The URL can be used to link to this page

2011062015 - Albright Way - Maps Exhibit BJOW Zoning and Development Agreement John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting. Guzzardo Partnership A Transit Oriented Development Al June 30. 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Planning Comment Response: March 18. 2011 PROJECT TEAM Owner's Representative /Applicant: John R. Shenk 700 Emerson Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-614-6245 Architect: Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street 3rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 415-293-6604 contact: Bob Giannini, AIA Environmental & Civil: RBF Consulting 111 North Market Street, Suite 440 San Jose, Ca 95113 408-993-9224 contact: Laura Forbes / Mike Keaney Landscape Architect: Guzzardo Partnership 836 Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94133 415-433-4672 contact: Paul Lettieri / Nick Samuelson John R. Shenk, Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement SHEET INDEX Al Cover Sheet A2 Project Team & Index A3 Vicinity Map & Existing Use A4 Site Photos A5 Site Photos A6 not used A7 not used A8a Land Use Exhibit A8b Land Use Exhibit A9 Setback Diagram Al Proposed Office Building Sections All Illustrative Site Plan: All Office Al2 Illustrative Site Plan Alternate Site Entry Location: All Office A13 Illustrative Site Plan: All Office - Potential Phasing Plans A14 Illustrative Site Plans: Mixed Use A15 Illustrative Character of Office Exterior Design & Design Guidelines A16 Illustrative Overall Site Sections A17a Illustrative Photo Simulation A17b Illustrative Photo Simulation A18 Shadow Study Cl Existing Conditions C2 Illustrative Grading Plan: All Office C3 Illustrative Utility Plan: All Office C4 Conceptual Stormwater Quality Exhibit C5 Tree Location Exhibit L1 Illustrative Landscape Plan: All Office L2 Illustrative Pedestrian Circulation Diagram Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Project Team & Sheet Index June 30. 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 Vicinity Map Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement CoLirtside.Q1ub:s - r c411.1)311M Ili lifT. : -, - .... iz 10.1Ei bilk ‘ : • :, : 11. r ' ,...-• Existing Conditions John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, .121-Albright 120 AlbEighi: -131 Albright - - RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Vicinity Map & Existing Conditions "11 gtok A3 June 30, 2010 401101111w. Albright Way .±., • ' John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Site Photos June 30. 2010 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 John R. Shenk, Albright Way Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Site Photos A5 June 30, 2010 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 tom'• I.I`t -/ DCVCLOP'ENT STANDARDS AND rATES WINCHESTER BOULEVARD TRACT N0. 5190 �\ (307 M 21-24) Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Residential development will be setback 261 feet from the centerline of Highway 85 per mitigation measure AQ-5 as described on page 50 of the report "Air Quality and Green House Gas Assessment, Albright Way Development Project, February 7, 2011 �- �'' s co".RA or-- �oS SAS `S,R\c CONSULTING l/ .