Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Item 4 - Staff Report with Exhibits 2 through 22
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. Iunderstand that the town is required to meet certain high-density requirements, as thestate 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 heavywith 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 theother direction. Will a traffic light be installed there? The intersection next to thedevelopment at High School Court at Main St. is already challenging to exit due tovisibility of cars parked along Main Street. I read the parking proposals and it looks like neither one meets the minimum townstandards. 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 parkingrequirements, as members fill up most of the street parking spots during the daybecause 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 proposeddevelopment 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 itsa pretty ugly existing building and would be an improvement, I am worried about kids safety and parkingduring the building stage. Most of us parents have to drop off our kids along Church in the morning, as the traffic is impossible outfront of the school and also pick up at 2.30 or 4 on the same street so unless the work is done outside ofthose hours its going to cause havoc safely dropping off our kids with material supply / constructiontrucks, 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 spacemonkeys outside of classes and never look where they are going, often glued to their phones with headsdown so I think the safety is going to be a huge concern unless you can get a huge chunk of the builddone during the summer holidays. Hopefully the parking underneath the garage will be enough for the residents to not also have to use theparking along church street as its already difficult to pick up/drop off with cafe users, church goers and thepre-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 andprobably others upcoming. Here are my concerns. Comment Letter #1 ____Page 480 1.Wildfire: I guess the NOI can bypass LRAs (Local Responsibility Areas). Guesswhat is right across the street from the project? The LRA VHFHSZ (Very HighFire Hazard Severity Zone). Yes, red is bad (attached two maps for yourreference). Wow, if the Mitigated Negative Declaration is able to workaround theLRA and refer only to the SRA...BAD. This is akin to just saying, "Nothing to seehere!" I realize the SRA may be the only requirement for the NOI, but onceagain WOW! Why can't the LRA be recognized in the Wildfire section of theNOI. I am getting a really bad feeling that NOI's are just a check the boxexercise. I hope I am wrong! 2.Transportation: not a single word about Emergency Evacuation. At what point isone more vehicle, one vehicle too many? If we have a wildfire above the TownHall, there may be hundreds to thousands of cars evacuating through MainStreet. What's a few more cars, right? Wrong. Ignoring emergency evacuationas 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 Stump408-568-8541___________________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 proposeddevelopment 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 itsa pretty ugly existing building and would be an improvement, I am worried about kids safety and parkingduring the building stage. Most of us parents have to drop off our kids along Church in the morning, as the traffic is impossible outfront of the school and also pick up at 2.30 or 4 on the same street so unless the work is done outside ofthose hours its going to cause havoc safely dropping off our kids with material supply / constructiontrucks, 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 spacemonkeys outside of classes and never look where they are going, often glued to their phones with headsdown so I think the safety is going to be a huge concern unless you can get a huge chunk