The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 06 - 15735 Camino Del Cerro - Staff Report Exh.7-13Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Service since 1984 Marni Moseley Town of Los Gatos Community Planning Department 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, C A 95031 RECE~VED SEP 0 4 701~ September 4, 201 5 TOWN OF LOS G/\TOS PLANNIN G DIVISION 15735 Camino Del Cerro - Peer Review #1 of the arborist report and recommendations for trees in the vicinity of the proposed development PO Bo x 371 4, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@p acbe ll.net . http:/ /www .decah .com. Page 1 of 4 i&xiDB I f • Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Service since 1984 SUMMARY: I visited the project site on September 3, 301 5. This is my first report for this project . I have reviewed the following document for this project: • Arborist Report (Tree Inventory, Assess ment & Pro tection. Camino Del C erro Los Gatos ). Monarch Consulting Arborists , August 4, 2015 The arborist report is a good report except that I found several discrepancies between trees in the field and their descriptions in the report. I did not check all of the reported data on each evaluated tree, but I did check many of the trees and found the significant discrepancies listed below. The tree survey and arborist report needs to be redone to correct the discrepancies and to make sure that all collected information is as accurate a s possible . Discrepancies noted: • 1872 coast live oak. 20". Th e trunk DBH I measured is 14.8 inc hes. Canopy spread (measured b y me, with calibrated pacing) is 25 feet, not 12 fe et as is listed in the report. Th is makes a difference in the number o f replacement t rees that would be required if this tree were to be removed, so canopy spread should be a s a c curate as possible. • 1873 coast live oak, 5": the trunk DBH I measured is 18.3". The canopy spread I measured with calibrated pac ing is 25 feet, not 15 feet. As mentioned previo usly , canopy w idth d etermines the number of replacement trees required if this tre e were to be removed, so c anopy spread sh ould be as accurate a s possible . • 1875 coast live oak, 12": I c annot find this tree in the field. • 1876 coast live oak, 12": The c anopy spread I measured with calibrated pacing is 18 feet, no t 12 feet. • 1877 coast live oak. 6": th e trunk diameter is closer to 12 inches, maybe 13 inches (on othe r property, so I did no t me asure with a measuring tape). Canopy spread is 18 feet, no t 12 fe et. • 1882 coast live oak, 12": c anopy spread is 22 feet, not 8 feet . Note that tag for this tree and #883 are on the c yc lo ne fen c e because these trees are on neighboring property. • 1892 silk tree, 16": canopy spread is 27 feet, not 20 feet. • 1893 silk tree, 16": canopy spread is 36 feet, not 20 feet. PO Bo x 3714 , Sarat oga , CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@pacbell .net . http://www.de cah .com . Pag e 2 of 4 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Se rvice sirtce 1984 RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) The previous arbori st report must be revised in order to correct the disc repancies listed above, and to correct any other discrepancies I have not found or listed. 2) Since the Town Code Tree Protection requirements were revised in July of 2015 , all arborist reports must now meet the standards listed in those requirements. The arborist report submitted for this projec t does not meet so me of the new requirements. 3) As part of the report revision, monetary valuations are required for protected trees that are to remain, when those trees are adjacent to proposed improvements and could be affected by construction of those improvements . Please provide such valuations, according to the most recent edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal (Council of Tree &Landscape Appraisers and International Society of Arboriculture) and the Species Classification & Group Assignment (Western Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture). 4) Please provide me with a full-size hard copy of the construction plan set for review, along with the revised arborist report . 5) The Tree Map in the arborist report is dHficult to read. In fact, I had to use a magnifying glass to find and read the tree numbers. Tree numbers and tree trunk locations should be larger and easy to find and read . 6) It is not necessary to provide a description of trees that do not qualify as "protected trees" in the arborist report, although it is helpful (and encouraged) to include the tree trunk and dripline location on the plans, as well as a brief note about the type and size of the tree such as : "4-inch almond". Likewise, non-protected trees do not require a valuation . 7) Tree replacement numbers and sizes to mitigate for tree removals should not be provided In the arborlst report. The reason for this is that the arborist report will be reviewed by the Town and the final tally of trees to remain or be removed may change. Final tree replacement numbers and sizes will be determined by the Town . 8) I agree with the recommendation to remove blue gum Eucalyptus #887. I don't see how the construction impact to this tree is "High", but in any case now is a good time to remove this large and problematic tree. 9) Protected trees to remain along the driveway: I do not think that the recommendation #4 on page 9 of the arborist report (construct the driveway out of porous materials and do not cut into soil surface for sub-base treatment) is going to work.· If this is really possible, then great. But usually the subsurface area is going to be ripped and compacted, with some soil removed, in order to ensure the most stable base possible . So the impacts t o some of the trees , e .g . coast live oaks #879 and 880 may be greater than "Low". It may be a good idea to investigate this further and perhaps move the driveway farther from the trees, or reduce the width of the driveway. PO Bo x 3714 , Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@pacbell.net. http://www .decah.com . Page 3 of 4 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Set'llice since 1984 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I certify that the information contained in this report is correct to the best of my knowledge, and that this report was prepared in good faith. Thank you for the opportunity to provide service again. Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance. Deborah Ellis , MS. Consultin g Arborist & Horticulturist Certified Professional Horticulturist #30022 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #305 I.S.A. Board Certified Master Arborist WE-4576 I.S.A . Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PO Bo x 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@pacbell.net. http://www.decah.com. Page 4 of 4 Marni Moseley Town of Los Gatos Community Planning Department 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos. CA 95031 September 11. 2015 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist SerfJi ce siu ce 1984 15735 Camino Del Cerro -Peer Review #2, after review of project plan set Dear Marni: This is my second report tor this project, otter re ceiving and reviewing the full-size plan se t . My fi rst and previous report was dated Sep tember 4, 2015. SUMMARY: Most of the recommendations in my previous report st ill stand. and I will repeat those along with some new recommendations on pages 1 and 2. I was able to resolve some of the questions (and associated recommendations) from my previous report otter review of the plans. My main tree protection concern at this time is tor several of the trees along the existing and proposed driveway. The fo llowing trees may be too close t oo and could sustain significant root damage due to driveway construction (assum ing typical subg ra de preparation): 1872, 14 .8" coast live oak (trunk DBH is not 20" as listed in applicant's arborist report dated August 4, 2015). 1873, 18.3" coast live oak (trunk DBH is not 5" as listed in applicant's arborist report). 1878, 8" coast live oak 1879. 1 0" coast live oak 1880. 1 0" coast live oak I think that root damage can be reduced to an acceptable le vel by moving the driveway and associated grading farther from the trees, so t hat at least the 3xDBH 1 and preferably the 6xDBH root protection distance or farther is provided tor these trees. That means that the actual driveway needs to be farth er than the calculated distances from these trees, to take into account any necessary over-excavation distances beyond the driveway. Based upon the site plan it seems t hat this should be relatively easy to accomplish. and it should not significantly alter the plan design or the functional use of the site. 1884, 8" coast live oak: some grading comes within a few teet of the trun k. Simply m ove th e grading so that there is no soi l disturbance within a minimum of 3xDBH from the trunk. 1887, 84" blue gum Eucalyptus: I can now see that grading will occur within the vicinity of this tree; hence the "High" level of <construction> influence. I would recommend the removal of this tree even it there were no construction impact .. PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 -725-1357. decah@pacbel l.net. htt p:/ /www .decah.com. Page 1 of 4 \J',XlliliiiS Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Ser11ice siu ce 1984 PLANS REVIEWED: PLAN DATE SHEET REVIEWED SHOULD REVIEW Existing Site Topographic Map including existing tree trunk 7/2015 C1 X locations Proposed Site Layout 7/2015 C2 X Demolition Construction Staging Grading/Drainage 7/2015 C3 X Erosion Control Underground Utility X Site & Building Sections 7/18/15 A5.0,5.1, X 6.1, 7.0 Building Exterior Elevations 7/18/15 A3.0 , 3.1, X 6.0, 7 .0 Roof 7/18/15 A4.0, 6.1, X 7.0 Shadow Study 7/18/15 A1 .0 X Construction Details that would affect trees (for example building foundation s, pavement installa tion including s ub-grade preparation, X underground utility installation) Landscape Planting X Irrigation Plan X Landscape & Irrigation Details X RECOMMENDATIONS: *repeated from my Sep t ember 4 , 2015 report. 