+CO•uE• John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. Project Description: The project proposes a Planned Development (PD) zoning that will allow the potential for a mix of land uses on the Property. The project may consist of office alone or a mix of office and multi-family/senior residential uses. The project could include up to a maximum of 550,000 square feet of office space or a combination of less office space with residential uses. Residential uses could include up to a maximum of 516 multi -family units and up to a maximum of 600 senior units. The specific uses for each phase of the project will be determined by the applicant at the Architectural and Site Approval stage, and any combination of uses authorized by the PD Zoning is authorized up to the stated maximums, subject to the Residential Development Triggers described on Sheet A8b, provided that the combination of uses does not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts than disclosed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. If the combination of uses does result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts than discussed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, then appropriate CEQA review shall be required prior to Architectural and Site Approval, but no amendment to this PD Zoning shall be required as long as the stated maximums for each individual use are not exceeded. For purposes of environmental analysis, the Town and the project applicant have developed four illustrative development scenarios (Scenarios 1-4) that represent examples of development that may occur on the project site as follows: Scenario 1: Replacement of 250,000 s.f. of existing office space with 550,000 s.f. of new office space. Scenario 2: Replacement of 109,000 s.f. of existing office space with 200,000 s.f. of new office space while leaving 141,000 s.f. of existing office. Scenario 3: Replacement of 250,000 s.f. of existing office space with 200,000 s.f. of new office space and 516 multi -family units. Scenario 4: Replacement of 250,000 s.f. of existing office space with 200,000 s.f. of new office space and 600 senior units. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Land Use Exhibit June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 Authorized Uses: Permitted Uses: Offices, including corporate, administrative, business, and professional offices Light manufacturing, light assembly, research and development, wholesaling, warehousing, and other light industrial uses (including indoor storage of materials and products) Ancillary office -serving retail comprising not more than 10% of the total allowed office area for each Architectural and Site Approval. Office -serving uses designed to primarily serve those employed at the site or visiting the site for business purposes, such as: recreational facilities; conference and training facilities; restaurants, cafeterias and other eating establishments; health and wellness facilities; and ancillary uses such as on -site banking, ATMs, private post offices, personal services (such as dry cleaning pick up) and similar support uses. Multi -family residential (for sale and/or rental) Senior Housing including without limitation, independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing, as well as Continuing Care Retirement Community and or Residential Care for the Elderly, including full food service and the sale of alcohol All uses permitted in the R-M, CM, and 0 zones Conditional Uses: Except as otherwise specifically permitted above, all conditional uses in the R-M, CM and 0 zones Development Standards: Office/Light Industrial Up to 550,000 square feet Parking to have minimum 3.3 stalls per 1,000 sf of occupied space Setbacks vary based on height and location of the project site as shown on sheet A9 of the PD Zoning Overlay Plan Set Maximum structure heights per Sheet A10 of the PD Zoning Overlay Plan Set Senior Housing Up to 750,000 Square feet Up to 600 senior (assisted or independent) units, or a combination thereof, and substantially ancillary uses Parking to be one and one half (1 '/2) paces per independent living unit and .3 spaces per assisted living unit Setbacks vary based on height and location of the project site as shown on sheet A9 of the PD Zoning Overlay Plan Set Maximum structure