of the builddone during the summer holidays. Hopefully the parking underneath the garage will be enough for the residents to not also have to use theparking along church street as its already difficult to pick up/drop off with cafe users, church goers and thepre-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. Iunderstand that the town is required to meet certain high-density requirements, as thestate 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 heavywith 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 theother direction. Will a traffic light be installed there? The intersection next to thedevelopment at High School Court at Main St. is already challenging to exit due tovisibility of cars parked along Main Street. I read the parking proposals and it looks like neither one meets the minimum townstandards. 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 parkingrequirements, as members fill up most of the street parking spots during the daybecause 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(PDLO GEODWW#FDSVWDFNSDUWQHUVFRP7+(*8==$5'23$571(56+,3,1&*5((1:,&+675((76$1)5$1&,6&2&$ 3KRQH &RQWDFW *DU\/D\PRQ(PDLO JOD\PRQ#WJSLQFFRP6$1',66:,1&+(67(5%/9'68,7(&$03%(//&$ 3KRQH &RQWDFW 7LP.LP(PDLO WNLP#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$6'(),1(',16(&7,21 2)7+(+($/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\(PDLO FEO\#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*237 237 127(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 &RQWDFW 6DPLU3DWHO(PDLO VSDWHO#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 $31 5(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 $31 15(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 $31 15(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 $31 15(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,//$$9(/26*$726&$ (0$,167/26*$726&$ Page 561 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$ &+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31 $31 15(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/&,5&8/$7,213/$1$&+85&+675((7675((7+,*+6&+22/9,//$$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 $31 5(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 $31 15(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 $31 15(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%$&.(175<(175<(175<(;,67,1*2))6,7(675((775((7<3,&$/$$$$127(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16)25'(02/,7,212)(;,67,1*75((65()(572675((77)25216,7(75((672%(5(029('$1'5(3/$&(0(177$%/(6 1(:352326('75((6(;,67,1*3$5.,1*67$//6727$/)/225$5($6)(;,67,1*216,7(75((6 72%(5(029('6((6+((777 7)25216,7(75((672%(5(029('$1'5(3/$&(0(177$%/(62)1(:352326('75((6 (;,67,1*/$1'6&$3($1'&21&5(7(:$/.6Page 567 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$ &+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31 $31 5(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/$(;,67,1*%8,/',1*(/(9$7,216 :(67(/(9$7,21 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/6287+(/(9$7,21 ($67(/(9$7,21 1257+(/(9$7,21 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) 67)/22572522) 72522) (;,67,1*3/$17(5$1'(;7(5,25&2/8016(;,67,1*5(&(66('287'2256($7,1*$5($(;,67,1*6/23('522) 7<3,&$/ (;,67,1*0$6215<$1'3/$67(5:$//6 7<3,&$/ (;,67,1*:,1'2: 7<3,&$/ (;,67,1*'2256 7<3,&$/ Page 568 .(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$ &+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31 $31 15(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/6,7(3/$1$&+85&+675((70$,1675((7+,*+6&+22/9,//$$9(18(%8,/',1*)22735,173523(57</,1((;,67,1*=21,1*6(7%$&.675$6+522067$,5687,/,7<52205$0372%$6(0(173$5.,1*/,1(2)%8,/',1*$%29((/(9$72565(6,'(1760$,/%2;(6$1'3$5&(/'523%,.(522035,0$5<(175<$7*5281'/(9(/'5,9(:$<$3521.(<127(652//830(6+*$7(/$1'6&$3(/2%%< (;7(5,253$7,22535,9$7('(&.(;7(5,2575$6+(1&/2685(*8(67%,.