1) The previous arborist report {the applicant's arborist report} should be revised In order to correct the discrepancies listed in my previous report dated Sept ember 4 , 20 15, and any other dis c repancie s I have not found or li sted. 2) Since the Town Code Tree Protection requirements were revised in July of 2015 , all arbori st reports must now meet th e standards listed in those requirements. The arbori st report su bmitted for this project does not meet some of the new requirements. 3) As part of the report revision, monetary valuations are required for protected trees that are to remain, when those trees are adjacent to proposed Improvements and could be affected by construction of those improvements. Please provide such valuations, acc ording to the most re c e nt edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal (Council o f Tree &Landscape Appraisers and International Society of Arbori culture) and th e Species Classific ation & Group Assignment (W es t ern Chapter o f th e International Society of Arboriculture). PO Box 3714 , S aratoga , CA 95070. 408-72 5-1357. decah@pa c bell.net. http://www.de cah.com . Pag e 2 of 4 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Seroice since 1984 4) The Tree Map in the applicant's arborist report is difficult to read . In fact, I had to use a magnifying glass to find and read the tree numbers. Tree numbers and tree trunk locatio ns should be larger and easy to find and read . 5) Some of the tree numbers in the applicant's arborist report Tree Map/ (Site Plan) are missing or incorrect. For example, trees li sted as #892 and 893 (12", 4" o ak) are actually #881 and 882. Tree #893 is the silk tree that is shown to be removed, located in the proposed driveway close to the sou th side of the proposed garage. Tree #892 is (on the site plan) an unnumbered tree with an 'X' symboL located within the proposed house footprint, between the Master Sui t e and an adjacent Bedroom whose number I cannot read. Tree #891 number is unreadable on the site plan (this tree has an X through it and will be removed). Th is tree is on the west side of the proposed cabana. Likewise, tree #896 on the North side of the house is unreadable on t he Site Plan . I need to see the numbers of trees that will be removed . Some of these numbered trees are less than protected size , but if a tree is shown to be removed and it has been described in the plans, I want to see the tree number on the tree map. 6) It is not necessary to provide a description of trees that do not qualify as "protected trees" in the arborist report , although it is helpful (and encouraged) to include the tree trunk and dripline location on the plans, as well as a brief note about the type and size of the tree such as: "4-inch almond". Likewise, non-protected trees do not require a valuation. 7) Tree replacement numbers and sizes to mitigate for tree removals should not be provided in the arborist report. The reason for this is that the arborist report will be reviewed by the Town and the final tally of trees to remain or be removed may change. Final tree replacement numbers and sizes will be determined by the Town. 8) Protected trees to remain along the driveway: I do not think that the recommendation #4 on page 9 of the applicant's arborist report (construct the driveway out of porous materials and do not cut into soil surface for sub-base treatment) is going to work. If this is really possible, then great. But usually the subsurface area is going to be ripped and compacted, with some soil removed, in order to ensure the most stable base possible. Instead, move the driveway fart her from the trees. See my recommendations for specific trees listed on page 1 of t his report relative to the driveway. PO Bo x 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 -725-1357. decah@pacbe ll.net. http:/ /www .decah.com . Pag e 3 of 4 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Sci'(Jice silt ce 1984 ****************************** I certify that the information contained in this report is correct t o t he best of my knowledge, and that this report was prepared in good faith . Thank you for the opportunity to provide service again. Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance. Si ncerely, ~~ Deborah Ellis, MS. Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Certified Professional Horticulturist #30022 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #305 I.S.A. Boord Certified Moster Arborist WE-4576 I.S.A. Tree Risk Assessment Qualified TREE ROOT PROTECTION DISTANCES No one can estimate and predict with absolute certainty how far a soil disturbance such as an excavat ion must be from the edge of the trunk of an individual tree to effect tree stability or health at a low , moderate or severe degree--there are simply too many variable involved that we cannot see or anticipate. 3xDBH however, is a reasonable "rule of thumb" minimum distance (in feet) any soil disturbance should be from the edge of the trunk on one side of the trunk. This is supported by several separate research studies including (Smiley, Fraedrich, & Hendrickson 2002, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories). DBH is tru nk "diameter at breast height" (4.5 feet above the ground). This distance is often used during the design and planning phases of a construction project in order to estimate root damage to a tree due to the proposed construction. It tends to correlate reasonably well wi th the zone of rap1d taper, which is the area in which the large bu ttress roots (main support roots close to the trunk) rapidly decrease in diameter with increasing distance from the trunk. Fo r example , using the 3X DBH guideline an excavation should be no closer than 4 .5 feet from the trunk of an 18-inch DBH tree. For trees with multiple trunks, an adjusted DBH is often calculated using lOO'Yo of the largest trunk plus 50'Yo of the remaining smaller trunks. Such distances are guidelines only, and should be increased for trees with heavy canopies, significant leans , decay, structural problems, etc. I will generally not recommend a root protection distance of less than 5 feet for any tree, even very small trees. It is also important t o understand that i n actual field conditions we often find that much less root damage occurs than was anticipated by the guide lines. 3xDBH may be more of an aid in preserving tree stability and not necessarily long-term tree health. 6 to 18 X DBH is the minimum distance which is recommended in the ANSI (American National Standard) A300 (Part 5)-2012 Management of Trees & Shrubs During Site Planning, Site Development, & Construction, and also i n the companion publication from the International Society of Arboriculture, Best Management Practices, Managing Trees During Construction, 2008 . When the 6 to 18 x DBH distance cannot be met, "ap propr iate mitigation or determination that the work will not impact tree health and stability shall be performed", according to the ANSI Standard. ANSI A300 (Part 8)-2013 Root Management , states: "When roots are damaged within 6 times the trunk diameter (DBH) mitigation shall be recommended ." For pract ic al purpo ses I use the 6 x DBH distance as the minimal distance acceptable (in most circumstances) in order to maintain good tree hea lth and structural stability. The 6 x DBH distance or greater should definitely be used when there are soi l disturbances on more than one side of the trunk. PO Box 3714 , Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@pa cbell.net. http://www .decah.com. Page 4 of 4 . . Tree Inventory, Assessment, And Protection Camino Del Cerro Los Gatos, CA 95032 Prepared for : Tony Jeans & T.H.I.S. Design August 4, 2015 Revised October 1, 2015 P.O. Box 1010 Felton, CA 95018 831. 331 . 8982 Prepared By: Consulting Arborists LLC ASCA -Registered Consulting Arborist ® #496 ISA -Board Certified Master Arborist® WE-4341B © Copyright Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC, 2015 RECIEtVED NUV 11 Z01~ TOWN OF LOS G ATOS PLANNI NG DIVISION 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, A ssessment, and Protection P lan Oc tober 1, 2015 Table of Contents Tab le of Contents ......................••.•............•........................................................... 1 Summ ary ............................................................................................•.................. 1 Introdu ction •...................................................•......•.•.........................•................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1 Assignment ............................................................................................................. 1 Limits of the assignment ......................................................................................... 1 Purpose and use of the report ................................................................................ 2 Ob servations .....................................................................................•................... 2 Analysis ..............................•...............................•...............•.................•................ 3 Di scussion ............................................................................................................. 4 Tree Inventory ......................................................................................................... 4 Condition Rating ..................................................................................................... 5 Suitability for Preservation ...................................................................................... 6 Influence Level ........................................................................................................ ? Tree Protection ....................................................................................................... 