heights per Sheet A10 of the PD Zoning Overlay Plan Set Multi -Family Residential Up to 516 units per the RM5-20 zoning designation. Multi Family Residential at densities up to 20 units per net acre for market rate and up to 24 units per net acre if affordable units are included. The entire project site (+/- 21 Acres) may be utilized to calculate the allowable multi -family residential density, notwithstanding the reservation of land for office uses in accordance with the Residential Development Triggers. Parking to be one and one-half (1 '/2) times the number of one bedroom units, two (2) times the number of two bedroom units and two (2) times the number of three bedroom units Setbacks vary based on height and location of the project site as shown on sheet A9 of the PD Zoning Overlay Plan Set Maximum structure heights per Sheet A10 of the PD Zoning Overlay Plan Set Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Residential Development Triggers: Until the earlier to occur of (i) issuance by the Town of a building permit for at least 200,000 square feet of new office development on the Property (the "Office Trigger"), or (ii) 30 months after the effective date of the Planned Development (PD) Zoning Ordinance for the Property (the "Phasing Trigger"), the Town only will process Architectural and Site Approval and associated entitlements for new office development on the Property. Upon satisfaction of the Office Trigger, whether satisfied before or after the Phasing Trigger, the Town will process Architectural and Site Approval and associated entitlements for the Property for any uses or combination thereof permitted by the PD Zoning, up to the maximum amounts permitted by the PD Zoning, provided that the land area of the Property approved for non -office uses shall not exceed the land area of the Property remaining after deducting the land area that is the subject of the approved building permit for office uses. Upon satisfaction of the Phasing Trigger, the Town will process Architectural and Site Approval and associated entitlements for the Property for any uses or combination thereof permitted by the PD Zoning, up to the maximum amounts permitted by the PD Zoning, provided that the land area of the Property approved for non -office uses shall not exceed the 50 percent of the total land area of the Property. John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, • RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Land Use Exhibit A8b June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 PROPOSED SETBACKS THIS APPLICATION: Setbacks for senior housing, residential, and parking structures serving senior housing and residential uses shall be per existing RM zoning standards, unless otherwise noted. Setbacks for office shall be as indicated on this sheet as follows: a. Setbacks at the "rear" of the property; adjacent to existing residential and the Creek Trail, is constant at 80' from the property line. b. Setbacks for the other property lines are per the diagram shown on this sheet, and are derived from the following table: PROPERTY LINE. SEE MIL DRAWINGS The top of Los Gatos Creek bank is the existing SCVWD chain link fence off -site on the creek trail. III WICHESTER BOULEVARD ENTRY; EXIT PROPERTY LIE SEE CNIL ORA/ 1NGS 1 L. 1 7 III ,I _ I 1 r 3 story — 11 I L. Isetback ctbac Loffice kat �Or all builaear 9 h f site � 80 Building Heights: See sheet Al 0 for building heights. Proposed setbacks are based on the existing Town Ordinance as follows: 3 story: 46' (46' - 20' = 26' + 25' = 51' setback) 4 story: 60' (60' - 20' = 40' + 25' = 65' setback) 5 story: 75' (75' - 20' = 55' + 25' = 80' setback) Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement 4 story PROPERTY LINE SEE MIL DRA'MNGS John 5 story Proposed