, or pest problems, at least one significant structural problem or multiple moderate defects requiring treatment. Major asymmetry or deviation from the species normal habit, function and aesthetics compromised. 2 (21-40%) - Poor = Unhealthy and declining appearance with poor vigor, abnormal foliar color, size or density with potential irreversible decline. One serious structural defect or multiple (The Civil Engineer's plans were also reviewed to evaluate tree impacts.) Page 402 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 2 significant defects that cannot be corrected and failure may occur at any time. Significant asymmetry and compromised aesthetics and intended use. 1 (6-20%) - Very Poor = Poor vigor, dying with little live foliage. Tree in irreversible decline. Severe defects with the likelihood of failure being probable or imminent. Aesthetically poor with little or no function in the landscape. 0 (0-5%) - Dead/Unstable = Dead or failure imminent. A tree’s suitability for preservation considers its health, structure, age, species characteristics (e.g. disease resistance, drought tolerance), species tolerances to root disturbance and other construction impacts, species invasiveness, and its potential to continue to benefit the site. Trees were rated either “high” “moderate” or “low” suitability for preservation. High = Trees with good vigor, structural stability, and potential to function well long after construction. Moderate = Trees with fair vigor, and with health or structural defects that can be mitigated with treatment. These trees will require more management and monitoring before, during, and after construction, and may have shorter life spans after development. Low = Trees are expected to decline during or after construction regardless of management. The species or individual tree may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site. Appraisal of value The reproduction value of trees was determined by using the Trunk Formula Technique methodology described in the Guide for Plant Appraisal, Tenth Edition. Page 403 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 3 Observations Ten (10) trees were measured and evaluated. Most trees were in poor and fair condition (Table 1), with varying degrees of crown dieback. Table 1. Tree species condition + quantity Species name Scientific name Poor (1-2) Fair (3) Good (4-5) Total Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica - - 1 1 Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 1 1 - 2 Southern magnolia Magnollia grandiflora 3 1 - 4 Callery pear Pyrus calleryana 1 1 - 2 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia - - 1 1 Total 5 3 2 10 50% 30% 20% A semi-mature coast live oak (#174) was in good condition. Soil level in its planter was approximately 2’ above sidewalk grade. Two evergreen pears were in fair and poor condition. Both had been previously topped and had many small branches (epicormic shoots) emerging from pruned ends. If left unmanaged, these shoots can become susceptible to failure. Southern magnolia street trees were in poor to fair condition. All three trees had significant trunk wounds on their southwest sides caused by sunburn. Town of Los Gatos Tree Protection Ordinance The Town of Los Gatos municipal code (Chapter 29, Sec. 29.10.0960) Protected Tree definition includes the following description. (4) All trees which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch circumference) of any trunk, when removal relates to any review for which zoning approval or subdivision approval is required. Based on trunk size, all 10 trees evaluated for this report were considered Protected, and a permit is required for the removal of any Protected tree. Page 404 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 4 Discussion and Recommendations I reviewed the Landscape Plan sheet L1.0 (The Guzzardo Partnership 1/14/24) and Civil Plan Set (Sandis 8/16/24) to evaluate tree impacts. The design requires that three on-site trees must be removed. Three street trees in poor condition will be removed and replaced. Street trees #170 and 176, which is outside development area, will be preserved and protected. Street tree #170 is expected to incur root impacts from sidewalk replacement. The tree is relatively young and the species tolerant of root impacts from construction. The following tree protection measures shall be employed to protect the tree in place. • Type III tree protection shall be used to protect the trunk of tree #170. • Type I tree protection shall be used to protect trees #177 and 178. • Existing sidewalk shall be removed in a manner that avoids damaging roots. • Any roots requiring pruning for sidewalk forms shall be cut cleanly at the edge of excavation. Adhering to these and the tree preservation guidelines in the next section will ensure root impacts are kept to a minimum. A total of six trees will be removed for development, six of which require mitigation. Tree removal and mitigation The Table 2 indicates the recommended replacement values. The applicant will be required to replace 6 protected trees according to the ordinance. Alternatively, it may be possible to create an approved landscape plan or provide an in-lieu payment. Table 2. Town of Los Gatos tree canopy replacement standard Canopy Size of Removed Tree Replacement Requirement (2)(4) 10 feet or less Two 24-inch box trees More than 10 feet to 25 feet Three 24-inch box trees More than 25 feet to 40 feet Four 24-inch box trees; or Two 36-inch box trees More than 40 feet to 55 feet Six 24-inch box trees; or Three 36-inch box trees Greater than 55 feet Ten 24-inch box trees; or Five 36-inch box trees The Landscape plan sheets and the Civil Engineer's plans were reviewed to evaluate tree impacts. Page 405 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 5 (2) Often, it is not possible to replace a single large, older tree with an equivalent tree(s). In this case, the tree may be replaced with a combination of both the Tree Canopy Replacement Standard and in- lieu payment in an amount set forth by Town Council resolution paid to the Town Tree Replacement Fund. (4) Replacement Trees shall be approved by the Town Arborist and shall be of a species suited to the available planting location, proximity to structures, overhead clearances, soil type, compatibility with surrounding canopy and other relevant factors. Replacement with native species shall be strongly encouraged. Tree Protection Guidelines Design recommendations 1. Provide sufficient clearance between trees and proposed features to avoid damage to roots. 2. Enlarge tree wells to increase water access and reduce sidewalk damage potential. 3. Underground services including utilities, sub-drains, water or sewer shall be routed around the tree protection zone (TPZ). a. Where encroachment cannot be avoided, special construction techniques such as hand digging or tunneling under roots shall be employed where necessary to minimize root injury. 4. Utilize novel design and construction techniques to preserve roots where utilities or features must be within tree TPZs. Pre-construction 1. The construction superintendent shall meet with the Project Arborist before beginning work to discuss work procedures and tree protection. 2. Fence street trees with Type III fencing prior to demolition, grubbing, or grading. a. Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout only: orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with two-inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. Page 406 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 6 b. Duration: Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction permits are issued and remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence. c. Warning sign: Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an 8.5x11 sign stating: "Warning—Tree Protection Zone—This fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025." i. Do not attach signs, wire, or rope to any protected tree. 3. Pruning trees to provide construction and access clearance may be required. a. All pruning shall be done by a State of California Licensed Tree Contractor (C61/D49). All pruning shall be done by Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker in accordance with the Best Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of Arboriculture, 2019) and adhere to the most recent editions of the American National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300). b. All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California Fish and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent possible, tree pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding season. Breeding bird surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified biologists should be involved in establishing work buffers for active nests. Construction 1. Tree protection fence layout must be approved by the Project Arborist. Fences must remain in this configuration throughout construction. a. No construction activities shall occur within tree protection fencing. Construction activities include, but are not limited to: i. Vehicle or pedestrian traffic ii. Materials storage iii. Vehicle exhaust iv. Concrete cleanout water dumping b. If tree protection fencing dimensions need to be reduced to allow for site access, protect tree protection zones against compaction by laying full sheets of plywood attached together with tie plates over coarse bark mulch. c. After construction is complete, tree protection fencing may be moved as needed for hardscape and landscape installation. Contact Project Arborist prior to removal. 2. Demolition of paving, utilities, and features within tree protection zones shall be done carefully avoid damaging roots. 3. If live roots over one inch in diameter are encountered at any time, in any location, prune with a sharp saw or bypass pruners, as close as practical to the edge of the disturbed area. 4. Any major root pruning (roots 2” and greater in diameter) shall receive the prior approval of and be supervised by the Project Arborist. 5. If excavated areas are to be left open for longer than 3-4 days, cover exposed or severed roots with burlap or jute fabric. Page 407 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 7 a. Irrigate fabric daily to keep fabric moist until excavation work is completed. 6. Any additional tree pruning needed for clearance during construction must be performed by a Certified Arborist and not by construction personnel. Violations 1. If a violation occurs prior to proposed development, then discretionary applications and/or building permit applications will not be accepted or processed by the Town until the violation has been remedied to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director. 2. Incomplete applications will not be processed further until the violation has been remedied. If an application has been deemed complete, it may be denied by the Director or forwarded to the Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial at the Director's discretion. Mitigation measures as determined by the director may be imposed as a condition of approval. 3. For those trees on public property, replacement is to be determined by the Director of Community Development or by the Director of Parks and Public Works. 4. If a violation occurs during construction, the Town may issue a stop work order suspending and prohibiting further activity on the property pursuant to the grading, demolition, and/or building permit(s) (including construction, inspection, and issuance of certificates of occupancy) until a mitigation plan has been filed with and approved by the Director, agreed to in writing by the property owner(s) or the applicant(s) or both, and either implemented or guaranteed by the posting of adequate security in the discretion of the Director. Maintenance of remaining trees Because of changes in the growing environment after construction, preserved trees may require additional maintenance. Tree health and structural stability should be monitored. Occasional pruning, fertilization, mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation may be required. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases; therefore, annual inspection for hazard potential is recommended. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about my observations or recommendations. Sincerely, Deanne Ecklund (Goff) Registered Consulting Arborist #647 ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor Page 408 Los Gatos Mixed Use Arborist Report December 20, 2023; updated October 24, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 Tag # Common name Trunk Diam. (in.) Est. Canopy Diam. (ft.) Condition (1=poor 5=excel.) Tree Disposition Suitability for Preservation Appraised Value Expected Impact Saved/ Removed /Pruned Height range (ft.) Comments 170 Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica 7 19 5 Street tree High $ 1,800.00 Moderate Save 15 Street tree; good form and structure. 171 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 8 12 2 Street tree Low $ 650.00 -Remove 12 Street tree; nice crown; large trunk wound from base to 5'. 172 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 7 7 2 Street tree Low $ 550.00 -Remove 10 Street tree; small crown; large trunk wound from base to 5'. 173 Evergreen pear Pyrus kawakamii 19 20 3 Protected Moderate $ 5,050.00 -Remove 20 Previously topped at ~12'; good form, fair structure. 174 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 26.5 34 4 Large protected High $ 33,250.00 -Remove 23 Good form and structure; minor thinning in upper crown. 175 Evergreen pear Pyrus kawakamii 12 12 2 Protected Low $ 1,300.00 -Remove 15 Previously topped at ~12'; poor form and structure. 176 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 6 18 3 Street tree Low $ 650.00 n/a Save 13 Street tree; dense crown; large trunk wound from base to 5'. 177 Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 2.5,2. 5,2 10 2 Exempt (species) Low $ 400.00 Moderate Save 11 Growing against building; leans east; poor form and structure. 178 Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 7,6.5 15 3 Exempt (species) Low $ 550.00 Moderate Save 9 Growing against building; leans east; fair form and structure. 179 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 5 8 2 Street tree Low $ 500.00 -Remove 13 Street tree; large trunk wound; thin crown. Tree Assessment 8 Physical Conditions,Reason for Removal Low suitability for preservation. Conflict with site plan. Conflict with site plan. Low suitability for preservation. Low suitability for preservation. Conflict with site plan. Page 409 Los Gatos Mixed Use Tree Inventory Map 151 E. Main St. (#170-179) Deanne Ecklund Certified Arborist WE9067-A Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting December 20, 2023 171 179 170 178 177 176 175 174 173 172 Page 410 143 & 151 E. Main St - Los Gatos, CA View 1 1 EXHIBIT 14 Page 411 143 & 151 E. Main St - Los Gatos, CA View 2 2 Page 412 143 & 151 E. Main St - Los Gatos, CA View 3 3 Page 413 143 & 151 E. Main St - Los Gatos, CA View 4 4 Page 414 YES NO N/A X A.1.1 L1.0, A2.0, A2.5, A2.6, and A2.7 Standard met. See Sheet A2.0 and L1.0 for 5' wide ADA Accessible walkway and ramp leading from the public sidewalk to the main entry of the building. The main entry consists of two (2) 3' wide doors to form a 6' wide entry to the building. Once inside the building all interior doors (all 3' wide), corridors, elevator openings, and stairwells are accessible. All unit entry doors, doors to bike rooms and amenity rooms are a minimum dimension of 3' wide. Basement parking area has a minimum 4' wide accessible path from all accessible ADA stalls to the elevator lobby core in parking Option 1 and Option 2. X A.1.2 A2.5, A2.6, and A2.7 Standard not met. Pathways are under six feet in width unless counting area of vehicular travel. All accessible parking stalls have a 4' minimum path to the garage main lobby and elevator. This path is a raised 6" curb and sidewalk from vehicles for separation. X A2.0, L1.0, L2.0, and L6.0 Standard met. Short term bike racks for visitor parking include (4) racks which hold 8 bikes and are located on Main Street and High School Way (2 racks per each street). See Sheets A2.0 and L1.0 for location and Sheet L2.0 for bike rack detail. X A.2.1 A2.0, L1.0, and L6.0 Standard met. The 8 bike racks are located within 50' of the two building entries. 4 racks located on Main Street for the residential building and 4 racks on High School Way for the commercial space. The project requires 32 short term stalls and only 8 short term stalls have been provided. All other secure bike parking is in two(2) long term bike rooms. See description on standard A.3 for other bike parking. X A.2.2 A2.0 Standard not met. 32 short-term spaces required, while eight are proposed. Due to space constraints, 32 short-term bicycle parking spaces could not be provided. However, the Project is meeting the Town’s goal of promoting alternative modes of transportation by providing more long-term bicycle parking spaces than required. X A.2.3 L6.0 Standard not met. The proposed dimensions are instead six feet by two feet. The Project’s minor 1’ deviation in short-term bicycle parking space length is justified in order to maximize the number of stalls in a constrained space. This deviation doesn’t affect the overall useability or security of the spaces. X A.2.4 no sheet provided Does not apply. Only eight short-term spaces are proposed. X A.3.1 A2.0, A2.6, A2.7, and A2.9 Standard not met. Some of the proposed long-term spaces would be below-grade. The intent of the Project is to maximize residential space, which is helped by providing long-term bike parking adjacent to automobile parking, which the Project provides below grade. This minor deviation maximizes ground floor space for residential use and meets the intent of the standard by providing long-term bicycle parking on the lowest available floor of the Project. X A.3.2 A2.6, A2.7 Standard met. Total of 72 long-term secure bike parking spaces for Option 1 (extra 42). Total of 41 long-term secure bike parking spaces for Option 2 (extra 11). A.3.3 X A2.9 Does not apply. Bike lockers are not proposed. X A2.9 Does not apply. Bike lockers are not proposed. X A2.9 Does not apply. Bike lockers are not proposed. A.3.4 X A2.9 Standard met. Ceiling height of all secure enclosed bike rooms will be 9'-0" clear. See written note Detail 2 on Sheet A2.9. X A2.9 Standard not met. Two points of support are not proposed. The Project’s one-point connection is justified as a minor deviation that doesn’t affect the overall integrity, strength, or security of the racks and therefore doesn’t make a significant difference to usability. APPLICANT RESPONSIBILITY Applicants are responsible for accurately responding to each objective design standard listed below by indicating whether each standard has been met or does not apply. Applicants shall indicate the sheet(s) within the project plans that show compliance with each objective design standard. OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS CHECKLIST SHEETS Objective Design Standard b.Must withstand a load of 200 pounds per square foot. c.   Opened door must withstand 500-pound vertical load. Bicycle rooms with key access minimum requirements: a.Bicycle rooms shall have a minimum ceiling height of seven feet. b.Bicycle rooms shall contain racks that support the bicycle frame at two points and allow for the bicycle frame and one wheel to be locked to the rack with a U-lock. STAFF RESPONSE A.1. Pedestrian Access APPLICANT RESPONSE/JUSTIFICATIONA. SITE STANDARDS Each short-term bicycle parking space shall be a minimum of seven feet in length and two feet in width. If more than 20-short term bicycle spaces are provided, at least 50 percent of the spaces shall be covered by a permanent solid-roofed weather protection structure. Long-term bicycle parking facilities (Class I bicycle parking facility) consists of bicycle lockers or bicycle rooms with key access for use by residents. A.2. Short-Term Bicycle Parking (Class II) A.3. Long-Term Bicycle Parking (Class I) Long-term bicycles parking facilities shall be located on the ground floor and shall not be located between the building and the street. Multi-family residential and residential mixed-use buildings shall provide one long-term bicycle parking space per dwelling unit. Developments such as townhomes that include individual garages for each unit shall not be required to provide long-term bicycle parking. Bicycle locker minimum requirements: a.Dimensions of 42 inches wide, 75 inches deep, and 54 inches high. All on-site buildings, entries, facilities, amenities, and vehicular and bicycle parking areas shall be internally connected with a minimum four-foot-wide pedestrian pathway or pathway network that may include use of the public sidewalk. The pedestrian pathway network shall connect to the public sidewalk along each street. Pedestrian pathways within internal parking areas shall be separated from vehicular circulation by a physical barrier, such as a grade separation or a raised planting strip, of at least six inches in height and at least six feet in width. A pedestrian pathway is exempt from this standard where it crosses a parking vehicular drive aisle. Short-term bicycle parking (Class II bicycle parking facility) consists of racks that support the bicycle frame at two points and allow for the bicycle frame and one wheel to be locked to the rack with a U-lock. Short-term bicycle parking space shall be located within 50 feet of the primary pedestrian building entrance. Short-term bicycle parking shall be provided at a rate of one space per dwelling unit and one space per 2,000 square feet of non-residential floor area. EXHIBIT 15Page 415 X A2.9 Standard not met. The bike room on the ground floor would have an aisle width of 5'-9". The basement bike room would comply. This minor 3” deviation on the first floor (below-grade bike rooms are size-compliant) is justified because it does not impact the maneuverability, accessibility, or safety of the long-term bicycle parking spaces, ensuring that residents can still easily store and retrieve their bicycles. The slightly smaller size was necessary due to constraints in the Project. X A2.9 Standard not met. Maneuverability space not provided on the ground floor. This minor deviation is justified because it maximizes bike parking in a constrained space while allowing more residential space to be provided. Even with this minor deviation on the first floor (below-grade bike rooms are size-compliant), the available maneuverability space is sufficient for residents to store and retrieve their bicycles without significant inconvenience. X A2.9 Standard not met. Length and width not met. Each vertical long-term bicycle parking space has 39" in length, 16" in width and 108" in height. This minor deviation is justified because the design enables the accommodation of a variety of bicycle types in a compact and secure manner, ensuring that residents have access to convenient and safe bicycle parking. The slightly smaller size was necessary due to space constraints in the Project. X A.4.1 no sheet provided Does not apply. No off-street parking proposed. X A.5.1 no sheet provided Does not apply. No surface parking lots or carports proposed. X A.5.2 no sheet provided Does not apply. No uncovered parking rows proposed. X A.6.1 A1.0 and A2.0 Standard met. A 20-foot setback is proposed. X A.6.2 no sheet provided Does not apply. Parking structure is below-grade. X A.6.3 A2.0 Standard not met. No pedestrian gate proposed. This deviation is justified because the Project’s parking is provided below grade and residential access to the garage is provided from the ground floor lobby and not from the garage entrance, which enhances the security of the garage area and resident/visitor safety on the access/egress ramp. X A.7.1 A1.0 Does not apply. No outdoor community recreation space proposed. X A.7.2 A3.0, A3.1, and A3.3 Standard not met. Exterior lighting would not be fully shielded. This minor deviation in lighting is justified by the Project's overall design aesthetic and because the lighting proposed meets the intent of the regulation as it will not spill over into adjacent properties. X A.7.3 C3.0, L3.0, A2.0, A3.0, A3.1, and A5.0 Standard met. Trash enclosure is located on A2.0 with details on A5.0. All trash bins are concealed from public streets. Utility equipment is located on the corner of High School Way and Church. See Sheet L3.0 for plant material used for screening these devices. The trash wall is 8' high which screens all trash bins that are not taller than 5' high. X A.7.4 A2.4 Standard met. See General Notes on A2.4. X A.8.1 L1.0, L3.0 and A0.6 Standard not met. This minor deviation is justified by the small size of the front setback area (only 1,183 square feet) and the Project's landscape design, which enhances the aesthetic appeal and environmental quality of the development, contributing positively to the neighborhood. X A.8.2 A2.0, L1.0 and L3.0 Does not apply. Property does not share a property line with residential use. Street-level views of ground level utility cabinets, mechanical equipment, trash, and service areas shall be screened from sight with landscape planting, fencing, or a wall, as allowed by the Town Code. The screening shall be at least the same height as the item being screened and screening that is not landscape material shall be constructed with one or more of the materials used on the primary building. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from the street. Solar equipment is exempt from this requirement. At least 50 percent of the front setback area shall be landscaped. A minimum 10-foot-wide landscape buffer shall be provided along the full length of the shared property line between multi-family or Residential Mixed-Use development and abutting residential properties. The buffer shall include the following: a. A solid masonry wall with a six-foot height, except within a street-facing setback where walls are not permitted; and b. Trees planted at a rate of at least one tree per 30 linear feet along the shared property line. Tree species shall be selected from the Town of Los Gatos Master Street Tree List and shall be a minimum 15-gallon size. A parking structure shall not occupy more than 50 percent of the building width of any street-facing façade, and it shall be recessed a minimum of five feet from the street- facing façade of the building. For projects with five or more residential units and that have a vehicle access gate to the parking structure, a pedestrian gate shall also be provided. Pedestrian-oriented lighting shall be provided along all pedestrian paths in community recreation spaces. Exterior lighting fixtures shall be a minimum of three feet and a maximum of 12 feet in height. Light fixtures shall be placed along the pedestrian path at a spacing of no more than 30 linear feet. Exterior lighting shall be fully shielded and restrain light to a minimum 30 degrees below the horizontal plane of the light source. Lighting shall be arranged so that the light will not shine directly on lands of adjacent residential zoned properties. Uplighting is prohibited. A.5. Parking Location and Design c.           Long-term bicycle parking spaces shall be served by an aisle with a minimum width of six feet. d.          Maneuverability space of at least two feet shall be provided between the aisle and long-term bicycle parking spaces e.          Each horizontal long-term bicycle parking space shall be a minimum of seven feet in length, two feet in width, four-and one-half feet in height. Each vertical long- term bicycle parking space shall be a minimum of three-and one-half feet in length, two feet in width, and seven feet in height. Off-street parking lots shall have vehicular circulation using an internal vehicular network that precludes the use of a public street for aisle-to-aisle internal circulation. Surface parking lots and carports shall not be located between the primary building frontage and the street. Uncovered parking rows with at least 15 consecutive parking spaces shall include a landscape area of six feet minimum width at intervals of no more than 10 consecutive parking stalls. One tree shall be provided in each landscape area. Any vehicular entry gate to a parking structure shall be located to allow a minimum of 18 feet between the gate and the back of the sidewalk to minimize conflicts between sidewalks and vehicle queuing. A.7. Utilities A.8. Landscaping and Screening A.6. Parking Structure Access A.4. Vehicular Access Page 416 X A.8.3 no sheet provided Does not apply. No surface parking lots proposed. X A.9.1 A2.0 Standard not met. Trash screening fence is within required setback along Church Street. This minor deviation is justified by the Project's commitment to maintaining a clean and organized environment for residents and visitors. The screening fence is strategically placed to ensure that trash and waste management areas are concealed from public view within this large rear setback, thereby enhancing the overall aesthetic and hygienic quality of the development. X A.9.2 no sheet provided Standard met. This project is not proposing to use chain-link fencing anywhere in the project. X A.9.3 A5.0 Standard not met. The vehicular gate would exceed this limitation. This minor deviation in the height of the perimeter barrier gate is justified to enhance the safety and security of the development, ensuring that unauthorized access is reasonably prevented. X A.9.4 A3.0 and A5.0 Standard met. Vehicular gate to parking garage complies with 50% open view as shown on Sheet A3.0 and A5.0. X A.10.1 L1.0, L3.0 and L6.0 Standard met. There are no retaining walls above grade. The project proposes 18"-24" raised landscape planter walls at the entry on East Main Street and Church Street. See Sheets L1.0, L3.0 and L6.0 for planter wall details. X A.10.2 L1.0, L3.0 and L6.0 Standard met. There are no retaining walls above grade. The project proposes 18"-24" raised landscape planter walls at the entry on East Main Street and Church Street. See Sheets L1.0, L3.0 and L6.0 for planter wall details. A.11.1 X A0.6 Standard not met. Approximately 13% proposed. Despite the minor deviation in landscaped space provided, the Project has maximized ground floor space on the site for residential use and the remaining space is significantly landscaped. By replacing an underutilized restaurant and parking lot, the Project significantly improves the site, offering a more attractive, functional, and activated urban space. Reducing the landscaped space to 13% is also necessary to achieve the targeted residential density. X A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, and A2.3 Standard met. Each unit has a minimum of 66SF of private open space on floors 1-3 and a maximum of 803SF per unit on the fourth floor of the project. See Sheets A2.0-A2.3 for calculations and dimensions of each private open space attached to each unit within the project. These open space areas have a minimum vertical clearance of 8'. See Sheet A3.0 general note. X A2.0 Standard not met. Private space for ground floor units ranges from 66sf to 102 sf. The Project has maximized ground-floor residential space while still providing some usable private recreation spaces. The design ensures that the private recreation spaces, although smaller than required, are sufficient to create a pleasant and functional living environment for residents and justifies the minor deviation in the size of private recreation spaces. X A2.1, A2.2, and A2.3 Standard met. Floors 2-4 meet the minimum 60 square feet of private recreation space. See Sheets A2.1-A2.3. X A0.6 Standard not met. No outside community recreation space proposed. The Project has maximized its space for residential uses. The absence of a designated community recreation space is justified by the Project's amenity spaces on the third and fourth floors and its strategic downtown location, which offers residents easy access to nearby public parks, schools, and recreational facilities. c. Community recreation space: The minimum dimensions are 10 feet by six feet. A minimum of 60 percent of the community recreation space shall be open to the sky and free of permanent solid-roofed weather protection structures. Community recreation space shall provide shading for a minimum 15 percent of the community recreation space by either trees or structures, such as awnings, canopies, umbrellas, or a trellis. Tree shading shall be calculated by using the diameter of the tree crown at 15 years maturity. Shading from other built structures shall be calculated by using the surface area of the overhead feature. Retaining walls shall not run in a straight continuous direction for more than 50 feet without including the following: a. A break, offset, or landscape pocket in the wall plane of at least three feet in length and two feet in depth; and b. Landscaping at a minimum height of three feet at the time of installation along a minimum of 60 percent of the total length of the retaining wall. The landscaped, private, and community recreation spaces listed below are required for all qualifying projects. Community recreation spaces and private recreation spaces are calculated independent of each other. Landscaped areas within community recreation spaces can contribute to required minimums for both landscaped area and community recreation space. a. Landscaped space: A minimum of 20 percent of the site area shall be landscaped. b. Private recreation space: The minimum horizontal dimension is six feet in any direction and a minimum area of 60 square feet. The minimum vertical clearance required is eight feet. Private recreation space shall be directly accessible from the residential unit. Landscaped sections of private recreation space shall not count towards required landscaping requirements. i. Each ground floor dwelling unit shall have a minimum of 120 square feet of usable private recreation space. ii. Each dwelling unit above the ground floor shall have a minimum of 60 square feet of usable private recreation space. Where multiple balconies are provided for a single unit, the 60-square-foot minimum can be an aggregate of all balconies, provide each balcony meets the requirements for minimum horizontal dimensions. Surface parking lots shall be screened from view of the street with landscaping or a wall with a minimum three-foot height to screen the parking lot when not already screened by a primary building. When located in a street-facing setback, screening may not exceed a height of three feet. Fences, walls, and gates within required setbacks along all street frontages are prohibited unless used to screen on-site parking spaces from view from the street. A.9. Fencing A.10. Retaining Walls A.11. Landscaped, Private, and Community Recreation Spaces Chain link fencing is prohibited. Perimeter barrier gates for vehicles and pedestrian entry gates shall have a maximum height of six feet. Solid vehicular and pedestrian entry gates are prohibited. Entry gates shall be a minimum 50 percent open view. Retaining walls shall not exceed five feet in height. Where an additional retained portion is necessary, multiple-terraced walls shall be used. Terraced walls shall set back at least three feet from the lower segment. Page 417 X A0.6 Standard not met. 3,048 sf required, while 1,010sf of indoor, amenity space is proposed. Despite this deviation, the Project maximizes its space for residential uses while also providing private amenity spaces for residents, which justifies the lack of an on-site community recreation space. The Project utilizes space for residential uses and its strategic location offers residents convenient access to existing public recreational facilities, thereby justifying the lack of an on-site community recreation space. X A0.6 Does not apply. The project is a mixed-use development (see standard above). X no sheet provided Does not apply. More than four residential units proposed. Therefore, the community recreation requirement is applicable. X A0.6 Does not apply. No outdoor, landscaped community recreation spacec proposed. X A.12.1 A1.0 and A2.0 Standard met. X A.12.2 A0.6 Standard not met. See subsections "a-d" below. The required 15% is not proposed. By replacing an underutilized restaurant and parking lot, the Project significantly improves the site, offering a more attractive and functional urban space. The Project design, despite the minor deviation in site amenities, still ensures that the provided site amenities are sufficient to create a pleasant and inviting environment, supporting the Town's goals of promoting sustainable and visually appealing urban development while addressing housing needs. L1.0, L3.0 and L6.0 Standard not met. L1.0, L3.0 and L6.0 Standard not met. L1.0, L3.0 and L3.0 Standard not met. L1.0 Standard not met. YES NO N/A X B.1.1 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Two solutions are proposed, but not three. See below. Despite the minor deviation, the Project design ensures that the building façade still achieves a high standard of aesthetic quality and urban integration, supporting the Town's goals of promoting sustainable and visually appealing urban development. X A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. The second and third floors do not step back a minimum of 5 feet. The fourth floor does step back a minimum of 5 feet to reduce building mass. X A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. There are changes in the façade plane of at least two feet, not to exceed 30 feet in length on levels 2 and 3. See Sheet A2.1 and A2.2 for dimensions of these projections. The fourth floor would have a change of plane with the trellis feature on all four units shown on the plans. X A2.0, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. Both the East Main Street and Church Street elevations have recessed entries that exceed 24 square foot minimum. See floor plan Sheet A2.0 for square footage calculations. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. No arcade is proposed. X A2.0 and A3.0 Standard not met. Despite the minor deviation, the Project still achieves a high standard of aesthetic quality and urban integration, supporting the Town's goals of promoting sustainable and visually appealing urban development. The maximized residential space on this smaller parcel made consistency with this standard infeasible. X A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. Vertical elements that project minimum of 1 foot are located along all street frontages on floors 1-3. See floor plan sheets for dimensions. X B.1.2 A2.2, A2.3, A3.0, and A3.1 Standard not met. The third floor is not stepped back 5 feet. The fourth floor is stepped back a minimum of 5 feet. See Sheet A2.3. This minor deviation is justified by the Project's overall design, which aims to balance the need for efficient space utilization with the provision of a visually appealing building form and therefore meets the intent of the standard. Objective Design Standard SHEETS STAFF RESPONSE APPLICANT RESPONSE/JUSTIFICATION i.      Community recreation space shall be provided in Residential Mixed-Use developments at a minimum of 100 square feet per residential unit plus a minimum of two percent of the non-residential square footage. ii.    Community recreation space shall be provided in multi-family residential development projects at a minimum of 100 square feet per residential unit. iii.  A project with four or less residential units is exempt from community recreation space requirements. iv.  Landscaped roof space can satisfy both required landscaping requirements and community recreation space requirements. Landscaped roof space may not be used to satisfy more than 50 percent of the required landscaping for the site. To ensure buildings provide a continuous frontage along sidewalks, development in commercial zones shall place at least 75 percent of any ground floor street-facing façade on or within five feet of the setback line designated in the Town Code. Upper floors above two stories shall be set back by a minimum of five feet from the ground-floor façade. B.1. Massing and Scale B. BUILDING DESIGN a.          A minimum of 40 percent of the upper floor façade length shall step back from the plane of the ground-floor façade by at least five feet; b.          Changes in the façade plane with a minimum change in depth of two feet for a minimum length along the façade of two feet at intervals of no more than 30 feet; c.          Recessed façade plane to accommodate a building entry with a minimum ground plane area of 24 square feet. Where an awning or entry covering is provided, it can extend beyond the wall plane; d.          An exterior arcade that provides a sheltered walkway within the building footprint with a minimum depth of eight feet. For a façade 50 feet or greater, the e.          Ground floor open area abutting street-facing façade with a minimum area of 60 square feet; or f.           Vertical elements, such as pilasters or columns, that protrude a minimum of one foot from the façade and extend the full height of the building base or ground floor, whichever is greater. A Residential Mixed-Use project with a ground-floor non-residential use shall provide site amenities on a minimum of 15 percent of the ground plane between the building and the front or street-side property line. The site amenities shall be comprised of any of the following elements: a.          Landscape materials or raised planters; b.          Walls designed to accommodate pedestrian seating, no higher than 36 inches; c.          Site furnishings, including fountains, sculptures, and other public art; or d.          Tables and chairs associated with the ground floor use. Multiple-story building façades that face a street shall incorporate breaks in the building mass by implementing a minimum of three of the following solutions along the combined façade area of all primary buildings facing the street: A.12. Building Placement Page 418 X B.2.1 no sheet provided Does not apply. The parking is below-grade. X B.2.2 no sheet provided Does not apply. The parking is below-grade. X B.2.3 no sheet provided Does not apply. The parking is below-grade. X no sheet provided Does not apply. The parking is below-grade. X no sheet provided Does not apply. The parking is below-grade. X B.3.1 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. See below. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Only one of items "a" through "e" are required. There is only one(1) gable proposed on the East Main Street and Church Street elevations. X A2.1, A2.2 and A2.3 Standard met. Therefore, B.3.1 is complied with as only one of items "a" through "e" are required. Building balcony projections occur on levels 2 and 3. See floor plans for projection dimensions. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Only one of items "a" through "e" are required. There is no change in roof height. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Only one of items "a" through "e" are required. There is no change in roof pitch. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Only one of items "a" through "e" are required. There are no dormers or varying cornices proposed. X B.3.2 no sheet provided Does not apply. No skylights are proposed. X B.3.3 no sheet provided Does not apply. No dormers are proposed. X B.3.4 no sheet provided Does not apply. No carports are proposed. X B.4.1 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. This minor deviation is justified by the Project's overall design, which employs alternative architectural strategies to create a visually distinct and cohesive building form. The design meets the intent of the standard and incorporates elements such as varied materials, colors, and window patterns to achieve a similar effect, enhancing the architectural character and visual interest of the building. X A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. The façade has not been recessed a minimum of two feet in all locations. X A2.0 Standard not met. Ground floor entry balconies do not project two feet. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. The awnings proposed do not meet 20 percent length on all street facing facades. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. At least four materials (stucco, brick, precast concrete and glass) make up the exterior facades. They do not provide a minimum of 20 percent on all street frontages. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. X B.4.2 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. Building materials used on street facing façade are used on all other elevations as well. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. X B.4.3 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. 11 points achieved when 16 required. The Project’s design ensures that the building façade still achieves a high standard of aesthetic quality and urban integration, supporting the Town's goals of promoting sustainable and visually appealing urban development. Therefore, while the full 16 points is not achieved, the design is consistent with the intent of the standard. X o   Arcade or gallery along the ground floor;8 points A2.0 Standard not met. There is no gallery or arcade proposed on the ground floor. X o   Awnings or canopies on all ground floor windows of commercial space;6 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Not all commercial ground floor windows have awnings. X o   Building cornice;5 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. A continuous precast cast concrete cornice is proposed. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. X o   Façade sconce lighting at a minimum of one light fixture per 15 linear feet.3 points A2.0, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Façade sconce lighting is not located at every 15 linear feet. c.          Variation in façade articulation, using shade and weather protection components, projecting a minimum of three feet for a minimum of 20 percent length from the street- facing façade; d.          The use of at least two different façade materials, each covering a minimum of 20 percent of the street-facing façade, or e.          The upper floor shall implement a façade height that is a minimum of two feet greater than the façade height of the floor immediately below. The greater façade height shall be made evident by taller windows or arrangement of combined windows. All façade materials, such as siding, window types, and architectural details, used on the street-facing façade shall be used on all other building façades. Variation in the street-facing façade planes shall be provided for buildings greater than one story by incorporating any combination of the following architectural solutions to achieve a minimum of 16 points: Architectural features, such as: Skylights shall have a flat profile rather than domed. The total width of a single dormer or multiple dormers shall not exceed 50 percent of the total roof length at the street-facing façade. The dormer width shall be measured at dormer roof fascia, or widest part of the dormer. Carport roof materials shall be the same as the primary building. Buildings greater than two stories shall be designed to differentiate the base, middle, and top of the building on any street-facing façade. Each of these elements shall be distinguished from one another using at least two of the following solutions: a.         Variation in building mass for a minimum of 60 percent of the length of the street- facing façade through changes in the façade plane that protrude or recess with a minimum dimension of two feet; b.          Balconies or habitable projections with a minimum depth of two feet for a minimum of 20 percent length of the street-facing façade; B.4. Façade Design and Articulation At intervals of no more than 40 feet along the building façade, horizontal eaves shall be broken using at least one of the following strategies: a.          Gables; b.          Building projection with a depth of a minimum of two feet; c.          Change in façade or roof height of a minimum of two feet; d.          Change in roof pitch or form; or e.          Inclusion of dormers, parapets, and/or varying cornices. The ground-floor façade of a parking structure facing a street or pedestrian walkway shall be fenestrated on a minimum of 40 percent of the façade. Façade openings on upper levels of a parking structure shall be screened at a minimum 10 percent and up to 30 percent of the opening to prevent full transparency into the structure. Parking structures facing a street and greater than 40 feet in length shall include landscaping between the building façade and the street, or façade articulation of at least 25 percent of the façade length. The façade articulation shall be implemented by one of the following solutions: a.          An offset of the façade plane with a depth of at least 18 inches for a minimum of eight feet in horizontal length; or b.          A different building material covering the entire façade articulation. B.2. Parking Structure Design B.3. Roof Design Page 419 X   Bay or box windows projecting a minimum of 18 inches from the façade plane and comprising a minimum of 20 percent of the fenestration on the upper floors of the facade; 6 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. There are no bay windows proposed. X   Balconies or Juliet balconies provided on a minimum of 40 percent of the fenestration on the upper floors of the facade;5 points A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Balconies do not occur on 40 percent of the building façade. X   Landscaped trellises or lattices extending across a minimum of 65 percent of any level of the facade;5 points A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. The proposed trellis feature on the fourth floor does not make up 65 percent of the wall façade. X   Materials and color changes;3 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. Material and color changes occur. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. X   Eaves that overhang a minimum of two feet from the facade with supporting brackets;3 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. The eaves at the upper floor project two feet, but the main entry feature on East Main and Church Street do not project a minimum of two feet. X   Window boxes or plant shelves under a minimum of 60 percent of the fenestration on the upper floors of the facade; or 3 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. There are no window boxes proposed. X   Decorative elements such as molding, brackets, or corbels 3 points A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. Decorative elements (moldings) are proposed on all elevations. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. X TOTAL 16 points 11 points Standard not met. 11 points achieved when 16 required. The Project’s design ensures that the building façade still achieves a high standard of aesthetic quality and urban integration, supporting the Town's goals of promoting sustainable and visually appealing urban development. Therefore, while the full 16 points is not achieved, the design is consistent with the intent of the standard. X B.4.4 A2.0 Does not apply. No garage doors are proposed. X B.4.5 A2.0 Standard not met. The building materials do not change at inside corners. The Project design employs a consistent material palette to create a cohesive and visually appealing building form. The design incorporates other architectural elements, such as varied textures and colors, to achieve a similar effect, enhancing the visual interest and character of the building. X B.4.6 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Part "a" is met, but not part "b". See below. Providing another primary building entrance along Church Street would reduce the amount of first floor residential space and create a dysfunctional ground-floor building layout considering the small size of the parcel. X A2.0, A3.0, and A3.1 Standard met. See below. Subsection "i" is complied with. X A2.0, A3.0, and A3.1 Standard met. All residential entries on the ground floor are recessed a minimum of 6'-9" and a maximum of 8'- 10". See Sheet A2.0 for dimensions. X A2.0, A3.0, and A3.1 Standard not met. The covered entries to residential units are 6'9" or 8'-10" deep. These entries do not project a minimum of three feet. The entrance to the commercial space is a covered area approximately 13' deep with the second and third floors above. X A2.0, A3.0, A3.1, and A4.2 Standard not met. Per the figure on A4.2, only one of the street facing facades would hit 60 percent, while the other two would be 41 and 44 percent. See drawings A4.2 which show the dimensions to calculate the required percentages. X B.4.7 A2.0, A3.0, and A3.3 Standard met. See "a" through "c" below. X A2.0 and A3.0 Standard met. Entries to residential units on the ground floor are 11'6" wide. X A2.0 and A3.0 Standard met. Main entry to the building is 14' wide. See Sheet A2.0. X A2.0 Standard met. Storefront entry to commercial building is 6' wide doors which provide the only entrance to the commercial space. See Note #16 on Sheet A2.0. X B.4.8 A3.3 Standard met. No mirrored glass is proposed. B.4.9 X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. Awnings at the commercial space are a minimum vertical clearance of 8' from the pedestrian path. See Note #6 on Sheet A3.0. X A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. See Sheets A3.0 and A3.1. X A3.3 Standard met. Awnings are a solid color black or yellow. See Sheet A3.3. X B.4.10 no sheet provided Does not apply. Building does not abut an existing single-family zone or use. X B.4.11 A2.1 and A2.2 Standard not met. Balconies project beyond the footprint. The projecting balconies are thoughtfully designed to minimally project beyond the building footprint to offer residents usable private outdoor areas. Awnings shall be subject to the following requirements: a.         A minimum vertical clearance of eight feet measured from the pedestrian pathway; b.         Shall not extend beyond individual storefront bays; and c.          Shall not be patterned or striped. For buildings abutting a single-family zoning district or existing single-family use, no part of a rooftop or upper floor terrace or deck shall be closer than five feet from the facade plane of the lower floor, to prevent views into adjacent residential uses. Balconies are allowed on facades facing the street and those facades facing existing non- residential uses on abutting parcels. Such balconies shall be without any projections beyond the building footprint. b.         For ground-floor commercial uses, façades facing a street shall include windows, doors, or openings for at least 60 percent of the building façade that is between two and 10 feet above the level of the sidewalk. Pedestrian entries to buildings shall meet minimum dimensions to ensure adequate access based on use and development intensity. Building entries inclusive of the doorway and the facade plane shall meet the following minimum dimensions: a.         Individual residential entries: five feet in width b.         Single entry to multiple residential unit building, including Residential Mixed-Use buildings: eight feet in width c.          Storefront entry: six feet in width Mirrored windows are prohibited. Garage doors shall be recessed a minimum of 12 inches from the façade plane and along the street-facing façade shall not exceed 40 percent of the length of the building façade. Changes in building materials shall occur at inside corners. A primary building entrance shall be provided facing a street or community recreation space. Additionally, all development shall meet the following requirements: a.         Pedestrian entries to ground-floor and upper-floor non-residential uses shall meet at least one of the following standards: i.      The entrance shall be recessed in the façade plane at least three feet in depth; or ii.    The entrance shall be covered by an awning, portico, or other architectural element projecting from the façade a minimum of three feet. Page 420 X B.4.12 A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. See below. X A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard not met. Only one of items "a" through "c" are required. Façade plane is not offset a minimum of five feet. X A2.1, A2.2, A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. All pilasters are 2' wide and their dimension is shown on Sheets A2.1 and A2.2. X A2.0 and A3.0 Standard not met. Only one of items "a" through "c" are required. An outdoor seating plaza at the corner of Main Street and High School Way is shown on Sheets A2.0 and L1.0. The seating area is approximately 200SF. The projected setback along Church Street includes landscaping, walkways and raised planters. It does not include open space or a seating area because the street is not a major pedestrian corridor. The open space is located on the corner of High School Court and East Main Street which is a major pedestrian connection. This standard is met. X B.4.13 A3.0 and A3.1 Standard met. There are no blank facades on any of the proposed elevations. Residential Mixed-Use buildings shall provide at least one of the following features along street-facing façades where the façade exceeds 50 feet in length: a.          A minimum five-foot offset from the façade plane for a length of at least 10 feet; b.         Multiple pilasters or columns, each with a minimum width of two feet; or c.          Common open space, such as a plaza, outdoor dining area, or other spaces. Continuous blank façades on any floor level shall not exceed 25 percent of the entire façade length along any street. Page 421 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 422 EXHIBIT 16Page 423 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 424 From: Cheryl Huddleston <> Sent: Saturday, May 4, 2024 2:27 PM To: Sean Mullin <SMullin@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Projects at 143 and 151 E. Main and 101 S. Santa Cruz [EXTERNAL SENDER] I have looked at the rendering and plans for the above projects. Thank you for pos�ng so much informa�on. 143 and 151 E. Main: I wish this could be kept to the exis�ng 3 story limit and pu�ng all of the parking in 2 levels below ground. The Architect has made an atempt to blend the structure with exis�ng buildings in the area. He is to be commended with the brick, and set back of the 4th floor. Thank you, Cheryl Huddleston EXHIBIT 17Page 425 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:feedback on 143 and 151 E Main Street proposal Date:Saturday, March 1, 2025 9:33:14 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] i'm writing to ask that the Los Gatos Town Council and Planning Commission reject this proposal along with the other proposals in flight (eg, post office plans) that threaten thecharacter of our small, charming downtown area. the proposed building at 143 and 151 East Main Street in particular is a monstrosity that looks completely incongruous with itssurroundings, when considering its proposed girth, height and architecture. consider a design more in-line with the Beckwith Block (Southern Kitchen) or Soda Works Plaza (PurpleOnion) to be infinitely more palatable! as written this proposal is not a good fit for our community and as a constituent i would ask that you reject it. regards,david knol los gatos Page 426 dtsc.ca.gov SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL March 3, 2025 Ryan Safty Associate Planner Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 rsafty@losgatosca.gov RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 143 & 151 E. MAIN STREET MIXED-USE PROJECT DATED FEBRUARY 27, 2025, STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2025021056 Dear Ryan Safty, The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project (Project). The Project proposes to demolish the existing on-site uses and then construct a four-story mixed-use building with underground parking. The ground level of the proposed building will include 2,416 square feet of pedestrian-oriented commercial with a total of 30 residential units located in the building. DTSC recommends and requests consideration of the following comments: 1. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment recommends that if the property use changes to residential or if the property is redeveloped and no longer utilizes a raised foundation, then soil vapor testing on the site should be conducted. DTSC recommends the Town of Los Gatos enter into a voluntary agreement to address contamination at brownfields and other types of properties or receive oversight from a self-certified local agency, DTSC or Regional Water Quality Control Board. If entering into one of DTSC’s voluntary agreements, please note Page 427 Ryan Safty March 3, 2025 Page 2 that DTSC uses a single standard Request for Lead Agency Oversight Application for all agreement types. Please apply for DTSC oversight using this link: Request for Agency Oversight Application. Submittal of the online application includes an agreement to pay costs incurred during agreement preparation. If you have any questions about the application portal, please contact your Regional Brownfield Coordinator. 2. DTSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to assess any contaminants of concern meet screening levels as outlined in DTSC's Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. Additionally, DTSC advises referencing the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet if importing fill is necessary. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material are suitable for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledge of prior land use. Additional information can be found by visiting DTSC’s Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) webpage. DTSC would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the MND for the 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting California’s people and environment from the harmful effects of toxic substances. If you have any questions or would like clarification on DTSC’s comments, please respond to this letter or via our CEQA Review email for additional guidance. Sincerely, Dave Kereazis Associate Environmental Planner HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit Department of Toxic Substances Control Dave.Kereazis@dtsc.ca.gov Page 428 Ryan Safty March 3, 2025 Page 3 cc: (via email) Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation State Clearinghouse State.Clearinghouse@opr.ca.gov Kenneth Rodrigues Architect and Applicant Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners, Inc kenr@kprarchitects.com Shoshana Lutz Senior Planner (EMC) EMC Planning Group lutz@emcplanning.com Tamara Purvis Associate Environmental Planner HWMP-Permitting Division – CEQA Unit Department of Toxic Substances Control Tamara.Purvis@dtsc.ca.gov Scott Wiley Associate Governmental Program Analyst HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit Department of Toxic Substances Control Scott.Wiley@dtsc.ca.gov Page 429 From: Cathleen Bannon <> Date: Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 9:10 AM Subject: 143 & 151 E. Main St To: <RSafty@losgatoca.gov> Hello- I am writing in concern to the proposed project on E Main Street next to the high school. First the visual rendering is misleading to the public as it shows an open space across from it which inaccurately looks like there is open space around the building. In fact the large building would crowd the narrow two lane street. Second, the large mix used building next the high school would create madness in an already super congested area trying to flow over 2,000 students/families through the area twice a day. This building would unnecessarily cause chaos. Again, too big in the most congested area of town. Third, if it were to be built the two years of construction would be madness. Clearly the construction vehicles would need to take up all the parking in the area, closed streets, etc would make getting to the school or downtown impossible. Please, please…yes the building does look like the town, but the size & placement is too much Cathleen Bannon Parent of two students at LGHS Page 430 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project - Public Comment Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 10:37:13 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Ryan, I am writing to express my strong support for the proposed mixed-use development at 143 and151 E. Main Street. This project is exactly the kind of thoughtful, well-designed growth that Los Gatos needs. The proposal strikes an ideal balance—adding much-needed downtown housing while maintaining retail space and preserving the town’s architectural character. Its inclusion ofunderground parking is a smart solution that mitigates congestion concerns. This is precisely the kind of responsible development that enhances our community without compromising itscharm. I urge the Planning Commission to stand firm against the obstructionist, anti-growth sentimentthat too often stifles progress in Los Gatos. Our town must evolve to remain vibrant, welcoming, and accessible. Approving this project is a step in the right direction. Thank you for your time and consideration. Michelle Badger17136 Wild Way Page 431 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Building Development Project Feedback Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 10:41:10 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi Ryan, Don't build this. It's a disgrace to the town of Los Gatos and a waste of money. Preserve our town. Preserve our history. Preserve our culture. Best regards. Page 432 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 10:54:08 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] To Ryan Safty I am writing to you to give my comments as to why I am strongly against the developmentproposed at 143 and 151 E Main Street. I grew up in Los Gatos, went to Van Meter, Fisher and LG High. I lived in San Francisco for 15 years so I understand the difference between a city and a town. I have three children inthe local schools. One at Van Meter, one at Fisher and one at the HS. I have been on the board at Van Meter for over 8 years and volunteer weekly at LG High. I live on Euclid Avenue offof College right in the heart of this town that I love . I understand the need for more housing, I understand that the town has to adhere to laws regarding housing that come from the state. I understand that for many of these developmentsour hands are tied. I try to be sane and open minded when it comes to development because I know that in many instances we do not have a choice. But I also know that during the summerweekends many days we cannot leave our house due to the traffic downtown. We literally drive down college and turn around and go home because there are bumper to bumper cars. Iworry that if there is ever a fire or an emergency my neighbors and my family will not be able to get out because there are not enough exit routes or an emergency vehicle will not be able toget in. I love my neighborhood but I am starting to worry about living here. The corridor where this building is proposed to go in is an absolute traffic nightmare. I know this because I have to drive it at least 4 times a day to drop off and pick up kids from schooland after school activities. Why on earth would it be a good idea to put 30 residential units in an area where there is a small two lane road that for many times during the day is literallybumper to bumper. I cannot even fathom how construction would go. I guess I would need to leave my house at 730 to go 1 mile down the road to get my kid to elementary school. Thisproposal is not about housing numbers, this is about greed and shoving too many units in small spaces to turn the biggest profit. I hope the Town of Los Gatos does everything in their power to stop this one or at least getthem to change the scope to be realistic. Thank you for your time Jamie Fumia Page 433 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 E Main Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 11:42:45 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] This proposal is so poorly thought out. The traffic in town is already unbearable during school start and end times, not to mention weekend beach traffic. Why has our town sold out to the highest bidder? There has to be a compromise that works for all of us that live in the town. 30 units??? The schools in the area are already over crowded has that been factored in? I’ve lived in Los Gatos for 53 years and am so sad to see what’s happening to our town. I am firmly against this development. Gail Manganello Sent from my iPhone Page 434 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Opposition to the 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 12:20:48 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Ryan, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development that seeks todemolish the existing on-site uses and construct a four-story mixed-use building withunderground parking near Los Gatos Highschool. While I understand the need for growth, thisproject raises several concerns that will have a lasting negative impact on our community. First and foremost, traffic congestion in the area is already a significant issue, particularlyduring school drop-off and pick-up times. The high school generates substantial pedestrianand vehicle activity, and adding 30 residential units along with commercial space will onlyexacerbate the problem. Furthermore, when there are disruptions on Highway 17, local streetsbecome highly congested, making it difficult for residents to navigate their ownneighborhoods. Beach traffic during warmer months further compounds the situation, and thisnew development will only aggravate these existing problems. Additionally, pedestrian safety is a major concern. With a large number of students walkingto and from school - before, during lunch and after, as well as seniors and families frequentingthe nearby senior center, library, and churches, the increased traffic could put pedestrians atgreater risk. I have personally witnessed near-accidents involving pedestrians in this area dueto inattentive drivers, and adding more vehicles to an already problematic location could leadto dangerous consequences. Beyond traffic and safety issues, the proposed building does not align with the town’scharm and character. A four-story structure in this location will be an eyesore and detractfrom the unique aesthetic of Los Gatos. Our town is known for its historic and small-townappeal, and this type of high-density development is inconsistent with that identity. While I recognize the importance of providing housing options, this project does notadequately balance the needs of the community with responsible urban planning. I urge you toreconsider the approval of this development or, at the very least, require significantmodifications to ensure it does not negatively impact traffic, pedestrian safety, and thecharacter of our town. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will take the concerns of localresidents seriously. Jenny Page 435 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Fwd: Town of Los Gatos seeking public input on the proposed development at 143 & 151 East Main Street Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 1:20:22 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Goodmorning, I am in favor of building upwards for more real estate for the Los Gatos community, however, I really enjoy having a coffee shop on that corner of the street and would love to not see it goaway. The other major concern I have is the flow of traffic. Our drop off flow during 8:07-8:34 am is so stagnant and difficult to navigate through, as well as 2:19-2:55 every day. It would be sochallenging to propose several new small businesses in that specific location because there is truly not enough parking for our own students and staff on campus. For parents attendingmeetings, school events, it is a challenge to find parking spots. I would recommend that this plan only be supplemented by a parking lot/structure in place of another standing buildingnow. Please plan for parking, is the moral of my concern! Sarah Pereira School Counselor for (Q-S) Los Gatos High School --- Feb '25 Guidance Newsletter ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Dave Poetzinger via Aeries Communications Date: Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 10:26 AMSubject: Town of Los Gatos seeking public input on the proposed development at 143 & 151East Main Street Los Gatos High School Page 436 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 & 151 East Main Street Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 2:46:42 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] > Hello- > I am writing in concern to the proposed project on E Main Street next to the high school. > > First the visual rendering is misleading to the public as it shows an open space across from it which inaccurately looks like there is open space around the building. In fact the large building would crowd the narrow two lane street. > > Second, the large mix used building next the high school would create madness in an already super congested area trying to flow over 2,000 students/families through the area twice a day. This building would unnecessarily cause chaos. Again, too big in the most congested area of town. > > Third, if it were to be built the two years of construction would be madness. Clearly the construction vehicles would need to take up all the parking in the area, closed streets, etc would make getting to the school or downtown impossible. > > Please, please…yes the building does look like the town, but the size & placement is too much > > Carrie Dean > 128 Teresita Way Page 437 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Fwd: 143 & 151 E. Main Street comment Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 6:37:52 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] The new proposed structure for 143 & 151 E. Main Street looks gorgeous! I read the transportation assessment that seemed quite thorough and would appreciate if the town would push for a 3rd subterranean level of parking that would not only allow the town'srequirements to be met for resident, commercial, visitor, and bike parking, but also to provide spaces for high schoolers that drive to school as the street parking constantly is filled withtheir cars getting ticketed after 90 minutes. Thanks, ...Andrew Coven, LG Resident Page 438 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Re: Public comment: Mixed - use development 143 and 151 E. Main Street Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 12:20:44 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Good afternoon, I am writing about the proposed mixed-use development at 143 and 151 E. Main Street. I understand that the town is required to meet certain high-density requirements, as the state dictates. My concern with the current proposal at this property is related to the traffic and parking issues that it will create. The area around the high school is currently heavy with traffic during the morning and afternoon school hours. The four-way stop at theintersection (Pleasant St. at Main St.) backs up past the library, and up the hill in the other direction. Will a traffic light be installed there? The intersection next to the development at High School Court at Main St. is already challenging to exit due to visibility of cars parked along Main Street. I read the parking proposals and it looks like neither one meets the minimum town standards. How will this be fixed before re-developing the site? Somehow the gymone block down the street (The Club LG) was able to not meet reasonable parking requirements, as members fill up most of the street parking spots during the day because their parking lot is so small. Thank you, Elke Billingsley Los Gatos resident Page 439 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Street comments Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 12:48:10 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi, the headmaster of Los Gatos High asked parents to share any concerns regards the proposed development of the address above to this email address. Whilst I think that its a good idea, as know that Los Gatos is under an affordable housing mandate and its a pretty ugly existing building and would be an improvement, I am worried about kids safety and parking during the building stage. Most of us parents have to drop off our kids along Church in the morning, as the traffic is impossible out front of the school and also pick up at 2.30 or 4 on the same street so unless the work is done outside of those hours its going to cause havoc safely dropping off our kids with material supply / construction trucks, workers vehicles also using the road. I am pretty sure that the entire area will also be cordoned off securely, as some of these kids are space monkeys outside of classes and never look where they are going, often glued to their phones with heads down so I think the safety is going to be a huge concern unless you can get a huge chunk of the build done during the summer holidays. Hopefully the parking underneath the garage will be enough for the residents to not also have to use the parking along church street as its already difficult to pick up/drop off with cafe users, church goers and the pre-school but I guess that is a while away and my son will hopefully have graduated by then lol. Rgs Chris Page 440 Page 441 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 & 151 Construction Project Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 2:54:27 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello Ryan, I received notification re: the 143 & 151 construction project. This project is going tosignificantly impact the drop-off and pick-up of Los Gatos High School students. Traffic during morning and pick-up is already congested and will be made far worse. What isbeing proposed to alleviate the impact that this project will have during these times? Additionally, the noise level will be very disruptive during school hours. What is going to bedone about that? Thank you, Isabel Guerra Page 442 From: To:Matthew Hudes; Rob Rennie; Maria Ristow; Mary Badame; rmoore@losgatos.gov Cc:Ryan Safty Subject:Proposed 141 and 153 East Main St. project Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 9:14:02 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear council members, The height of this project will obscure hillside views. The size and mass is way out of proportion with otherbuildings located in downtown Los Gatos. This project is much too large for our town. Is there any chance it could kindly be scaled back to a single story structure instead? Best regards,Mike Kennedy26 Bayview Ave. Sent from my iPhone Page 443 From: To:Ryan Safty Cc: Subject:Comment for 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project Date:Sunday, March 9, 2025 2:58:58 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello,I am a parent with a sophomore at LGHS and an incoming freshman next year. The current traffic around the schoolat all times (not just drop-off and pickup) does NOT allow for a multi-story mixed use project. We cannot seriouslybe considering that for that area. A new project that correlates with the high school area would be great but not amulti-story that will congest traffic even more. Please do not approve this project. It will impact the high schoolstudents, teachers, parents, and community in a negative way.Thank you,Jennifer Lambert Page 444 From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 3:36 PM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Online Form Submission #15665 for Community Development Contact Form [EXTERNAL SENDER] Community Development Contact Form First Name Majid Last Name Alasvandian Email Address (Required) Phone Number Tell Us About Your Inquiry (Required) Comment Regarding A Planning Project Address/APN you are inquiring About (Required) 143 and 151 E Main Message (Required) I have lived in 103 Cleland Ave since Feb., 1999. I and many of residents in Los Gatos Main area consider this project way out of proportion for the lot size and the location. My concerns are: 1) This building is too big. The height is twice the size of every thing around. It ruins the small town character of Los Gatos. 2) 30 units plus commercial spaces and parking lots in 14000 sq feet is too dense and it does impact traffic around. Many parents drop their kids right around this location and it is already too crowded. 3) Approval of this project will set a precedence for the owners of other commercial buildings nearby to convert their small lots into 4 or higher story buildings. What is is that going to stop them once this project gets approved? 4) Fire hazards- All homes behind the library are considered Page 445 to be in fire hazard zone and as you all know all homes behind Library have two evacuation routes in case of Fire (Jackson and College) and both streets merged into the Main street. Main is already narrow for the existing traffic, adding high density homes near downtown will endanger the lives of existing residents in case of any wild fires in the hills. People want to come to Los Gatos for the small town character feel of the town and the downtown setting with the hills visible to pedestrians. Let's not ruin the beauty of this town by setting precedence in issuing permits to people who are in this just to make money and go to the next project. Add An Attachment if applicable Field not completed. Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. Page 446 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Date:Monday, March 10, 2025 11:10:32 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] I volunteer at the Friends of Los Gatos book store, so I can attest to the amount of traffic on East Main Street during the week, on weekends, and especially during school dismissal times. Adding beach traffic during the summer months to normal traffic and now a 30 unit family complex will make the traffic situation gridlock. Parking during the week and on weekends is almost impossible. How can library patrons, LG Rec patrons, school employees and students find parking with the additional cars that will come with a multi-story apartment building? Please consider the impact of neighboring public and businesses that require access to parking and a flow of traffic that makes our downtown accessible. I travel from Shannon Road to the library and I experience bumper to bumper traffic on the weekends now and very few parking spaces in the Main Street area. Thank you for your consideration Karen Chase 107 Ann Arbor Dr Los Gatos Page 447 From: To:Ryan Saft Subject:143 E Main Street Proposal Date:Monday, March 10, 2025 2:42:34 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] This project makes no sense - replacing one story small businesses with a 4 story building right next to the high school is a horrible plan. That area of town already is already onlyaccessible two ways and becomes backed up with traffic due to the high school. Addingmore traffic and ridiculous, barely usable underground parking, is a joke. Visually, theproject doesn't fit in with the surrounding area. I strongly urge the Town Council to reject this proposal. Page 448 Page 449 March 10, 2025 Lauren Roseman 17429 Pleasant View Ave Monte Sereno, CA 95030 Town Council Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 Dear Los Gatos Town Council, I am writing to express my concern about the proposed development of 143 and 151 East Main Street. While I welcome some development of the above-mentioned property, I am concerned about the negative impact a project of this size will have. Given the location next to the high school, the already limited parking available in the area and traffic and safety issues that currently exist, adding an additional 30 residential units and ground-floor business space will further exacerbate traffic, parking and safety issues for students, faculty, families and the greater community. Please consider modifying the plans to limit the negative impact this will have on the town of Los Gatos. Kind regards, Lauren Roseman Page 450 From: To:Ryan Safty Cc:Joel Paulson Subject:Public Comment: 143 and 151 E. Main Street Date:Tuesday, March 11, 2025 6:50:23 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello Ryan, Thank you for your thorough review of the project on behalf of the Town. The developer hascreated an architecturally attractive design with commendable style and detail. While I haveconcerns about the building's overall size and height, I understand the Town's limited ability todeny or redirect the project due to State laws. Ideally, I would prefer to see the building reduced to 3 stories total and set back further fromthe street, though I recognize these requests may be overridden by the State Builder's RemedyLaw. Regarding parking options, I strongly support Option 1 as it maximizes available parking. I'mconcerned that Option 2, with its reduced number of spaces, would create significant parkingchallenges for both residents and the surrounding area. I'd also like to inquire about the planned ownership structure of the building. Will it be undersingle ownership with all residential units and commercial spaces being leased, or will theresidential units be sold as condominiums? I have concerns about the condominium model, asI anticipate potential shared parking conflicts in the future. If the project moves forward,shared parking stipulations should be clearly incorporated into the leases for both residentialand commercial spaces. Jim Lyon Johnson Avenue Page 451 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Fwd: New building next to the high school Date:Wednesday, March 12, 2025 11:00:28 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Thank You! Hello, this link was forwarded to me and I am very interested to understand what the town isgoing to do about all these projects as far as infrastructure improvement. These major projects without infrastructure improvement really are detrimental to the town,and I don’t understand why these issues are not being addressed as predominant negotiationsas part of the plants. These developers are making a lot of money they can afford to do someadditional infrastructure upgrades as a part of the total projects. Who is in charge of this mess? I would really like to know, and I don’t mean to imply thatpeople aren’t trying, but they’re really seems to be a lack of leadership and response from thetown in these areas. Another issue is that Los Gatos Saratoga Road at downtown Los Gatos connecting betweenSaratoga and Los Gatos Blvd. is a huge bottleneck and some of these building projects goingin are not required to do anything for the infrastructure: no additional outlets; no laneexpansion; no road improvements. I would welcome your share on all of this and what you’re understanding is. I also have a concern is with parking and added vehicles to this already-congested area next tothe high school. If you read Appendix H in the plans proposed, you'll see that neither optionfor the underground parking meets the town's requirements. I'm curious if this will just beapproved without meeting the minimum requirements https://www.losgatosca.gov/DocumentCenter/Index/2356 Caron Rakich Page 452 Community Development Contact Form First Name Carol Last Name Anglin Email Address (Required) Phone Number Tell Us About Your Inquiry (Required) Comment Regarding A Planning Project Address/APN you are inquiring About (Required) 143-151 E. Main Street Message (Required) I live at 95 Church Street and the traffic congestion is often unbearable. If an emergency happened, it would be impossible for us to be safe. The project is too close to the congested high school area and the number of units is outrageous given its limited space and our town's resources. The rendering is totally incorrect as it looks if there is green space in front of the complex. I encourage you to VOTE NO on this development. I feel we have little say in our community. Add An Attachment if applicable Field not completed. Page 453 Page 454 143 and 151 EAST MAIN STREET - PUBLIC COMMENT LETTERS/EMAILS Date Received Resident/Citizen Concern(s)Response CEQA Finding/Applicant Response 2/27/2025 Andrea Traffic Height Sent an email on 2/27 directing her to review the MND, which will be available on 3/3/25 which addresses her concerns about traffic and height. 3/3/2025 Cathleen Bannon Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Construction Management of Noise, Dirt, etc. Construction management of traffic noise, air quality, construction impacts are addressed on pages 21-29 and 59-62 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in applicable standards of other agencies. "Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated". See Page 59 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/6/2025 Jamie Fumia Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Construction Management Construction management of traffic noise, air quality, construction impacts are addressed on pages 21-29 and 59-62 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in applicable standards of other agencies. "Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated". See Page 59 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/6/2025 Michelle Badger Letter of Support 3/10/2025 Elke Billingsley Traffic/Parking Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. March 20, 2025 EXHIBIT 18 Page 455 3/10/2025 Isabel Guerra Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Construction Management of Noise, Dirt, etc. Construction management of traffic noise, air quality, construction impacts are addressed on pages 21-29 and 59-62 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in applicable standards of other agencies. "Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated". See Page 59 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/10/2025 Chris Construction Impacts Construction management of traffic noise, air quality, construction impacts are addressed on pages 21-29 and 59-62 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in applicable standards of other agencies. "Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated". See Page 59 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/10/2025 Mike Kennedy Height/Vistas and Views/Land Use/Planning Height and view of the hills is addressed in the MND report. See pages 17-18 and page 57. "The proposed project would add a small obstruction to the existing westbound traveler's views on Church Street, however, the majority of the existing view directly west of Church Street would remain unobstructed. The project would completely obstruct, albeit small, views for a very limited number of eastbound travels on Church Street. Therefore, the impact would be less-than-significant." See page 17, item 9, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. "The project site is located within an urbanized area and is zoned C-2 Central Business District. This zoning district allows a maximum height of 45 feet; however, the proposed building would be 52 feet high, allowed when using SB330, Builder's Remedy. Due to the project's affordable housing component, this Builder's Remedy project qualifies for unlimited exception to the Town Code and General Plan." "Although the proposed structure is seven feet higher than the maximum permitted height in the C-2 Zoning District, the project is eligible for this increase based on Builder's Remedy law. The project's location in downtown, in addition to being a Builder's Remedy project, result in less-than-significant visual impacts." See page 18, item C, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/10/2025 Gloria & Eric R Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/10/2025 Jennifer Lambert Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Page 456 3/11/2025 Majid Alasvandian Height Height and view of the hills is addressed in the MND report. See pages 17-18 and page 57. "The proposed project would add a small obstruction to the existing westbound traveler's views on Church Street, however, the majority of the existing view directly west of Church Street would remain unobstructed. The project would completely obstruct, albeit small, views for a very limited number of eastbound travels on Church Street. Therefore, the impact would be less-than-significant." See page 17, item 9, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. "The project site is located within an urbanized area and is zoned C-2 Central Business District. This zoning district allows a maximum height of 45 feet; however, the proposed building would be 52 feet high, allowed when using SB330, Builder's Remedy. Due to the project's affordable housing component, this Builder's Remedy project qualifies for unlimited exception to the Town Code and General Plan." "Although the proposed structure is seven feet higher than the maximum permitted height in the C-2 Zoning District, the project is eligible for this increase based on Builder's Remedy law. The project's location in downtown, in addition to being a Builder's Remedy project, result in less-than-significant visual impacts." See page 18, item C, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/11/2025 Michael Kennedy Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/11/2025 Karen Chase Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Page 457 3/11/2025 Lauren Roseman Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/11/2025 David Knol Height/Aesthetics Height and view of the hills is addressed in the MND report. See pages 17-18 and page 57. "The proposed project would add a small obstruction to the existing westbound traveler's views on Church Street, however, the majority of the existing view directly west of Church Street would remain unobstructed. The project would completely obstruct, albeit small, views for a very limited number of eastbound travels on Church Street. Therefore, the impact would be less-than-significant." See page 17, item 9, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. "The project site is located within an urbanized area and is zoned C-2 Central Business District. This zoning district allows a maximum height of 45 feet; however, the proposed building would be 52 feet high, allowed when using SB330, Builder's Remedy. Due to the project's affordable housing component, this Builder's Remedy project qualifies for unlimited exception to the Town Code and General Plan." "Although the proposed structure is seven feet higher than the maximum permitted height in the C-2 Zoning District, the project is eligible for this increase based on Builder's Remedy law. The project's location in downtown, in addition to being a Builder's Remedy project, result in less-than-significant visual impacts." See page 18, item C, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/14/2025 Jim Lyon Height Height and view of the hills is addressed in the MND report. See pages 17-18 and page 57. "The proposed project would add a small obstruction to the existing westbound traveler's views on Church Street, however, the majority of the existing view directly west of Church Street would remain unobstructed. The project would completely obstruct, albeit small, views for a very limited number of eastbound travels on Church Street. Therefore, the impact would be less-than-significant." See page 17, item 9, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. "The project site is located within an urbanized area and is zoned C-2 Central Business District. This zoning district allows a maximum height of 45 feet; however, the proposed building would be 52 feet high, allowed when using SB330, Builder's Remedy. Due to the project's affordable housing component, this Builder's Remedy project qualifies for unlimited exception to the Town Code and General Plan." "Although the proposed structure is seven feet higher than the maximum permitted height in the C-2 Zoning District, the project is eligible for this increase based on Builder's Remedy law. The project's location in downtown, in addition to being a Builder's Remedy project, result in less-than-significant visual impacts." See page 18, item C, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Underground Parking The "applicant is proposing two (2) parking options; one- two level below grade. By proposing two options the future project can build either option based on market conditions and construction costs. Ownership vs Rental or Both At this time the applicant is asking for approval of either units for-sale or rental.Page 458 3/18/2025 Carol Anglin Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. 3/18/2025 Kristi Grasty Height/Aesthetics Height and view of the hills is addressed in the MND report. See pages 17-18 and page 57. "The proposed project would add a small obstruction to the existing westbound traveler's views on Church Street, however, the majority of the existing view directly west of Church Street would remain unobstructed. The project would completely obstruct, albeit small, views for a very limited number of eastbound travels on Church Street. Therefore, the impact would be less-than-significant." See page 17, item 9, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. "The project site is located within an urbanized area and is zoned C-2 Central Business District. This zoning district allows a maximum height of 45 feet; however, the proposed building would be 52 feet high, allowed when using SB330, Builder's Remedy. Due to the project's affordable housing component, this Builder's Remedy project qualifies for unlimited exception to the Town Code and General Plan." "Although the proposed structure is seven feet higher than the maximum permitted height in the C-2 Zoning District, the project is eligible for this increase based on Builder's Remedy law. The project's location in downtown, in addition to being a Builder's Remedy project, result in less-than-significant visual impacts." See page 18, item C, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Traffic Traffic is addressed in the MND report. See pages 21- 29, 45-49 and 59-62 "The existing office/retail building is estimated to generate 119 daily trips and the proposed project is estimated to generate 136 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 net daily trips with a reduction of trips during the AM and PM peak hours (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2024, Table 1). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways system and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. The project would not conflict with a program, plan ordinance, or policy addressing the Town's roadway system." See page 68 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration report dated February 14, 2025. Page 459 Page 460 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project March 21, 2025 Prepared by EMC Planning Group EXHIBIT 19 Page 461 Page 462 Table of Contents MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Monitoring and Reporting Program ....................................................................................... 