8 Critical Root Zone ................................................................•.................................. 9 Conclusio n .............................................................................................•............ 1 0 Recommendations .............................................................................................. 1 0 Bibliography ...................•............................................•......•....................•........... 11 Glossary of Terms .............................................................................................. 12 Appendix A: Tree Inven tory and Site Map ........................................................ 13 Appendix 8: Tree Inventory and Disposition Tables .............................•......... 14 B2 : Appraisal Summary ........................................................................................ 17 Append ix C: Photographs ....•................................•............•.............................. 20 C 1 : black walnut 889 ............................................................................................ 20 C2: Blue gum eucalyptus 887 ............................................................................... 21 C3: Silk tree 893 ................................................................................................... 22 C4: Silk tree 892 ................................................................................................... 23 C5: Willow tree 894 ............................................................................................... 24 C6: Silk tree 895 ................................................................................................... 25 C7: Driveway ........................................................................................................ 26 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Fe lton , CA 95018 831 .331.8982-rick @monarcharborist.com Page 1 of 2 15735 Ca mino Del Ce rro Tree Inventory, Asses sment, and Protection P lan Octo ber 1, 2015 Appendix 0 : Tree p rot ectio n specifications ..................................................... 2 7 Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications ................................................. 27 All persons, shall comply with the following precautions ...................................... 27 Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 28 Root Pruning ......................................................................................................... 28 Boring or Tunneling ............................................................................................... 28 Tree Pruning and Removal Operations ................................................................ 28 Appe ndix E: Tree Protection Sig ns ................................................................... 29 E1 : English ............................................................................................................ 29 E2 : Spanish .......................................................................................................... 30 Q ualificatio ns , A ssumption s, and Limiting Condit io n s .................................. 31 Certificatio n of Performance ............................................................................. 32 Mon arch Consulting Arbo rist s LLC -P.O Box 1010, Fe lton , CA 9 50 18 83 1.331 .8982-ri c k@mo narch arborist.com Page 2 of 2 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment , and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 Summary The property located at the end of Camino Del Cerro and adjacent properties contain twenty- seven trees comprised of eleven different species. The most commonly found species in the inventory is coast live oak (Qu ercus agrifo/ia), most of which are located adjacent to the driveway along the top of the creek bank. The blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus ) (887) is the only tree considered a "Large Protected Tree" as defined in section 29.10.0955 Definitions of the municipal code. Most of the trees are in either fair or good condition with fair or good suitability for preservation. Eleven trees will be highly affected by the project, four of which are not protected by the ordinance. The trees growing along the top of the creek bank will be moderately affected depending on the new driveway construction and location. The removal of seven protected trees will result in a replanting mitigation plan to account for lost canopy cover. A total of 27 trees were appraised for a value of$57,495 .00 (Appendix B2). A total of $25,749.00 is the value of the protected trees to be retained. Introduction Background Tony Jeans ofT.H.I.S. Design asked me to assess the site, trees, proposed footprint plan, and to provide a report with my findings and recommendations to help satisfy the Town of Los Gatos planning requirements. Assignment 1. Provide an arborist 's report that includes an assessment of the trees within the project area. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter), condition (health and structure), and suitability for preservation ratings. 2. Provide tree protection specifications and influence ratings for the trees that will be influenced by the project. 3. Provide canopy replacement requirements. Limits of the assignment 1. The information in this report is limited to the condition of the trees during my inspection on July 31 , 2015. No tree risk assessments were performed. 2. The plans reviewed for this assignment were as follows : Site Plan C2 and Grading and Drainage Plan C3 dated July 2015 . No landscape or utility plan was reviewed. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 1 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Purpose and u se of the report The report is intended to identify all the trees within the plan area that could be affected by a project. The report is to be used by T.H.I.S . Design, the property owners, their agents, and the Town of Los Gatos as a reference for existing tree conditions to help satisfy the Town of Los Gatos planning requirements . Observations The property is a flag lot located at the end of Camino Del Cerro if you enter from the Los Gatos Almaden Road intersection (Image 1 ). The property is the last lot on the west side of the road where Ross Creek bisects Camino Del Cerro at the foot bridge. The lot and adjacent properties contain twenty-seven trees on or in close proximity to the property. Most of the trees are coast live oaks located along the driveway into the main portion of the property and are growing at the top of the creek bank on the other side ofthe cyclone fence. Within the property are three silk trees (Albiziajulibriss in), a black walnut (Juglans nigra), willow, a few fruit trees and one large blue gum eucalyptus. The north side of the driveway is lined with oleander (Nerium oleander) growing under the high voltage utility lines. The proposed new structure moved the main house east toward the central portion of the lot creating a larger backyard. The new structure footprint is over the two silk trees and orange. The plan indicates a total of twenty-two 24-inch box and five 15-gallon replacement trees are to be planted around the site. Image 1 : The white online above indicated the approximate property boundary. Image courtesy of Google Maps, 2015 . Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 -rick @mona rcharborist.com Page 2 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Analysis Tree appraisal was performed according to the Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers Guide for Plant Appraisal 9th Edition, 2000 (CLTA) along with Western Chapter International Society of Arboriculture Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004. The trees were appraised using the "Cost Approach" and more specifically the "Trunk Formula Method" (Appendix B). "Trunk Formula Method" is calculated as follows : Basic Tree Cost= (Appraised tree trunk increase X Unit tree cost + Installed tree cost) Appraised Value = (Basic tree cost X Species% X Condition% X Location%). The trunk formula valuations are based on four tree factors; species, size (trunk cross sectional area), condition, and location. There are two steps to determine the overall value. The first step is to determine the "Basic Tree Cost" based on size and species rating which is determined by the Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004 We s tern Chapter Regional Suppleme nt. The second part is to depreciate the value according to the location and condition of the trees. The condition assessment and percentages are defined in the "Condition Rating" section of this report. The condition ratings deviate from the Guide's condition assessment numerical rating system. The reason for this deviation is the Guide's assessment criteria fails to account for significant health or structural issues creating high percentages for tree with either significant structural defects or health problems that could ultimately lead to failure or irreversible decline. Location rating is an average of three factors; site, contribution, and placement. Site is determined by the relative property value where the trees are planted. The residential site would be classified as "very high" value with a 90 percent rating compared to similar sites in the area (ISA, 2000). Contribution and placement is determined by the function and aesthetics the trees provide for the site and their location on the property. The percent of contribution and placement can range from 10 to 100 percent depending on the trees influence to the value of the property. These percentages ranged from 0 to 90 percent in my assessment. A total of 27 trees were appraised for a value of$57,495 .00 (AppendixB2). A total of $25,749 .00 is the value of the protected trees to be retained. Appraisal worksheets are available upon request. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1 01 0 , Felton , CA 95018 831 .331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com Page 3 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 Discussion Tree Inventory The tree inventory consists of trees protected by the Town of Los Gatos that are located on the site and those in close proximity on neighboring properties. The Town of Los Gatos protects all trees with a trunk diameter greater than (4) four inches at (54) fifty-four inches above grade on vacant or underdeveloped lots (Appendix A and B). Aluminum tree tags have been affixed to all trees listed in the inventory except the two trees on the adjacent properties. The property and adjacent properties contain twenty-seven trees comprised of eleven different species. The most commonly found species in the inventory is coast live oak, most of which are located adjacent to the driveway along the top of the creek bank. The trees within the property consist of the black walnut (889), blue gum eucalyptus (887), three silk (892, 893, and 895), with one willow (894) growing horizontal off the retaining wall, as well as some smaller trees (888, 890, 891, and 896). The blue gum eucalyptus (887) is considered a "Large Protected Tree" as defined in section 29.10.0955 Definitions of the municipal code. The chart below lists the species and their relative quantity within the project area (Chart 1). Almond (Prunus dulcis) Apple (Malus domestica) Black walnut (Juglans nigra) Blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus) Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) Lemon (Citrus limon) Mock orange (Pittosporum tobira) Orange (Citrus sinensis) Plum (Prunus cerasifera) Silk (Aibizia julibrissin) Willow (Salix purpurea) Chart 1 : Speceis Distribution Quantity 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831 .331 .8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 4 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Conditi o n Rating A tree 's condition is a determination of its overall health and structure based on five aspects: Roots , trunk, s caffold branches, twigs, and foliage . The assessment considered both the health and structure of the trees for a combined condition rating. • 100% = Exceptional = Good health and structure with significant size, location or quality. • 75 % =Good = No apparent problems, good structure and health, good longevity for the site. • 50%= Fair = Minor problems, at least one structural defect or health concern, problems can be mitigated through cultural practices such as pruning or a plant health care program. • 25 % = Poor = Major problems with multiple structural defects or declining health, not a good candidate for retention. • 0% = Dead/Unstable = Extreme problems, irreversible decline, failing structure, or dead. Most of the trees are in either fair or good condition, primarily because they are small volunteers that have not developed the same kinds of problems older trees develop . The willow (894) and silk (895) are both in poor shape and located along the north side of the driveway within the oleander hedge. The chart below li st the condition ratings and the relative quantity of each category (Chart 2). Good Fair Poor Dead 0 2 Chart 2: Condition Rating • Quantity 4 6 8 10 12 14 Mon arc h Cons ulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Fe lton , CA 95018 83 1.33 1.898 2 -ri ck @monarcharborist.com Page 5 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Suitability for Preservation A tree 's suitability for preservation is determined based on its health , structure, age, species characteristics, and longevity using a scale of good, fair, or poor. The following list defines the rating scale (Tree Care Industry Association, 20 12): • Good = Trees with good health, structural stability and longevity. • Fair= Trees with fair health and/or structural defects that may be mitigated through treatment. These trees require more intense management and monitoring, and may have shorter life spans than those in the good category. • Poor = Trees in poor health with significant structural defects that cannot be mitigated and will continue to decline regardless of treatment. The species or individual may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site. Most of the trees have fair or good suitability for preservation and are small volunteers growing along the top of the creek bank adjacent to the existing driveway. In addition to the silk (895) and willow (894) I also considered the almond (885), black walnut (881) although it is on water district property, mock orange (896), and the blue gum eucalyptus (887) to be poorly suited for preservation. The black walnut (889) has fair suitability for preservation but the area near the tree would need to be left alone because the tree's tolerance to disturbance is poor. The chart below list the condition ratings and the relative quantity of each category (Chart 3). Good Fair Poor Dead 0 Chart 3: Suitability for Preservation • Quantity 3 6 9 1::> Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com Page 6 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 Influence Level Influence level defines how a tree may be influenced by construction activity and proximity to the tree, and is described as low, modera te , or high . The following scale defines the impact rating : • Low = The construction activity will have little influence on the tree. • Moderate = The construction may cause future health or structural problems, and steps must be taken to protect the tree to reduce future problems. • High = Tree structure and health will be compromised and removal is recommended, or other actions must be taken for the tree to remain. The tree is located in the building envelope. Eleven trees will be highly affected by the project, four of which are not protec ted by the ordinance. Eleven more trees will be moderately affected and are located along the driveway. If driveway excavation can be moved away from the trees or biaxial georgic is used the impact can be reduced. The trees highly influenced are all the fruit trees and mock orange along with the three silk, black walnut (889), willow (894), and blue gum eucalyptus (887). The chart below lists the trees and the development influence rating (Chart 4). High Moderate Low 0 Influence Rating Quantity 3 6 9 12 I I I j Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Fe lton, CA 95018 831.331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com Page 7 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 Tree Protection Tree protection focuses on protecting trees from damage to the roots, trunk, or scaffold branches from heavy equipment (Appendix D). The tree protection zone (TPZ) is the defmed area in which certain activities are prohibited to minimize potential injury to the tree. The TPZ can be determined by a formula based on species tolerance, tree age, and diameter at breast height (DBH) (Matheny, N . and Clark, J . 1998) or as the drip line in some instances. The tree protection zones for this project should be located at the critical root zone distance of five times the trunk diameter because influence will only be on one side of any tree to remain. The fence along the driveway should remaining place during construction unless a new fence is to be erected prior to construction. This will protect the trees on the adjacent site and is a sufficient means ofType I tree protection. Preventing mechanical damage to the main stems from equipment or hand tools can be accomplished by wrapping the main stem with straw wattle for Type II and Type III protection scenarios (Figure 2). The wattle will create a porous barrier around the trunk and prevent damage to the bark and vascular tissues underneath. No trees for this project will require trunk protection. Straw Wattle Wrap trunks with atraw wattle up to 6 feet Sturdy TPZ Fencing 6 ft. high Figure 1 : Tree protection distances Figure 2 : Trunk protection with straw wattle Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331.8982 -rick @monarcharborist.com Page 8 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 20 15 Critical Root Zone Because the trees w ill only be influenced on one side the CRZ will in effect be the TPZ for this project. The critical root zone (CRZ) is the area of soil around the trunk of a tree where roots are located that provi de stability and uptake of water and nutrients required for the tree's survival. The CRZ is the minimum distance from the trunk that trenching or root cutting can occur and will be defined by the trunk diameter as a distance of three times the DBH in feet, and preferably, five time s (Smiley, E.T., Fraedrich, B . and Hendrickson, N. 2007). For example if the tree is two feet in diameter, the minimum CRZ distance would be six to ten feet from the stem on one side of th e tree. The recommended maximum encroachment distance into the root zone of oaks on one side is five times the trunk diameter (Coate, B .)(Costello, L., Hagan, B., Jones, K. 20ll)(Figure 3). Most of the trees that could be affected are located along the driveway at the top of the creek bank. New driveway construction will be the only impact on the trees . Critical Root Zone (CRZ) = 5 times the trunk diameter for California oak trees . Preferred 4 5x Figure 3: The image above depicts the preferred Critical Root Zone distance for oaks . Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831 .331.8982 -rick @ monarcharborist.com Page 9 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Conclusion The property located at the end of Camino Del Cerro and adjacent properties contain twenty- seven trees comprised of eleven different species. The most commonly found species in the inventory is coast live oak, most of which are located adjacent to the driveway along the top of the creek bank. The blue gum eucalyptus (887) is the only tree considered a "Large Protected Tree" as defined in section 29.10.0955 Definitions of the municipal code. Most of the trees are in either fair or good condition, primarily because they are small volunteers that have not developed the same kinds of problems older trees develop . The willow (894) and silk (895) are both in poor shape and located along the north side of the driveway within the oleander hedge. The majority of trees have fair or good suitability for preservation and are small volunteers growing along the top of the creek bank adjacent to the existing driveway. In addition to the silk (895) and willow (894) I also considered the almond (885), black walnut (881) although it is on water district property, mock orange (896), and the blue gum eucalyptus (887) to be poorly suited for preservation. Eleven trees will be highly affected by the project, four of which are not protected by the ordinance. The trees highly influenced are all the fruit trees and mock orange along with the three silk, black walnut (889), willow (894), and blue gum eucalyptus (887). The trees growing along the top of the creek bank will be moderately affected depending on the new driveway construction. The fence along the driveway should remaining place during construction unless a new fence is to be erected prior to construction. This will protect the trees on the adjacent site. Most of the trees that could be affected are located along the driveway at the top of the creek bank. The removal of seven protected trees will result in a replanting mitigation plan to account for lost canopy cover. A total of$25,749.00 is the value of the protected trees to be retained. Recommendations 1. Obtain all necessary permits prior to removing or significantly altering any trees. 2. Provide a replanting plant with the appropriate number and size of trees or mitigate the loss in canopy cover (Appendix F). 3. Maintain the current fence along the driveway to be used as tree protection or construct a new one prior to site development activity to be used as a Type I tree protection fence. 4. Move the driveway to the northeast to avoid the trees or use biaxial georrid on native soil for support on existing grade. 5. Construct the driveway out of porous materials and do not cut into the soil surface for sub- base treatment. Place new driveway on top of existing grade or move to the northeast. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 10 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Bibliography American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree , Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management : Standard Practices (Management ofTrees and Shrubs During Site Planning, Site Development, and Construction)(Part 5). Londonderry, NH: Secretariat, Tree Care Industry Association, 2012 . Print. ISA. Glossary of Arboricultural Terms . Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture, 2011. Print. Matheny, Nelda P. Trees and development: A technical guide to preservation of trees during land development. Bedminster, PA : International Society of Arboriculture, 1998. Smiley, E. Thomas, Fraedrich, Bruce R., and Hendrickson, Neil. Tree Risk Management. 2nd ed. Charlotte, NC: Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories, 2007. Monarch Consu lting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 11 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Glossary of Terms Defect: An imperfection, weakness, or lack of something necessary. In trees defects are injuries, growth patterns, decay, or other conditions that reduce the tree's structural strength. Diameter at breast height (DBH): Measures at 1.4 meters ( 4.5 feet) above ground in the United States, Australia (arboriculture), New Zealand, and when using the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th edition; at 1.3 meters ( 4.3 feet) above ground in Australia (forestry), Canada, the European Union, and in UK forestry; and at 1.5 meters (5 feet) above ground in UK arboriculture. Drip Line: Imaginary line defined by the branch spread or a single plant or group of plants . Mechanical damage: Physical damage caused by outside forces such as cutting, chopping or any mechanized device that may strike the tree trunk, roots or branches. Scaffold branches: Permanent or structural branches that for the scaffold architecture or structure of a tree. Straw wattle: also known as straw worms, bio-logs, straw noodles, or straw tubes are man made cylinders of compressed, weed free straw (wheat or rice), 8 to 12 inches in diameter and 20 to 25 feet long. They are encased in jute, nylon, or other photo degradable materials, and have an average weight of 35 pounds . Tree Protection Zone (TPZ): Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, especially during construction or development. Tree Risk Assessment: Process of evaluating what unexpected things could happen, how likely it is, and what the likely outcomes are. In tree management, the systematic process to determine the level of risk posed by a tree, tree part, or group of trees. Trunk: Stem of a tree. Volunteer: A tree, not planted by human hands, that begins to grow on residential or commercial property. Unlike trees that are brought in and installed on property, volunteer trees usually spring up on their own from seeds placed onto the ground by natural causes or accidental transport by people. Normally, volunteer trees are considered weeds and removed, but many desirable and attractive specimens have gone on to become permanent residents on many public and private grounds. This G lossary of terms was adapted from the Glossary of Arboricultural Terms (IS A, 2011 ). ~' , Monarch Consu lting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1 01 0, Felton , CA 95018 831 .331 .8982 -rick @monarcharborist.com Page 12 of 3 2 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan Appendix A: Tree Inventory and Site Map Tree inventory and site map is provided on a separate sheet. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com October 1, 2015 Page 13 of 32 15735 Ca mino De l Cerro Tree Inve nto ry, Assessment, and Prot ection Plan October 1, 2015 Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Disposition Tables Table 1 : Tree Inventory, Assessment , Disposition I Tree # Trunk Cond ition Suitability Influence Protected 1 Species Diameter Height Crown LeveV " Remove or Retain I Coast live 870 I 1 0 25 12 Fair I Good I Moderate / Protected I oak (Quercus I Retain ; agrifoli~----~ ____________ 1 __ L_ ~----~ __ _ . Plum (Prunus 871 r 5 15 10 Fair Fai r Moderate / I Protected I cerasifera) I -~ I Retain ' I Coast live ~~~72 15 1 -3-0 +,---25 Good Good --~, Moderate / Protected _, 1 oak (Quercus 1 Retain : agrifolia) I I j I j Coast live 8 73 1-18 1 --3 s:--25 4 Good 1 Good ---+-, M-od~rat~ Protected oak (Quercus . I I j_Retam 11 ;----~ I agrifolia) 1 I 1 I r -+-I J --4--------..---1------ ,Coast live 1 874 1 5 1 35 1 15 Fair 1 Fair I Moderate/ 1 Protected I agrifolia) 1 j ___ j I I oak (Quercus 1 + 1 I Retain ~ Co~~t live--~ 875 -4 25 r--8 Fair ! Fair Moderate/ t Protected 1 oak ( Quercus j_ j 1 I 1 Retain I 1 agrifolia) 1 L ~ -----~ ---~--------__ _j_ ------+-----' 1 Coast live I 87 6 12 1 20 1 18 Good 1 Good Mod erate / I Protect ed 1 oak (Quercus I I I I Retain [ agrifolia) I I _ l ; I ' Coast live 1 877 I 12 35 18 Good Good 1 Mod erate / P rote cted oak (Quercus I I 1 Retain ~~~ I I I I ~ l 1 Coast live l 878 I 8 35 12 Good I Good 1 oak (Quercus . 1 1 agrifolia) 1 ! I I I ...____ ------_J.. __ --L ' Moderate / Protected I Retain I l __ Monarch Co nsultin g Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831 .331 .898 2 -rick @monarcharborist.com Page 14 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 I Tree Species # Trunk Condition Suitability Influence Protected Diameter Height Crown LeveV " j Coast live 879 10 35 10 1 Good I loak (Quercus agrifolia) ~~--;,~;;live --~j-----~--- oak (Quercus 880 10 35 1 10 Good agrifolia) ---- Black walnut (Jug fans nigra) 881 Coast live 882 oak (Quercus agrifolia) 11 25 30 15 1 Fair -1 ·- 22 1 Good I Coast live 883 j 12 -2S ~--a tl Fair I oak (Quercus J. agr-ifolia) t-1 I Coast live 884~----8 ~-20 -~Fair oak (Quercus l agrifo/ia) 12 Fair 8 Good 60 Fair 8 Fair (Prunus J dufcis) ' J I Coast live 1 886 10 -15 1 oak (Quercus 'I 1 1 1 j agrifolia) I 1 I I I Blue gum 887 84 1 j 80 1 1 eucalyptus I 1 (Eucalyptus 1 Jl 1 globulus!_ _ 1 ~ _ . I Orange 1 1 888 ! 1 6 j 1 15 1 ' (Citrus I sinensis) _ L _ j _j_ _ _j Good --1-- 1 Good I l Poor I Remove or Retain Moderate/ Protected Retain Moderate/ Protected! Retain j Lo_;,--+-P-r-o-te-ct-ed-1 I Retain I Good Low/ Protected I F ... ' a1r Fair _ __J_ I Poor I Good I j i 1 Poor I t -I Fair Retain Low/ I Retain j Low/-- ~ Retain . High/ ~--1 Remove 1 Low/ Retain I I High/ I Remove I ~ :High/ I Remove I _ ___j---- Protected IN;-- protected Protected J Protected I t Not --· --l I protected ' !_--- Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331 .8982-rick @monarcharborist.com Page 15 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment , and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 I Tree Species # Trunk Condition Suitability Influence Protected Diameter Height Crown LeveV " Remove or Retain i Black walnut j 889 1 36 1 35 1 40 ' Fair Fair High/ 1 , Protected 1 (Juglans l 1 Remove I nigra) 1 'J\pple (M-;;,us I 89o-l 8 i -wt 7 Good tGood --~ High/- - : Not--- I domestica) I I I I Remove 1 protected ~emo;---i a;)----;~ ---ej--5-~Fair -----j,l Fair---f igh/ -I Nm-----j ( Citrus limon)'ll ! j I j Remove r protected Silk (Aibizia 892 1 16 I 35 27 Fair 1 Fair I High/ Protected 1 ju/ibrissin) lJ ! I I I Remove I f silk (Aibizia 1 893 1 ____ -,s l 3; r--36 Fair -·j Fai~---~,'High/ +, Protect;d l julibrissin) 1 I I i I Remove 1 [wmow (s.;/;;r8-;;;r ---301 --25 , -15 -Poo;--~Po.;;----; High/-liProtected- t_:'purea) ~-_J J -I - ----f-----; Remo: 1 ----' 1 Silk (Aibizia 1 895 J 6. 6. 6. 