(3$5.,1* 67$//621+,*+6&+22/&2857$1'67$//6210$,1675((7 (;,67,1*75((725(0$,1$%29(*5281'87,/,7,(66((&,9,/$1'/$1'6&$3(3/$16 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//&2857($67'2:172*5$5*(/26*$72681,7('0(7+2',67&+85&+&+85&+67/26*$726&$ /26*$726+,*+6&+22/+,*+6&+22/&7/26*$726&$ +27(//26*$726($670$,167/26*$726&$ /26*$7261(,*+%25+22'&(17(5($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$ 81,781,7 81,7 81,781,781,7&200(5&,$/5(7$,/5(67$85$176,7(3/$1 5(7$,/5(67$85$175(6,'(17,$//2%%< &,5&8/$7,21/(*(1'35,0$5<(175<$7*5281'/(9(/$872(175<7281'(5*5281'3$5.,1*$0(1,7<63$&(&200(5&,$/5(48,5('%8,/',1*6(7%$&. 6)6)6)6)6)81,76$&6)$5($&$/&8/$7,21%8,/',1**5266$5($&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($5(6,'(17,$/$5($$0(1,7<63$&(&200(5&,$/5(7$,/5(67$85$17 6(7%$&.81,7 (175$1&(72*$5$*($ 6(7%$&.72(;,67,1*%8,/',1* 0$621,&+$//(0$,1675((75(48,5(' )5217<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 5($5<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1(5(48,5(' 6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1( 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&. 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/5(48,5(' 6,'(<$5'%8,/',1*6(7%$&./,1( 6(7%$&. 6(7%$&.$$$$ 6(7%$&.72(;,67,1*%8,/',1* 6(7%$&.72(;,67,1*%8,/',1*81,765(6,'(17,$/'(16,7<352326('6,7(&29(5$*( *5281')/225%8,/',1*)22735,17)$5(;,67,1*6,7(&29(5$*((;,67,1*%8,/',1*6,=(6) $& 6,7(6800$5<6,7($5($9,6,2175,$1*/($$237 237 3$5.,1*&$/&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$5.,1*7+5(9,6('68%0,77$/Page 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 $31 15(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)(81,7 6))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) 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 $31 15(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$//(9(/)/2253/$1 81,7 6)$81,7 6)*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('$7 7<3,&$/81,7 6)%81,76))81,76)+81,7 6)-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 $31 15(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$//(9(/)/2253/$1 81,7 6)$81,7 6)%81,7 6)*$0(1,7<63$&(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 $31 15(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$//(9(/)/2253/$1 81,76)$81,7 6)& '181,76)'6)6) 6)5(6,'(17,$/81,77$%8/$7,21/(9(/*5266$5($6)&,5&8/$7,21$5($86$%/()/225$5($$0(1,7<63$&(5(6,'(17,$/6) 6) 6)6)%('5220$%('5220%%('5220&%('5220' 6)6)6)6)%('5220%('5220%('5220 /(9(/727$/81,766)6)6)6)6)(;7(5,25678':$//3523(57</,1(75$6+5220$1'75$6+&+87(67$,5687,/,7<52205$0372%$6(0(173$5.,1*/,1(2)%8,/',1*$%29(/2%%<(;,67,1*3523(57</,1(72%(5(029('/21*7(50%,.(522035,0$5<&200(5&,$/(175< :,'($7*5281'/(9(/,17(5,25678':$//.(<127(6,17(5,25'225 :,'( (;7(5,253$7,22535,9$7('(&. +$5'6&$3(6((/$1'6&$3(3/$1/,1(2)%8,/',1*%(/2:52//830(6+*$7(%521=(&2/256(('(7$,/216+((7$(/(9$7256 :22'75(//,6,5215$,/,1*%5,&.&/$'',1*0,'/,1(%$1'),5(+<'5$17),5('(3$570(17&211(&7,2167$1'3,3(.12;.(<%2;/2&.65(6,'(1760$,/%2;(6$1'3$5&(/'5236+2577(50%,.(3$5.,1* 67$//621+,*+6&+22/&2857$1'67$//6210$,1675((7 &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(0$%29(*5$'(87,/,7,(66((/$1'6&$3(3/$16+((7/3/$173$/(77()25352326('3/$17,1*726&5((187,/,7,(6 +,*+62/,'0$6215<:$//'(&25$7,9(/,*+7),;785(02817('$7 7<3,&$/$$ 81,7 6)% $$ 75$6+$1'87,/,7<5220 (;7(5,25'(&.(;7(5,25'(&.(;7(5,25'(&.6)(;7(5,25'(&. $$$ ),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 $31 15(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$$7232)522) Page 574 (9(9(9(9(9(9(9(99$1(9+&+&9$1(9.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&&352-(&712'5$:1%<6&$/('$7(.(11(7+52'5,*8(6 3$571(56,1&1RUWK:KLVPDQ5RDG6XLWH0RXQWDLQ9LHZ&$ &+(&.('%<$66+2:1($670$,1675((7/26*$726&$/,)251,$/26*$7260,;('86($31 $31 15(9,6,21&2168/7$176 675(9,6('68%0,77$/ 5'5(9,6('68%0,77$/%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 $%$6(0(173$5.,1*/(9(/ 237,21 &21&5(7(3(5,0(7(5:$//&21&5(7('5,9($&&(665$03 87,/,7<5220/21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*(;,767$,56685)$&(02817('/('/,*+76 /21* /2%%<3523(57</,1(/,1(2)'5,9(:$<$%29(,17(5,25678':$//67$1'$5'3$5.,1*67$// ; $&&(66,%/(3$5.,1*67$//:,'(3$,17('3$5.,1*675,3(:+,7(6,*1$*($7$&&(66,%/(63$&(6.