Setbacks: 3 story setback line = 51' 4 story setback line = 65' 5 story setback line = 80' Office setback at rear of site = 80' 0' chit C�a�a��gr: o�\cese%b dot a\\ bU �\ PROPERTY LINE. SEE Civil. DRAWINGS 1 1 1 1 I I I1I ; III I ' ' I, ' I 1 II I II I II II II 1 1 II I II 1 I II 1 1 I1 II I 1 1 - �s x Setbacks for parking structures serving office buildings shall be per existing CM zoning standards, except that the setback adjacent to Highway 85 (northern property line) as well as along the most northerly 400' property fronting Winchester, where the Railroad property separates the subject property from the public right of way, shall be 20' - 0" PROPERTY LNE. SEE CIVIL ORAWNGS LID OD cts R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Setback Diagram A9 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 70'-0' MAXIMUM HEIGHT AT MECHANICAL ROOF SCREEN 60'-0' MAXIMUM HEIGHT AT 4 STORY EXTF T.O. ROOF SCREEN 0 0 +60'-0" T.O. PARAPET +43 -8" T.O.4TH FLR. SLAB +29 -0" T.O. 3RD FLR. SLAB Illustrative 4-Story Height Diagram Albright Way +14'-6" T.O. 2ND FLR. SLAB T.O. SLAB Please refer to Sheet A9 for setbacks based on number of stories. 84'-8' MAXIMUM HEIGHT AT MECHANICAL ROOF SCREEN 74'-6' MAXIMUM HEIGHT AT 5 STORY EXTERIOR WALL Illustrative 5-Story Height Diagram +84'-6" T.O. ROOF SCREEN 0 0 +74'-6" T.O. PARAPET +58'-0" T.O. 5TH FLR. SLAB +43'-6" T.O.4TH FLR. SLAB +29 -0" T.O.3RD FLR. SLAB +14'-6" T.O. 2ND FLR. SLAB T.O. SLAB John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Building Sections AIO June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Note: The all -office master plan shown on this sheet is one of numerous possible configurations, and is shown to illustrate 110,000 sf buildings, 4 stories tall parked at 3.3/1000 sf Please see sheet Al2 for alternate plan option should a possible traffic mitigation with full office buildout suggest relocating the main entry point. -Wow PROPERTY LNE; SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS JI11Iti.i I1111J111FTip L'11i1111111111n1111 maintain existing landscaped slope POSITION OF BUILDINGS RELATIVE TO CODE AND FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS - OFFICE, SENIOR & RESIDENTIAL USES: Distances between structures will be as dictated by Building Code which takes into account construction type, sprinklers, height, side yards, etc. Relative to Fire Protection, buildings shall be located so that a fire truck can park on an approved and stable surface within 30' measured horizontally from two remote points of the roof. In addition, when portions of a building are further than a 150' hose reach (for example in the center courtyard), approved fire hydrants will be located as directed by the Fire Department. Albright WayT TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement WICHESTER BOULEVARD ENTRY/ EXIT PROPERTY LNE. SEE CIVIL ORM/NCS . V\11IIIU111I[11J1[.1TT 11TITTlliUIJ11U1I111T1 1111 1TurT11T111I1 \ 111f11I111111IilinliIll1J ll:1ftrJ1111I1".11Llllliiilf 111[F ;i Emergency Vehicle Access from parking to existing cul de sac OPKS PROPERTY LINE. SEE CIVIL DRAW NES <— PARKING GARAG 3 L'_VELS PARKING GARAGE 3 LEVELS Parking Structure setback proposed as 20' from property line at Highway 85. PROPERTY LNE SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS 10 co cs John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partne ship Illustrative Site Plan: Scenario 1, All Office All June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Potential new signalized access point located to align with Courtside Club existing driveway. Alternate master plan option should a possible traffic mitigation with full office buildout suggest relocating the primary site entry point. Note: The master plan shown on this sheet represents one example of numerous possible configurations. Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Reconfigure current site entry point to right in / right out. John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Illustrative Site Plan Alternate Site Entry Location: A 1 2 June 30, 2010 Scenario 1 AII Office Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 = 11111111101I1:11J1111101111I11'1I _ Cttmr�IIIIIn.lunndntmlJttmn-nntn:�lnm;'mm�lr��-�,7 11IIr111111I-111111IIi1111111111III1-11111I1111.1 ithlIj 11111: Note: The master plans shown on this sheet represent examples of numerous possible configurations. Albright Way JIIIIIyIIII(IL TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement ��_t1lTTTLunIn.IIIIIILIIIIL'I:IIIIiII.ItITITI II uIILnlnnn: T 11l u111 I I 111 I I I l l 11111111ll11111: l u l l 11 L l 1_ 1111E 111: Sri ii=riri ��,vin »>itt0 ,W01- .01 U >`J�rrUrr1r r�trrr. r rirrU1 U J 1rrrrr �iu'v'�y� . �nr III.-.. 1111111 '1111 _.... -... 111...--...1111111 Phasing: Future buildings may be constructed in phases. All or any portion of the existing development is permitted to remain in place and continue in office/research and development use, such that at any time the property may be improved partially with all or some of the existing buildings and partially with new development, which new development may include any of the uses authorized on the land use exhibit. The layouts shown on this page indicate one possible phasing sequence (using an all office configuration for the example) where new and exiting buildings would coexist during the process to total build - out. John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Illustrative Site Plan: All Office - Potential Phasing Plans Scenario 1 ,AII Office A13 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Scenario 3 RESIDENTIAL Area 1 +/- 11 acres Note: The master plans shown on this sheet represent examples of numerous possible configurations. Albright Way OFFICE +!- 10.5 acres TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Possible Mix of Uses: The diagrams on this sheet show examples of possible configurations of the mix between office and residential or senior uses described in greater detail on Sheet A8a. Following the Residential Development Triggers the office area shown in each of these Scenarios is 200,000 s.f. SENIOR Area 1 +1- 5 acres Scenario 4 • OFFICE +I- 8.5 acres SENIOR Area 2 +/- 8 acres John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Illustrative Site Plans: Mixed Use A14 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Architectural Design Guidelines for Office & Residential Use: The Albright site is bounded by a boulevard/rail line and freeway on two sides, a residential neighborhood and the Los Gatos Creek Trail on a third, and an office building to the fourth. The design goals for future buildings on the site are to fit into that transitional environment and to provide adequate density for a transit oriented development to meet the Town's goals. Density guidelines are addressed in this package. The goals for fitting into the environment are described as follows: Style: The buildings and parking structures are to be contextual in a Los Gatos design style: Abstracted Mediterranean. Massing: Buildings will have a base, middle and top. For buildings 3 stories and taller, portions of the upper floors will be setback from floors below so the apparent building mass is reduced as it becomes taller. Employ additional techniques that reduce apparent mass such as ground floor arcades and setbacks, trellises and overhangs. Modulate roof forms to break up the skyline. Materials & Colors: The predominance of materials and colors are to be natural. A mix of exterior materials will be used to create a composition of glass and solid. All