6 20 I 10 Poor 1 Poor · High/ I Protected 1 julibrissin) 1 I I I 1 Remove L I I I I I I Mock orange lags~~ 4 ~ 4 1 -15~ 7 G~od ' Poor 1 1 High/-~ot --- (Pittosporum I 1 i , Remove 1 protected tobira) I ! I l I 1 l 1 I ! I ] Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331 .8982-rick@mo narcharbori st.com Pag e 16 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 82: Apprai sal Summary Table 2: Appraisal Summary Tree Species Number Trunk Location Condition Species Appraised Protected Diameter (Average Rating Value and ofS, c, Retained and P) I Coast live oak 870 I 10 68.33% 50.0% 1.~ 90.00% $1 ,1 50.3 Yes ~(Quercus agrifolia) I ---------+---i ---- Plum (Prunus 871 I 5 68.33% i 50.0 % I 50.00% $288.0 No I cerasifera) I L l ! Coast live oak l --87 2 1 Yes ---~ 15 68.33%1 75.0% 90.00% $3,782.8 (Quercus I I I agrifolia) _j 75 ~.~-90 .00% ----I Coast live oak 873 18 68.33% $5,412.2 Yes I (Quercus I agrifolia) I $327.4 t y;~ I -68.33%1 I ----l· --;o.o;;.r-90.00;·] j Coast live oak 1 874 1 5 1 (Quercus I ! agrifolia) I I -------~ I -~ 4 r 68.33% ~-50.0%1 I 875 1 $228.7 1 Yes I Coast live oak 1 90.00% (Quercus I I I 1 agrifo/ia) ~J I ___ _J I I I 68.33% t -I 90.00%1 --, Coast live oak 876 I 75.0% I $2,449.7 Yes 1 (Quercus I agrifolia) I I ! I I I j 1 I 68.33% j I Coast live oak 877 12 1 75.0% 90.00% $2,449.7 Yes (Quercus I ! I ! agrifo/ia) I I I I I I i I r- 75.0% r I I Coast live oak 878 8 68.33% 90.00% i $1,133.0 Yes I (Quercus I I agrifolia) I I I I I I I I L -I Mona rch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331 .8982 -rick @monarcharborist.com Page 17 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 Tree Species Number Tru nk Locatio n Diameter (Average ofS, C, and P) I . Coast live oak ; (Quercus 1 agrifolia) 1 10 i I --·---. Coast live oak 1 (Quercus agrifolia) -i--- 880 10 1 I --·----_ _.j __ -- Black walnut (Juglans [nigra) _ I Coast live oak ~ ! (Quercus agrifolia) I Coast live o~k-; - (Quercus + 881 I I I I I i 882 1 I I 883 11 4 12 ~grifolia_) -----,---~ ____ _ I Coast live oak 884 1 8 (Quercus I agrifolia) Almond (Prunus 885 I I dulcis) __,----...,.--·- 1 Coast live oak 886 (Quercus agrifolia) 1 Blue gum eucalyptus I I (Eucalyptus globu/us) lora~~e - I (Citrus . !_ine::_~!s~ -. ' Black walnut (Jug fans nigra) 887 888 889 84 I 68.33% 68.33 %1 68.33% 68 .33% 68.33% 68 .33% 68.33% i I 68.33%1 I I 63.33% I I I J Condition Species Appraised Protected Rating Value and Retained 75.0% I l I 75.0% 90.00% 1 $343.0 Yes 50.0% J 9o.ooo/.4--$1,s33.1-Yes ---~ I I I 50.0% r 90.00";.r $755.3 -y~;-. _j_j ---~ ---~ 50.0% I 50.00% I $2,056.3 Remove ___ J __ -t -----L - 75.0%! 90.00% I $1 ,725.5 'Yes I , 50.0% l 50.00% I 50.0% t 50.0% J - 70.00%1 I 50.00% I I _ ] $14,755.2 1 Remove J I $521 3 ~ Remove ~ $5,633.2-! R~mo ve -j --l _ J Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831 .331 .8982 -rick @monarcharborist.com Page 18 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan Tree Species Number Trunk Location Apple (Malus I 890 I Diameter (Average ofS, C, and P) 8 63.33% j domestica) ~ l ------1-___ l_- Lemon (Citrus 1 891 : limon) j I Silk (Aibizia julibrissin) I ' J~ Silk (Aibizia I 893 3 63.33% 16 80.00% Condition Species Rating 75.0% 70.00% 50.0% 50.0% 50.00% julibrissin) I -------+ ---+------~--·----~~~-----J --·----- October 1, 2015 Appraised Protected Value and Retained $1,438.0 Remove $1,861.5 1 Remove $1 ,s08.71 R~m~ve ~I I I Willow (Salix 1 894 1 30 1 purpurea) 1 I ~ ! I I I , I -----+ ~------·- ! Silk (Aibizia 895 I 6, 6, 6, 6 ! julibrissin) I 46.67% I 25.0% I 50.00% I 46.67%. 2S.oo/. r -S0.00o/J-$34o.oo Fi;~~v~ I i ~ l I !Mock~range T (Pittosporum · tobira) I L_ ____ [ I 75.o1 -70.ooo/; I $1~~1~oO I R;;;;;ov~~ - 1 --___ _l ---j_ ---J -j A total of $25,749.00 is the value of the protected trees to be retained . Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 19 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan Appendix C: Photographs C1 : black walnut 889 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831.331 .8982-rick @monarcharborist.com October 1, 2015 Page 20 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan C2: Blue gum eucalyptus 887 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331.8982-rick @monarc harborist.com October 1, 2015 Page 2 1 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan C3: Silk tree 893 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331 .8982 -rick @monarcharborist.com October 1 , 2015 Page 22 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan C4: Silk tree 892 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com October 1, 2015 Page 23 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan C5: Willow tree 894 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com October 1 , 2015 Page 24 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan C 6 : Sil k tree 895 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com October 1 , 2015 Page 25 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan C7: Driveway Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick @monarcharborist.com October 1 , 2015 Page 26 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 Appendix D: Tree protection specifications Section 29.10.1005.-Protection of Trees During Construction states the following: Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications l. Size and materials: Six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two-inch diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven into the ground to a depth of at least two (2) feet at no more than ten-foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and when stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base. 2. Area type to be fenced: Type I: Enclosure with chain link fencing of either the entire dripline area or at the tree protection zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or consulting arborist. Type II: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain link fence around the entire planter strip to the outer branches. Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout only (such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with two-inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches. 3. Duration of Type I, II, III fencing: Fencing shall be erected before demolition , grading or construction permits are issued and remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence . 4. Warning Sign: Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an eight and one-half-inch by eleven-inch sign stating : "Warning-Tree Protection Zone--This fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025." Text on the signs should be in both English and Spanish (Appendix E). All persons, shall comply with the following precautions 1. Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the drip line , or tree protection zone (TPZ) when specified in an approved arbori st report, around any tree and/or vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and prohibit any storage of construction materials or other materials, equipment cleaning, or parking of vehicles within the TPZ. The dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of the construction. 2. Prohibit all construction activities within the TPZ, including but not limited to: excavation, grading, drainage and leveling within the drip line of the tree unless approved by the Director. 3. Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil , gasoline, chemicals or other harmfu l materials within the drip line of or in drainage channels, swales or areas that may lead to the drip line of a protected tree. 4 . Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree. 5. Design utility services and irrigation line s to be located outside of the dripline when feasible. Monarch Consu lting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018 831 .33 1.8982 -rick @monarcharborist.com Page 27 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 6. Retain the services of a certified or consulting arborist who shall serve as the project arborist for periodic monitoring of the project site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The project arborist shall be present whenever activities occur which may pose a potential threat to the health of the trees to be preserved and shall document all site visits. 7 . The Director and project arborist shall be notified of any damage that occurs to a protected tree during construction so that proper treatment may be administered. Listed below are some additional tree protection measures: Monitoring Any trenching, construction or demolition that is expected to damage or encounter tree roots should be monitored by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist and should be documented. The site should be evaluated by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist after construction is complete, and any necessary remedial work that needs to be performed should be noted. Root Pruning Roots greater than two inches in diameter shall not be cut. When roots over two inches in diameter are encountered and are authorized to be cut or removed, they should be pruned by hand with loppers, handsaw, reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left crushed or tom. Roots should be cut beyond sinker roots or outside root branch junctions and be supervised by the project arborist. When completed, exposed roots should be kept moist with burlap or backfilled within one hour. Boring or Tunneling Boring machines should be set up outside the drip line or established Tree Protection Zone. Boring may also be performed by digging a trench on both sides of the tree until roots one inch in diameter are encountered and then hand dug or excavated with an Air Spade® or similar air or water excavation tool. Bore holes should be adjacent to the trunk and never go directly under the main stem to avoid oblique (heart) roots. Bore holes should be a minimum of three feet deep. Tree Pruning and Removal Operations All tree pruning or removals should be performed by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49 California Contractors License. Treatment, including pruning, shall be specified according to ANSI A-300A standards and limitations and performed according to ISA Best Management Practices, and adhere to ANSI Z133 .1 safety standards. Trees that need to be removed or pruned should be identified in the pre-construction walk through. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831 .331 .8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 28 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs E1:English G) c: 0 N C)c: c: .2 ·-... u G) ... 0 a.. D.. G) G) a.. ~ ~ ""00> Q) c > ·-0""0 EOLO Q)t.)C\J a:~~ Q) ~a co ...... -~ +-' ctj . Ocm Za>C\J =O..a> ~c-o ...cr::-o (f)...,_.(.) Q) ~ c g:c~ (].)::J~ LLCI) en ·--..c-o I-c <( Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felto n, CA 95018 October 1 , 2015 831.331.8982-rick @monarcharborist.com Page 29 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro E2 : Spanish Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan ·-.(1) L a; a.. OD.. -gc; -c.c ·-... ::I<( 0(1) c ca c::: 0 N CJ) 0 -o ro (.) ro CJ) '-Q) CJ) c ... ro '- -o 0 c.. 0 c ro -ro > ro ~ CJ) w Q) -o CLO :Q N uo c~ ~0 ~ c . Q)O"> eN -... 0 CD ·u -c C-o ro co CJ)-o ro :::J ·-() ro ~ Q) 0 ·----C> :::J._ CJ)-o ... ro ... o ~o CJ) Q) >- October 1, 20 15 Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331 .8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 30 of 32 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1 , 2015 Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the c onsultant 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 r eport 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 i s only for coordination and ease of reference. Inclusion of said information with any drawings or other documents does not constitute a r epresentation 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 31 of 32 . . ' .. 15735 Camino Del Cerro Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Protection Plan October 1, 2015 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 fmdings 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 l 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 2015, 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 permiss ion of the author. Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018 831.331.8982-rick@monarcharborist.com Page 32 of 32 This Page Intentionally Left Blank DECORA TIVI! 'LUE CAP ON WOOD AtAM!D C~Mt\.EY )203 _....,:'~~~ ~'.!:::..!. ~ ~-----------------------~-------------- TO f'> OF ENTRY ,.L.ATE ~ -·-·-·-3 16>.16- l&- TOP M ,.LATE ':' 3'4-~ fDLATE AT DAY "' ~ 'TOL." 9 WOOD j ijJINOOI.LI& 9 ., 6MOOT1-I TROWEL. !llUCCO ,INI~ WI INTeGRAL. COLOFI: R F R 0 N T G 1-l T D E §§ -~ .. : . . -...... . &TONE &uflil'tOUND A T ENTPIY ARCI-I E L EVA T O N ELEVA T A WINDOW& TOL WOOO WINI:)OU.t$ WI LIME&TONE !.U T'RIM TYPICAl. COMMERCIAL.. TYPE TEMPEJita:> Gl,A.$6$KY~T O£COAATIVE REC~ &T\JCCO P A NEL& L .. TOD OF &KYUCi4-4T -------------0 c~& ···&LATE Fii'OOf''NG 1-tAlf·Fii'OUND CiUTT'Dt6 ANO eEAH END& D E CORA T!YE A.OWEARED &TONE V!NBE'A ·~304.eo TOP OF FLOOR I I I 1 I I )3.~ """·· )02.0 ,. T .. I-I .. LS Deeten D ESIGN .,nd DEVELOPMENT P .O . BOX ~I& LQ. Gat.cs, CA. 4!~31 VOICE• -40&.3S~Ue33 .... th l.oe-1 ~ RECEIVED At.!G n 5 7ll15 'i*D1''"*1N 'I''' '''ffi"A"''i1 f""P'*"I &1111 ~ new •l ngle -et~ reeldence ~nd ~tt.sehed 9"'~9'"' CAl-lOON RESID ENCE 15135 Camino Del Cerro Lo& G~o&, CA ~S032 A.F .N. 523-24 -001 ~lyiW.(•) --~--... ·--·....-.--... - c._ -..... z ~_..,..,,;_...s ... ··---·-----.-:""'11 .-.~ i TQHY.-..Ht ;;;'i:r,;-~-;,.-:~;.,.~y;:~--... -.... 0 Revl e!on•: 9 e xte rior elevation& I 2010.-30 Sheet -"Is 1&, 2o1s A3,0 ~ ~ _T?P~PLA~ T_~¢!PLA~ ·.·.-.·§§·.· ... ·:.·:.·. ;~'-:§§~·-·-·-:~·-:~·-. ,· _ .. _ : ~~ .. -_ ... : ~~ . . . . . . . . ' ... . '. '. '. . ' .. · '. ' ; _ .. _ ,· _ ... ,; : ... : -~-~-. , .. --· ... · . .. . . . -. ' . ' . '. ... '. ' ' . . . . . . . .· :. ,• -~-.. · _ ..... .. · _ .. _ : _.. : ~~-,· _ ... ' ' .· . ' .· ' . . . . ' . . . . . ' .· ' .. · . . . ..-_·. ; . .. . .. -, _ .. _ : F..AT ~00' UJI ~A!It~ET .C.T COVER£!) P'ATIO 6MOOTW TROI.IIE.LED &TUCCO F!NI$,... I.J/ INTEG~ COLOR L E F T 1\ a OECOfltA fiVE IIWJE C ;..p OJWOOO .....,.., O<lr1NEY CL..A6$ • A. • $_ATE ~OOfiiNG FLAT I'Q;OOJI' W/ PARAPET /AT C OV~EO P ATIO .. ~~:·:·::·:·:~ ··§:~· _: .. -_: _: .-·.: --~ R E A R E D COMNI!RCIAL TTPE TEJ"'1111"EJil!DGL~ ~Yl.IG..rf E E L E L E V A T v A T 0 N . -' . ' . . . 1--- ..· -. : .. , . . .. . .. : . '1---- : .... --... · --.. -... . -. !!!!!= 0 N . . .. OECOR.ATIYE API-fEAREC &TONE VENEER OECORATtVE ~ CAP OtWOOD F'lltAMED CJ.I !I"1W!Y C~$6 "A" &LATE ROOfl'lNG TDL. WOOD Wl t-4)0\L/& WI L.IME&>TONE !IU. cl ~··· ,, '''I''' I '',,,, I I 0 4 I U '6 )0 H IG.41..El ve· • r -<:>" HA.L.F--!Itc:u-10~& WI 4 X. &TAINED F AL&E R ..A.FrfJit eEA.M EN06 0 lo4Alfi'-ROUND 6tJT'fER6 U.V 4 )( 6 &T.AINED FAL&E IQ:.4FT£Jil &£AM a4D$ I I I I I I at;.:..&.LI• v•· ,.,. ...!~~~!~- TOt-OF PLATE TOP'~PLAT! ~ _ENT~! ~~ __ TOF OF PL.A TE TOP OF P'L.ATE I I. "' ,. T .. j-1 .. 1..5 Deefgn DESIGN and DEVELOPMENT P .O . eox ~le l ot G.-tot. CA. ~~3 1 VOICE• .oiC&.Y.>4.\e)) tldl».lhl t.o.Mi gt'-C.OII'I i@iiMBJ§IMIFFS CiiUUiiiFIFF 1'8"111¥ "''"*" " nsw olngle-•t""'l! reoldsnce <lnd <ltt<lchec:l 9"'"9'"' CAl-lOON RESIDENCE 1S13S Camino Del Cerro L oa Gatoe, CA 9S032 A .P .N . &23-24-001 &! mr: .-. •·s=::;:;:;::::: ,011 ,....__; .. ·---b'#--lf'-'T~-~~-) _ _..._,_...,..,.., __ .. ...,.c --"'W. TOI'{T ........ ,....~oo .... ., __ ,..... .. ..,~l.,._...,_ .. __ tr!.,,.,...__,.,_,.,.o...r·, Revlalona: ------------ e xterior elevation& 2 &e<l le, 1!4 " • 1'-o" 201!>-30 Sheet J.JI~ 18 , 201!> A3,1 ~ ~ J· f ~ )1.~ 0 - ... TOP Of PLATE T<>-OF -;;rArE AT t>AY MAV-ROUND G UTTER& 01 -4 X • &lArNED FALH ~AFTER BE.A.,...& &MOOfl.t TROWELED 6TUCCO WI INT!6!1tAL CO~OR OECORA nve ADOJER£0 &TONE VENEER &TONE 61U. Tfi1 IM 0 )Cll.O ~· T~~!L-OOOR:: __ Jl::::!!ll!!l!i!l!l!ll!!ll!i!I!!I!!!I!I!!II!!;;;;J ______ _ SO~o·--___T?" ~ ~~" TOf'" 0, GRA:>E F R 0 N T E L E v A T 0 N ~--- • --·· ~Cl.A&.'A'SLATE .. OOFING ::::::::::::J • ""LF-.. OUNO GUTTEIO. 0 1 A X • 6 TAJNE0 FAl&E R.6FTEJit eEAM& TOP OF PL.A.TE ---------- TOO OF -----PLA'ri' PECORA livE ~!D 6TONE YEI'\EE'flil: TOP OF P~TE" F T D E E L 0 N cLA&• o Ao 61..ATE .. <X"IN6 0-IA.I,..II-ROUND GUTT!R.6 0 1 -4 X • &T A INED !"AL&! RAq'£R eEAM& 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 '-o' 18°-2~' 4 '-A.· 3 CAR GARAGE WO RK &!-lOP I UTILITY R OOM ... ~~~~~~!l~i·i~i-~I!III!I!~li~tt~tt~i.i.i!~~ii!I~!IIIJ!!IIl!lll~llll!lli~!lll!:llli!lij~l!ll~:: ~~ 0 °:0 :> 0 : 0 :_; :::o0: _:-:_; 0.-:0 °: 0: 0 :_.: _:-:_; o_0:o 0: /0; 0_-:0 °: _:-:,.: _:-: 0:0::0°: :::_; 0.-:_; 0: 0 :_.: 0 _-: 0: -.-: 0: :0 :; : 0 : 0: ·:: 0: .-: 0: :0 : 0: : 0 : 0: _-: /"r __ ..IJ_ ____ _J 4 °--4' l 30-o· I~ • ·.·· :· .. < :. 0·············.·. ; /• :····· :·······•·: : ,. :•····· .•• ' ; ze-===:~o ~~· 0 --0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 • 0 0 •• 0 0 • 0 0 • 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 G A R A G E F L 0 0 R p L A N 00 ° _.:· 00 -0 ; -- ; -• 0 -0 0 • =---=......:..::.._:::.:.__=--=------'---=--=-----'::..,__;_:_ _ _;_--=___;_-'--'-'---'o 'o 'o ·-; ; 'o ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 0-; ; -----TOP~,LQ~~:_ ____ ~~~~~~~::~~==~==~==~==::==~==~==~========~~::~~==~==~==~==~==::==~==~==~====~==~~::~ \ OECOfUThfE .AOiofERED '-... &TONE VENEER R G 1-1 T 5 D E E L E v A T 0 N L , •l o•• I •• • I •• •1 1 1111 • 1 I 0 • • .., 16 lO ,.. ~a, ••• r..o· b 0 T,~,I,S DeeTgn D ES IG N and DEV ELOPMENT P .O. BOX 15-t& Lot C.at.ot. C A . ~!!103 1 VOICE• A06.*"'.1e)) .W..lhl~•Jgn.e.o-'1 f l ii#!ill II .. A"""' Miiiiiiipilii M"*fiD 11 ne~.a •lnsl e-.~ r e•ldanc;e and attached 9 "'"9e' CA~OO N RES IDENCE 15 135 C am ino Del Cerro L oe Gatoe, CA 'a5032 A.P.N . S23-24-001 "· ---·-·-rr-~=_______ ..__,....,.,.. __ _.,..., --~------~-....... TON,-~ _____ _..,.... .. _.,"'0 __ . .,_.,.._ """'., '?-_ ... ·1.,.,. O.·r· R•vfelone. ------------------- at tached gar age f loor p lan and e le v at l one &eale: 1/4 11 • 1'-a• ~ ~- Sheet } I I I 0 I I I l A6,0 f 201!:>-30 • "' •• .AJI ~ 18 0 201!:> L_ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ~ __ ~_·_o __ v· ___ o __ .. ~_o __________________________ ~--------------------------------~1 CllG· CANNON DESIGN GROUP September 9, 2015 Ms. Manu Mosley Community Development Department Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 RE: 15735 Camino Del Cerro Dear Marni: ARCHITECTURE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN SEP 1 0 2015 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLA NNING DIVISION I reviewed the drawings, and visited the site. My comments and recommendations are as follows : Neighborhood Context The site is located adjacent to Ross Creek, and is accessed via a long driveway from Canl.ino Del Cerro. The site is shown on the aerial photo below, and photos of the site and its surroundings are on the following page. 700 LA RKSPUR LAN DING CIRCLE . SU ITE 199 . LA RK SPUR . CA . 94939 • i.JXHlB IT 1 1 TEL: 4 1 5.33 1.3 7 95 CDGPlAN@PACBEi l.NET En try drive (rom Ca mino D e l Ce rro View from site to homes across Ross Creek 1/o m f:' t o th e imme d iat.e rear of the sit e \'ie~\ from ~it(' t o home immediately to the north Exist ing hou se o n t he site The sit e and existing ho u se 15735 C amino Dd Cerro Design Review Comments September 9, 20 15 Page 2 Rear yard of the existing house on the si te CAN NON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIR CLE . SU ITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA. 94939 Iss ues and Concerns 15735 Camino Dd Cerro Design Rev iew Comments Septem ber 9, 20 15 Page 3 The property is relatively isolated from adjacent development except for the home immediately to the rear of the site. While the proposed h ouse i s large, its one-story h eight will limit its impact o n adjacent h omes. There are only a few concerns re lating to the design style and details as follows: 1. The architectural style is a bit eclectic, but seem s to be drawing inspiration from the Tuscan and Mediterranean Styles. Stone veneer is employed in areas on three sides of the house (see diagram below), but it appears rather fragmented and used purely decoratively whereas the architectural style would u sually include more stone relative to the stucco, and the stone would b e used to d efine significan t volumetric areas of the structure. Current isolated stone usage ----------· 2. While hip roof fo rms are used extensively, there is on e awkward area w h ere a gable end is used to accommodate a large skylight over th e Great Room . 