1 1.3 Monitoring and Reporting Program Procedures .................................................................. 1 1.4 Monitoring and Reporting Checklist ...................................................................................... 2 Page 463 Page 464 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1.1 Introduction CEQA Guidelines section 15097 requires public agencies to adopt reporting or monitoring programs when they approve projects subject to an environmental impact report or a negative declaration that includes mitigation measures to avoid significant adverse environmental effects. The reporting or monitoring program is to be designed to ensure compliance with conditions of project approval during project implementation in order to avoid significant adverse environmental effects. The law was passed in response to historic non-implementation of mitigation measures presented in environmental documents and subsequently adopted as conditions of project approval. In addition, monitoring ensures that mitigation measures are implemented and thereby provides a mechanism to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. A definitive set of project conditions would include enough detailed information and enforcement procedures to ensure the measure's compliance. This monitoring program is designed to provide a mechanism to ensure that mitigation measures and subsequent conditions of project approval are implemented. 1.2 Monitoring and Reporting Program The basis for this monitoring program is the mitigation measures included in the project mitigated negative declaration. These mitigation measures are designed to eliminate or reduce significant adverse environmental effects to less than significant levels. These mitigation measures become conditions of project approval, which the project proponent is required to complete during and after implementation of the proposed project. The attached checklist is proposed for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures. This monitoring checklist contains all appropriate mitigation measures in the mitigated negative declaration. 1.3 Monitoring and Reporting Program Procedures The Town of Los Gatos shall use the attached monitoring checklist for the proposed project. The monitoring program should be implemented as follows: Page 465 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 1. The Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department should be responsible for coordination of the monitoring program, including the monitoring checklist. The Community Development Department should be responsible for completing the monitoring checklist and distributing the checklist to the responsible individuals or agencies for their use in monitoring the mitigation measures. 2. Each responsible individual or agency will then be responsible for determining whether the mitigation measures contained in the monitoring checklist have been complied with. Once all mitigation measures have been complied with, the responsible individual or agency should submit a copy of the monitoring checklist to the Community Development Department to be placed in the project file. If the mitigation measure has not been complied with, the monitoring checklist should not be returned to the Community Development Department. 3. The Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department will review the checklist to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures and additional conditions of project approval included in the monitoring checklist have been complied with at the appropriate time, e.g. prior to issuance of a use permit, etc. Compliance with mitigation measures is required for project approvals. 4. If a responsible individual or agency determines that a non-compliance has occurred, a written notice should be delivered by certified mail to the project proponent within 10 days, with a copy to the Community Development Department, describing the non-compliance and requiring compliance within a specified period of time. If non-compliance still exists at the expiration of the specified period of time, construction may be halted and fines may be imposed at the discretion of the Town of Los Gatos. 1.4 Monitoring and Reporting Checklist Step 1 - Prior to Issuance of Ground-Disturbing Activities Including Demolition or Tree Removal Permits AQ-1 The applicant shall prepare a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activities, including tree removal. The Construction Management Plan shall include the following measures to reduce toxic air contaminant emissions during construction: a. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles will have 2010 or newer model year engines, in compliance with the California Air Resources Board’s Truck and Bus Regulation; b. Idling of construction equipment and heavy-duty diesel trucks will be avoided where feasible, and if idling is necessary, it will not exceed three minutes; Page 466 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 c. All construction equipment will be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and will be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator; and d. All non-road diesel construction equipment will, at a minimum, meet Tier 3 emission standards listed in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 89, Subpart B, §89.112. Further, where feasible, construction equipment will use alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas, propane, electricity, or biodiesel. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ BIO-1 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. One survey for active bird nests shall occur within 48 hours prior to ground disturbance. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. The survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to Page 467 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ BIO-2 Per Town Code Section 26.20.010 and Chapter 29, Article 1, Division 2, the developer shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to the removal of protected trees on private or Town property. The project developer shall abide by any tree replacement ratios and/or in-lieu payments, tree protection measures, and best management practices required by the tree removal permit and/or within the arborist report dated October 24, 2024 (Appendix D). Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ CUL-1 The following language shall be incorporated into any plans associated with tree removal, grading, and construction, “In the event that archaeological resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, contractor shall temporarily halt or divert excavations within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated. All potentially significant archaeological deposits shall be evaluated to demonstrate whether the resource is eligible Page 468 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources, even if discovered during construction. If archaeological deposits are encountered, they will be evaluated and mitigated simultaneously in the timeliest manner practicable, allowing for recovery of materials and data by standard archaeological procedures. For indigenous archaeological sites, this data recovery involves the hand‐excavated recovery and non‐destructive analysis of a small sample of the deposit. Historic resources shall also be sampled through hand excavation, though architectural features may require careful mechanical exposure and hand excavation. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance by a qualified Archaeologist. Significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, glass, ceramics, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.” Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ CUL-2 The following language shall be incorporated into any plans associated with tree removal, demolition, grading, and construction, “In the event that human remains (or remains that may be human) are discovered at the project site, Public Resource Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. All grading or earthmoving activities shall immediately stop within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find. The Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified immediately, and the coroner shall be permitted to examine the remains as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If human remains are determined as those of Native American origin, the project proponent shall comply with the state relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (Public Resource Code [PRC] § 5097). The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to determine the most likely descendant(s) (MLD). The MLD shall complete his or her inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 Page 469 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD will determine the most appropriate means of treating the human remains and associated grave artifacts, and shall oversee the disposition of the remains. In the event the NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being granted access to the site, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity within the project area in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify the MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being allowed access to the site; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.” Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ GEO-2 The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit: “If paleontological resources are uncovered during demolition, grading or other on-site excavation activities, construction activities in the area shall be suspended. The developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist to examine the site and identify protective measures to be implemented to protect the paleontological resource. The measures shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director.” Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Page 470 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 ______________________________________________________________ N-1 The project developer shall ensure that no individual piece of construction equipment produce a noise level exceeding 85 dBA at 25 feet. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification.  The project developer shall also ensure that best management practices are incorporated during construction activities. The following shall be placed on all ground-disturbing project plans:  All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and muffled as to minimize noise generation at the source.  Noise‐producing equipment shall not be operating, running, or idling while not in immediate use by a construction contractor.  All noise‐producing construction equipment shall be located and operated, to the extent possible, at the greatest possible distance from any noise‐sensitive land uses.  Locate construction staging areas, to the extent possible, at the greatest possible distances from any noise‐sensitive land uses.  Signs shall be posted at the construction site and near adjacent sensitive receptors displaying hours of construction activities and providing the contact phone number of a designated noise disturbance coordinator. Party Responsible for Implementation: Applicant Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Building Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Step 2 - Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits GEO-1 The applicant shall prepare a soils report addressing, but not limited to: foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, and impacts associated with lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. The soils report shall be submitted to the Town Building Division for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. All Page 471 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 recommendations outlined in the soils report shall be incorporated into the project design. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Building Division Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ HAZ-1 The project developer shall conduct soil vapor testing on the project site prior to issuance of a grading permit. The results of the soil vapor testing shall be reviewed by the Town Engineer and only with approval by the Town Engineer can any grading and earth-moving construction activities take place. If soil vapor testing comes back with concentration levels that exceed safety thresholds for residential uses, the Town Engineer shall determine if Environmental Solutions should provide recommendations for construction of the project. If soil vapor testing comes back with concentration levels below safety thresholds, no further action is necessary. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Engineer Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Step 3 - Prior to Issuance of Building Permits AQ-2 The project applicant shall ensure that MERV 13 air filtration systems, or an equivalent system, are included in the design and operations of the proposed project. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and specifications demonstrating compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification. These plans shall identify the locations and Page 472 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 specifications of the air filtration systems and confirm they meet the performance standards for particulate and airborne pollutant removal. The air filtration systems must be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Verification of proper installation and functionality shall be conducted by a licensed professional and documented in a final compliance report, which must be submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for approval. The property owner or operator shall also establish a maintenance plan for the air filtration system to ensure ongoing performance in accordance with manufacturer specifications. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Building Division Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ GHG-1 The project developer shall incorporate the following GHG emissions reduction performance standard into the final project design:  No permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the project plans; no natural gas shall be made available through permanent natural gas infrastructure. The project shall be all electric. Final plans for the development shall be reviewed by the Town Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure this performance standard is incorporated into the project design. Verification of development consistent with this performance standard shall be assured prior to approval of occupancy permits. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Page 473 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 Step 4 - Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits AQ-2 The project applicant shall ensure that MERV 13 air filtration systems, or an equivalent system, are included in the design and operations of the proposed project. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and specifications demonstrating compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification. These plans shall identify the locations and specifications of the air filtration systems and confirm they meet the performance standards for particulate and airborne pollutant removal. The air filtration systems must be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Verification of proper installation and functionality shall be conducted by a licensed professional and documented in a final compliance report, which must be submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for approval. The property owner or operator shall also establish a maintenance plan for the air filtration system to ensure ongoing performance in accordance with manufacturer specifications. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Building Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ GHG-1 The project developer shall incorporate the following GHG emissions reduction performance standard into the final project design:  No permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the project plans; no natural gas shall be made available through permanent natural gas infrastructure. The project shall be all electric. Final plans for the development shall be reviewed by the Town Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure this performance standard is incorporated into the project design. Verification of development consistent with this performance standard shall be assured prior to approval of occupancy permits. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department Page 474 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 11 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ N-2 The project developer shall install mechanical ventilation or air conditioning for all residential units so that windows and doors can remain closed for sound insulation purposes. Implementation of this measure is subject to review and approval by the Town Building Department, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Building Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ TRANS-1 Project improvements plans shall include the following, subject to review and approval by the Town Engineer, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit: a. Stripe a loading space along the project frontage on E. Main Street; b. Apply 10 feet of No Parking (Red Zone) on both sides of the project driveway on Church Street; and c. Provide adequate landing space at the top and bottom of the garage ramps. Party Responsible for Implementation: Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: Town of Los Gatos Engineer Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Page 475 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 476 March 21, 2025 Ryan Safty Associate Planner Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Re: 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project Mitigated Negative Declaration Response to Comments Dear Ryan, EMC Planning Group has reviewed the public comments that were received during the 21-day public review period (February 28, 2025 to March 20, 2025) for the above-referenced mitigated negative declaration (MND). The lead agency (Town of Los Gatos, hereinafter “Town”) is not required to respond to public comments on the proposed MND, but the Town’s decision-making body is required to consider all comments prior to considering adoption of the MND and approval of the project. We are only providing responses to environmental issues, as well as comments on the environmental review (CEQA) process. The following public comments were received, and are incorporated into this document. Each letter is presented, followed by the response. 1.Rob Stump, dated February 28, 2025; 2.Department of Toxic Substances Control, dated March 3, 2025; 3. Majid Alasvandian, dated March 10, 2025; 4.Jenny, dated March 6, 2025; 5. Jim Lyon, dated March 11, 2025; 6. Michael Kennedy, dated March 10, 2025; EXHIBIT 20 Page 477 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 2 7. Andrew Coven, dated March 6, 2025; 8. Carrie Dean, dated March 6, 2025; 9. Cathleen Bannon, dated March 3, 3035; 10. Jamie Fumia, dated March 6, 2025; 11. Mike Kennedy, dated March 7, 2025; 12. Caron Rakich, dated March 12, 2025; 13. David Knol, dated March 1, 2025; 14. Rgs Chris, dated March 7, 2025; 15. Gail Manganello, dated March 6, 2025; 16. Isabel Guerra, dated March 7, 2025; 17. Elke Billingsley, dated March 7, 2025; 18. Gloria and Eric R., dated March 7, 2025; 19. Jennifer Lambert, dated March 9, 2025; 20. Karen Chase, dated March 10, 2025; 21. Lauren Roseman, dated March 10, 2025; 22. Sarah Pereira, dated March 6, 2025; 23. Unknown, dated March 10, 2025; 24. Unknown, dated March 6, 2025; 25. Michelle Badger, dated March 6, 2025; 26. Carol Anglin, dated March 18, 2025; 27. Kristi Grasti, dated March 18, 2025; and 28. Miles Imwalle, dated March 19, 2025. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out at lutz@emcplanning.com. Page 478 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 3 Sincerely, Shoshana Lutz Senior Planner Page 479 From: Rob Stump <rastump@verizon.net> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2025 11:28 AM To: Ryan Safty <RSafty@losgatosca.gov> Cc: Joel Paulson <jpaulson@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Re: Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project [EXTERNAL SENDER] Ryan, Wow...totally disappointed on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and probably others upcoming. Here are my concerns. Comment Letter #1 ____Page 480 1.Wildfire: I guess the NOI can bypass LRAs (Local Responsibility Areas). Guess what is right across the street from the project? The LRA VHFHSZ (Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone). Yes, red is bad (attached two maps for your reference). Wow, if the Mitigated Negative Declaration is able to workaround the LRA and refer only to the SRA...BAD. This is akin to just saying, "Nothing to see here!" I realize the SRA may be the only requirement for the NOI, but once again WOW! Why can't the LRA be recognized in the Wildfire section of the NOI. I am getting a really bad feeling that NOI's are just a check the box exercise. I hope I am wrong! 2.Transportation: not a single word about Emergency Evacuation. At what point is one more vehicle, one vehicle too many? If we have a wildfire above the Town Hall, there may be hundreds to thousands of cars evacuating through Main Street. What's a few more cars, right? Wrong. Ignoring emergency evacuation as part of the Transportation study is just wrong. Ryan...please understand that my concerns/criticism are not being directed toward you. It's the process. My main concern...in the push for development, cirtical items can/will be overlooked. No one wants to believe our decisions could result in harm to the public. But plain and simple (and in my opinion), development does has consequences. Just trying to keep an eye on public safety. I plan to address this in the near future. Thank you, Rob Stump 408-568-8541___________________1 _________2 _________3 Page 481 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 6 Response to Letter 1 Rob Stump (February 28, 2025) 1. The commenter raises concerns related to wildfire local responsibility areas and states that a local responsibility area very high fire hazard severity zone is present across the project site, on the other side of E. Main Street. The commenter requests that local responsibility areas be recognized in the Wildfire Section of the initial study. The checklist questions provided in the CEQA Guidelines are sample questions to assist lead agencies in addressing a variety of different environmental topics. The Town has the ability to edit, remove, or add to the checklist questions as they see appropriate in order to evaluate and address environmental issues that are more specific to Los Gatos or of value to its residents. The commenter’s attached map shows very high fire hazard severity zones across the street from the project site. This map is Figure 9-1, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, located within the Town’s Safety Element of the 2040 General Plan and is included at the end of this response as Figure 1. However, this map has wildfire information from 2009. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection updated Santa Clara County’s local responsibility maps February 24, 2025. The state’s updated local responsibility area map for Los Gatos is shown on Figure 2. Although the project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (the site is located 0.33 miles east of the nearest very high fire hazard severity zone, as shown on Figure 2), the following analysis has been prepared to address wildfire hazards in response to the commenter’s concerns. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Wildfire checklist question “a:” Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? As discussed in Section 9.0, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, checklist question “f” of the initial study, the current hazard mitigation plan (Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan) does not identify evacuation routes within Los Gatos; however, it can be assumed that the primary evacuation routes are the highways (e.g., State Route 17, State Route 9, etc.). The project does not involve any work within the adjacent roadways (i.e., Church Street, High School Court, or East Main Street). Additionally, as discussed in Section 17, Transportation, of the initial study, the proposed project would result in an addition of only 17 daily vehicle trips above the vehicle trips associated with the existing commercial uses. Therefore, the project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency Page 482 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 7 response plan or emergency evacuation plan, nor would it substantially change existing emergency evacuation processes. Wildfire checklist question “b:” Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire? The project site is relatively flat and located within downtown Los Gatos surrounded by urban development and therefore, would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire. Although the project would introduce occupants and visitors to the site that could increase the likelihood of ignitions from (e.g., careless disposal of lit cigarettes, etc.), the site already serves visitors as a café and a furniture store. The project has undergone development review with the Santa Clara County Fire Department, which has specified that the development comply with the following: California Fire and Building Code, 2022 edition, as adopted by the Town of Los Gatos Town Code; California Code of Regulations; and Health and Safety Code. Compliance with the conditions and regulations required by the Santa Clara County Fire Department would ensure less than significant impacts associated with the project’s potential to exacerbate fire risks and thereby expose project occupants and visitors to fire pollutants or the uncontrolled spread of a fire. Wildfire checklist question “c:” Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? The proposed project does not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, or power line.) However, as identified in Section 19.0, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed project involves the installation of new stormwater drainage facilities. This type of utility infrastructure installation would not exacerbate fire risk at the site, but the construction of the stormwater drainage facilities could result in significant, adverse physical environmental impacts. Section 19.0, Utilities and Service Systems, checklist question “a,” explains that the potentially significant construction impacts associated with the implementation of the project’s stormwater drainage facilities are identified in the air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise sections of the initial study. All such impacts are either less than significant or mitigated to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, the project would not require the Page 483 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 8 installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Wildfire checklist question “d:” Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The project site is relatively flat and located in downtown Los Gatos. As discussed in Section 7.0, Geology and Soils, the project site is not located within a landslide hazard zone. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire instability, or drainage changes. 2. The commenter recommends a discussion about emergency evacuation. As mentioned previously, Section 9.0, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the initial study evaluated whether the project would impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Refer to the discussion above under comment #1 associated with wildfire checklist question “a.” No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. This comment does not raise environmental issues and, therefore, no response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 484 ProjectProject LocationLocation Project Location Source: Town of Los Gatos 2022 (CalFire 2009) Figure 1 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project Response to Comments 2040 General Plan Fire Hazard Severity Zones Page 485 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 10 This side intentionally left blank. Page 486 Project SiteModerate FHSZHigh FHSZVery High FHSZ143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project Response to CommentsCALFIRE’s Local Responsibility AreaFigure 2Source: CalFire FHSZ Map 2025525 feet00.33 MilesPage 487 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 12 This side intentionally left blank. Page 488 dtsc.ca.gov SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL March 3, 2025 Ryan Safty Associate Planner Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 rsafty@losgatosca.gov RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 143 & 151 E. MAIN STREET MIXED-USE PROJECT DATED FEBRUARY 27, 2025, STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2025021056 Dear Ryan Safty, The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project (Project). The Project proposes to demolish the existing on-site uses and then construct a four-story mixed-use building with underground parking. The ground level of the proposed building will include 2,416 square feet of pedestrian-oriented commercial with a total of 30 residential units located in the building. DTSC recommends and requests consideration of the following comments: 1.The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment recommends that if the property use changes to residential or if the property is redeveloped and no longer utilizes a raised foundation, then soil vapor testing on the site should be conducted. DTSC recommends the Town of Los Gatos enter into a voluntary agreement to address contamination at brownfields and other types of properties or receive oversight from a self-certified local agency, DTSC or Regional Water Quality Control Board. If entering into one of DTSC’s voluntary agreements, please note Comment Letter #2 Page 489 Ryan Safty March 3, 2025 Page 2 that DTSC uses a single standard Request for Lead Agency Oversight Application for all agreement types. Please apply for DTSC oversight using this link: Request for Agency Oversight Application. Submittal of the online application includes an agreement to pay costs incurred during agreement preparation. If you have any questions about the application portal, please contact your Regional Brownfield Coordinator. 2.DTSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to assess any contaminants of concern meet screening levels as outlined in DTSC's Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. Additionally, DTSC advises referencing the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet if importing fill is necessary. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material are suitable for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledge of prior land use. Additional information can be found by visiting DTSC’s Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) webpage. DTSC would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the MND for the 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting California’s people and environment from the harmful effects of toxic substances. If you have any questions or would like clarification on DTSC’s comments, please respond to this letter or via our CEQA Review email for additional guidance. Sincerely, Dave Kereazis Associate Environmental Planner HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit Department of Toxic Substances Control Dave.Kereazis@dtsc.ca.gov Page 490 Ryan Safty March 3, 2025 Page 3 cc: (via email) Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation State Clearinghouse State.Clearinghouse@opr.ca.gov Kenneth Rodrigues Architect and Applicant Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners, Inc kenr@kprarchitects.com Shoshana Lutz Senior Planner (EMC) EMC Planning Group lutz@emcplanning.com Tamara Purvis Associate Environmental Planner HWMP-Permitting Division – CEQA Unit Department of Toxic Substances Control Tamara.Purvis@dtsc.ca.gov Scott Wiley Associate Governmental Program Analyst HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit Department of Toxic Substances Control Scott.Wiley@dtsc.ca.gov Page 491 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 16 Response to Letter 2 Department of Toxic Substances Control (March 3, 2025) 1. The commenter repeats information provided within the phase I environmental site assessment prepared for the proposed project (Environmental Solutions 2020, p. 31), that there is a recommendation in the assessment that if the property use changes to residential or if the property is redeveloped and no longer utilizes a raised foundation, then soil vapor testing on the site should be conducted. As discussed in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 requires the project developer to conduct a soil vapor test and if concentration levels exceed safety thresholds, appropriate mitigation would be applied, prior to issuance of a grading permit. The commenter then recommends that the Town enter into a voluntary agreement to address contamination at brownfields and other types of properties or receive oversight from a self-certified local agency, Department of Toxic Substances and Control, or Regional Water Quality Control Board. This recommendation is at the Town’s discretion. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to assess any contaminants of concern meet screening levels as outlined in the Department of Toxic Substances and Control Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. The commenter also advises referencing the Department of Toxic Substances and Control Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet if importing fill is necessary. Additional guidance is provided to minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material. These recommendations and guidance from the Department of Toxic Substances and Control can be required by the Town as a condition of approval. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 492 From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 3:36 PM To: Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Online Form Submission #15665 for Community Development Contact Form [EXTERNAL SENDER] Community Development Contact Form First Name Majid Last Name Alasvandian Email Address (Required) Phone Number Tell Us About Your Inquiry (Required) Comment Regarding A Planning Project Address/APN you are inquiring About (Required) 143 and 151 E Main Message (Required) I have lived in 103 Cleland Ave since Feb., 1999. I and many of residents in Los Gatos Main area consider this project way out of proportion for the lot size and the location. My concerns are: 1)This building is too big. The height is twice the size of every thing around. It ruins the small town character of Los Gatos. 2)30 units plus commercial spaces and parking lots in 14000 sq feet is too dense and it does impact traffic around. Many parents drop their kids right around this location and it is already too crowded. 3)Approval of this project will set a precedence for the owners of other commercial buildings nearby to convert their small lots into 4 or higher story buildings. What is is that going to stop them once this project gets approved? 4)Fire hazards- All homes behind the library are considered Comment Letter #3 ______________________________________1 2 3 4 Page 493 to be in fire hazard zone and as you all know all homes behind Library have two evacuation routes in case of Fire (Jackson and College) and both streets merged into the Main street. Main is already narrow for the existing traffic, adding high density homes near downtown will endanger the lives of existing residents in case of any wild fires in the hills. People want to come to Los Gatos for the small town character feel of the town and the downtown setting with the hills visible to pedestrians. Let's not ruin the beauty of this town by setting precedence in issuing permits to people who are in this just to make money and go to the next project. Add An Attachment if applicable Field not completed. Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. ________________________________4 cont'd 5 Page 494 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 19 Response to Letter 3 Majid Alasvandian (March 10, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses concern related to the proposed building’s size and height. The visual impacts of the proposed project are discussed in Section 1.0, Aesthetics, of the initial study. The conclusion in the initial study is that although the proposed project is larger than other buildings in the vicinity, the adverse visual impact would not be significant. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that the proposed uses within the site are too dense and would impact the traffic around the site. As discussed in Section 17.0, Transportation, checklist question “a” of the initial study, the proposed project would result in an increase of 17 daily trips compared to the existing office building. However, the proposed project would result in a reduction of trips during the AM peak hour (when students are being dropped off at school), as well as the PM peak hour. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a conflict with the surrounding roadways systems and an off-site traffic operations analysis was not required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. The commenter states that approval of this project would set a precedence for the owners of nearby commercial buildings to convert their small lots into taller buildings. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 4. The commenter expresses concern for the fire hazards around the Town Library in relation to evacuation routes. The commenter states that the project’s high density could endanger the lives of existing residents evacuating on Main Street in case of a fire. Refer to the response under the first comment for comment letter #1. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 5. The commenter states that people want to come to Los Gatos for the small-town character feel and the downtown setting with the hills visible to pedestrians. Section 1.0, Aesthetics, provides a discussion about the project’s impact associated with scenic vistas, such as the hillsides and distant mountain ranges. There are limited views of forested hillsides for east- and westbound travelers on Church Street; current views are limited due to views being partially obstructed by existing trees. The proposed Page 495 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 20 project would add a small obstruction to the existing westbound traveler’s views on Church Street; however, the majority of the existing view directly west of Church Street would remain unobstructed. Impacts were determined to be less than significant. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 496 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Opposition to the 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 12:20:48 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Ryan, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development that seeks todemolish the existing on-site uses and construct a four-story mixed-use building withunderground parking near Los Gatos Highschool. While I understand the need for growth, thisproject raises several concerns that will have a lasting negative impact on our community. First and foremost, traffic congestion in the area is already a significant issue, particularlyduring school drop-off and pick-up times. The high school generates substantial pedestrianand vehicle activity, and adding 30 residential units along with commercial space will onlyexacerbate the problem. Furthermore, when there are disruptions on Highway 17, local streetsbecome highly congested, making it difficult for residents to navigate their ownneighborhoods. Beach traffic during warmer months further compounds the situation, and thisnew development will only aggravate these existing problems. Additionally, pedestrian safety is a major concern. With a large number of students walkingto and from school - before, during lunch and after, as well as seniors and families frequentingthe nearby senior center, library, and churches, the increased traffic could put pedestrians atgreater risk. I have personally witnessed near-accidents involving pedestrians in this area dueto inattentive drivers, and adding more vehicles to an already problematic location could leadto dangerous consequences. Beyond traffic and safety issues, the proposed building does not align with the town’scharm and character. A four-story structure in this location will be an eyesore and detractfrom the unique aesthetic of Los Gatos. Our town is known for its historic and small-townappeal, and this type of high-density development is inconsistent with that identity. While I recognize the importance of providing housing options, this project does notadequately balance the needs of the community with responsible urban planning. I urge you toreconsider the approval of this development or, at the very least, require significantmodifications to ensure it does not negatively impact traffic, pedestrian safety, and thecharacter of our town. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will take the concerns of localresidents seriously. Jenny Comment Letter #4 _____________________________________________________1 2 3 4 5 Page 497 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 22 Response to Letter 4 Jenny (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses their opposition to the proposed project. No environmental issues are raised; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that the traffic congestion in the area is a current, significant issue especially during school drop-off and pick-up times. The commenter adds that the problem is exacerbated when there are disruptions on Highway 17 and during warmer months when there is beach traffic. See Letter 3, response to comment #2. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. The commenter expresses concern associated with pedestrian safety indicating that the increased traffic could put pedestrians at a greater risk. The proposed project would result in an increase of only 17 vehicle trips per day. See also Letter 3, response to comment #2. Pedestrian facilities and the project’s potential to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing pedestrian facilities is discussed in the initial study under Section 17.0, Transportation, checklist question “a.” As concluded in the initial study, there are no policies regarding pedestrian facilities that are applicable to the project and, therefore, no conflict with a policy would occur as a result of the project. The transportation study prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants (Appendix H of the initial study) discusses pedestrian access and circulation within and surrounding the project site, indicating that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Town of Los Gatos - 2020 lists several proposed pedestrian facilities in the project vicinity including a high visibility crosswalk at the intersections of Church Street and E. Main Street, Villa Avenue and E. Main Street, and High School Court and E. Main Street. The Town could consider requiring additional pedestrian safety elements as identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Town of Los Gatos - 2020 as a condition of approval. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 4. The commenter states that the proposed building does not align with the Town’s charm and character citing the building’s height and stating that it would detract from the unique aesthetic of Los Gatos. See responses to Letter 3, comment #1 and #5. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 498 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 23 5. The commenter states that the project does not adequately balance the needs of the community with responsible urban planning and urges the Town to reconsider the approval of this development or to require significant modifications to ensure that it does not negatively impact traffic, pedestrian safety, and the character of the Town. See response under comment #3 above for a discussion about pedestrian safety. See response to Letter 3, responses to comment #2 and #5 for comment for a discussion about traffic and consistency with the Town’s character. See response to Letter 3, response to comment #3 for a discussion about pedestrian safety. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 499 From: To:Ryan Safty Cc:Joel Paulson Subject:Public Comment: 143 and 151 E. Main Street Date:Tuesday, March 11, 2025 6:50:23 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello Ryan, Thank you for your thorough review of the project on behalf of the Town. The developer hascreated an architecturally attractive design with commendable style and detail. While I haveconcerns about the building's overall size and height, I understand the Town's limited ability todeny or redirect the project due to State laws. Ideally, I would prefer to see the building reduced to 3 stories total and set back further fromthe street, though I recognize these requests may be overridden by the State Builder's RemedyLaw. Regarding parking options, I strongly support Option 1 as it maximizes available parking. I'mconcerned that Option 2, with its reduced number of spaces, would create significant parkingchallenges for both residents and the surrounding area. I'd also like to inquire about the planned ownership structure of the building. Will it be undersingle ownership with all residential units and commercial spaces being leased, or will theresidential units be sold as condominiums? I have concerns about the condominium model, asI anticipate potential shared parking conflicts in the future. If the project moves forward,shared parking stipulations should be clearly incorporated into the leases for both residentialand commercial spaces. Jim Lyon Johnson Avenue Comment Letter #5 ________________________________1 2 3 4 Page 500 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 25 Response to Letter 5 Jim Lyon (March 11, 2025) 1. The commenter thanks the Town for the thorough review of the project and expresses their understanding that although there are concerns about the building’s overall size and height, the Town has limited ability to deny or redirect the project due to state laws. See response to Letter 3, comment #1 regarding the proposed building’s size and height. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that they would prefer the building be reduced to three stories total and set back further from the street, but understands that may be overridden by the Builder’s Remedy law. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. The commenter states that they strongly support Parking Option 1 as it maximizes available parking and is concerned that Parking Option 2, with its reduced number of spaces, would create significant parking challenges for both residents and the surrounding area. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 4. The commenter inquires about the planned ownership structure of the building. The commenter would like to know whether it will be under single ownership with all residential units and commercial spaces being leased or if the residential units will be sold as condominiums. The commenter expresses concerns about the condominium component of the project and its relation to shared parking. The commenter also recommends shared parking stipulations be incorporated into the leases for both residential and commercial spaces. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 501 From: Michael Kennedy Sent: Monday, March 1 o, 2025 5:23 PM To: Ryan Safty <RSatty@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Re: Proposed 141 and 153 East Main St. project [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Mr. Safty, Thank you for quickly following up in your kind response below. There is also a concern about the effect of an increase in traffic how it will affect pedestrian and bicycle safety in particular. Can you please forward this additional information to the applicant? Best regards, Mike Sent from my iPhone Comment Letter #6 ______1 Page 502 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 27 Response to Letter 6 Michael Kennedy (March 10, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses concern about the increase in traffic as a result of the project and how it will impact pedestrian and bicycle safety. See response to Letter 4, comment #3 regarding pedestrian safety. Regarding bicycle safety, the transportation study prepared for the project by Hexagon Transportation Consultants (Appendix G) states that there are existing class II bicycle lanes present along E. Main Street. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 503 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Fwd: 143 & 151 E. Main Street comment Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 6:37:52 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] The new proposed structure for 143 & 151 E. Main Street looks gorgeous! I read the transportation assessment that seemed quite thorough and would appreciate if the town would push for a 3rd subterranean level of parking that would not only allow the town'srequirements to be met for resident, commercial, visitor, and bike parking, but also to provide spaces for high schoolers that drive to school as the street parking constantly is filled withtheir cars getting ticketed after 90 minutes. Thanks, ...Andrew Coven, LG Resident Comment Letter #7 __________1 Page 504 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 29 Response to Letter 7 Andrew Coven (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter requests that the Town push for a third subterranean level of parking that would not only allow the Town’s requirements to be met for residents, commercial, visitor, and bicycle parking, but also to provide spaces for high schoolers that drive to school. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 505 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 & 151 East Main Street Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 2:46:42 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] > Hello- > I am writing in concern to the proposed project on E Main Street next to the high school. > > First the visual rendering is misleading to the public as it shows an open space across from it which inaccurately looks like there is open space around the building. In fact the large building would crowd the narrow two lane street. > > Second, the large mix used building next the high school would create madness in an already super congested area trying to flow over 2,000 students/families through the area twice a day. This building would unnecessarily cause chaos. Again, too big in the most congested area of town. > > Third, if it were to be built the two years of construction would be madness. Clearly the construction vehicles would need to take up all the parking in the area, closed streets, etc would make getting to the school or downtown impossible. > > Please, please…yes the building does look like the town, but the size & placement is too much > > Carrie Dean > 128 Teresita Way Comment Letter #8 1 ___________ _______ _______2 3 ___4 Page 506 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 31 Response to Letter 8 Carrie Dean (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter states that the visual rendering of the proposed project is misleading as it shows an open space across from it, which make it appear as though there is open space around the building. The commenter states that the proposed building would instead crowd the narrow two-lane street. The visual impacts of the proposed project are discussed in Section 1.0, Aesthetics, of the initial study. The conclusion in the initial study is that although the proposed project is larger than other buildings in the vicinity, the adverse visual impact would not be significant. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that the proposed mixed-use building next to the high school would create madness in an already congested area. The commenter adds that the proposed building would unnecessarily cause chaos. The commenter is concerned with the size of the project. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 for a discussion about the increase in traffic. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. The commenter expresses concerns related to construction of the project and its impact on the nearby roadways, parking in the area, and the closing of streets. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. 4. The commenter states that the size and placement of the proposed project is too much. See the response to Letter 3, comment #1 regarding the visual impacts associated with the size and height of the building. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 507 From: Cathleen Bannon <> Date: Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 9:10 AM Subject: 143 & 151 E. Main St To: <RSafty@losgatoca.gov> Hello- I am writing in concern to the proposed project on E Main Street next to the high school. First the visual rendering is misleading to the public as it shows an open space across from it which inaccurately looks like there is open space around the building. In fact the large building would crowd the narrow two lane street. Second, the large mix used building next the high school would create madness in an already super congested area trying to flow over 2,000 students/families through the area twice a day. This building would unnecessarily cause chaos. Again, too big in the most congested area of town. Third, if it were to be built the two years of construction would be madness. Clearly the construction vehicles would need to take up all the parking in the area, closed streets, etc would make getting to the school or downtown impossible. Please, please…yes the building does look like the town, but the size & placement is too much Cathleen Bannon Parent of two students at LGHS Comment Letter #9 _________________________1 2 3 Page 508 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 33 Response to Letter 9 Cathleen Bannon (March 3, 2025) The commenter expresses the same concerns as expressed in Letter 8. See responses above under Letter 8. Page 509 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 10:54:08 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] To Ryan Safty I am writing to you to give my comments as to why I am strongly against the developmentproposed at 143 and 151 E Main Street. I grew up in Los Gatos, went to Van Meter, Fisher and LG High. I lived in San Francisco for 15 years so I understand the difference between a city and a town. I have three children inthe local schools. One at Van Meter, one at Fisher and one at the HS. I have been on the board at Van Meter for over 8 years and volunteer weekly at LG High. I live on Euclid Avenue offof College right in the heart of this town that I love . I understand the need for more housing, I understand that the town has to adhere to laws regarding housing that come from the state. I understand that for many of these developmentsour hands are tied. I try to be sane and open minded when it comes to development because I know that in many instances we do not have a choice. But I also know that during the summerweekends many days we cannot leave our house due to the traffic downtown. We literally drive down college and turn around and go home because there are bumper to bumper cars. Iworry that if there is ever a fire or an emergency my neighbors and my family will not be able to get out because there are not enough exit routes or an emergency vehicle will not be able toget in. I love my neighborhood but I am starting to worry about living here. The corridor where this building is proposed to go in is an absolute traffic nightmare. I know this because I have to drive it at least 4 times a day to drop off and pick up kids from schooland after school activities. Why on earth would it be a good idea to put 30 residential units in an area where there is a small two lane road that for many times during the day is literallybumper to bumper. I cannot even fathom how construction would go. I guess I would need to leave my house at 730 to go 1 mile down the road to get my kid to elementary school. Thisproposal is not about housing numbers, this is about greed and shoving too many units in small spaces to turn the biggest profit. I hope the Town of Los Gatos does everything in their power to stop this one or at least getthem to change the scope to be realistic. Thank you for your time Jamie Fumia Comment #10 1 ________________________ _______________________________________ 2 Page 510 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 35 Response to Letter 10 Jamie Fumia (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter states that they are strongly against the proposed development and explains their experience and feelings toward traffic issues within Los Gatos. The commenter mentions concerns about evacuation during an emergency situation. See response to Letter 1 for a discussion about emergency evacuation. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that the corridor where the building is proposed has existing traffic issues. See response to Letter 3, comment #2. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 511 From: To:Matthew Hudes; Rob Rennie; Maria Ristow; Mary Badame; rmoore@losgatos.gov Cc:Ryan Safty Subject:Proposed 141 and 153 East Main St. project Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 9:14:02 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear council members, The height of this project will obscure hillside views. The size and mass is way out of proportion with otherbuildings located in downtown Los Gatos. This project is much too large for our town. Is there any chance it could kindly be scaled back to a single story structure instead? Best regards,Mike Kennedy26 Bayview Ave. Sent from my iPhone Comment Letter #11 _________1 Page 512 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 37 Response to Letter 11 Mike Kennedy (March 7, 2025) 1. The commenter states concern related to the height of the proposed building and its potential to obscure hillside views. The commenter also states that the size and mass of the proposed building is out of proportion with other buildings located in downtown Los Gatos. The commenter requests that the project be scaled back to a single-story structure. See response to Letter 3, comments #1 and #5 for a discussion about the size and height of the proposed structure as well as hillside visibility. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 513 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Fwd: New building next to the high school Date:Wednesday, March 12, 2025 11:00:28 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Thank You! Hello, this link was forwarded to me and I am very interested to understand what the town isgoing to do about all these projects as far as infrastructure improvement. These major projects without infrastructure improvement really are detrimental to the town,and I don’t understand why these issues are not being addressed as predominant negotiationsas part of the plants. These developers are making a lot of money they can afford to do someadditional infrastructure upgrades as a part of the total projects. Who is in charge of this mess? I would really like to know, and I don’t mean to imply thatpeople aren’t trying, but they’re really seems to be a lack of leadership and response from thetown in these areas. Another issue is that Los Gatos Saratoga Road at downtown Los Gatos connecting betweenSaratoga and Los Gatos Blvd. is a huge bottleneck and some of these building projects goingin are not required to do anything for the infrastructure: no additional outlets; no laneexpansion; no road improvements. I would welcome your share on all of this and what you’re understanding is. I also have a concern is with parking and added vehicles to this already-congested area next tothe high school. If you read Appendix H in the plans proposed, you'll see that neither optionfor the underground parking meets the town's requirements. I'm curious if this will just beapproved without meeting the minimum requirements https://www.losgatosca.gov/DocumentCenter/Index/2356 Caron Rakich Comment Letter #12 _______________1 ____________________________2 3 4 Page 514 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 39 Response to Letter 12 Caron Rakich (March 12, 2025) 1. The commenter raises a broader concern over projects in Los Gatos stating that major projects without infrastructure improvement are detrimental to the Town. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required 2. The commenter expresses concerns regarding the proposed project. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. The commenter states that the connection between Saratoga Road and Los Gatos Boulevard is a bottleneck and expresses concern that the projects in Los Gatos are not required to do anything for infrastructure (no outlets, no lane expansion, no road improvements). The Town contains development impact fees associated with traffic (Town Code Chapter 15, Article VII); its purpose is to assure that each new development or expansion of use pays for its fair share of the transportation improvements needed to accommodate the cumulative traffic impacts. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 4. The commenter states concern with parking and added vehicles to the existing congestion in the area. The commenter indicates that the parking options proposed by the project do not meet the Town’s requirements. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 515 From: David Knol <david@knolcal.net> Sent: Saturday, March 1, 2025 9:33 AM To: Ryan Safty <RSafty@losgatosca.gov> Subject: feedback on 143 and 151 E Main Street proposal [EXTERNAL SENDER] i'm writing to ask that the Los Gatos Town Council and Planning Commission reject this proposal along with the other proposals in flight (eg, post office plans) that threaten the character of our small, charming downtown area. the proposed building at 143 and 151 East Main Street in particular is a monstrosity that looks completely incongruous with its surroundings, when considering its proposed girth, height and architecture. consider a design more in-line with the Beckwith Block (Southern Kitchen) or Soda Works Plaza (Purple Onion) to be infinitely more palatable! as written this proposal is not a good fit for our community and as a constituent i would ask Comment Letter #13 _________________________1 Page 516 that you reject it. regards, david knol 41 peralta ave los gatos__Page 517 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 42 Response to Letter 13 David Knol (March 1, 2025) 1. The commenter requests that the Town reject the proposed project along with the other proposal in flight (e.g., post office plans) that the commenter believes threatens the character of the downtown area. See response to Letter 3, comment #5 regarding visual impacts. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 518 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Street comments Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 12:48:10 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi, the headmaster of Los Gatos High asked parents to share any concerns regards the proposed development of the address above to this email address. Whilst I think that its a good idea, as know that Los Gatos is under an affordable housing mandate and its a pretty ugly existing building and would be an improvement, I am worried about kids safety and parking during the building stage. Most of us parents have to drop off our kids along Church in the morning, as the traffic is impossible out front of the school and also pick up at 2.30 or 4 on the same street so unless the work is done outside of those hours its going to cause havoc safely dropping off our kids with material supply / construction trucks, workers vehicles also using the road. I am pretty sure that the entire area will also be cordoned off securely, as some of these kids are space monkeys outside of classes and never look where they are going, often glued to their phones with heads down so I think the safety is going to be a huge concern unless you can get a huge chunk of the build done during the summer holidays. Hopefully the parking underneath the garage will be enough for the residents to not also have to use the parking along church street as its already difficult to pick up/drop off with cafe users, church goers and the pre-school but I guess that is a while away and my son will hopefully have graduated by then lol. Rgs Chris Comment Letter #14 ____________________________1 2 3 4 Page 519 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 44 Response to Letter 14 Rgs Chris (March 7, 2025) 1. The comment states support for the idea of affordable housing and removing the existing building. The commenter raises concern for kids’ safety and parking during the building stage. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that parents have to drop their children off along Church Street in the morning due to traffic issues. The commenter states that unless the construction work is done outside of the morning and afternoon pick-up/drop-off for school, it would cause havoc safely dropping off the kids with material supply/construction trucks and workers also using the road. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 3. The commenter states concern for children safety during construction of the project. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 4. The commenter expresses hope that the parking proposed will be enough for the residents to not also have to use parking along Church Street. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 520 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 E Main Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 11:42:45 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] This proposal is so poorly thought out. The traffic in town is already unbearable during school start and end times, not to mention weekend beach traffic. Why has our town sold out to the highest bidder? There has to be a compromise that works for all of us that live in the town. 30 units??? The schools in the area are already over crowded has that been factored in? I’ve lived in Los Gatos for 53 years and am so sad to see what’s happening to our town. I am firmly against this development. Gail Manganello Sent from my iPhone Comment Letter #15 ____________1 2 3 Page 521 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 46 Response to Letter 15 Gail Manganello (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses concern about traffic. See response to Letter 3, comments #2 for a discussion about traffic impacts associated with the proposed project on the surrounding roadways. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter expresses concern for the number of units proposed for the project. This comment does not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no response is necessary. 3. The commenter expresses concern related to the schools and over-crowding. Section 15.0, Public Services, checklist question “c” of the initial study addresses the impacts to schools in Los Gatos. The initial study concludes that the payment of statutory fees pursuant to Section 65995(h) of the California Government Code is deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts to school facilities. New facilities, if and when required by the Los Gatos Union School District and Los Gatos- Saratoga Union High School District would be developed and analyzed independent of this project review. Page 522 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 & 151 Construction Project Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 2:54:27 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello Ryan, I received notification re: the 143 & 151 construction project. This project is going tosignificantly impact the drop-off and pick-up of Los Gatos High School students. Traffic during morning and pick-up is already congested and will be made far worse. What isbeing proposed to alleviate the impact that this project will have during these times? Additionally, the noise level will be very disruptive during school hours. What is going to bedone about that? Thank you, Isabel Guerra Comment Letter #16 ____________1 Page 523 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 48 Response to Letter 16 Isabel Guerra (March 7, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses concern related to student drop-off/pick-up at the adjacent school. The commenter adds that traffic is already congested in this area and can be made worse with implementation of the proposed project. The commenter questions what is being proposed to alleviate the impact that the project will have during these times. The commenter also mentions noise levels being disruptive during school hours and questions what is going to be done about that. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic and the impacts of the project on the surrounding roadways. Section 13.0, Noise, of the initial study contains Mitigation Measure N-1, which requires that the project developer ensure that no individual piece of construction equipment produce a noise level exceeding 85 dBA at 25 feet and that best management practices are incorporated during construction activities to further reduce noise levels. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 524 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Re: Public comment: Mixed - use development 143 and 151 E. Main Street Date:Friday, March 7, 2025 12:20:44 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Good afternoon, I am writing about the proposed mixed-use development at 143 and 151 E. Main Street. I understand that the town is required to meet certain high-density requirements, as the state dictates. My concern with the current proposal at this property is related to the traffic and parking issues that it will create. The area around the high school is currently heavy with traffic during the morning and afternoon school hours. The four-way stop at theintersection (Pleasant St. at Main St.) backs up past the library, and up the hill in the other direction. Will a traffic light be installed there? The intersection next to the development at High School Court at Main St. is already challenging to exit due to visibility of cars parked along Main Street. I read the parking proposals and it looks like neither one meets the minimum town standards. How will this be fixed before re-developing the site? Somehow the gymone block down the street (The Club LG) was able to not meet reasonable parking requirements, as members fill up most of the street parking spots during the day because their parking lot is so small. Thank you, Elke Billingsley Los Gatos resident Comment Letter #17 ____________________________________1 2 Page 525 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 50 Response to Letter 17 Elke Billingsley (March 7, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses concerns related to the traffic and parking issues that could arise as a result of the proposed project. The commenter questions whether a traffic light will be installed at the four-way stop at the intersection of Pleasant Street at Main Street due to current traffic congestion issues. The commenter adds visibility concerns when exiting the intersection next to the project site at High School Court and Main Street. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic. No traffic signals are proposed or required by the project. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that the parking options provided by the project do not meet the Town’s minimum standards and questions what will be done about this before redevelopment of the site. This comment does not raise an environmental issue and, therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 526 From: To: Ryan Sa! Cc: Subject: I Re: input on 143 & 151 East Main Street Date: Friday, March 7, 2025 1:15:00 PM I [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Mr. Safty, Hope this message finds you well. I received the following email from our high school principal. We have owned and lived in our home in Ahnond Grove for over 17 years, and cunently have 2 students attending Los Gatos High. It is an amazing school. With this proposed development that is adjacent to the high school, my husband and I are ve1y concerned about the safety and increased traffic problems it would cause. Cunently, drop offs and pickups are aheady challenging and often chaotic; additionally, all the afterschool activities go well into the evenings. The proposed development is eno1mous and the additional traffic and activity it would generate would create a ve1y stressful environment for the students even before they begin their school day. Accordingly, it would set back their productivity and studies. We hope that as you and the planning collllllission review this project, that you will take these grave concerns into consideration. Hopefully, a small-scale project will take place instead. Thanks in advance, Gloria and Eric R. Sent from my iPhone Begin fo1warded message: Comment Letter #18 ___________________________1 2 Page 527 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 52 Response to Letter 18 Gloria and Eric R. (March 7, 2025) 1. The commenter states their concern about the safety and increased traffic problems implementation of the proposed project could cause. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic and the project’s impact on surrounding roadways. See Letter 4, comments #3 for a discussion about pedestrian safety. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states that the proposed project is large and the additional traffic and activity it would generate could crease a stressful environment for the students. The commenter adds that a small-scale project is preferred. See response above under comment #1. See also the response to Letter 3, comment #1 for a discussion of the visual impacts associated with the size and height of the proposed project. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 528 From: To:Ryan Safty Cc: Subject:Comment for 143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project Date:Sunday, March 9, 2025 2:58:58 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hello,I am a parent with a sophomore at LGHS and an incoming freshman next year. The current traffic around the schoolat all times (not just drop-off and pickup) does NOT allow for a multi-story mixed use project. We cannot seriouslybe considering that for that area. A new project that correlates with the high school area would be great but not amulti-story that will congest traffic even more. Please do not approve this project. It will impact the high schoolstudents, teachers, parents, and community in a negative way.Thank you,Jennifer Lambert Comment Letter #19 ___________1 Page 529 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 54 Response to Letter 19 Jennfier Lambert (March 9, 2025) 1. The commenter states that traffic around the school at all times, not just during drop- off/pick-up) does not allow for a multi-story mixed-use project. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic and the project’s impact on surrounding roadways. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 530 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Date:Monday, March 10, 2025 11:10:32 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] I volunteer at the Friends of Los Gatos book store, so I can attest to the amount of traffic on East Main Street during the week, on weekends, and especially during school dismissal times. Adding beach traffic during the summer months to normal traffic and now a 30 unit family complex will make the traffic situation gridlock. Parking during the week and on weekends is almost impossible. How can library patrons, LG Rec patrons, school employees and students find parking with the additional cars that will come with a multi-story apartment building? Please consider the impact of neighboring public and businesses that require access to parking and a flow of traffic that makes our downtown accessible. I travel from Shannon Road to the library and I experience bumper to bumper traffic on the weekends now and very few parking spaces in the Main Street area. Thank you for your consideration Karen Chase 107 Ann Arbor Dr Los Gatos Comment Letter #20 _____________________________1 Page 531 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 56 Response to Letter 20 Karen Chase (March 10, 2025) 1. The commenter states their concern about traffic and parking issues in the area surrounding the project site. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic and the project’s impact on surrounding roadways. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. . The commenter does not raise any other environmental issues. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 532 March 10, 2025 Lauren Roseman 17429 Pleasant View Ave Monte Sereno, CA 95030 Town Council Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 Dear Los Gatos Town Council, I am writing to express my concern about the proposed development of 143 and 151 East Main Street. While I welcome some development of the above-mentioned property, I am concerned about the negative impact a project of this size will have. Given the location next to the high school, the already limited parking available in the area and traffic and safety issues that currently exist, adding an additional 30 residential units and ground-floor business space will further exacerbate traffic, parking and safety issues for students, faculty, families and the greater community. Please consider modifying the plans to limit the negative impact this will have on the town of Los Gatos. Kind regards, Lauren Roseman Comment Letter #21 ____________________1 Page 533 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 58 Response to Letter 21 Lauren Roseman (March 10, 2025) 1. The commenter states their concern about traffic, parking, and safety issues that could occur with implementation of the proposed project. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic and the project’s impact to surrounding roadways. See response to Letter 4, comment #3 regarding pedestrian safety. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 534 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Fwd: Town of Los Gatos seeking public input on the proposed development at 143 & 151 East Main Street Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 1:20:22 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Goodmorning, I am in favor of building upwards for more real estate for the Los Gatos community, however, I really enjoy having a coffee shop on that corner of the street and would love to not see it goaway. The other major concern I have is the flow of traffic. Our drop off flow during 8:07-8:34 am is so stagnant and difficult to navigate through, as well as 2:19-2:55 every day. It would be sochallenging to propose several new small businesses in that specific location because there is truly not enough parking for our own students and staff on campus. For parents attendingmeetings, school events, it is a challenge to find parking spots. I would recommend that this plan only be supplemented by a parking lot/structure in place of another standing buildingnow. Please plan for parking, is the moral of my concern! Sarah Pereira School Counselor for (Q-S) Los Gatos High School --- Feb '25 Guidance Newsletter Comment Letter #22 __________________________1 2 Page 535 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 60 Response to Letter 22 Sarah Pereira (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter states that they enjoy the current building and would not like to see it redeveloped. The comment does not raise an environmental concern and, therefore, no response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter states their concern related to the existing flow of traffic and the lack of parking in the area. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 regarding traffic. The commenter does not raise any other environmental issues; therefore, no further response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 536 From: To:Ryan Saft Subject:143 E Main Street Proposal Date:Monday, March 10, 2025 2:42:34 PM [EXTERNAL SENDER] This project makes no sense - replacing one story small businesses with a 4 story building right next to the high school is a horrible plan. That area of town already is already onlyaccessible two ways and becomes backed up with traffic due to the high school. Addingmore traffic and ridiculous, barely usable underground parking, is a joke. Visually, theproject doesn't fit in with the surrounding area. I strongly urge the Town Council to reject this proposal. Comment Letter #23 _____________1 Page 537 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 62 Response to Letter 23 Unknown (March 10, 2025) 1. The commenter states disagreement with the type of project being proposed at the site due to existing traffic concerns and indicates a concern for the amount of parking being proposed. The commenter adds that the proposed project does not visually fit with the surrounding area. See response to Letter 3. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 538 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:Building Development Project Feedback Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 10:41:10 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi Ryan, Don't build this. It's a disgrace to the town of Los Gatos and a waste of money. Preserve our town. Preserve our history. Preserve our culture. Best regards. Comment Letter #24 ______1 Page 539 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 64 Response to Letter 24 Unknown (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter disagrees with the proposed project and asks that the project not be built. This comment does not raise an environmental issue and, therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 540 From: To:Ryan Safty Subject:143 and 151 E. Main Street Mixed-Use Project - Public Comment Date:Thursday, March 6, 2025 10:37:13 AM [EXTERNAL SENDER] Ryan, I am writing to express my strong support for the proposed mixed-use development at 143 and151 E. Main Street. This project is exactly the kind of thoughtful, well-designed growth that Los Gatos needs. The proposal strikes an ideal balance—adding much-needed downtown housing while maintaining retail space and preserving the town’s architectural character. Its inclusion ofunderground parking is a smart solution that mitigates congestion concerns. This is precisely the kind of responsible development that enhances our community without compromising itscharm. I urge the Planning Commission to stand firm against the obstructionist, anti-growth sentimentthat too often stifles progress in Los Gatos. Our town must evolve to remain vibrant, welcoming, and accessible. Approving this project is a step in the right direction. Thank you for your time and consideration. Michelle Badger17136 Wild Way Comment Letter #25 ____________________________1 Page 541 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 66 Response to Letter 25 Michelle Badger (March 6, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses their agreement with the type of project proposed at the site and states that this kind of responsible development enhances the community without compromising charm. The commenter requests that the Town stand firm against the obstructionist, anti-growth sentiment that too often stifles progress in Los Gatos. This comment does not raise an environmental issue and, therefore, no response is required. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 542 Community Development Contact Form First Name Carol Last Name Anglin Email Address (Required) Phone Number Tell Us About Your Inquiry (Required) Comment Regarding A Planning Project Address/APN you are inquiring About (Required) 143-151 E. Main Street Message (Required) I live at 95 Church Street and the traffic congestion is often unbearable. If an emergency happened, it would be impossible for us to be safe. The project is too close to the congested high school area and the number of units is outrageous given its limited space and our town's resources. The rendering is totally incorrect as it looks if there is green space in front of the complex. I encourage you to VOTE NO on this development. I feel we have little say in our community. Add An Attachment if applicable Field not completed. Comment Letter #26 ______________________1 Page 543 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 68 Response to Letter 26 Carol Anglin (March 18, 2025) 1. The commenter expresses concern about traffic congestion and emergency evacuation. The commenter adds that the project is too close to the congested high school area. See Letter 3, response to comment #2 for a discussion about traffic increases. Also see Letter 1, response to comment #1 for a discussion about emergency evacuations. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 544 From: To: Subject: Date: IJ!ll!I Concerns about proposed development Tuesday, March 18, 2025 9:56:11 AM I [EXTERNAL SENDER] Good morning, I am writing in response to the proposed mixed-use development at 143 and 151 E. Main Street, which includes 30 multi-family residential units commercials ace on the ·ound floor, and the removal of large protected trees. , I am concerned about the sea e o t s proJect. 1 et e tree remova 1s concernmg m itself, the size of the proposed stmcture seems dispropo1iionate to the capacity of the smTounding streets to safely accommodate it. The intersections of Main Street, High School Comi , and Church Street are ah-eady highly congested, paiiicularly during peak times on school days. These busy periods occur just before school begins (ai·ound 8:10-8:30 AM) and after school ends (from 2:15-4 PM). The neai·by Methodist church operates a daycai·e, with pai·ents frequently crossing these streets with young children, often pushing strollers. Additionally, many students, school staff, church staff, business people, and cafe patrons regulai·ly walk across these streets. CmTently, traffic congestion is ah-eady a concern, with drivers pausing at intersections or along these streets to drop off students, while pedestrians and other drivers navigate through these busy areas. On school days, we often experience near-miss accidents at these intersections. Adding a much lai·ger building-one that occupies significantly more squai·e footage, is multiple stories high, and potentially blocks sightlines-will likely exacerbate these issues. This could lead to more blind spots, increased traffic congestion, and heightened safety risks, paiiicularly for pedestrians. Should this project proceed, the following adjustments should be incorporated into the plan: 1) reduce the size of the development, and 2) implement traffic lighting and other measures to mitigate congestion and ensure safety at neai·by intersections. Without these changes, the risk of accidents and fmiher traffic issues will only increase. Thank you for considering these concerns. This email was sent by a staff member at Las C,qtq<-Sqrqtaim ltuiqn High School Qi<trict This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. Jfyoo are not the intended recipient (or have received this email in error), please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto. Comment Letter #27 _____________1 _____________2 _______________3 ________4 Page 545 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 70 Response to Letter 27 Kristi Grasty (March 18, 2025) 1. The commenter states their concern with the scale of the proposed project and removal of trees. The commenter adds that the size of the proposed structure is disproportionate to the capacity of the surrounding streets to safely accommodate it. Section 4.0, Biological Resources, checklist question “e” of the initial study discusses tree removal. Six total trees (three on-site and three off-site) are proposed for removal; all of which are protected by the Town. Therefore, the initial study requires implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which requires tree replacement consistent with the Town Code. See response to Letter 1, comment #3 for a discussion about the size of the proposed structure. See also response to Letter 3, comment #2 for a discussion about the increase in traffic. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 2. The commenter discusses congestion at the intersections of Main Street, High School Court, and Church Street. The commenter also states that the nearby church operates a daycare with parents frequently crossing these streets with young children, as well as other students, high school staff members, church staff, business people, and café patrons. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 for a discussion about the increase in traffic. See also response to Letter 4, comment #3 for a discussion about pedestrian safety. 3. The commenter states concern about current traffic congestion in the area. The commenter states that adding a larger building at the site, one that occupies significantly more square footage, is multiple stories high, and potential blocks sightlines, could exacerbate these issues. The commenter states that the project could lead to more blind spots, increased traffic congestion, and heightened safety risks for pedestrians. See response to Letter 3, comment #2 for a discussion about the increase in traffic. See also response to Letter 4, comment #3 for a discussion about pedestrian safety. See response to Letter 3, comment #1 for a discussion about the size and height of the proposed structure. According to Hexagon Transportation Consultants, sight lines would be improved with the project compared to existing conditions. The existing building comes right up to the back of the sidewalk on Church Street, High School Court, and E. Main Street. The proposed new building would be set back at least ten feet from Church Street and E. Main Street, and about five feet from High School Court. In addition, the corners of the building would be chamfered for greater visibility. Page 546 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 71 No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. 4. The commenter states if should the project proceeds, the following adjustments are recommended: reduce the size of the development and implement traffic lighting and other measures to mitigate congestion and ensure safety at nearby intersections. The commenter expresses concern that without these changes, the risk of accidents and further traffic issues will increase. See response to Letter 3, comment #1 for a discussion about the size of the proposed project and comment #2 for a discussion about the increase in traffic. See also response to Letter 17, comment #1 for a discussion about traffic signals. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. Page 547 143 & 151 E. Main Street | Proposed Changes to MM BIO-1 March 18, 2025 BIO-1: To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), all construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction or project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. One survey for active bird nests shall occur within 48 hours prior to ground disturbance.Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet forpasserines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. The survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or frompublic areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will beprepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Departmentand no further mitigation is required. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearbysurrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shallbe established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young havefledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. Thequalified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities andincrease the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensiveflights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the younghave fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has beenconfirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos. Comment Letter #28 _______________________________________________________________________1 Page 548 Ryan Safty Town of Los Gatos March 21, 2025, Page 73 Response to Letter 28 Miles Imwalle (March 19, 2025) 1. The commenter (the applicant’s counsel) has requested a change to Mitigation Measure BIO-1 to be consistent with similar measures adopted by the Town for other projects. This change to the language of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would not alter the intent or purpose of the mitigation to protect nesting birds. This change has been made in a revised mitigated negative declaration. Page 549 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 550 Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 REVISED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION In Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Project Name 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project Lead Agency Town of Los Gatos Project Proponent CSPN LLC Project Location 143 & 151 E Main Street, Los Gatos Project Description The project proposes to demolish the existing on-site uses and construct a four-story mixed-use building with underground parking. The ground level of the proposed building will include 2,416 square feet of pedestrian-oriented commercial with a total of 30 residential units (24 market rate and 6 affordable) located on all stories of the building. There are two options for the underground parking: Option 1 is a two-level parking garage with 47 individual parking stalls and Option 2 is a one-level parking garage with 39 parking stalls that include 16 car stackers. The project involves the removal of three existing on-site trees and planting 21 new on-site trees. Public Review Period February 28, 2025 – March 20, 2025 Written Comments To Ryan Safty, Associate Planner 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Proposed Findings The Town of Los Gatos is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based. The initial study indicates that the proposed project has the potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. However, the mitigation measures identified in the initial study would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency Town of Los Gatos that the project, with mitigation measures incorporated, may have a significant effect on the environment. See the following project-specific mitigation measures: EXHIBIT 21 Page 551 Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 Mitigation Measures Air Quality  AQ-1 The applicant shall prepare a Construction Management Plan for review and approval by the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activities, including tree removal. The Construction Management Plan shall include the following measures to reduce toxic air contaminant emissions during construction: a. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles will have 2010 or newer model year engines, in compliance with the California Air Resources Board’s Truck and Bus Regulation; b. Idling of construction equipment and heavy-duty diesel trucks will be avoided where feasible, and if idling is necessary, it will not exceed three minutes; c. All construction equipment will be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and will be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator; and d. All non-road diesel construction equipment will, at a minimum, meet Tier 3 emission standards listed in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 89, Subpart B, §89.112. Further, where feasible, construction equipment will use alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas, propane, electricity, or biodiesel. AQ-2 The project applicant shall ensure that MERV 13 air filtration systems, or an equivalent system, are included in the design and operations of the proposed project. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and specifications demonstrating compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification. These plans shall identify the locations and specifications of the air filtration systems and confirm they meet the performance standards for particulate and airborne pollutant removal. The air filtration systems must be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Verification of proper installation and functionality shall be conducted by a licensed professional and documented in a final compliance report, which must be submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for approval. The property owner or operator shall also establish a maintenance plan for the air filtration system to ensure ongoing performance in accordance with manufacturer specifications. Biological Resources  BIO-1 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), all construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction or project-related work is Page 552 Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. One survey for active bird nests shall occur within 48 hours prior to ground disturbance. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. The survey shall be conducted at the appropriate time of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the Town of Los Gatos. BIO-2 Per Town Code Section 26.20.010 and Chapter 29, Article 1, Division 2, the developer shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to the removal of protected trees on private or Town property. The project developer shall abide by any tree replacement ratios and/or in-lieu payments, tree protection measures, and best management practices required by the tree removal permit and/or within the arborist report dated October 24, 2024 (Appendix D). Cultural Resources  CUL-1 The following language shall be incorporated into any plans associated with tree removal, grading, and construction, “In the event that archaeological resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, contractor shall temporarily halt or divert excavations within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated. All potentially significant archaeological deposits shall be evaluated to demonstrate whether the resource is eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources, even if discovered during construction. If archaeological deposits are encountered, they will be evaluated and Page 553 Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 mitigated simultaneously in the timeliest manner practicable, allowing for recovery of materials and data by standard archaeological procedures. For indigenous archaeological sites, this data recovery involves the hand-excavated recovery and non-destructive analysis of a small sample of the deposit. Historic resources shall also be sampled through hand excavation, though architectural features may require careful mechanical exposure and hand excavation. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance by a qualified Archaeologist. Significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, glass, ceramics, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.” CUL-2 The following language shall be incorporated into any plans associated with tree removal, demolition, grading, and construction, “In the event that human remains (or remains that may be human) are discovered at the project site, Public Resource Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. All grading or earthmoving activities shall immediately stop within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find. The Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified immediately, and the coroner shall be permitted to examine the remains as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If human remains are determined as those of Native American origin, the project proponent shall comply with the state relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (Public Resource Code [PRC] § 5097). The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to determine the most likely descendant(s) (MLD). The MLD shall complete his or her inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD will determine the most appropriate means of treating the human remains and associated grave artifacts, and shall oversee the disposition of the remains. In the event the NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being granted access to the site, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity within the project area in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify the MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being allowed access to the site; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.” Page 554 Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration 5 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 Geology and Soils  GEO-1 The applicant shall prepare a soils report addressing, but not limited to: foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, and impacts associated with lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. The soils report shall be submitted to the Town Building Division for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. All recommendations outlined in the soils report shall be incorporated into the project design. GEO-2 The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit: “If paleontological resources are uncovered during demolition, grading or other on-site excavation activities, construction activities in the area shall be suspended. The developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist to examine the site and identify protective measures to be implemented to protect the paleontological resource. The measures shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director.” Greenhouse Gas Emissions  GHG-1 The project developer shall incorporate the following GHG emissions reduction performance standard into the final project design:  No permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the project plans; no natural gas shall be made available through permanent natural gas infrastructure. The project shall be all electric. Final plans for the development shall be reviewed by the Town Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure this performance standard is incorporated into the project design. Verification of development consistent with this performance standard shall be assured prior to approval of occupancy permits. Hazards and Hazardous Materials  HAZ-1 The project developer shall conduct soil vapor testing on the project site prior to issuance of a grading permit. The results of the soil vapor testing shall be reviewed by the Town Engineer and only with approval by the Town Engineer can any grading and earth- moving construction activities take place. If soil vapor testing comes back with concentration levels that exceed safety thresholds for residential uses, the Town Engineer shall determine if Environmental Solutions should provide recommendations for construction of the project. If soil vapor testing comes back with concentration levels below safety thresholds, no further action is necessary. Page 555 Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration 6 EMC Planning Group 143 & 151 E. Main Street Mixed Use Project March 2025 Noise  N-1 The project developer shall ensure that no individual piece of construction equipment produce a noise level exceeding 85 dBA at 25 feet. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department for review and verification.  The project developer shall also ensure that best management practices are incorporated during construction activities. The following shall be placed on all ground-disturbing project plans:  All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and muffled as to minimize noise generation at the source.  Noise-producing equipment shall not be operating, running, or idling while not in immediate use by a construction contractor.  All noise-producing construction equipment shall be located and operated, to the extent possible, at the greatest possible distance from any noise-sensitive land uses.  Locate construction staging areas, to the extent possible, at the greatest possible distances from any noise-sensitive land uses.  Signs shall be posted at the construction site and near adjacent sensitive receptors displaying hours of construction activities and providing the contact phone number of a designated noise disturbance coordinator. N-2 The project developer shall install mechanical ventilation or air conditioning for all residential units so that windows and doors can remain closed for sound insulation purposes. Implementation of this measure is subject to review and approval by the Town Building Department, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. Transportation  TRANS-1 Project improvements plans shall include the following, subject to review and approval by the Town Engineer, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit: a. Stripe a loading space along the project frontage on E. Main Street; b. Apply 10 feet of No Parking (Red Zone) on both sides of the project driveway on Church Street; and c. Provide adequate landing space at the top and bottom of the garage ramps. Page 556 352-(&76,7(/26*$7260,;('86($ &29(56+((7$ '(6,*1,0$*(5<$ $(5,$/0$3$ 3+272*5$3+62)(;,67,1*6,7($ 1(,*+%25+22'&217(;7$ &,5&8/$7,213/$1$ 23(163$&($5($&$/&8/$7,216$ 5(1'(5,1*$ 5(1'(5,1*$ 6+$'2:678'<$(;,67,1*%8,/',1*6,7(3/$1$(;,67,1*%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216$ 6,7(3/$1$ )/2253/$1/(9(/$ )/2253/$1/(9(/$ )/2253/$1/(9(/$ )/2253/$1/(9(/$ %8,/',1*522)3/$1.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1:+,60$152$'68,7(02817$,19,(:&$3KRQH   &RQWDFW .HQ5RGULJXHV(PDLO NHQU#NUSDUFKLWHFWVFRP&631//&7+(*5((168,7($'29(5'(3KRQH&RQWDFW'DYLG%ODWW(PDLOGEODWW#FDSVWDFNSDUWQHUVFRP7+(*8==$5'23$571(56+,3,1&*5((1:,&+675((76$1)5$1&,6&2&$3KRQH&RQWDFW*DU\/D\PRQ(PDLOJOD\PRQ#WJSLQFFRP6$1',66:,1&+(67(5%/9'68,7(&$03%(//&$3KRQH&RQWDFW7LP.LP(PDLOWNLP#VDQGLVQHW3523(57<$''5(66$31(;,67,1*=21,1*352326('86(62&&83$1&<7<3(2)&216758&7,21/(9(/6%(/2:*5$'(3$5.,1*/(9(/6$%29(*5$'(+286,1*727$/*$5$*($5($727$/+286,1*$5($($670$,1675((7,6$6725<0,;('86(%8,/',1*:,7+81'(5*5281'3$5.,1*/2&$7('21$&5(6,7($77+(&251(52)0$,1675((7$1'+,*+6&+22/&2857,1/26*$726&$/,)251,$7+(*5281'/(9(/,1&/8'(6648$5()((72)3('(675,$125,(17('&200(5&,$/:+,&+&28/'%(/($6('72$5(7$,/255(67$85$177(1$175(6,'(17,$/ )256$/( 81,76$5(/2&$7('21$//)285/(9(/62)7+(352-(&77+(352326('352-(&7,1&/8'(681,760$5.(75$7(81,76$1'$))25'$%/(81,765$1*,1*)520648$5()((772648$5()((7$//2)7+($))25'$%/(81,76352326(' 252)7+(727$/81,76 :,//%(62/'72/2:(5,1&20(+286(+2/'6$6'(),1(',16(&7,212)7+(+($/7+$1'6$)(7<&2'(0($1,1*7+26(:+26(,1&20('2(6127(;&(('2)$5($0(',$1,1&20(352326('352-(&781,76$5(%('52208372%('52206:,7+287'2253$7,267+(5($5(7:2  237,216)257+(81'(5*5281'3$5.,1*237,21$7:2/(9(/3$5.,1**$5$*(:,7+,1',9,'8$/3$5.,1*67$//6237,21$21(/(9(/3$5.,1**$5$*(:,7+3$5.,1*67$//67+$7,1&/8'(&$567$&.(567+(352326('(;7(5,25(/(9$7,2167$.(6,76&8()520/26*$726+,*+6&+22//2&$7('1(;7'225$1'7+(0$1<6,*1,),&$17%5,&.6758&785(6/2&$7('210$,1675((7$1'1257+6$17$&58=,1'2:172:1/26*$726%8,/',1*0$7(5,$/6,1&/8'(%5,&.:$//635(&$67&21&5(7()$&$'('(7$,/,1*,521%$/&21,(60(7$/*5,':,1'2:6$1'&$19$6$:1,1*67+(6(0$7(5,$/6&$1%()281',1'2:172:1/26*$726,127+(5.(<%8,/',1*67+()2857+)/225,667(33('%$&.725('8&(7+(29(5$//$33($5$1&(2)0$66$1'+(,*+72)7+(352326('352-(&70$7(5,$/6217+()2857+)/225,1&/8'((;7(5,253/$67(5:$//635(&$67&21&5(7('(7$,/,1*$1'$6/23('&/$<7,/(522)72)857+(55('8&(7+(%8,/',1*0$66,1*287'2253$7,26:,7+:22'75(//,6)($785(6$1'/$1'6&$3,1*3529,'(2:1(569,(:6727+()227+,//6$1'6855281',1*%8,/',1*6352-(&7,1)250$7,21352-(&7'(6&5,37,213KRQH   &RQWDFW <LFKDR/L(PDLO \LFKDR#NUSDUFKLWHFWVFRP$5&+,7(&785$/ (0$,1675((7(0$,1675((7&&200(5&,$/5(6,'(17,$/0,;('86(0(5&$17,/($1'5(6,'(17,$/7<3(,%7<3(,9%6)6)6,7(6800$5<6,7($5($$5($&$/&8/$7,21%8,/',1**5266$5($&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($5(6,'(17,$/$5($$0(1,7<63$&(&200(5&,$/5(7$,/5(67$85$1781,765(6,'(17,$/'(16,7<352326('6,7(&29(5$*( *5281')/225%8,/',1*)22735,176) )$5(;,67,1*6,7(&29(5$*((;,67,1*%8,/',1*6,=(6+((7 ,1'(;352-(&7 7($0 9,&,1,7<0$3/ /$1'6&$3(3/$1/ /$1'6&$3(,0$*(5</6&+(0$7,&3/$17,1*3/$1/ 7+)/225522)'(&./$1'6&$3(3/$1/ +<'52=21(3/$1/ '(7$,/67 75((',6326,7,213/$17$5%25,675(32577$5%25,675(3257/$1'6&$3(3KRQH  &RQWDFW&ROLQ%O\(PDLOFEO\#WJSLQFFRP6) $& 6)6)6)6)6)6)81,76$&6)$ %$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 $ %$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 $ $/7(51$7(%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 $7<3,&$/81,73/$16$7<3,&$/81,73/$16$ %8,/',1*(/(9$7,216$ %8,/',1*(/(9$7,216$ 675((76&$3((/(9$7,21$ %8,/',1*0$7(5,$/6$1'),1,6+(6$ %8,/',1*6(&7,216$%$6(0(17'5,9(:$<6(&7,21$ :$//6(&7,216$1'(1/$5*('(/(9$7,216$ :$//6(&7,216$1'(1/$5*('(/(9$7,216$6,7(&52666(&7,21$75$6+(1&/2685(3/$16$1'(/(9$7,216$&$567$&.(563(&,),&$7,213$5.,1*&$/&8/$7,21727$/3$5.,1*67$//65(7$,/+286,1*6+$5('+286,1*$&&(66,%/(67$1'$5'67$//6 +& $&&(66,%/(9$167$//6 +&9 /(9(/(9&667$//6(9 67$1'$5' (9 $&&(66,%/( (9 9$1$&&(66,%/( 727$/%,&<&/(3$5.,1*/21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*6+2577(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*02725&<&/(69,6,7253$5.,1*237237         127(6 $6(3$5$7(%8,/',1*3(50,7,65(48,5(')257+(396<67(07+$7,65(48,5('%<7+(&$/,)251,$(1(5*<&2'(3(5)250$1&(2535(6&5,37,9(67$1'$5'67+(6(3$5$7(396<67(03(50,70867%(),1$/('35,2572,668$1&(2)&(57,),&$7(2)2&&83$1&< 7+,608/7,)$0,/<6758&785(:,//&203/<:,7+7+(72:1 6$//(/(&75,&$33/,$1&((/(&75,&9(+,&/($1'(1(5*<6725$*(6<67(05(48,5(0(176,1$&&25'$1&(:,7+72:1&2'( %8,/',1*,6)8//<635,1./(5('$'()(55('68%0,77$/,65(48,5(' ),5($/$50:,//%(3529,'('$'()(55('68%0,77$/,65(48,5(' ),5(+<'5$176:,//%(3529,'('6((&,9,/3/$16 7:2:$<&20081,&$7,216<67(0,6$'()(55('68%0,77$/ (0(5*(1&<5(6321'(55$',26<67(0,6$'()(55('68%0,77$/ 67$1'3,3(6'5$:,1*6$5($'()(55('68%0,77$/0$5.(75$7(81,76$))25'$%/(81,76727$/81,76   3KRQH&RQWDFW6DPLU3DWHO(PDLOVSDWHO#VDQGLVQHW& &29(56+((7& &216758&7,21127(6& &216758&7,21127(6& 7232*5$3+,&6859(<& 352326('3$5&(/,=$7,213/$1& *5$',1*$1''5$,1$*(3/$1& 87,/,7<3/$1& 67250:$7(50$1$*(0(173/$1& 6,/9$&(//'(7$,/&),5($&&(663/$1&),5(67$*,1*$5($&&216758&7,21'(7$,/6&&216758&7,21'(7$,/6&%03127(6&,9,/EXHIBIT 22Page 557 '(6,*1,0$*(5<$.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 558 $(5,$/0$3$  $(5,$/0$3   .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 559 3+27262)7+((;,67,1*6,7($  3+27262)7+((;,67,1*6,7(176&217(;76,7(3/$1$,0$*(62)6,7(%.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/9,(:)5200$,1675((79,(:)5200$,1675((7 9,(:)520&+85&+675((79,(:/22.,1*($67)520&+85&+675((7 9,(:/22.,1*6287+)520&+85&+675((79,(:)5200$,1675((7 %8,/',1*+(,*+7“ *(1(5$/127(6 (;,67,1*%8,/',1*+(,*+7“  (;,67,1*%8,/',1*$1'3$5.,1*/2772%('(02/,6+('Page 560 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/1(,*+%25+22'&217(;7$1(,*+%25+22'&217(;7176352-(&76,7(&217(;76,7(3/$1$,0$*(62)$'-$&(17%8,/',1*6%),567&+85&+2)&+5,676&,(17,67 %8,/',1*+(,*+7“ (/*$723(17+286( %8,/',1*+(,*+7“ +27(//26*$726 %8,/',1*+(,*+7“ /*65(&5($7,21 $'8/75(&5($7,21&(17(5  %8,/',1*+(,*+7“ /26*$726/,%5$5< %8,/',1*+(,*+7“ 3853/(21,21&$)( %8,/',1*+(,*+7“    (0$,167/26*$726&$ (0$,167/26*$726&$(0$,167/26*$726&$ (0$,167/26*$726&$9,//$$9(/26*$726&$(0$,167/26*$726&$Page 561 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/&,5&8/$7,213/$1$&+85&+675((7675((7+,*+6&+22/9,//$$9(18(  &2857($67 /(*(1'0$,17+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 562 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/23(163$&($5($&$/&8/$7,216$   23(163$&($5($&$/&8/$7,216  )/2253/$1/(9(/  )/2253/$1/(9(/  )/2253/$1/(9(/  )/2253/$1/(9(/  $5($&$/&8/$7,2161'5(9,6('68%0,77$/5(6,'(17$0(1,7<35,9$7(5(&5($7,21&20081,7<5(&5($7,216)6) 6)6)6)6) 6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6) 6) 6) 6)6)6) 6) 6) 6) 6) 6)6) 6)6) 6)6) 6) 6) 6) 6) 6)6)6) 6)6)6)6)6)$5($&$/&8/$7,216$0(1,7<6)$0(1,7<6)3(5&(17$*(2))52176(7%$&.$5($,6/$1'6&$3('  6)6) 6)6) 6)6)6)16)6)5(48,5(' )5217<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 5($5<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1( 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 563 Page 564 Page 565 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$6+$'2:678'<6800(562/67,&($0  6800(562/67,&(1221  6800(562/67,&(30  :,17(562/67,&($0  :,17(562/67,&(1221  :,17(562/67,&(30     6+$'2:678'<  ($670$,167/26*$726&$6725,(6($670$,167/26*$726&$6725,(6($670$,167/26*$726&$6725,(6($670$,167/26*$726&$6725,(6($670$,167/26*$726&$6725,(6&+85&+67/26*$726&$0$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$6725,(6($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$-81(-81(-81('(&(0%(5'(&(0%(5'(&(0%(5/26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$6725</26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$6725</26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$6725</26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$6725</26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$6725</26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$6725< 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$//276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5&+85&+67/26*$726&$0$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5&+85&+67/26*$726&$0$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5&+85&+67/26*$726&$0$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5&+85&+67/26*$726&$0$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5&+85&+67/26*$726&$0$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$($670$,167/26*$726&$/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5/276,=($&)/225$5($6)6725<)$5Page 566 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$(;,67,1*%8,/',1*6,7(3/$1   (;,67,1*%8,/',1*6,7(3/$1  ($670$,167%5,&. &21&5(7(522)3($.(/(9$7,21 “)((7&+85&+675((7($670$,1675((7+,*+6&+22/&2857                      '(02%8,/',1*($670$,16721(6725<&21&5(7(%8,/',1*522)3($.(/(9$7,21 “)((7($670$,167 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/(175< 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.(175<(175<(175<(;,67,1*2))6,7(675((775((7<3,&$/$$$$127(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16)25'(02/,7,212)(;,67,1*75((65()(572675((77)25216,7(75((672%(5(029('$1'5(3/$&(0(177$%/(6 1(:352326('75((6(;,67,1*3$5.,1*67$//6727$/)/225$5($6)(;,67,1*216,7(75((6  72%(5(029('6((6+((777 7)25216,7(75((672%(5(029('$1'5(3/$&(0(177$%/(62)1(:352326('75((6      (;,67,1*/$1'6&$3($1'&21&5(7(:$/.6Page 567 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$(;,67,1*%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216   :(67(/(9$7,21   1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/6287+(/(9$7,21  ($67(/(9$7,21  1257+(/(9$7,21           67)/22572522) 72522)  67)/22572522) 72522)  67)/22572522) 72522)  67)/22572522) 72522)          67)/22572522) 72522)  67)/22572522) 72522)  67)/22572522) 72522)  67)/22572522) 72522) (;,67,1*3/$17(5$1'(;7(5,25&2/8016(;,67,1*5(&(66('287'2256($7,1*$5($(;,67,1*6/23('522) 7<3,&$/ (;,67,1*0$6215<$1'3/$67(5:$//6 7<3,&$/ (;,67,1*:,1'2: 7<3,&$/ (;,67,1*'2256 7<3,&$/ Page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age 569 )/2253/$1/(9(/$&+85&+675((7($670$,1675((7.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/'2:172*5$5*(/(9(/)/2253/$1     81,76)$&200(5&,$/5(7$,/5(67$85$176),1'22575$6+52206)/21*7(50%,.(52206)  83'183'1$5($7$%8/$7,21/(9(/*5266$5($6)&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($&200(5&,$/5(7$,/5(67$85$175(6,'(17,$/6)  6)  6)6)(;7(5,25678':$//3523(57</,1(75$6+5220$1'75$6+&+87(67$,5687,/,7<52205$0372%$6(0(173$5.,1*/,1(2)%8,/',1*$%29(/2%%<(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(72%(5(029('/21*7(50%,.(522035,0$5<&200(5&,$/(175< :,'($7*5281'/(9(/,17(5,25678':$//.(<127(6,17(5,25'225  :,'( (;7(5,253$7,22535,9$7('(&.+$5'6&$3(6((/$1'6&$3(3/$1/,1(2)%8,/',1*%(/2:52//830(6+*$7(%521=(&2/256(('(7$,/216+((7$(/(9$7256:22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*%5,&.&/$'',1*0,'/,1(%$1'),5(+<'5$17),5('(3$570(17&211(&7,2167$1'3,3(.12;.(<%2;/2&.65(6,'(1760$,/%2;(6$1'3$5&(/'5236+2577(50%,.(3$5.,1* 67$//621+,*+6&+22/&2857$1'67$//6210$,1675((7 &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(0$%29(*5$'(87,/,7,(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16+((7/3/$173$/(77()25352326('3/$17,1*726&5((187,/,7,(6 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//'(&25$7,9(/,*+7),;785(02817('$7 7<3,&$/  81,76)%81,76)&81,76)'81,76)(81,76))81,76)*6)6) 6)6)23(172$%29($$ $$                6(7%$&.   6(7%$&.          75$6+(1&/2685(:75(//,6$%29(        +,*+6&+22/&2857 $  *$7(6(7%$&.     ),1,6+)/225 $$$$%,.(67232)5$03 6(7%$&.6)   6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.$(/(9$725(/(9$7255(48,5(' 5($5<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' )5217<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1( 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 6(7%$&.   $$%('5220%('5220%('5220%('5220$6)%&'(%('5220)%('5220*6)6)%('5220 6)%('5220 6)%('5220 6)%('5220  6)/(9(/727$/81,766)6)6)6)6)6)6)6) 3266,%/(287'2256($7,1*6)ƒƒ                      ƒƒ     9,6,2175,$1*/(   7<3 7<3                                773 7<3    7<3 6) 6)        7<3          ),1,6+)/225 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 570 )/2253/$1/(9(/$.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$//(9(/)/2253/$1 81,76)$81,76)*23(172%(/2:  83'183'1/(9(/*5266$5($6)5(6,'(17,$/81,77$%8/$7,21&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($5(6,'(17,$/6)  6)  6)%('5220$ 6)%&  '%('5220(%('5220%('5220*+  6)%('5220-%('5220.%('5220 6)%('5220 6)%('52206)%('5220 6))6)6)6)6)%('5220%('5220%('5220/(9(/727$/81,766)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)(;7(5,25678':$//3523(57</,1(75$6+5220$1'75$6+&+87(67$,5687,/,7<52205$0372%$6(0(173$5.,1*/,1(2)%8,/',1*$%29(/2%%<(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(72%(5(029('/21*7(50%,.(522035,0$5<&200(5&,$/(175< :,'($7*5281'/(9(/,17(5,25678':$//,17(5,25'225  :,'( (;7(5,253$7,22535,9$7('(&.+$5'6&$3(6((/$1'6&$3(3/$1/,1(2)%8,/',1*%(/2:52//830(6+*$7(%521=(&2/256(('(7$,/216+((7$(/(9$7256:22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*%5,&.&/$'',1*0,'/,1(%$1'),5(+<'5$17),5('(3$570(17&211(&7,2167$1'3,3(.12;.(<%2;/2&.65(6,'(1760$,/%2;(6$1'3$5&(/'5236+2577(50%,.(3$5.,1* 67$//621+,*+6&+22/&2857$1'67$//6210$,1675((7 &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(0$%29(*5$'(87,/,7,(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16+((7/3/$173$/(77()25352326('3/$17,1*726&5((187,/,7,(6 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//'(&25$7,9(/,*+7),;785(02817('$7 7<3,&$/81,76)%81,76))81,76)+81,76)-81,76).6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)$$ $$                                  87,/,7<522075$6+5220   81,76)&81,76)'81,76)( 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.$$$$ %0581,7   ),1,6+)/225 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.(/(9$725(/(9$725 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/    $$ 773          7<3 7<3                                   7<3 7<3  7<3 7<3         7<3 7<3   7<3 7<3%0581,7%0581,7 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 571 )/2253/$1/(9(/$.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$//(9(/)/2253/$1 81,76)$81,76)%81,76)*$0(1,7<63$&(6)  '183$5($7$%8/$7,215(6,'(17,$/81,77$%8/$7,21/(9(/*5266$5($6)&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($$0(1,7<63$&(5(6,'(17,$/6)  6)  6)6)%('5220$ 6)%&'6)  (%('5220)*6)6)  +6)-6)6)6)6)%('5220%('5220%('5220%('5220%('5220%('5220%('5220/(9(/727$/81,76%('5220%('5220%('52206)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)(;7(5,25678':$//3523(57</,1(75$6+5220$1'75$6+&+87(67$,5687,/,7<52205$0372%$6(0(173$5.,1*/,1(2)%8,/',1*$%29(/2%%<(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(72%(5(029('/21*7(50%,.(522035,0$5<&200(5&,$/(175< :,'($7*5281'/(9(/,17(5,25678':$//,17(5,25'225  :,'( (;7(5,253$7,22535,9$7('(&.+$5'6&$3(6((/$1'6&$3(3/$1/,1(2)%8,/',1*%(/2:52//830(6+*$7(%521=(&2/256(('(7$,/216+((7$(/(9$7256:22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*%5,&.&/$'',1*0,'/,1(%$1'),5(+<'5$17),5('(3$570(17&211(&7,2167$1'3,3(.12;.(<%2;/2&.65(6,'(1760$,/%2;(6$1'3$5&(/'5236+2577(50%,.(3$5.,1* 67$//621+,*+6&+22/&2857$1'67$//6210$,1675((7 &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(0$%29(*5$'(87,/,7,(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16+((7/3/$173$/(77()25352326('3/$17,1*726&5((187,/,7,(6 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//'(&25$7,9(/,*+7),;785(02817('$7 7<3,&$/81,76))81,76)+81,76)-6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)6)$$                      $$           87,/,7<522075$6+5220   81,76)&81,76)(81,76)' 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&.)25'(&. 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.$$$$ %0581,7   ),1,6+)/225 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.(/(9$725(/(9$725 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/    $$ 773         7<3 7<3                                  7<3 7<3 7<3 7<3         7<3 7<3   7<3 7<3 %0581,7%0581,7 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/*<0 :25.2875220Page 572 )/2253/$1/(9(/$.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$//(9(/)/2253/$1 81,76)$81,76)&  '181,76)'6)6)6)5(6,'(17,$/81,77$%8/$7,21/(9(/*5266$5($6)&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($$0(1,7<63$&(5(6,'(17,$/6)  6)  6)6)%('5220$%('5220%%('5220&%('5220'6)6)6)6)%('5220%('5220%('5220  /(9(/727$/81,766)6)6)6)6)(;7(5,25678':$//3523(57</,1(75$6+5220$1'75$6+&+87(67$,5687,/,7<52205$0372%$6(0(173$5.,1*/,1(2)%8,/',1*$%29(/2%%<(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(72%(5(029('/21*7(50%,.(522035,0$5<&200(5&,$/(175< :,'($7*5281'/(9(/,17(5,25678':$//.(<127(6,17(5,25'225  :,'( (;7(5,253$7,22535,9$7('(&.+$5'6&$3(6((/$1'6&$3(3/$1/,1(2)%8,/',1*%(/2:52//830(6+*$7(%521=(&2/256(('(7$,/216+((7$(/(9$7256:22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*%5,&.&/$'',1*0,'/,1(%$1'),5(+<'5$17),5('(3$570(17&211(&7,2167$1'3,3(.12;.(<%2;/2&.65(6,'(1760$,/%2;(6$1'3$5&(/'5236+2577(50%,.(3$5.,1* 67$//621+,*+6&+22/&2857$1'67$//6210$,1675((7 &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(0$%29(*5$'(87,/,7,(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16+((7/3/$173$/(77()25352326('3/$17,1*726&5((187,/,7,(6 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//'(&25$7,9(/,*+7),;785(02817('$7 7<3,&$/$$ 81,76)%                    $$                  75$6+$1'87,/,7<5220   (;7(5,25'(&.(;7(5,25'(&.(;7(5,25'(&.6)(;7(5,25'(&.   $$$                ),1,6+)/225(/(9$725(/(9$725 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%8,/783)/$7522)%8,/783)/$7522)$$         7<3 7<3 7<3 7<3                       7<3  7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/$0(1,7<63$&(6)0((7,1*5220/,%5$5< &$5'5220Page 573 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/522)3/$1$522)3/$1  723 7275(//,6 7236/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)76/23(3(5)7 7275(//,6 7275(//,67275(//,6  723 72'6/23(6/23()70,16/23()70,1 725,'*(6/23(6/23(6/23(6/23(6/23(6/23(6/23(5:/2'5:/2'5:/2'5:/2'5:/2'5:/2'6+((7.(<127(6%8,/7835,*,',168/$7,21&5,&.(70,16/23(3(5)2275:/2'5$,1:$7(5/($'(572(;7(1' %(<21'%/'*6/$%('*(&211(&772672506(:(56((&,9,/'5$:,1*629(5)/2:'5$,1522)'5$,1$1'3,3,1*6((3/80%,1*':*6 723 7232)3$5$3(772'7232)'(&.'(127(6(/(9$7,2132,17'(127(6522)6/23(',5(&7,21'(127(6(;7(172)%8,/783522)&5,&.(70,16/23(3(5)227*(1(5$/127(6127$//127(6$33/<727+,66+((7*(1(5$/&2175$&7256+$//9(5,)<7+(6/23(35,2572,167$//$7,212)522),1*0$7(5,$/$//$5($66+$//+$9($0,1,080326,7,9('5$,1$*(2)3(5)227$//522),1*6+$//%(&/$66$),5(5(6,67$17$//)8785(0(&+$1,&$/(48,30(17/2&$7,2166+$//%(9(5,),(':,7+7+($5&+,7(&7$1'6758&785$/(1*,1((535,2572,167$//$7,21522)02817('+9$&(48,30(176+$//%(6&5((1(')5209,(:%</2&$7,1*7+(81,76627+$77+(7232)7+(81,7,6%(/2:7+(7232)7+(3$5$3(7:$//25%<7+($'',7,212)522)6&5((16$//522)3(1(75$7,216 (/(&75,&$/0(&+$1,&$/3/80%,1*(7& 6+$//2&&8535,2572$33/,&$7,212)522),1*(/(9$7,216$5(*,9(1)5207+(%8,/',1*'$780  5()(5(1&((/(9213/$16 *(1(5$/&2175$&725,65(63216,%/()25&216758&7,21$1'9(5,),&$7,212)$//326,7,9(522)6/23(6720((7$1'3(5)250$66+2:121$//$5&+,7(&785$/&,9,//$1'6&$3(0(&+$1,&$/$1'6758&785$/'5$:,1*672& 7232)&$123<(/(9$7,216,1*/(3/<522),1*6<67(029(50(7$/'(&.3(56758&785$/'5$:,1*65816,1*/(3/<522)$7%$&.2)3$5$3(7:$//6785183$1'7(50,1$7(81'(50(7$/)/$6+,1*&$3,168/$7,21127(63523(57</,1(/,1(2)02180(17)($785($%29(*$0(7$/*877(5$1''2:163287&/$<7,/(522),1*:22'(175(//,6,5215$,/,1*%(/2::$//2)%8,/',1*%(/2:(/(9$72529(55,'(72%(6&5((1('%<522)3$5$3(7+9$&(48,30(17/2&$7,21)8785(393$1(//2&$7,216%8,/',1*3/80%,1*72%(3,3('727+(6(/2&$7,216)25)8785(3$1(/,167$//$7,21 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//$$                   $$                      $$        1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%8,/783)/$7522)%8,/783)/$7522) 723$$7232)522) Page 574 (9(9(9(9(9(9(9(99$1(9+&+&9$1(9.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 $%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21  &21&5(7(3(5,0(7(5:$//&21&5(7('5,9($&&(665$0387,/,7<5220/21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*(;,767$,56685)$&(02817('/('/,*+76  /21* /2%%<3523(57</,1(/,1(2)'5,9(:$<$%29(,17(5,25678':$//67$1'$5'3$5.,1*67$// ; $&&(66,%/(3$5.,1*67$//:,'(3$,17('3$5.,1*675,3(:+,7(6,*1$*($7$&&(66,%/(63$&(6.(<127(6(9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*16(('(7$,/$7$1'(03$5.,1*67$//67$&.(53$5.,1*67$//5$,6('&21&5(7(&85%02725&<&/(3$5.,1*67$// ; &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(067((/68332576)2567$&.(5 3$5.,1*29(5+$1*'13$5.,1*6800$5<%$6(0(17%%$6(0(17%727$/%$6(0(173$5.,1*67$//667$//6727$/3$5.,1*67$//65(7$,/+286,1*6+$5('+286,1*67$//6$&&(66,%/(9$167$//6 +&9 /(9(/(9&667$//6(/(&75,&9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&9(+,&/( 9$1$&&(66,%/( /21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*02725&<&/(3$5.,1*$&&(66,%/(67$1'$5'67$//6 +& 6)6)6)(/(&75,&9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' 727$//(9(/(9&667$//6  /(9(/%/(9(/% %5(*8/$567$1'$5'67$//6/(9(/% /2%%<87,/,7<522083                              $$   $$$$           5(7$,/+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*  +286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*7232)5$03%277202)5$036+$5('5(7$,/+286,1*+286,1*3$5.,1*727$/3$5.,1*7+,6/(9(/67$//667$//667$//6 3('(675,$1&,5&8/$7,217<3,&$/  +286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*83'1'183127(5(7$,/+28562)23(5$7,216+$//%(3267('$%29(($&+3$5.,1*67$//$07230125(6,'(17,$/3$5.,1*$//2:(''85,1*7+(6(7,0(67<3,&$/6,*17(;785('&21&5(7()/225(/(9$725(/(9$725),1,6+(')/225  7<3,&$/7<3,&$/ 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*$///(9(/62)*$5$*(3$5.,1*723529,'($/,*+7/(9(/720((77+(&%&&855(17'$6+('/('/,*+76$5(35(/,0,1$5<$1':,//%($'-867('720((77+(&%&&2'(5(48,5(0(176:,7+7+(%8,/',1*'(3$570(1768%0,77$/'5$:,1*6)25&216758&7,213(50,76/,*+7,1*127(   67$7('(16,7<%2186/$:5(6,'(17,$/3$5.,1*5(48,5(0(17180%(52)81,763$5.,1*67$//65(48,5('3$5.,1*67$//63529,'('9$1(99$1(9/(*(1'+$1',&$33$5.,1*+$1',&$39$13$5.,1*(/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 9$1 (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' (9&+$5*(5+286,1* +286,1*+286,1*            5$,6('&21&5(7($&&(663$7+),1,6+0$7(5,$/&2/25$1'7(;785(72%(68%0,77(':,7+%8,/',1*3(50,7'5$:,1*6   $'$6+$5('5(7$,/+286,1*67$//6         $&&(66,%/(9$167$//5(48,5(0(176  (967$//5(48,5(0(17  3$5.,1*67$//'(7$,/  6,*11763$5.,1*  $  29(5+$1*&85%:,'(3$,17('675,3(6'28%/(675,3('(7$,/$  (9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*1:,'(3$,17('675,3(6 $$,'(17,),&$7,216,*1 $&&(66,%/($,6/(6,*1$*($7$&&(66,%/(63$&(6/(9(/(9&6 5(48,5(')2567$//6 67$//65(48,5('3(5&$/*5((1%8,/',1*&2'(  5 5 5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*3('(675,$13$7+2)75$9(/7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 575 +&+&9$1(9(9(9(9(9(9(9(9.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21  %$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 &21&5(7(3(5,0(7(5:$//&21&5(7('5,9($&&(665$0387,/,7<5220/21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*(;,767$,56685)$&(02817('/('/,*+76  /21* /2%%<3523(57</,1(/,1(2)'5,9(:$<$%29(,17(5,25678':$//67$1'$5'3$5.,1*67$// ; $&&(66,%/(3$5.,1*67$//:,'(3$,17('3$5.,1*675,3(:+,7(6,*1$*($7$&&(66,%/(63$&(6.(<127(6(9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*16(('(7$,/$7$1'(03$5.,1*67$//67$&.(53$5.,1*67$//5$,6('&21&5(7(&85%02725&<&/(3$5.,1*67$// ; &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(067((/68332576)2567$&.(5 3$5.,1*29(5+$1*/2%%<%,.(5220 83                                 $$   $$$$           +286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*%277202)5$03 +286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*7<3+286,1*3$5.,1*727$/3$5.,1*7+,6/(9(/67$//667$//6 %,.(66((6+((7$'(7$,/)255$&.63(&,),&$7,216$1'',0(16,2163('(675,$1&,5&8/$7,21      8383  /21*7(507(;785('&21&5(7()/225(/(9$725(/(9$725),1,6+(')/2253$'+(,*+7   7<3,&$/7<3,&$/ 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$///(9(/62)*$5$*(3$5.,1*723529,'($/,*+7/(9(/720((77+(&%&&855(17'$6+('/('/,*+76$5(35(/,0,1$5<$1':,//%($'-867('720((77+(&%&&2'(5(48,5(0(176:,7+7+(%8,/',1*'(3$570(1768%0,77$/'5$:,1*6)25&216758&7,213(50,76/,*+7,1*127(                    /(9(/%$6(0(173$5.,1*,65(6(59(')2535,9$7(81,72:1(56129,6,725255(7$,/3$5.,1*$//2:('    3$5.,1*6800$5<727$/3$5.,1*67$//6 $&&(66,%/(67$1'$5'67$//6 +& $&&(66,%/(9$167$//6 +&9 02725&<&/(3$5.,1*/(9(/(9&667$//6(/(&75,&9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&9(+,&/( 9$1$&&(66,%/( /21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*(/(&75,&9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' 5(7$,/+286,1*6+$5('+286,1*/(9(/%%$6(0(17%%$6(0(17%727$/%$6(0(173$5.,1*67$//667$//667$//66)6)6)/(9(/% %5(*8/$567$1'$5'67$//6/(9(/%727$//(9(/(9&667$//6  67$7('(16,7<%2186/$:5(6,'(17,$/3$5.,1*5(48,5(0(17180%(52)81,763$5.,1*67$//65(48,5('3$5.,1*67$//63529,'('9$1(99$1(9/(*(1'+$1',&$33$5.,1*+$1',&$39$13$5.,1*(/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 9$1 (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' (9&+$5*(55$,6('&21&5(7($&&(663$7+),1,6+0$7(&2/25$1'7(;785(72%(68%0,77(':,7+/(9(/(9&6 5(48,5(')2567$//6 67$//65(48,5('3(5&$/*5((1%8,/',1*&2'(  5 3('(675,$13$7+2)75$9(/127(3529,'(.(<$&&(66)255(6,'(176$7/21*7(50%,.(522067+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 576 +&9$1(99$1(9(9(9+&(9(9(9(9(9(9(9+&+&9$1(9$/7(51$7(%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 $.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$3115(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$/7(51$7(%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21  &21&5(7(3(5,0(7(5:$//&21&5(7('5,9($&&(665$0387,/,7<5220/21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*(;,767$,56685)$&(02817('/('/,*+76  /21* /2%%<3523(57</,1(/,1(2)'5,9(:$<$%29(,17(5,25678':$//67$1'$5'3$5.,1*67$// ; $&&(66,%/(3$5.,1*67$//:,'(3$,17('3$5.,1*675,3(:+,7(6,*1$*($7$&&(66,%/(63$&(6.(<127(6(9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*16(('(7$,/$7$1'(03$5.,1*67$//67$&.(53$5.,1*67$//5$,6('&21&5(7(&85%02725&<&/(3$5.,1*67$// ; &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(067((/68332576)2567$&.(5 3$5.,1*29(5+$1*3$5.,1*6800$5<727$/%$6(0(173$5.,1* 6)727$/3$5.,1*67$//6$&&(66,%/(67$1'$5'67$//6 +& $&&(66,%/(9$167$//6 +&9 02725&<&/(3$5.,1*67$//6/(9(/(9&667$//6(/(&75,&9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&9(+,&/( 9$1$&&(66,%/( /21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*(/(&75,&9(+,&/( 67$&.(5 5(7$,/+286,1*6+$5('+286,1*/(9(/%%$6(0(17% 6)67$//6/(9(/%7$1'(03$5.,1*67$//667$&.