glass buildings are not allowed. Solid materials could be cement paster, concrete, GFRC, metal, or wood. Other than at spandrels, reflective, dark or opaque glass is not allowed. Site: To work with the site's natural grades, site design shall utilize walls, terraces, and landscaped steps that become an extension of the building architecture, and create useful outdoor social gathering spaces. Integration of pedestrian connectivity to the Creek Trail is important. John Albright Way -- R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Illustrative Character of Office Exterior Design A 1 5 & Design Guidelines June 30,2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 20114,4 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Los Gatos Creek Trail Winchester !f s VRAN TRAc ,113Z BLVD. i SITE SECTION AT NORTH PARKING GARAGE Note: Buildings may be up to 5 stories tall and would employ the massing guidelines described on Sheet A15. .-Y GR/OE PARKaG -- PAD ELEVATION: 276.0 EULD115c 1 PAD ELEVATION: 279.0 5/LD716 B PA1i C: Existing wall of mature trees N14f5'ER BLVD. SITE SECTION AT OFFICE BUILDING Albright Way SITE SECTION KEY PLAN John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Illustrative Overall Site Sections /A A16 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement This and the following page are photo simulations depicting the tallest buildings allowed per the zoning, taken from these 8 viewpoints. John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzarido Partnership Albright Way' Illustrative Photo Montage Al7a June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Albright Way John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture. RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership AI7b Illustrative Photo Montage June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement „ nuncnu.=•nm;umprmneumrmlmPTIM Note: The master plans shown on this sheet represent examples of numerous possible configurations. John Albright Way SUMMER June 21 9AM noon 3PM R. Shenk. Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, WINTER December 21 9AM noon 3PM Guzzardo Partnership Shadow Study Shadow study assuming the tallest buildings allowed per the zoning. A18 June 30, 2010 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Planning Comment Response: March 18, 2011 PARCEL TWO (PER FIR b. PCS-431119-SC) P(C:,A 14000 t(NOESIER WOO. APR 424-31-0 3 PARCEL TWO (PER PTR AD. RC5-431111-SC) PARCEL E (pII4L4TY 41)5.0. PARCEL FOUR (PER P1R ND. NCS-431719-SC) (PARKING EASE)ENT) WINCHESTER BOULEVARD LANDS OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY PARCEL THREE (PEA P1R 433-A4A31110-s0) PD6V 36) (4 APTt 424-32-003 W /t:Blin7 WAY APR 424-31-C63 I -PARCEL THREE (PER PRI NO. PCS-431119-SC) PARCEL ONE 7---4143t PTR NG. 7 D 1111-SC) PACEL W ISM 4k^)).!.[. ot.Pxro PARCEL CNE -z, 0.RP .. er (PER PTR �3I111-$C) TRACT No. 5190 (307 M 21-24) Albright Way 101 ALB7I0T1 WAY APM 424-32-053 PARCEL FOUR (PER Pin NO. ACS -t 31110-SC) (405 Y 35) 100 AL0I8R 4AY ARt 24-32-049 PARCEL FIVE (PER PTA pARCEL -A431110-5C) (303 Y 55) ALBRIGHT WAY 1 ova / o0(s 121 ALBRIGHT WAY PARCEL SIX (PEA PTR [O. N5-431110i) A PCRTI (579 Y 29 T k 30) 5807 131 AEPRIBTT VAT NIN 424-3204.5 ARV 424-32-035 PARCEL Ot'E (PER PTA NO. —4 1110-SC) (415 V 33) 120 k 110 ALBRIGHT WAY A.14 424-32054 PARCEL T10 (PER PTR NO. 2k5-431110-SC) A P[RTIO! OP P T-2 (430 V 15) 151 ALBRIGHT 44 AP4t 424-32-059 1 PARCEL TWO (PE PON INO. 7-443111110-S) (430 Y 15) 141 44.2RIOH1 VAT Aft 424-32-De0 Los A o� R�G-c TOPCRAP-IIC A`O PROPERTY 17F-NATIQ. TAKEN TRW D3C.LVENT TITLED 'PLANNING EXHIBIT OCR 7i5. INC.: LOS GATOS EA[5(4£SS P084. PREPARED BT KIER k WRID(T CIVIL ENG:[EERS k SRYEYORS. INC. DATED VARY 2010. CONSULTING John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Existing Conditions cI June 30, 2010 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement EG 258 2 1C 1111LiJ111111IL_.I1111J JJ1Li 1111111LL� Hi 'E: 237. 