The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-12-19 Planning Commission Agenda PacketSaratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 12, 2019 7:00 P.M. - PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING Civic Theater | 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA 95070 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 8, 2019. Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of May 8, 2019 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. This law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications. REPORT ON APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision. 1. NEW BUSINESS 2. PUBLIC HEARING Applicants and/or their representatives have a total of ten (10) minutes maximum for opening statements. All interested persons may appear and be heard during this meeting regarding the items on this agenda. If items on this agenda are challenged in court, members of the public may be limited to raising only issues raised at the Public Hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to the close of the Public Hearing. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three (3) minutes. Applicants and/or their representatives have a total of five (5) minutes maximum for closing statements. 2.1. Application PDR19-0002, ARB19-0008; 19731 Three Oaks Way (397-18-042); Manisha and Sandeep Jain – The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a one-story, approximately 20’-6” tall, 4,509 square foot single-family home. One (1) protected tree is requested for removal. The site is zoned R-1-40,000 with a General Plan Saratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 2 of 2 Designation of RVLD (Residential Very Low Density). Staff Contact: Victoria Hernandez (408) 868-1212 or vhernandez@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No.19-016 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. 2.2. Application PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, and ENV18-0002; 14630 Big Basin Way (517-08-005); Paul and Joe Hernandez – The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a two story, 26 feet tall, 2,922 square foot mixed-use commercial building on a 5,000 square foot parcel located at 14630 Big Basin Way at the corner of Sixth Street. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 19-014 adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration ENV18- 0002 for the Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 19-015 approving Design Review PDR13-0023, Use Permit CUP13-0004, and Arborist Report ARB13-0004 subject to conditions included in Attachment 2. DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF THE AGENDA I, Frances Reed, Administrative Assistant for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission was posted and available for public review on June 7, 2019 at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Signed this 7th day of June 2019 at Saratoga, California. Frances Reed, Administrative Assistant In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 408/868-1269. Notification 24 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA title II] You can also sign up to receive email notifications when Commission agendas and minutes have been added to the City at website http://www.saratoga.ca.us/contact/email_subscriptions.asp. NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 19731 Three Oaks Way Meeting Date: June 12, 2019 Application: PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Address/APN: 19731 Three Oaks Way / 397-18-042 Property Owner: Manisha and Sandeep Jain From: Debbie Pedro, Community Development Director Report Prepared By: Victoria Hernandez, Planner 1 7 Report to the Planning Commission 19731 Three Oaks Way – Application # PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 June 12, 2019 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to construct a new one-story, approximately 20’6” tall, 4,509 square foot single-family home. One (1) protected tree is requested for removal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No.19-016 approving the proposed residence subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a)(3), Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required because the residence has a proposed height over eighteen feet. PROJECT DATA Gross/Net Site Area: 46,169 sq. ft. gross/net (1.06 acres) Average Site Slope: 2.75% General Plan Designation: RVLD (Very Low Density Residential) Zoning: R-1-40,000 Proposed Allowed/Required Site Coverage Residence/Garage including overhangs Permeable Paver Driveway/Walkways/Patio Total Proposed Site Coverage 5,302 sq. ft. 1,696 sq. ft. 6,998 sq. ft. (15%) 16,159 sq. ft. (35%) Floor Area Residence Garage Total Proposed Floor Area 4,109 sq. ft. 400 sq. ft. 4,509 sq. ft. 6,140 sq. ft. Height 20’ 6” 26’ Setbacks Front: Left Side: Right Side: Rear: 34’ 11” 49’ 9” 23’ 4” 171’ 6” 30’ 20’ 20’ 50’ Grading Cut 25 CY Fill 0 CY Export 25 CY No grading limit in the R-1-40,000 zoning district SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description The subject property is located on the northern side of Three Oaks Way in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. The site is currently developed with a single-story residence and detached garage. The surrounding uses consist of single-family residences to the east, west, north, and south. Twenty-five (25) trees, which are protected by the Saratoga City Code, were inventoried on the site by the project arborist. 