3. T h e detail proposed for the drop eaves at bay pop outs is awkward, and not typical of the architectural style. Drop eaves are and not consistent with t he architect ural style CANNON DESIGN GROUP Sin gle gable roof end :+---t interrupts the visual unity of the design 700 LA RK SPUR LANDING CI RC LE . SUITE 1 99 . LAR KSPUR . CA. 94939 15735 Camino Del Cerro D es ign R~iew Comments Septembe r 9, 2015 Page 4 4. The columns at the rear covered patio are too small for the architectural style and for the scale of stone. 5. The parapet at the rear covered patio does not seem to work ver:y w ell with the stone at the rear patio. Porch top does not relate well to the stone or to the architectural are for stone and for the architectural style 6. The depth o f the wall area above the sto ne arch at the side of the rear patio is too small for a stone wall. Depth of wall above the arch Is for stone Recommendations 1. Increase the amount of stone facing, and consolidate the stone to define volume tric por- tions of the structure. T h ere are undoubtably a number of ways of doing this. One recom - mended approach is shown in the diagram to the right. /l --· Recommended approach to stone usage In building blocks ----------· CAN NON DES IGN GRO UP 7 00 LARKSPUR LAND ING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LA RK SPUR . CA . 94939 15735 Cam ino Del Cerro D es ign Rev iew Comments Septem ber 9 , 20 I 5 Page 5 2 . Replace the g able r oof with a hip roof to match the remainder o f the structw:e, and redesign the skylight to b et- ter integrate it with the roof form. Simplify form of the drop eave -~! ............... ~- Use hip roof to match other roof forms Organize stone to define volumetric portions of the structure 3. Design the dco p eave in a m ore traditional manner. I noticed plan s and elevatio n for a cabana, but did not find it located on any of the other drawings. I also n oticed that the elevatio n drawings for the cabana were incomplete -the elevations sh ow a substantial overhang on the fr o nt and rear elevations, but how that is resolved o n the left side elevation is not shown. Marni, pleas e let me kno w if you have any questions, or if there are other issues that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESI GN GROUP Larry L. Canno n CANNON DE SI GN G RO UP 7 00 LA RKSPU R LANDING C IR C LE . SUITE 199 . LA RKS PUR . CA. 9 4 9 3 9 This Page Intentionally Left Blank OECOI'O!AT ~VE FL.UE CAP OH u.IOO:> FRAMED C~EY COMM~C IA.L. TYPE TEI""P~ED ~66SKYU6'"'T TO"" OF &KTLIGf.lT ~~ --~~~~~~~------------------------------------------ 30'-0 TOP OF ENTRY ~LATE -~---·- ~ TOP OF PLATE 3 '4 ,!o PLATE AT !lAY •10L• .9 WOOP "9 WK>OW& Q RECD~m .. 3·TY~AL •V :-- -+- C.! .. ASS "A • &.ATE -----'""""""" ~AL.f-4Q:OUNP (.UTTER~ AND ee..AM EN:>$ To-OF PLATE .... f GARAGE PLATE AT B AY $TO~ 6IU. ~ ~ ,.,., .. "' $l\JCCO t.IJ!!P >c,.m> ToP Oil co;. lll.!o "'"·· !MOOTM TtQ.OWEl.. $T\JC.CO fiiNI&I-4 WI INTE'G,_AL. COLOR 302.0 &ILL TRIM AT WINDOWS TOP Of EXI&T!NG GRAD£ F R 0 N T ELEVAT .. ·;~-~-~~-~~~~~~~~>< ~ • PAI'ITEO Z X il> FLAT GL..A$6 6KYL'GWT$ ~. • , • , • ,' , • ,' , • • • , ·~AJitGE R~ WI ANWODIZED FRAMe ~ .. : ; ·••• ; ~ ..... ~ ~'~ .. ~ ~" ... • ~ ... ~ 0 N A OECORA TIVE ADt-IEARED &TOt-:E V ENEER / ~ ~ ~ "OOf'ING I<AU'-"OUNO c>UTTERO AND l!ll:!lli!!ll!l!:l!l!l!l!l!i!l!lll!!!lli!:i!t!IIlli!i!:llllil.llllii.!ti!lliiiiiiiiiiiillllli!!!i!lli!llllilllllllllll!lll!lll!l!tii!lll!.llc!"'!i""~·A;·i·i·A;Ti•!!!l~l!lljj~~;;::: • >< & OTAIN£t> ·~ ,.MTEI'I 8EA!1 END& &MOOll-IT~OUJEJ.. •,,., , •• , , , , , • , , , , • , , , , • , , , , , , • , .. , , , , , , , ••• , , , , , ~.·,·,·,•,·,·,·,·.·,·.·,',',',',',',',',',',',',', ~~=~~ ~s:.-~a--->---:.-:-~-:--~--->--->-<--~----·: _____ .. ------>-<s-:a~-:.-:-->.--:.§>>->-~-:.-~. -:. ~ -_: -~------~------~---------.---~------~------~----->-.---~----->--_---~------·- -.~------------.. --.----------.~-----.~-----.~-----.---.--.----.--.. -.--_.·_:_.-_:_:.. -. ~--.--.-----.. --. ·.--.~-----.~-----.~--. 1----.--.--.--.-·.--.--.--.-·_:_.-_--.. -.--.-·.--.-·.--.--.--.-·.--.-·.--.-.. ; .. ; . --.; . . .. ; -; -.; . ; .. ; . ; ; .. ; ~ . __ ·::·:.· __ . __ ·:;·:~·::-: .-_.-_::::::::-::::::::::-::·:;·:~·::·::·::·::·::-:: :::.:::. :_::~ -----::: ____ ·:::~·::·_: _:_: :---.<·:<):;·.:.:T·)::;::~::::::::;_:~_::_:~_::_:_::::-::::~:::-:-----~----:::- ] UNE ~ E>Cl&TtNG G R.AOE 30).0 R 1-l T D E E L E V A T 0 N "-._. 3• ~ECI!&6f!t> fDL ......... WOOO WINOOW!!I WI L.IME6TONE SILL TRII"'i Tl"fD'ICAL J.o L .. 0 TOP OF PLAT!! . --e .)l,),!o I ! I I I I I ,. -'II >noe 2.0 T .. J-LLS Deetgn D ES IG N and DEV ELOPMENT fD .0. BOX 1~18 l..o. Gate., CA. ~~)I vOtce, 40e.3~.L&33 WIIIIIIU.I .thl~el gn.c;.c:m RECEIVED SEP , n !015 TO WN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION •cwu '"'*W'"*"'•iie a nsw •rnsls-&tor:f rs•ldenc:.s ~ a tYehsd gar~, 11\iii* C Al-lOON RESIDENCE 15135 C.!lm lno Del Cerro Loe G.!lloe, CA 95032 A .F .N. S23 -24 -001 ""·-·-'-·st =::;:;t;ZJ -wm .. .,---~--...... T""t'.-.-~lfl"lcJ ---··-... ---·~--...-1'<)WT ~ ----.....,. ....... .,.r--•-....... -::r'l .. ,., --· ., .. , • .,_ T' R:e:vl•lof"''6 : -------- ~ g ~ g -------·~ ext e rior e le v atr ons I ~ ~ Si Sheet j A3 .. 0 f 201:.-~0 ~iT.L2 _ T~O!'fOlA~ ~~PLA_l!_ AT COY~ P A TIO 30~.0 30<4.0 L E F T COMMER~AL TYP£ T'El'1PERED t"LA&& $iCY"LlC.I1T D E E L E v A T 0 N D ECORATIVE Fl..IJE C J.P O I WOOO FIOAI1EP aoMNEY ~T ROOF WI l"'A fltAP ET A T COYEfi!EC> P A TIO DECORA TIVE ~ CA ,. Ot WOOO ~MEOClollMNEY )~ 111EC!6 &E> TPl W000 LLI NOOW& WI LIME6TO'l£: !Ill .· .: .. -. ~ , -. ~ -·. D D ~AL~·!Ii!:OLJND GUTTER& WI " X 6 &TA lNEP FAL&E RAFTER e EAM EN06 HALF-ROUND GUTTERe, WI <4 )( '-6 T A l NEO FAL6E R AFTER D EAM ENDa ..!<.?P~~~-)~.s TOP~ PLATE TOP OC ~TE ~T _ENTR Y ~.?'4 __ TOP OF FLATE T .. l-ti..S Deeten DESIG N and D EVELOPMENT P.O . BOX lSI& Lo. G.tto.. CA. ~5031 VOIC E, .40&.3S4.1&33 ~W~W.thl ~•lgn.ec:>IP'I CAI-iOON RESID E NCE IS13S C ami no D e l C e rro Lo& G lltoa, CA ~S032 A .P .N. S23-24 -00! tt .mr-c: ....... rM .... --... m .. .. ~ .. -.. -~--.-'r<i -·-~..,....~~ ---··-----.... -.-.... .... TQJ.IT ~ ,....... .. ., .... _,.._ .. -. ... --.. -·--:==7_.'? ••d a>•"f.M I &o-''( R s v l&lon&: ------------ ; g I ~ -----1! e xte rio r e l e v a ti o n~ 2 ecale : 11.4" • 1'-0'" 201&-30 She et " ll ~ i L_---------------------------------------------------------------------------------·-L_._._1 ~_·_·_·_·_·_~._:_~_ .. _·_f~-~_.·_·_·_J_·_·_·,_~ ______ o _____________ 1 "'-~_._1 _"_~_._'_._1 ,_~_'. __ l ____ ~ _____ '_' ____ _j~~--~~ __ 'a_._2_o_I_& ___________ ~ ____ ~ ___ , __ 1 __ -J f [., 'i~ . _!_CJ!" OF -~TE TOP Of' ·'P[A~ 4T eAY "'0· ·'?"'~!.'--""""~-L-~-IIIII so~.-~~"!~-:: TOP ~ GRADE )01,& --r-- F R 0 N T E L E V A T 0 N I-IAL.F..fliii:OUNO C.UT'TE'!Q.!o 01 "'><. ~TAINEO FA1.6E R~eEAM& ~MOOn.! TROWEl.!D &TUCCO WI INTEC.RAL. COLOI'l DECOfU.11VE .0.01-!!:Jiii!ED ~TONE VEN EER &TON!: &ILL MIM ~--- f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[i~~~~~~~-~·~~~~~-=:~~::~~---~: 1-tot.L.~OUMO c.uTTER$ 0 1 _fi:J 4 X 6 &TAINEO FAL!E ~ fCAFTER eEA.M ~ ___ T~ ~-PLA~ __ ~-~ TOP Of' -----PLATE - ~HOOT~ TRO'JJE:l.~ T SAy ~ ---&T\JCCO Uif INTEGRAL CO\.()R )0),0 -+-- !()2.0 --r T D E E L E v A T 0 N >Ole> <~~~~~~~~~·i~~-~~~ll~~~i!~~~~~!:!I~~!I!I~!II!I!II~I!i:!lllil!l~lil!!lil!il!l!il!li;j:: -~-···~·-- ~ -: · __ ·: · __ ·: · __ ·: · __ -: · __ ·: · __ ·: · __ ·: · __ ·: · __ ·: · __ ·: -__ ·' · __ ·. ·~-:· _: "< _: -~-:· _: '-/ _: ··_-:· _: -~-:· _: ·~-:· _: ·~-:· _: "< _: ·~-:· _: ·~-:· _: ·~-:· _: -~-:· _:~, WA.LHiii:OIJNI:> 6UT'TER6 01 4 >< 6 6 TAI NEI:> FAL6E Pi!AFTER eEAH& .. ' ... • ' · ' ' ' ' ' ' ' !MOOTW TROWELED 6TUCGO ; -·~· .... · -·~ _., '."'.; ·_~.; _.; ~".; .. ,; .·,' _.,; _.; ~" .. ; ~"'.; _ .... · _.,; .· .. · _.,; .· .. · .· .. ".; ~"'.; :~·~·:c·'· .. · _ ... · -W/INTEGRALCOLOfi! .............. ' . ' .......... ' ................ ' . . . . ' ... ' . . . . . . . .... ' ' .. ; -· .. · .-: .· .. · _ ... · .-.: .·.: .... · _.; .-.. · .-.: .· .. · .... · _.; .· .. · _ ... · _ ... · _ ... _.,· .• .. _~ .... :" ... · _ ...... _ ...... ~~-; -------------~~:~:~:~:~:~-~: J -~ 3 CAR GARAGE 14 '-!l\2' WORK&I-IOP MATCW LINE Tc> "ESIDENCE I UTILITY ROOM LIVA!SLE AR!A ~ ~ ~::::::::::::::::::· :::) ~ : .. --~~~:~-.----~~-=~---+- ! ~ 2'-'!l' I l l ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' • ' ' ' • ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' : '' • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' • G A R A G E F L 0 0 R P L A N DECORATIVE: ~ED 6TONE VE'\Eet -+ )02.0 , ... : . ~ .. . R G 1-4 T D , -. ~· -.. -. : -. : -. E E L E V A T )0),0 0 N L ••I ···I •. •I'' •I•• •I•• .I 0 "' • Gl • X) lt &C.4l.E: ve• a I '~' b I I I I I I " ,. ~C A.L..£ 114 " , 1'.0' 20 T .. l-ti..S De&tgn DESIG N and DEV ELOPMENT P.O. BOX 15 l& Lot Gmn•. CA. ~5031 VOfCE : ~8.~.1&)3 III'A!.lh1.0S•Jg rt.c:.Otn *"'*"**" •a• "d' •u se 'K't" fllt'l a nsw •lng l s~•t~ rsaldsnc:s ~nd ~lt~chsd 9"""9"' CAl-lOON RESIDENCE IS13 S C oi!mfno Del Cerro Loa Gl!lloa, CA 95032 A .P .N. S 23-24 -001 ;g , -~-....... 1:::;::;1~-·=,..~· .. _ .. .,.......,....,. __ ..-r....,-.-"'PV.,.teJ _____ .. _____ _ TONT .....,.. _ _, __ ....,. ......... --.. --- C:::Y "' •:z----·"-"''•erz· Rev Iaione: ------------------- ~ ~ ~ Ill a -----------------------1 ~ attached g arage fl oor p lan and elev ations Sheet 201!>-30 ..IJI~ 18, 201!> A 2 .. 1 ~ ~ ~ I t L_----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------~ f