1 30 7C7.° CG PR7PER-Y LINE 285 • 1. 1F J-L'x1S7;rr yy 'art° NFS GRADING LEGEND RCP 0 v1E NOTE: 258 0 TC 283.0 'C 287.0 IC WINCHESTER BOULEVARD -C 267 C IC 254.5 5 to TC 260. 7/ 767.5 TC TC 267.5. PACPERTY LINE Cs "f \•a T'-L_ ;C - _ t, E C .. .,1x .,..4AfK_'-6f 1, ,.'C al_-. r=. ". -f2; '..'.. J:-__41_, Y- v... -7, SFE \•J AU" A\: r';6:7.r -:,_ f'.}rt ...__.C._ `IL:t: fk:_.V fiV\If.ro_V_s r.Y •:�.G.]_ A—Lu-',7,C=M1rOA,7 3t.,.: aG 6G:ret A'.0uu7 tx'tv..r, .I.e• W,--,.... X - \' d �`\s..i -~llr y" O /c D'C T0P/SAFE 2841 TOP/CARS 282r SLOPE SECTION A -A 26' NIDE DRY PROD. PARY.1112 GARAGE aAD E_ 272.0 Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement \; ftrF n-TI1 l l 1111T11TI I i 1 111 TC EG S=LFE )15 �I[ilI'I I111111111fi11111I1 \275.0 iL 65.5A .1. 11111111,i;lll:.ii. I r111!1111 IIIIF 1 11111 l PAD'219.0 /�. \\ \ 7C' 1C PLJESTA(AN CCFT.ZCiI�I 1_ '0 REEK 1RA:L MCPEST• _7,1C -r- T---i Il• • • • PAb=278.0• - PAD r 276.0 - 1 I 1 1 I'4011'rY 1;.F HIGHWAY 85 IMPERVIOUS SURFACES * EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA 15.8.5 ACRES (687.000 57) PROPOSE0 IMPERVIOUS AREA 14 8: ADRES (645.000 SF) PROPOSED LAND USES * DVELOP\EST AREA 21.5: ACRES (939,00D SE) RELIC S-REE75 0 ACRES '5:MATE 51REE•5 AND DR:7EAAYS 7.7. AGES (334.000 S=) I ANC COVERED BY BUILDINGS INCLUDING PARKING STRUCTURES 6.1A ACRES (266.000 5r) OPEN SPACE (_AN0SCAPE/BAR7•SCAPE) 7.E_ ACRES ,'339.000 SF) *THIS TABLE AP'LIES TO THE L. .77 SITE PLAN SHORN ON THIS SHEET = A- OR Vi1CD USE PROJECT IS I1.P_EVE'JTEC T-ESE WADERS CW_0 BE DIFFERENT. PROPOSED EARTHWORK -•E PRE_:2:GAR\' 'AD ELEVA-IGNS AND GRADES S'1041•1 CN .{ EXILST FEASIBLE, 1FE E. " N 'RIDER TC 9:S:VIZE SITE GRADING PIS; :>,:•. - . - _ :S AND ASS-LPTIONS SUILDI'1; - ___.ENTS, EXIST:NG 50:L Cc1:7:1:. - _. ::'I^r : HATER C_: _. CO2 CIE:: ARTS _= TF£ r_S :_L F_ A RAC = THE ' FROM TFE S:-F n [: BE APPRL'XIMA-E.• O3O IF A RESIDUO IAL OR MIXED USE PRGJEC' I5 IMPLEMENTED ON THE S:TE, TIE ESTIMATED EARTFd10'OK AXED BE SIMILAR CONSULTING John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Conceptual Grading - All Office June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 i -my,+T. LTE [5. s1 Il— E% 15' RCP CCAJEC- IC DCSTIIG p VA:N WINCHESTER BOULEVARD :4272.0 \ .5),„/ \SS Cam/ x mTr LIrE UTILITY LEGEND DYSTIc l4CR .IIE W:i•ANY 5EM'R .IIE 5.CRV DRAIN .:IC SICRV DRAIN IILtT • STCRY DRAIN NAI&O,T [ ■Airs/s7ER ::IE M CAP O SV :4? Scs_R VAx0.0 o oxr DRA:N MwECIIP: ,15 _ :.ITT I.AYR.T W " Vr_ IE5 TT TIC vATIVC R/ti 5'C S a 'HIS SECT IY A 'ES:L04 :A_ CR VIxE .E 4_1E120T:RE IS IV'_CICNICD T•C I.iTv ,AYR1T ■:.L EC :IFFE 0'. &' RILL S'IL_ nOVECT (FFSITE IN '"Rvlt irsl!,.S Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement \,6 cs\ r 7PA_ -- 7N .0 I5T:N3 CA v..I so S6 DP ON 23 SO oat so so CN DM 1. 9 SD F.-- DP C7 • PAD=278.0 4, PAD=276.0 • ss ss . E HIGHWAY 85 CCNNE TO txiSI:IA3 SS VAIN 1/ FPF CGNsuirriNC John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Conceptual Utilities - All Office C3 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 flllllli "111111101111111 F WTE: 3_;:I.:•! ,ic41 0IC,AA_I .t �T'AIf1 TR3P IN.ET 12. AL-- r D D_,/ 24'.12 . 5:;i5o u:x OF RAIN ROCS ANC CONCRETE SAAC ARAPPEC IN GEOT_%T:•-E FABRIC— LCUTI.7J .ACFR:RA: •. 8E.GIN\iNG - \ 6 PER=CRA'.;. WRAPPED ' ` :11 F ' _::-SA:.