8 Report to the Planning Commission 19731 Three Oaks Way – Application # PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 June 12, 2019 Page | 3 Project Description The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing home and detached garage and the construction of a new 4,509 square foot single-story residence. The 4,109 square foot main floor consists of a foyer, living room, family room, dining room, kitchen, office, four (4) bedrooms with bathrooms, and a master suite. In addition, an attached 400 square foot two-car garage and an attached one-car carport are proposed. Architecture/Design The project would have a contemporary architectural style. Exterior materials and colors would consist of light tan stucco, dark brown trim, and light brown roofing. The variety of exterior materials, varying roof heights and the long building footprint provide architectural articulation to break up the mass of the home. The applicant has provided a color and materials board, which will be available for review at the site visit and during the public hearing. Below is a list of the proposed exterior materials. Detail Colors and Materials Exterior Stucco (light tan) Trim (dark brown) Windows Vinyl (dark brown) Doors Wood and Vinyl Clad (dark brown) Roof Concrete Tile (light brown) Trees The project arborist inventoried twenty-five (25) trees on the site, which are protected. One (1) Coast Live Oak is proposed for removal. The City Arborist is able to make the findings and recommend approval for the removal of the requested tree. All protected trees to remain in the vicinity of the project will be protected prior to building permit issuance and throughout the duration of the project. The applicant is required to place a tree security deposit of $22,405 and install tree protection fencing on the site. Details of the arborist report findings and descriptions of the trees to be preserved are included in the Arborist Report (Attachment 2). Landscaping The existing landscaping is proposed to remain. If any new landscaping is proposed during the building permit submittal, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance when the application is submitted to the Building Department. Geotechnical Review This project is not located in a geo hazard zone therefore Geotechnical review was not required. FINDINGS The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 15-45.080 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: 9 Report to the Planning Commission 19731 Three Oaks Way – Application # PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 June 12, 2019 Page | 4 a. Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project minimizes changes to the contours of the site. Grading will be limited to the location of the new residence and driveway, as well as contouring the site as necessary to direct water to landscaped areas. b. All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree Regulations). If constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees, heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the City Arborist has reviewed and recommends approval for the proposed removal of one (1) protected tree. The number of trees to be removed is being kept to a minimum and limited to trees that are either in poor condition and in conflict with the location of the project. A total of twenty-four (24) protected trees will remain on the site. c. The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that and the residence has a proposed height of 20’6” feet and setbacks that are greater than the minimum required by the zoning district. No community viewsheds are located in the vicinity of the project. d. The overall mass and height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project is a single-story residence in a neighborhood with both one and two-story structures, fitting with the context of other residences within its vicinity. The project includes architectural elements consistent with the contemporary architectural style which are in scale with the structure and the neighborhood. e. The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the hardscape will be less than 50% of the front setback area and limited to a permeable paver driveway. The existing landscaping is proposed to remain. f. Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. 10 Report to the Planning Commission 19731 Three Oaks Way – Application # PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 June 12, 2019 Page | 5 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the development will not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy as the project meets or exceeds required setbacks. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding can be made in the affirmative because the proposed project incorporates applicable design policies and techniques from the Residential Design Handbook. The overall mass and height of the structure are in scale with the neighborhood; the structure is set back in proportion to the size and shape of the lot; development is clustered on the southern portion of the lot to preserve the grove of trees to the north. In addition, the proposed materials, colors, and details enhance the architecture in a well-composed manner which is complementary to the architectural style of the home. h. On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100. This finding is not applicable as the project is not on a hillside lot. The project is not located on a ridgeline, and will not affect any significant hillside features or community viewsheds. Neighbor Notification and Correspondence A public notice was sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. In addition, the public hearing notice and description of the project was published in the Saratoga News. The applicant submitted four (4) completed neighborhood notification forms with no negative project related comments (Attachment 3). The applicant also submitted three (3) letters from neighboring property owners in support of the project (Attachment 4). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction of three single-family residences in a residential area, including small structures. The project, as proposed, is for the construction of a new residence in a suburban, residential area. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 19-016 2. Arborist Report dated May 21, 2019 3. Neighbor Notification Forms 4. Neighbor Letters of Support 5. Story Pole Certification 6. Project Plans 11 At RESOLUTION NO: 19-016 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR19-0002 AND ARBORIST REPORT ARB19-0008 19731 THREE OAKS WAY (APN 397-18-042) WHEREAS, on January 30, 2019 an application was submitted by Manisha and Sandeep Jain, requesting Design Review approval to construct a new 4,509 square foot single-story residence located at 19731 Three Oaks Way (APN 397-18-042). One (1) protected tree is proposed for removal. The site is located within the R-1-4,000 zoning district. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project Categorically Exempt. WHEREAS, on June 12, 2019 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3(a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction of a single- family residence and small structures in a residential area. Section 3: The proposed residence is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies: Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings; Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; and Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. Section 4: The proposed residence is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and improvements are consistent with the design review findings. The overall mass and height of the structure are in scale with the neighborhood; the structure is set back in proportion to the size and shape of the lot; site development follows contours and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints; the porch and entry are in scale with other structures in the neighborhood. In addition, the proposed materials, colors, and details enhance the architecture in a well-composed, understated manner. ATTACHMENT 1 12 19731 Three Oaks Way Application #PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Resolution #19-016 Page | 2 Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR19-0002 and ARB19-0008 located at 19731 Three Oaks Way (APN 973-18-042), subject to the Findings, and Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 12th day of June 2019 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Sunil Ahuja Chair, Planning Commission 13 19731 Three Oaks Way Application #PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Resolution #19-016 Page | 3 Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PDR19-0002 AND ARB19-0008 19731 THREE OAKS WAY (APN 397-18-042) GENERAL 1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the Community Development Director. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent. 2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga City Code incorporated herein by this reference. 4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney. 14 19731 Three Oaks Way Application #PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Resolution #19-016 Page | 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 5. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following: a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A” on file with the Community Development Department. b. Arborist Report dated May 21, 2019 printed onto a separate plan page; and c. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the Building Division. d. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages. e. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note shall represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this Design Review Approval. 6. The owner/applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding drainage, including but not limited to complying with the city approved Stormwater management plan. The project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the site, that is created by the proposed construction and grading project, such that adjacent down slope properties will not be negatively impacted by any increase in flow. Design must follow the current Santa Clara County Drainage Manual method criteria, as required by the building department. Retention/detention element design must follow the Drainage Manual guidelines, as required by the building department. 7. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans date stamped May 22, 2019. All proposed changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with City Code. 8. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit for staff approval, a Lighting Plan for the home’s exterior and landscaped areas. Proposed exterior lighting shall be limited to full-cut off & shielded fixtures with downward directed illumination so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. All proposed exterior lighting shall be designed to limit illumination to the site and avoid creating glare impacts to surrounding properties. 9. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 10. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall prepare for review and approval by City staff a Construction Management Plan for the project which includes but is not limited to the following: 15 19731 Three Oaks Way Application #PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Resolution #19-016 Page | 5 a. Proposed construction worker parking area. b. Proposed construction hours that are consistent with City Code. c. Proposed construction/delivery vehicle staging or parking areas. d. Proposed traffic control plan with traffic control measures, any street closure, hours for delivery/earth moving or hauling, etc. To the extent possible, any deliveries, earth moving or hauling activities will be scheduled to avoid peak commute hours. e. Proposed construction material staging/storage areas. f. Location of project construction sign outlining permitted construction work hours, name of project contractor and the contact information for both homeowner and contractor. 11. All fences, walls and hedges shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code Section 15-29. 