(567$1'$5'3$5.,1*67$//6/(9(/%727$//(9(/(9&667$//6    /2%%<87,/,7<522083        +&          $$     $$                         +286,1*3$5.,1*727$/3$5.,1*7+,6/(9(/67$//667$//67<3+286,1*3('(675,$1&,5&8/$7,21%277202)5$03+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*%,.(5220%,.(6+286,1*+286,1*+286,1* /21*7(5083'1'183  6(($$1'$)25&$5/,)763(&,),&$7,21667$&.(567$//667$1'$5'67$//6 7(;785('&21&5(7()/225(/(9$725(/(9$725),1,6+(')/2253$'+(,*+7#67/(9(/5(6)5((63$&(#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6)5((63$&(#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/  1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$///(9(/62)*$5$*(3$5.,1*723529,'($/,*+7/(9(/720((77+(&%&&855(17'$6+('/('/,*+76$5(35(/,0,1$5<$1':,//%($'-867('720((77+(&%&&2'(5(48,5(0(176:,7+7+(%8,/',1*'(3$570(1768%0,77$/'5$:,1*6)25&216758&7,213(50,76/,*+7,1*127(6((6+((7$)25&$567$&.(563(&,),&$7,216$1'127(6&$567$&.(5127($$                           $&&(66,%/(9$167$//5(48,5(0(176  (967$//5(48,5(0(17  3$5.,1*67$//'(7$,/  $  29(5+$1*&85%:,'(3$,17('675,3(6'28%/(675,3('(7$,/$   $,'(17,),&$7,216,*1 $&&(66,%/($,6/(6,*1$*($7$&&(66,%/(63$&(6   (9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*1:,'(3$,17('675,3(6$9$1(99$1(9/(*(1'+$1',&$33$5.,1*+$1',&$39$13$5.,1*(/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 9$1 (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' (9&+$5*(55$,6('&21&5(7($&&(663$7+),1,6+0$7(&2/25$1'7(;785(72%(68%0,77(':,7+%8,/',1*3(50,7'5$:,1*6127(67$//6$1'$5()5((63$&(6$7($&+21(2)7+(6(/2&$7,216725(75,(9(5(6,'(176&$56/(9(/(9&6 5(48,5(')2567$//6 67$//65(48,5('3(5&$/*5((1%8,/',1*&2'( #67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6)5((63$&(#1'/(9(/#67/(9(/5(6#1'/(9(/67$7('(16,7<%2186/$:5(6,'(17,$/3$5.,1*5(48,5(0(17180%(52)81,763$5.,1*67$//65(48,5('3$5.,1*67$//63529,'(' 5 127(3529,'(.(<$&&(66)255(6,'(176$7/21*7(50%,.(522063('(675,$13$7+2)75$9(/7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 577 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/.(<127(6     .,7&+(1',1,1* ; /,9,1* ; &/ ; (;7(5,25%$/&21< ; 6)  35,0$5<%('5220 ; 35,0$5<%$7+ ; &/ ;        .,7&+(1 ; /,9,1* ; %('5220 ; :,& ; %$7+ ; :' ; &/ ; (;7(5,25%$/&21< ; 6)35,0$5<%('5220 ; 35,0$5<%$7+ ; :' ;    7<3,&$/81,73/$1$(;7(5,25678':$//(;7(5,25:,1'2:6<67(0,17(5,25678':$//,17(5,25'22581,7(175<'225(;7(5,25%$/&21<'(&.     &/ ; ',1,1* ; &/ ;  21(%('522081,76)7:2%('522081,76)Page 578 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/.(<127(6     .,7&+(1 ; /,9,1* ; (;7(5,25'(&. ; 6)  35,0$5<%('5220 ; 35,0$5<%$7+ ; :,& ; :' ;    7<3,&$/81,73/$1$(;7(5,25678':$//(;7(5,25:,1'2:6<67(0,17(5,25678':$//,17(5,25'22581,7(175<'225(;7(5,25%$/&21<'(&.%,.(5$&.63(&,),&$7,2161769(57,&$/%,.(6725$*(%< &<&/(6$)( :$//5$&.6<67(0 %,.(52203/$1 237  7:2%('522081,76)   ',1,1* ; &/ ; &/ ; %$7+ ; %('5220 ; /21*7(50%,.(5220%,.(6/21*7(50%,.(5220%,.(6/21*7(50%,.(5220%,.(6%,.(52203/$1 237 /21*7(50%,.(52203/$1 237 $77$&+0(1732,176 +(,*+7&/*3529,'(32,1762)$77$&+0(1772:$// +(,*+7&/* +(,*+7&/*  127(3529,'(.(<$&&(66)255(6,'(176$7/21*7(50%,.(52206127(3529,'(.(<$&&(66)255(6,'(176$7/21*7(50%,.(52206127(3529,'(.(<$&&(66)255(6,'(176$7/21*7(50%,.(522067+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 579 Page 580 Page 581 Page 582 Page 583 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%8,/',1*6(&7,216$%8,/',1*6(&7,21  67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)       /(9(/%/(9(/%  3/3/237,213$5.,1*5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/&,5&8/$7,21$0(1,7<$0(17,<67)/225 ))  1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)       /(9(/% /(9(/%   5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/&200(5&,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/&200(5&,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/%8,/',1*6(&7,21  .(<127(66,1*/(3/<522),1*6<67(029(50(7$/'(&.3(56758&785$/'5$:,1*6*$0(7$/*877(5$1''2:16328772%$&.63/$6+&/$<7,/(522):22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*(;7(5,25678':$//,17(5,25678':$//%5,&.9(1((5$1'&(0(173/$67(56<67(029(5(;7(5,25)$&(6&(0(173/$67(56<67(029(5(;7(5,25)$&(6$/80,1806725()5217:,1'2:6<67(0:,7+&(17(56(7&/($5,168/$7('*/$=,1*6758&785$/%($06((6758&785$/(1*,1((5,1*'5$:,1*6%$77,168/$7,21$7:$//6&21&5(7(6/$%)281'$7,216((6758&785$/':*6%(/2:*5$'(&21&5(7(:$//:,7+:$7(53522),1*3(5,0(7(5'5$,1$*(6<67(03(5*(27(&+1,&$/5(48,5(0(176$:1,1*672%($0,19(57,&$/&/($5$1&(2) )5203('(675,$13$7+:$<35(&$67&251,&(+9$&(48,30(17/2&$7,21(/(9$72529(55,'(6&5((1('%(+,1'3$5$3(7:$//&,5&&,5&&,5&&,5&5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/3/3/67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)       /(9(/% /(9(/%   67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)       /(9(/%/(9(/%       6(7%$&. 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.   0,1&/($50,1&/($5 0,1&/($5 0,1&/($5+,*+6&+22/&2857&+85&+675((7($670$,1675((7     1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/237,213$5.,1*  237,213$5.,1*237,213$5.,1*(;,67,1*%8,/',1*$1'6,7(*5$'((;,67,1*%8,/',1*$1'6,7(*5$'(Page 584 (9(9.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%$6(0(17'5,9(:$<6(&7,216 3/$16$/(9(/%/(9(/% 6/23(/21*7(50%,.(5220 /(9(/%/(9(/%  6/23(%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ %$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 3523(57</,1(.(<127(6(;,767$,56&21&5(7(3(5,0(7(5:$//&21&5(7('5,9($&&(665$03/,1(2)'5,9(:$<$%29(87,/,7<5220%,.(5220&+85&+675((7($670$,1675((7 &/($56/23(%$6(0(17'5,9(:$<6(&7,21 &+85&+675((77232)5$03%277202)5$0387,/,7<5220      685)$&(02817('/('/,*+76  /21* /,*+7/(9(/6720((7&%&5(48,5(0(1763/3/83'15 5 5  1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/1),567)/225  &/($51               6725$*(5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*%,.(522083          +286,1*+286,1*+286,1*%277202)5$03+286,1*+286,1*%,.(66((6+((7$'(7$,/)255$&.63(&,),&$7,216$1'',0(16,21683/21*7(50   6725$*(    83'1     $$(;,67,1*%8,/',1*$1'6,7(*5$'(7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 585 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/:$//6(&7,216 (1/$5*('(/(9$7,216$  ),567)/225(1/$5*('6287+(/(9$7,21    6(&21')/225  7+,5')/225  )2857+)/225  72522)  72522)  ),567)/225  6(&21')/225  7+,5')/225  )2857+)/225  72522).(<127(66,1*/(3/<522),1*6<67(029(50(7$/'(&.3(56758&785$/'5$:,1*6*$0(7$/*877(5$1''2:16328772%$&.63/$6+&/$<7,/(522):22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*(;7(5,25678':$//,17(5,25678':$//%5,&.9(1((5$1'&(0(173/$67(56<67(029(5(;7(5,25)$&(6&(0(173/$67(56<67(029(5(;7(5,25)$&(6$/80,1806725()5217:,1'2:6<67(0:,7+&(17(56(7&/($5,168/$7('*/$=,1*6758&785$/%($06((6758&785$/(1*,1((5,1*'5$:,1*6%$77,168/$7,21$7:$//6&21&5(7(6/$%)281'$7,216((6758&785$/':*6%(/2:*5$'(&21&5(7(:$//:,7+:$7(53522),1*3(5,0(7(5'5$,1$*(6<67(03(5*(27(&+1,&$/5(48,5(0(176$:1,1*672%($0,19(57,&$/&/($5$1&(2) )5203('(675,$13$7+:$<35(&$67&251,&(+9$&(48,30(17/2&$7,21(/(9$72529(55,'(6&5((1('%(+,1'3$5$3(7:$//  6(&21')/225  7+,5')/225  )2857+)/225  72522)  72522)  6(&21')/225  7+,5')/225  )2857+)/225  72522)(1/$5*('6287+(/(9$7,21  $:$//6(&7,21  :$//6(&7,21  $  72522)  72522)237,213$5.,1*5(7$,/5(67$85$17/2%%< ))( ))( ))( ))   72&$123<       1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/),1,6+)/225 5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/),1,6+)/225 5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/237,213$5.,1*  237,213$5.,1*237,213$5.,1*     ),567)/225   ),567)/225(;,67,1*%8,/',1*$1'6,7(*5$'((;,67,1*%8,/',1*$1'6,7(*5$'(    6) 6)  6)  6)  6)  6)6)   6)*/$66$5($)256287+%8,/',1*)$&$'(,66) %8,/',1*)$&$'(*/$66$5($)256287+($67%8,/',1*)$&$'(,66) %8,/',1*)$&$'(*/$66$5($)25($67%8,/',1*)$&$'(,66) %8,/',1*)$&$'( 6) 6)  6)(1/$5*('6287+&200(5&,$/(/(9$7,21 0$,167   (1/$5*('($67&200(5&,$/(/(9$7,21 +,*+6&+22/&7   (1/$5*('6287+($67&200(5&,$/(/(9$7,21   7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/*/$66$5($&$/&8/$7,216 Page 586 Page 587 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/6,7(&52666(&7,216$  0,1&/($567)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)  /(9(/%/(9(/% 3/237,213$5.,1*&,5&8/$7,215(6,'(17,$/%8,/',1*6(&7,21  .(<127(66,1*/(3/<522),1*6<67(029(50(7$/'(&.3(56758&785$/'5$:,1*6*$0(7$/*877(5$1''2:16328772%$&.63/$6+&/$<7,/(522):22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*(;7(5,25678':$//,17(5,25678':$//%5,&.9(1((5$1'&(0(173/$67(56<67(029(5(;7(5,25)$&(6&(0(173/$67(56<67(029(5(;7(5,25)$&(6$/80,1806725()5217:,1'2:6<67(0:,7+&(17(56(7&/($5,168/$7('*/$=,1*6758&785$/%($06((6758&785$/(1*,1((5,1*'5$:,1*6%$77,168/$7,21$7:$//6&21&5(7(6/$%)281'$7,216((6758&785$/':*6   1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%(/2:*5$'(&21&5(7(:$//:,7+:$7(53522),1*3(5,0(7(5'5$,1$*(6<67(03(5*(27(&+1,&$/5(48,5(0(176$:1,1*672%($0,19(57,&$/&/($5$1&(2) )5203('(675,$13$7+:$<35(&$67&251,&(+9$&(48,30(17/2&$7,21(/(9$72529(55,'(6&5((1('%(+,1'3$5$3(7:$//&,5&8/$7,21&,5&8/$7,21&,5&8/$7,21 /26*$72681,7('0(7+2',67&+85&+7+(0$621,&+$// 6(7%$&.&,5&8/$7,21/2%%<$0(1,7< %8,/',1*6(&7,21  %8,/',1*6(&7,21    0,1&/($5      67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)  /(9(/%/(9(/%       3/  6(7%$&./*65(&5($7,21/26*$726+,*+6&+22/ /*65(&5($7,21$'8/75(&5($7,21&(17(5&+85&+675((7 0,1&/($5 0,1&/($53/ 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.3/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/5(6,'(17,$/$0(1,7<237,213$5.,1*($670$,1675((7 /26*$7261(,*+%25+22'&(17(5 +,*+6&+22/&285767)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)  /(9(/% 3/237,213$5.,1*&,5&8/$7,217+(0$621,&+$// 6(7%$&.  0,1&/($5    67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)        3/ 6(7%$&./*65(&5($7,21/26*$726+,*+6&+22//(9(/% 0,1&/($5      &,5&8/$7,21&,5&8/$7,21&,5&8/$7,21      237,213$5.,1*237,213$5.,1*     67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)  /(9(/%/(9(/%          67)/225 )) 1')/225 5')/225 7+)/225 72522)   %2522)  /(9(/%/(9(/%         +,*+6&+22/&2857Page 588 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/75$6+(1&/2685(3/$16 (/(9$7,216$ *$5%$*(%,1 *$5%$*(%,1 *$5%$*(%,1   *$5%$*(%,1       (1/$5*('75$6+(1&/2685(3/$1  75$6+(1&/2685(522)3/$175$6+(1&/2685(:(67(/(9$7,2175$6+(1&/2685(($67(/(9$7,2175$6+(1&/2685(1257+(/(9$7,21 0(7$/522),1*29(567((/)5$0(:,7+,17(*5$7(''5$,1$*($1'/,*+7,1*     :22'&/$'',1*   78%(67((/32670(7$/522),1*29(567((/)5$0(:22'&/$'',1*78%(67((/32670(7$/522),1*29(567((/)5$0(:22'&/$'',1*78%(67((/32670(7$/522),1*29(567((/)5$0( 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/&+85&+675((7&+85&+675((7   &<%,1;;0(7$/522)$%29(75$6+5220&21&5(7(3$'3$5.,1*0(6+*$7('5$,16((&,9,/3/$166+((7&)25'5$,1127(+27 &2/':$7(5Page 589 &$567$&.(563(&,),&$7,216$.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 590  RO ECT ESCRI TION E MA -3LEGEN E ISTING*:(33,9 RO OSE ••A RE IATIONS3,9-3&29(56+((7&CI IL SHEET IN E .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/EAST MAIN STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURT EASTMAIN STREET EASTMAIN STREETLOS GATOS MI E USE ESTING TENTATI E MA ORCON OMINIUM UR OSES EAST MAIN STLOS GATOS CALI ORNIA ICINIT MA SITEO NERPage 591 &216758&7,21127(6&.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/ ISCRE ANCIESUTILIT OTHOLE NOTECONSTRUCTION NOTES LOO ONEENCROACHMENT NOTE UN ERGROUN OR CAUTIONA LICA LE IRE CO E NOTES IRE ESIGN NOTE EMOLITION NOTES IMENSIONS A EMENT SECTIONSCONSTRUCTION ENCERECOR RA ING NOTEHA AR OUS MATERIALS NOTEGENERAL UTILIT NOTESPage 592 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/&216758&7,21127(6& RO ECT SITE MAINTENANCE TREE ROTECTION UST CONTROL NOTESGENERAL SITE NOTESPage 593 CHURCH STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURT7232*5$3+,&6859(<&.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/0'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FTPage 594 CHURCH STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURTLT352326('3$5&(/,=$7,213/$1&.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/0'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FT4TH REVISED SUBMITTAL02.18.2025Page 595 CHURCH STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURT*5$',1*$1''5$,1$*(3/$1&0'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FTLEGEN .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/EARTH OR CALCULATIONSGRA ING NOTES Page 596 EAST MAIN STREETCHURCH STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURT.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/;;;; 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$//(*(1'67250'5$,1127(66$1,7$5<6(:(5127(6:$7(56<67(0127(60'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FT87,/,7<3/$1&(;&$9$7,21127(602.18.2025Page 597 EAST MAIN STREETCHURCH STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURT'0$'0$'0$'0$'0$'0$.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/+<'5202',),&$7,21127(6,7(75($70(17$5($127(67250:$7(50$1$*(0(17127(667250:$7(50$1$*(0(173/$1/(*(1'0'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FT67250:$7(50$1$*(0(173/$1&Page 598 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/6,/9$&(//'(7$,/&Page 599 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$//(*(1'($670$,1675((7&+85&+675((7+,*+6&+22/&28570'1 INCH = 40'20'10'4'20 FT),5($&&(663/$1&127(6),5()/2:5(48,5(0(176352-(&7'(6&5,37,21Page 600  “ “ƒ “.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/),5(67$*,1*$5($&($670$,1675((7&+85&+675((7+,*+6&+22/&28570'1 INCH = 80'40'20'8'40 FT/(*(1'($670$,1675((7+,*+6&+22/&2857&+85&+675((70'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FT0'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FT0'1 INCH = 20'10'5'2'10 FT4TH REVISED SUBMITTAL02.18.2025Page 601 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/&216758&7,21'(7$,/6&Page 602 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/&216758&7,21'(7$,/6&Page 603 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/3/$11,1*3/$1&+(&.5(63216(6 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/ 7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/%03127(6&Page 604 4TH REVISED SUBMITTAL02.18.2025Page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age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age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age 608 ;,1*.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/7+(,1&*X]]DUGR3DUWQHUVKLS+<'52=21(3/$1/ 6&$/(     (0$,1675((7&+85&+675((7+,*+6&+22/&75(7$,//2%%<*$5$*(5$033523(57</,1(+<'52=21(/(*(1'/RZ:DWHU8VH0RGHUDWH:DWHU8VH.(<:8&2/69$/8(Page 609 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/7+(,1&*X]]DUGR3DUWQHUVKLS'(7$,/6/)LQLVK*UDGH)DFHRI%XLOGLQJ)DFHRI%XLOGLQJQGIORRUUGIORRU6HFWLRQ$W(JUHVV:LQGRZ/DGGHU3DG'LDJUDP6FDOH  UGIORRURSHUDEOHHJUHVVZLQGRZVLOO/DGGHUDWGHJUHHVWRUGIORRUZLQGRZVLOOQGIORRURSHUDEOHHJUHVVZLQGRZVLOO/DGGHUDWGHJUHHVWRQGIORRUZLQGRZVLOO 3ODQ (4(4/DGGHUSDG3ODVWLF5HLQIRUFHG&HOO3DYHUV/DGGHUSDGFRPSDFWHGVRLORUSDYLQJSHUSODQ/DGGHU   &/RIRSHUDEOHHJUHVVZLQGRZRUSDWLR6LOORIHJUHVVZLQGRZ6LOORIHJUHVVZLQGRZƒƒ)LQLVK*UDGH)DFHRI%XLOGLQJQGIORRUUGIORRU6HFWLRQ$W3ULYDWH%DOFRQ\UGIORRUEDOFRQ\JXDUGUDLO/DGGHUDWGHJUHHVWRUGIORRUEDOFRQ\JXDUGUDLOQGIORRUEDOFRQ\JXDUGUDLO/DGGHUDWGHJUHHVWRQGIORRUEDOFRQ\JXDUGUDLO /DGGHUSDG3ODVWLF5HLQIRUFHG&HOO3DYHUV  $VVXPHG $VVXPHG $VVXPHG $VVXPHGƒƒ 0LQ 0LQ 0LQ 2& 0LQ3ODQ2Q*UDGHZ&RQFUHWH&RQGLWLRQ%LNH5DFN6FDOH   0LQ%LNH5DFN,QVWDOOSHU0DQXIDFWXUHU V6SHFLILFDWLRQV(GJHRI%XLOGLQJRU3DYLQJ6HH/D\RXW3ODQVIRU&RQGLWLRQV3HGHVWULDQ&RQFUHWH3DYLQJ3HGHVWULDQ&RQFUHWH3DYLQJ  (PEHGGLQJ7KUHDGHG5RGV6HH0DQXIDFWXUHU V6SHFLILFDWLRQVPage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ingle-family residential option not applicable replacementoption for this project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age 611 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/7+(,1&*X]]DUGR3DUWQHUVKLS$5%25,675(32577 6&$/(      Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 Summary The inventory contains 10 trees comprised of 5 species. Five of these were street trees. The following plan was reviewed to evaluate impacts to trees: •L1.0 Landscape Plan (The Guzzardo Partnership 1/14/24). •Civil plans (Sandis 8/16/24) Two street trees #170 and #176 would be preserved. The remaining trees would be removed to accommodate development. Introduction Assignment Provide an inventory and assessment of the trees located at 151 E. Main St. in Los Gatos, CA. The assessment shall include the species, size (trunk diameter), condition (health, structure, form), and suitability for preservation ratings. Prepare a report with tree preservation guidelines. Limits of the Assignment 1.Information in this report is limited to the condition of trees during my tree assessment on December 8, 2023. 2.Tree risk assessments were not performed. 3.Landscape plans were available for review. Assessment Methods Trees were numbered #170-179. The assessment included all trees within and immediately adjacent to development area. Tree condition was based on three components: health, structure, and form. The assessment considered both the health and structure for a combined condition rating (Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Ed. ISA 2019). 5 (81-100%) - Excellent = High vigor, nearly ideal and free of defects. 4 (61-80%) - Good = Normal vigor, well-developed structure. No significant insect or disease damage. Defects are minor and can be corrected. Function and aesthetics not compromised. 3 (41-60 %) - Fair = Reduced vigor, damage, dieback, or pest problems, at least one significant structural problem or multiple moderate defects requiring treatment. Major asymmetry or deviation from the species normal habit, function and aesthetics compromised. 2 (21-40%) - Poor = Unhealthy and declining appearance with poor vigor, abnormal foliar color, size or density with potential irreversible decline. One serious structural defect or multiple (The Civil Engineer's plans were also reviewed to evaluate tree impacts.)  Los Gatos Mixed Use 151 E. Main St. Los Gatos, CA 95030 December 20, 2023; updated October 15, 2024 Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting 221 Main St. #83 Los Altos CA 94023 650.935.5822 Prepared for: The Guzzardo Partnership, Inc. Pier 9, The Embarcadero, Suite 115 San Francisco, CA 94111 Prepared by: Deanne Ecklund (Goff), ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #647 24, 2024/RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW  'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHU Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 significant defects that cannot be corrected and failure may occur at any time. Significant asymmetry and compromised aesthetics and intended use. 1 (6-20%) - Very Poor = Poor vigor, dying with little live foliage. Tree in irreversible decline. Severe defects with the likelihood of failure being probable or imminent. Aesthetically poor with little or no function in the landscape. 0 (0-5%) - Dead/Unstable = Dead or failure imminent. A tree’s suitability for preservation considers its health, structure, age, species characteristics (e.g. disease resistance, drought tolerance), species tolerances to root disturbance and other construction impacts, species invasiveness, and its potential to continue to benefit the site. Trees were rated either “high” “moderate” or “low” suitability for preservation. High = Trees with good vigor, structural stability, and potential to function well long after construction. Moderate = Trees with fair vigor, and with health or structural defects that can be mitigated with treatment. These trees will require more management and monitoring before, during, and after construction, and may have shorter life spans after development. Low = Trees are expected to decline during or after construction regardless of management. The species or individual tree may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site. Appraisal of value The reproduction value of trees was determined by using the Trunk Formula Technique methodology described in the Guide for Plant Appraisal, Tenth Edition.  /RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW  'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHU Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 Observations Ten (10) trees were measured and evaluated. Most trees were in poor and fair condition (Table 1), with varying degrees of crown dieback. Table 1. Tree species condition + quantity Species name Scientific name Poor (1-2) Fair (3) Good (4-5) Total Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica - - 1 1 Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 1 1 - 2 Southern magnolia Magnollia grandiflora 3 1 - 4 Callery pear Pyrus calleryana 1 1 - 2 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia - - 1 1 Total 5 3 2 10 50% 30% 20% A semi-mature coast live oak (#174) was in good condition. Soil level in its planter was approximately 2’ above sidewalk grade. Two evergreen pears were in fair and poor condition. Both had been previously topped and had many small branches (epicormic shoots) emerging from pruned ends. If left unmanaged, these shoots can become susceptible to failure. Southern magnolia street trees were in poor to fair condition. All three trees had significant trunk wounds on their southwest sides caused by sunburn. Town of Los Gatos Tree Protection Ordinance The Town of Los Gatos municipal code (Chapter 29, Sec. 29.10.0960) Protected Tree definition includes the following description. (4)All trees which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch circumference) of any trunk, when removal relates to any review for which zoning approval or subdivision approval is required. Based on trunk size, all 10 trees evaluated for this report were considered Protected, and a permit is required for the removal of any Protected tree. /RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW  'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHU Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 Discussion and Recommendations I reviewed the Landscape Plan sheet L1.0 (The Guzzardo Partnership 1/14/24) and Civil Plan Set (Sandis 8/16/24) to evaluate tree impacts. The design requires that three on-site trees must be removed. Three street trees in poor condition will be removed and replaced. Street trees #170 and 176, which is outside development area, will be preserved and protected. Street tree #170 is expected to incur root impacts from sidewalk replacement. The tree is relatively young and the species tolerant of root impacts from construction. The following tree protection measures shall be employed to protect the tree in place. •Type III tree protection shall be used to protect the trunk of tree #170. •Type I tree protection shall be used to protect trees #177 and 178. •Existing sidewalk shall be removed in a manner that avoids damaging roots. •Any roots requiring pruning for sidewalk forms shall be cut cleanly at the edge of excavation. Adhering to these and the tree preservation guidelines in the next section will ensure root impacts are kept to a minimum. A total of six trees will be removed for development, six of which require mitigation. Tree removal and mitigation The Table 2 indicates the recommended replacement values. The applicant will be required to replace 6 protected trees according to the ordinance. Alternatively, it may be possible to create an approved landscape plan or provide an in-lieu payment. Table 2. Town of Los Gatos tree canopy replacement standard Canopy Size of Removed Tree Replacement Requirement (2)(4) 10 feet or less Two 24-inch box trees More than 10 feet to 25 feet Three 24-inch box trees More than 25 feet to 40 feet Four 24-inch box trees; or Two 36-inch box trees More than 40 feet to 55 feet Six 24-inch box trees; or Three 36-inch box trees Greater than 55 feet Ten 24-inch box trees; or Five 36-inch box trees The Landscape plan sheets and the Civil Engineer's plans werereviewed to evaluate tree impacts.Page 612 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$&+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31$315(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/7+(,1&*X]]DUGR3DUWQHUVKLS$5%25,675(32577 6&$/(     Los Gatos Mixed Use Tree Inventory Map 151 E. Main St. (#170-179)Deanne Ecklund Certified Arborist WE9067-A Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting December 20, 2023171179170178177176175174173172/RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW  'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHU Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 (2) Often, it is not possible to replace a single large, older tree with an equivalent tree(s). In this case, the tree may be replaced with a combination of both the Tree Canopy Replacement Standard and in-lieu payment in an amount set forth by Town Council resolution paid to the Town Tree Replacement Fund. (4) Replacement Trees shall be approved by the Town Arborist and shall be of a species suited to the available planting location, proximity to structures, overhead clearances, soil type, compatibility with surrounding canopy and other relevant factors. Replacement with native species shall be strongly encouraged. Tree Protection Guidelines Design recommendations 1.Provide sufficient clearance between trees and proposed features to avoid damage to roots. 2.Enlarge tree wells to increase water access and reduce sidewalk damage potential. 3.Underground services including utilities, sub-drains, water or sewer shall be routed around the tree protection zone (TPZ). a.Where encroachment cannot be avoided, special construction techniques such as hand digging or tunneling under roots shall be employed where necessary to minimize root injury. 4.Utilize novel design and construction techniques to preserve roots where utilities or features must be within tree TPZs. Pre-construction 1.The construction superintendent shall meet with the Project Arborist before beginning work to discuss work procedures and tree protection. 2.Fence street trees with Type III fencing prior to demolition, grubbing, or grading. a.Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout only: orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with two-inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. /RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW  'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHU Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 b.Duration: Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction permits are issued and remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence. c.Warning sign: Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an 8.5x11 sign stating: "Warning—Tree Protection Zone—This fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025." i.Do not attach signs, wire, or rope to any protected tree. 3.Pruning trees to provide construction and access clearance may be required. a.All pruning shall be done by a State of California Licensed Tree Contractor (C61/D49). All pruning shall be done by Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker in accordance with the Best Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of Arboriculture, 2019) and adhere to the most recent editions of the American National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300). b.All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California Fish and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent possible, tree pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding season. Breeding bird surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified biologists should be involved in establishing work buffers for active nests. Construction 1.Tree protection fence layout must be approved by the Project Arborist. Fences must remain in this configuration throughout construction. a.No construction activities shall occur within tree protection fencing. Construction activities include, but are not limited to: i.Vehicle or pedestrian traffic ii.Materials storage iii.Vehicle exhaust iv.Concrete cleanout water dumping b.If tree protection fencing dimensions need to be reduced to allow for site access, protect tree protection zones against compaction by laying full sheets of plywood attached together with tie plates over coarse bark mulch. c.After construction is complete, tree protection fencing may be moved as needed for hardscape and landscape installation. Contact Project Arborist prior to removal. 2.Demolition of paving, utilities, and features within tree protection zones shall be done carefully avoid damaging roots. 3.If live roots over one inch in diameter are encountered at any time, in any location, prune with a sharp saw or bypass pruners, as close as practical to the edge of the disturbed area. 4.Any major root pruning (roots 2” and greater in diameter) shall receive the prior approval of and be supervised by the Project Arborist. 5.If excavated areas are to be left open for longer than 3-4 days, cover exposed or severed roots with burlap or jute fabric. /RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW  'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHU Calyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 a.Irrigate fabric daily to keep fabric moist until excavation work is completed. 6.Any additional tree pruning needed for clearance during construction must be performed by a Certified Arborist and not by construction personnel. Violations 1.If a violation occurs prior to proposed development, then discretionary applications and/or building permit applications will not be accepted or processed by the Town until the violation has been remedied to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director. 2.Incomplete applications will not be processed further until the violation has been remedied. If an application has been deemed complete, it may be denied by the Director or forwarded to the Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial at the Director's discretion. Mitigation measures as determined by the director may be imposed as a condition of approval. 3.For those trees on public property, replacement is to be determined by the Director of Community Development or by the Director of Parks and Public Works. 4.If a violation occurs during construction, the Town may issue a stop work order suspending and prohibiting further activity on the property pursuant to the grading, demolition, and/or building permit(s) (including construction, inspection, and issuance of certificates of occupancy) until a mitigation plan has been filed with and approved by the Director, agreed to in writing by the property owner(s) or the applicant(s) or both, and either implemented or guaranteed by the posting of adequate security in the discretion of the Director. Maintenance of remaining trees Because of changes in the growing environment after construction, preserved trees may require additional maintenance. Tree health and structural stability should be monitored. Occasional pruning, fertilization, mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation may be required. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases; therefore, annual inspection for hazard potential is recommended. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about my observations or recommendations. Sincerely, Deanne Ecklund (Goff) Registered Consulting Arborist #647 ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor /RV*DWRV0L[HG8VH $UERULVW5HSRUW 'HFHPEHUXSGDWHG2FWREHUCalyx Tree + Landscape Consulting, LLC decklund.arborist@gmail.com 650.935.5822 Tag # Common name Trunk Diam. (in.) Est. Canopy Diam. (ft.) Condition (1=poor 5=excel.) Tree Disposition Suitability for Preservation Appraised Value Expected Impact Saved/ Removed/Pruned Height range (ft.) Comments 170 Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica 7 19 5 Street tree High $ 1,800.00 Moderate Save 15 Street tree; good form and structure. 171 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 8 12 2 Street tree Low $ 650.00 - Remove 12 Street tree; nice crown; large trunk wound from base to 5'. 172 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 7 7 2 Street tree Low $ 550.00 - Remove 10 Street tree; small crown; large trunk wound from base to 5'. 173 Evergreen pear Pyrus kawakamii 19 20 3 Protected Moderate $ 5,050.00 - Remove 20 Previously topped at ~12'; good form, fair structure. 174 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 26.5 34 4 Large protected High $ 33,250.00 - Remove 23 Good form and structure; minor thinning in upper crown. 175 Evergreen pear Pyrus kawakamii 12 12 2 Protected Low $ 1,300.00 - Remove 15 Previously topped at ~12'; poor form and structure. 176 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 6 18 3 Street tree Low $ 650.00 n/a Save 13 Street tree; dense crown; large trunk wound from base to 5'. 177 Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 2.5,2.5,2 10 2 Exempt (species) Low $ 400.00 Moderate Save 11 Growing against building; leans east; poor form and structure. 178 Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 7,6.5 15 3 Exempt (species) Low $ 550.00 Moderate Save 9 Growing against building; leans east; fair form and structure. 179 Southern magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 5 8 2 Street tree Low $ 500.00 - Remove 13 Street tree; large trunk wound; thin crown. Tree Assessment Physical Conditions,Reason for RemovalLow suitability for preservation.Conflict with site plan.Conflict with site plan.Low suitability for preservation.Low suitability for preservation.Conflict with site plan.Page 613 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 614