__ :s -0 EC SLOPED FDAARC FIELD INLET A;'- A u:N:u_u SOPS _F 0.5t TYPICAL BIO—SWALE SECTION NCT TO ECAE YR3{k Albright Way WINCHESTER BOULEVARD T1 Ti I J I I I I I I I UTTl TTITUTI111111J1T[T17T[l 111111 [ J 1 1 [ 1111 [ I I I I 1 I I IJ q111111111 11111111 111(1LI1L1111111111111111 111111111111111 i 1 f . -JIIIIII \ _ \ / 1 L/ \ \ylY LIKE WATER QUALITY TREATMENT* EST IMATm CATER C• '_:'Y , :FS I TR_ATAENT FLCN (A{p ) ESTIMATED TOT& RFOJ!RFO _FNG11, 3.125 F' FF 91C-SIALE ON PROJECT SITE ESTIMATED RATER C.JALITT TREATuENT F_01 C 0 J-ATIs I Rl = CIA C = CLEFF:CIENT OF RLNE F = C 8 FOR IIPERvlCtS FEAS = C. 1 1 LA+ N_HVIOLS AH_4S . = INTENSI-• I - C.2 :N./HR (PLR TIE. SA\TA CLARA VA_LEY URBAN RMOFF PCiou1:ON PREVENT ION PRCgi0J1 C.3 ST101WIITER HANDBOLI:) AFSA 5 CF5 Al = CIA m � 2 S'ST:kB-ED_EZA.i_LLIIL,L7_9ICSIALE'A.C.>_AT,2i G- USi' *ANNING'S EOJATION HIGF v = t1. RVA. S'n MERE M - 1.49 FOR ENG.IS•4 CA.ITS N - 0.2 FOR SA_LOA ,LCA BELOA TOP O: '.EGETAT10N (WF). 0.1 FCR CCN!_YA5 C O_kA A. Rv3. 5,:: P] . A • Rv1 • S';, ASSJ.EC VALUES: DIANN.I SLOPE (S) = 1.0% SIDE SLOPE (SS) = 3-1 BCD SLOPE (9S) = 22 BOTTCA EOIH (B) = 2 F" OLP1r (D) 0-7 F' COSTAC--ACT) - 10.0 MI1S A = C S7 FT, P -6 47 FT R -A/P = C.15 FT 0. m . A. R2)3•5',2 = C 096 CF5 = C/A C 2 FT/S 1 = L/Y VT 12C FEET CI% • A . 0/3 TOTAL PrOJIRFD RIG-SMAL3 _EMIR ON 3: - 'A? /O)-I = 3.125 FT *T,-ESE PRELIMINARY CALCV_ATIJT. - 1L_.STRo :YE SITE PLAN SC4P, :•• F SIZES AND LOCATIONS CF BiC-E•A_'_ A:__ !IPER::OJS PER:EN1A,Cc OF SI'E. S-._ DESIGN. John R. Shenk, Forrn4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Conceptual Stormwater Quality Exhibit June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement WINCHESTER BOULEVARD 2 TREE LOCATION EXHIBIT Albright Way 111.01111111fi11111W11111111111111 2 >- 0 John R. Shenk. Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Tree Location Exhibit C5 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011 TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Vi TREE REMOVAL MITIGATION SCHEDULE Canopy of Tree to be removed Replacement Trees Alternate Tree 4'•9' Two 24' Box Size One 36- Sox Sze 10'-27' Three 24.* Box Size Two 36" Box Size 28'-40' Four 24" Box Size Two 48" Box Size 40'-56' Six 24" Box Size Two 36' Box Size and Two 48" Box Size 56'-60' Two 24' Box Size and Two 36" ox Size Plus Two 48" Box Size See Nole 1 60'+ See Nole 1 See Note 1 Emergency Vehicle Access from parking to existing cul de sac 1) 1f it is not possible to replace a single large older tree with an equivalent tree(s). In this case, the tree shall be replaced with a combination of both the Tree Canopy and Tree Value Standards as determined by the Director. 2) If a tree cannot be reasonably planted on the subject properly the value of the removed trees) shall be paid 10 the Town Forestry Fund to: Add or replace trees on public property in the vicinity of the subject property or: Add trees or landscaping on other Town Property. The replacement value of a Tree shall be determined using the most recent edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal. as prepared by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. Pedestrian amenities. connection & focal point at Creek Trail 30' 601 150' III THE GUZZARDO PARTNERSHIP INC Landscape Architect. • land Planners John R. Shenk, Form4 Architecture, RBF Consulting, Guzzardo Partnership Albright Way: TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement Conceptual Landscape Plan - All Office 156 Momgom. 35treet San Fan ee u 94133 T415 &Bill r415433SOU LI June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 48 WINCHESTER BLVD. Albright Way TOD • Zoning and Development Agreement LEGEND p BUS STOP 4C _ LIGHT RAIL PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTION John R. Shenk. Form4 Architecture. 50' 100' 200' 300' THE GUZZARDO PARTNERSHIP INC. Landscape amit.m • lane Mennen alb wen:wer), CA sSeec., 113 ns ql .672 a:S all SOP! Guzza,rdo Partnership Illustrative Pedestrian Circulation Diagram L2 June 30, 2010 Planning Comment Response: August 9, 2010 Planning Comment Response: February 23, 2011