12. The final landscaping and irrigation plan submitted for Building Permit approval shall demonstrate how the project complies with the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and shall take into account the following: a. To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. b. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. c. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. d. Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. e. Any proposed or required under grounding of utilities shall take into account potential damage to roots of protected trees 13. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City. 14. A locking mailbox approved for use by the U.S. Postal service shall be installed and in compliance with Saratoga Municipal Code section 6-25.030. The mailbox shall be installed prior to final inspection. 15. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. FIRE DEPARTMENT 16. The owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. 16 19731 Three Oaks Way Application #PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Resolution #19-016 Page | 6 CITY ARBORIST 17. All requirements in the City Arborist report dated May 21, 2019 are hereby adopted as conditions of approval and shall be implemented as part of the approved plans. PUBLIC WORKS 18. Applicant / Owner shall obtain an encroachment permit for any and all improvements in any City right-of-way or City easement including all new utilities prior to commencement of the work to implement this Design Review. 19. Per Design Review PDR19-0002, no improvements in the public right-of-way are required. 20. Damages to driveway approach, curb and gutter, public streets, or other public improvements during construction shall be repaired prior to final inspection. 21. All new/upgraded utilities shall be installed underground. 22. Applicant / Owner shall maintain the streets, sidewalks and other right of way as well as adjacent properties, both public and private, in a clean, safe and usable condition. All spills of soil, rock or construction debris shall be removed immediately. 23. All project that create and/or replace more than 2,500 square feet of impervious surface shall install one or more of the following site design measures: a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. f. Construct bike lanes, driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces. 24. The Owner/Applicant shall incorporate adequate source control measures to limit pollutant generation, discharge, and runoff (e.g. landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration where possible, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates appropriate sustainable landscaping practices and programs, such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping). 25. Construction Site Control a. Owner shall implement construction site inspection and control to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains per approved Erosion Control Plan. b. The City requires the construction sites to maintain year-round effective erosion control, 17 19731 Three Oaks Way Application #PDR19-0002/ARB19-0008 Resolution #19-016 Page | 7 run-on and run-off control, sediment control, good site management, and non-storm water management through all phases of construction (including, but not limited to, site grading, building, and finishing of lots) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures. c. City will conduct inspections to determine compliance and determine the effectiveness of the BMPs in preventing the discharge of construction pollutants into the storm drain. Owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 26. Prior to the Building final, all Public works conditions shall be completed per approved plans. 18 Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 ARBORIST REPORT Application No. ARB19-0008 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 19731 Three Oaks Way Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Sandeep and Manisha Jain Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 397-18-942 Email: sgjain@icloud.com Report: Approval of Tree Protection Plan Date: May 21, 2019 PROJECT SCOPE: The applicant has submitted plans to demolish the existing house and build a new single story house with an attached two car garage and a carport. One coast live oak (tree 3) is requested for removal to construct the project. STATUS: Approved by City Arborist, with attached conditions. PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF: Tree security deposit – Required - $22,405 Tree protection – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map. Tree removals – Tree 3 is approved for removal once building permits have been issued. Replacement trees – Required = $2,520 + 10 15-gallon sized trees for TRP18-0304 ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Findings and Tree Information 2 – Tree Removal Criteria 3 – Conditions of Approval 4 – Map Showing Tree Protection 1 ATTACHMENT 2 19 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 1 FINDINGS: Tree Removals According to Section 15-50.080 of the City Code, whenever a tree is requested for removal as part of a project, certain findings must be made and specific tree removal criteria met. One coast live oak (tree 3) is requested for removal in conjunction with the project. It meets the City’s criteria allowing it to be removed and replaced as part of the project, once building division permits have been obtained. Attachment 2 contains the tree removal criteria for reference. Table 1: Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met Tree No. Species Criteria met Comments 3 Coast live oak 1, 4, 7, 9 In conflict with driveway New Construction Based on the information provided, and as conditioned, this project complies with the requirements for the setback of new construction from existing trees under Section 