(<127(6(9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*16(('(7$,/$7$1'(03$5.,1*67$//67$&.(53$5.,1*67$//5$,6('&21&5(7(&85%02725&<&/(3$5.,1*67$// ; &217,1828675(1&+'5$,1&211(&77267250'5$,1$*(6<67(0 67((/68332576)2567$&.(5 3$5.,1*29(5+$1*'13$5.,1*6800$5<%$6(0(17%%$6(0(17%727$/%$6(0(173$5.,1*67$//667$//6727$/3$5.,1*67$//65(7$,/+286,1*6+$5('+286,1*67$//6 $&&(66,%/(9$167$//6 +&9 /(9(/(9&667$//6(/(&75,&9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&9(+,&/( 9$1$&&(66,%/( /21*7(50%,&<&/(3$5.,1*02725&<&/(3$5.,1*$&&(66,%/(67$1'$5'67$//6 +& 6) 6) 6)(/(&75,&9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' 727$//(9(/(9&667$//6 /(9(/%/(9(/% %5(*8/$567$1'$5'67$//6/(9(/% /2%%<87,/,7<522083 $$ $$$$ 5(7$,/+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1* +286,1*5(7$,/+286,1* 7232)5$03%277202)5$03 6+$5('5(7$,/+286,1*+286,1*3$5.,1*727$/3$5.,1*7+,6/(9(/67$//667$//667$//6 3('(675,$1&,5&8/$7,217<3,&$/ +286,1*+286,1* +286,1*+286,1*83'1'183127( 5(7$,/+28562)23(5$7,216+$//%(3267('$%29(($&+3$5.,1*67$//$07230125(6,'(17,$/3$5.,1*$//2:(''85,1*7+(6(7,0(67<3,&$/6,*17(;785('&21&5(7()/225(/(9$725(/(9$725),1,6+(')/225 7<3,&$/7<3,&$/ 1'5(9,6('68%0,77$/5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*5(7$,/+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*$///(9(/62)*$5$*(3$5.,1*723529,'($/,*+7/(9(/720((77+(&%&&855(17'$6+('/('/,*+76$5(35(/,0,1$5<$1':,//%($'-867('720((77+(&%&&2'(5(48,5(0(176:,7+7+(%8,/',1*'(3$570(1768%0,77$/'5$:,1*6)25&216758&7,213(50,76/,*+7,1*127( 67$7('(16,7<%2186/$:5(6,'(17,$/3$5.,1*5(48,5(0(17180%(52)81,763$5.,1*67$//65(48,5('3$5.,1*67$//63529,'('9$1(99$1(9/(*(1'+$1',&$33$5.,1*+$1',&$39$13$5.,1*(/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( $&&(66,%/( (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 9$1 (/(&75,&$/9(+,&/( 67$1'$5' (9&+$5*(5+286,1* +286,1*+286,1* 5$,6('&21&5(7($&&(663$7+),1,6+0$7(5,$/&2/25$1'7(;785(72%(68%0,77(':,7+%8,/',1*3(50,7'5$:,1*6 $'$6+$5('5(7$,/+286,1*67$//6 $&&(66,%/(9$167$//5(48,5(0(176 (967$//5(48,5(0(17 3$5.,1*67$//'(7$,/ 6,*11763$5.,1* $ 29(5+$1*&85%:,'(3$,17('675,3(6'28%/(675,3('(7$,/$ (9&+$5*(53$5.,1*6,*1:,'(3$,17('675,3(6 $$,'(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 $31 15(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$03 87,/,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$*(6<67(0 67((/68332576)2567$&.(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$//6 6) 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 $31 15(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$03 87,/,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(0 67((/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 +& $$ $$ +286,1*3$5.,1*727$/3$5.,1*7+,6/(9(/ 67$//6 67$//6 7<3+286,1*3('(675,$1&,5&8/$7,21%277202)5$03+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1* +286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*+286,1*%,.(5220%,.(6+286,1*+286,1*+286,1* /21*7(50 83'1'183 6(($$1'$)25&$5/,)763(&,),&$7,21667$&.(567$//6 67$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(')25 67$//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 $31 5(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(%('522081,7 6)7:2%('522081,7 6)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 $31 5(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%('522081,7 6) ',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 $31 5(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(6 6,1*/(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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$7,21 6(&21')/225 7+,5')/225 )2857+)/225 72522) 72522) ),567)/225 6(&21')/225 7+,5')/225 )2857+)/225 72522).(<127(6 6,1*/(3/<522),1*6<67(029(50(7$/'(&.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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age 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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 COURT 7232*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 $31 5(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 COURTLT 352326('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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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$7,21127(6 02.18.2025Page 597 EAST MAIN STREETCHURCH STREETHIGH SCHOOL COURT '0$'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 $31 5(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(6 67250:$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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 .(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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 $31 5(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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age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ingle-family residential option not applicable replacementoption for this project.75((',6326,7,21/(*(1'([LVWLQJ7UHHWREH5HPRYHG([LVWLQJ7UHHWR5HPDLQ75((',6326,7,216800$5<(;,67,1*216,7(75((672%(5(029('(;,67,1*216,7(75((6725(0$,1727$/(;,67,1*75((6216,7( '%+ *5($7(5 (;,67,1*75((672%(75$163/$17('47<352326('1(:216,7(75((6%2;25*5($7(55HIHUWR3ODQWLQJ3ODQVKHHW/1RWH 5HIHUWR$UERULVW5HSRUWSUHSDUHGE\&DO\[RQ2FWREHUIRU7UHH5HPRYDODQG3URWHFWLRQUHFRPPHQGDWLRQV%2;0,1%2;0,15(3/$&(0(1775((65(48,5('3(57$%/(727$/5(3/$&(0(1775((65(48,5('727$/(;,67,1*75((62))6,7((;,67,1*2))6,7(75((6725(0$,1(;,67,1*2))6,7(75((672%(5(029('7UHH3URWHFWLRQ)HQFLQJ6HF 3URWHFWLRQRIWUHHVGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQD 3URWHFWLYHWUHHIHQFLQJVKDOOVSHFLI\WKHIROORZLQJ 6L]HDQGPDWHULDOV6L[ IRRWKLJKFKDLQOLQNIHQFLQJPRXQWHGRQWZRLQFKGLDPHWHUJDOYDQL]HGLURQSRVWVVKDOOEHGULYHQLQWRWKHJURXQGWRDGHSWKRIDWOHDVWWZR IHHWDWQRPRUHWKDQWHQIRRWVSDFLQJ)RUSDYLQJDUHDWKDWZLOOQRWEHGHPROLVKHGDQGZKHQVWLSXODWHGLQDWUHHSUHVHUYDWLRQSODQSRVWVPD\EHVXSSRUWHGE\DFRQFUHWHEDVH $UHDW\SHWREHIHQFHG7\SH, (QFORVXUHZLWKFKDLQOLQNIHQFLQJRIHLWKHUWKHHQWLUHGULSOLQHDUHDRUDWWKHWUHHSURWHFWLRQ]RQH 73= ZKHQVSHFLILHGE\DFHUWLILHGRUFRQVXOWLQJDUERULVW7\SH,, (QFORVXUHIRUVWUHHWWUHHVORFDWHGLQDSODQWHUVWULS FKDLQOLQNIHQFHDURXQGWKHHQWLUHSODQWHUVWULSWRWKHRXWHUEUDQFKHV7\SH,,, 3URWHFWLRQIRUDWUHHORFDWHGLQDVPDOOSODQWHUFXWRXWRQO\ VXFKDVGRZQWRZQ RUDQJHSODVWLFIHQFLQJVKDOOEHZUDSSHGDURXQGWKHWUXQNIURPWKHJURXQGWRWKHILUVWEUDQFKZLWKWZRLQFKZRRGHQERDUGVERXQGVHFXUHO\RQWKHRXWVLGH&DXWLRQVKDOOEHXVHGWRDYRLGGDPDJLQJDQ\EDUNRUEUDQFKHV 'XUDWLRQRI7\SH,,,,,,IHQFLQJ)HQFLQJVKDOOEHHUHFWHGEHIRUHGHPROLWLRQJUDGLQJRUFRQVWUXFWLRQSHUPLWVDUHLVVXHGDQGUHPDLQLQSODFHXQWLOWKHZRUNLVFRPSOHWHG&RQWUDFWRUVKDOOILUVWREWDLQWKHDSSURYDORIWKHSURMHFWDUERULVWRQUHFRUGSULRUWRUHPRYLQJDWUHHSURWHFWLRQIHQFH :DUQLQJVLJQ(DFKWUHHIHQFHVKDOOKDYHSURPLQHQWO\GLVSOD\HGDQHLJKWDQGRQHKDOILQFKE\HOHYHQLQFKVLJQVWDWLQJ :DUQLQJ7UHH3URWHFWLRQ=RQH7KLVIHQFHVKDOOQRWEHUHPRYHGDQGLVVXEMHFWWRSHQDOW\DFFRUGLQJWR7RZQ&RGH Page 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 $31 5(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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHU 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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHU 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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHU 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 $31 5(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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHU 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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHU 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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHU 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 'HFHPEHU XSGDWHG2FWREHUCalyx 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