15- 50.120 of the City Code. Tree Preservation Plan Section 15-50.140 of the City Code requires a Tree Preservation Plan for this project. To satisfy this requirement the following shall be copied onto a plan sheet and included in the final sets of plans: 1) The recommendations and tree information from the submitted arborist report dated May 1, 2019; 2) The Project Data in Brief, the Conditions of Approval, and the map showing tree protection from this report dated May 21, 2019. TREE INFORMATION: Arborist Report reviewed: Preparer: Robert Wilson, Certified Arborist Date of Report: May 1, 2019 An arborist report was submitted for this project that inventoried four trees protected by Saratoga City Code. Information on the condition of each tree, potential impacts from construction, suitability for preservation, appraised values and tree protection recommendations was provided. A table summarizing information about each tree is below. One coast live oak (tree 3) protected by Saratoga City Code is requested for removal to construct this project. 2 20 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 1 TREE INFORMATION: Table 2: Tree information from arborist report dated May 1, 2019. Tree No. Species Trunk Diameter (inches) Condition Intensity of Construction Impacts Suitability for Preservation Appraised Value Coast live oak 1 Quercus agrifolia 8 Good Moderate High $1,090 Coast redwood 2 Sequoia sempervirens 27, 15, 14 Good Moderate High $28,300 Coast live oak 3 Quercus agrifolia 8, 8 Good High Low $2,520 Coast live oak 4 Quercus agrifolia 15 Good High High $3,620 Coast redwood 5 Sequoia sempervirens 19, 14 Fair Moderate High $8,400 Coast redwood 6 Sequoia sempervirens 18 Fair Moderate High $2,450 Coast live oak 7 Quercus agrifolia 12 Good Moderate High $1,960 Coast live oak 8 Quercus agrifolia 16 Good Moderate High $4,110 English walnut 9 Juglans regia 15 Poor Low Moderate $2,900 Coast live oak 10 Quercus agrifolia 8 Good Moderate High $1,090 Coast live oak 11 Quercus agrifolia 14 Good Moderate High $3,170 Coast live oak 12 Quercus agrifolia 10 Good Moderate High $1,650 Coast live oak 13 Quercus agrifolia 12 Good Moderate High $2,350 Coast live oak 14 Quercus agrifolia 11 Good Moderate High $1,990 Coast redwood 15 Sequoia sempervirens 18 Good Moderate High $7,300 Coast live oak 16 Quercus agrifolia 12 Good Moderate High $2,350 Coast redwood 17 Sequoia sempervirens 16, 11 Good Moderate High $9,300 Coast redwood 18 Sequoia sempervirens 18 Good Moderate High $4,160 3 21 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 1 Table 2 continued: Tree information from arborist report dated May 1, 2019. Tree No. Species Trunk Diameter (inches) Condition Intensity of Construction Impacts Suitability for Preservation Appraised Value Coast live oak 19 Quercus agrifolia 12 Good Moderate High $2,350 Coast live oak 20 Quercus agrifolia 12 Good Moderate High $2,350 Coast live oak 21 Quercus agrifolia 15 Good Low High $3,620 Coast live oak 22 Quercus agrifolia 11 Good Moderate High $1,990 Coast live oak 23 Quercus agrifolia 11 Good Low High $1,990 Coast live oak 24 Quercus agrifolia 16 Good Low High $9,100 English walnut 25 Juglans regia 18 Poor Low Moderate $3,000 4 22 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 2 TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article 15-50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and replacement during construction. (1) The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a Fallen tree. (2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. (3) The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. (6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. (8) Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in Section 15-50.010 (9) The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. (10) The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation. 5 23 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Owner, Architect, Contractor: It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the information in this report and implement the required conditions. 2. Permit: a. Receipt of a Planning or Building permit does not relieve applicant of his responsibilities for protecting trees per City Code Article 15-50 on all construction work. b. No protected tree authorized for removal or encroachment pursuant to this project may be removed or encroached upon until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved project. 3. Final Plan Sets: a. Shall include the recommendations and tree information from the arborist report by Robert Wilson dated May 1, 2019 copied onto a plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation”. b. Shall include the Project Data in Brief, the Conditions of Approval, and the map showing tree protection sections of the City Arborist report dated May 21, 2019. 4. Tree Protection Security Deposit: a. Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080. b. Shall be $22,405 for tree(s) 1, 2, 4 – 8, 10 – 19, 22 and 23. c. Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department before obtaining Building Division permits. d. May be in the form of cash, check, credit card payment or a bond. e. Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project. f. May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City Arborist. 5. Tree Protection: a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached map. b. Shall be shown on the Site Plan. c. Shall be established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. d. Shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 2-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. e. Shall be posted with signs saying “TREE PROTECTION FENCE - DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, KATE BEAR (408) 868-1276”. f. Between trees 5 – 8, install unprocessed wood chips to a minimum depth of 6 inches and place plywood sheets on top. Fasten plywood sheets together to prevent separating when equipment drives over this area. g. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection of tree protection fencing once it has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits. h. Tree protection shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final inspection. 6 24 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 3 6. Construction: All construction activities shall be conducted outside tree protection fencing unless permitted as conditioned below. These activities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching for utility installation, equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and parking. 7. Work inside fenced areas: a. Requires field meeting with City Arborist before performing work. b. Requires City Arborist approval prior to performing work. c. Requires Project Arborist on site to monitor work. 8. Project Arborist: a. Shall be Robert Wilson unless otherwise approved by the City Arborist. b. Shall visit the site every two weeks during grading, trenching or digging activities and monthly thereafter. c. Shall provide letters or emails to the City following site visits. The letters shall document the work performed around trees, include photos of the work in progress, and provide information on the condition of the trees during construction. d. Shall supervise any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site. Roots of protected trees measuring two inches in diameter or more shall not be cut without prior approval of the Project Arborist. Roots measuring less than two inches in diameter may be cut using a sharp pruning tool. 9. The Project Arborist shall be on site to monitor: a. All work within 15 feet of trees 1, 2, 10 and 12 b. Installation of the driveway by tree 4. c. Installation of the foundation for the carport by trees 5 – 7. d. Excavation for the new driveway. 10. Tree removal: Tree 3 meets the criteria for removal and may be removed once building division permits have been obtained. 11. New trees: a. New trees equal to $2,520 and 10 15-gallon sized trees (for TRP18-0304) shall be planted before final inspection and occupancy of the new home. b. Trees shall be replaced on or off site according to good forestry practices, and shall provide equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height, location, appearance and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees. c. Ten (10) trees must reach a height when mature of 25 feet or more. d. Four (4) trees shall be from the City’s list of native species. e. The rest of the replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach on retained trees. f. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 g. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half of the canopy of oak trees on site. 7 25 19731 Three Oaks Way Attachment 3 12. Damage to protected trees that will be retained: a. Should any protected tree be damaged beyond repair, new trees shall be required to replace the tree. If there is insufficient room to plant the necessary number of new trees, some of the value for trees may be paid into the City’s Tree Fund. Replacement values for new trees are listed above. b. Water loving plants and lawns are not permitted under oak tree canopies. 13. Final inspection: a. At the end of the project, when the contractor wants to remove tree protection and have the tree protection security deposit released by the City, call City Arborist for a final inspection. b. Before scheduling a final inspection from the City Arborist, have the project arborist do a final inspection, prepare a letter with their findings and provide that letter to the City for the project file. 8 26 Attachment 4 19731 Three Oaks Way Legend Tree protection fencing Install wood chips to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Place plywood on top and fasten sheets together to prevent separating when equipment drives over them. 9 27 CommunttiJ Oa\1r:.,Joprrtsn'!. Oa�ar"'!.rrt�nt City or Saratogz 13777 FrviNs!e !\venue Saratoga, California 95070 . j .• A proje(�t is proposed at the above address. The City asks that you sign this form to indicate you have had an opportunity to review and comment on the prnposaL Your signature is .not an acceptance of the plans, only an acknowledgement that you have had an opportunity to comment. IMPORTANT NOTE FROM CITY: These plans are PREUMlNARY ONLY and mav change as the JWoject moves forward. Architectura1 Plans am prntt:cted under copyright law. 111e applicant should allow 1 you to view the plans but is not !"!quired to give you a physical copy. Once the application is submitted, you may review a foil sized set of plans at City Hall during norrnal business hours. The appiic.ant should infonn you when the plans will be submitted. This notice is being provided to a!! of the adjoining property owners and the property o\vner(s) across the street from the project address. The Cicy will send an additional notice to adjacent neighbors prior to a decision being made on the project. Netghbor Name: ..... :±:s:c:rt:fy·) .... ::b.rr;l.\L ............... ·-···-····-·" ......... ·--·Da'l:e: ... J /J4J1 c1._ Neighbor AddreM: _'tl]J,Q _ JJ\� _ D ttks v0__a.j-+-:5cL1GJ..fo3u_ Neighl)t>t" Cmatad h1fo: (phone ,,;· email): .. :408 ., "t::\8 .3 .. .'f 4-::3 ·-·---.. ···· .. -This enables the City to cnmact you if they have any questions Please address any initial concerns be!(,,,1; (attach additional sheets iJ n<Xessary): Feel free to maii this fom1 directly to thr City: City of Saratoga Planning Depanme:n: ; 3 777 Fruitvale Avenue; Saratoga CA 95070 � ., ... , ...... ,.,, ......... _______ ., ___ ·--·----····-·····--·--········· .. -------·--·-··---·-·-.. --·-·····-·-···· My signature belo-.v certi.fes ,hat f am i:;w;.Jrl! of the proposal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°39'00"W179.63'S00°01'00"W 260.00'S89°39'00"E 108.05'N82°30'00"E 70.73'N00°21'00"E 250.34' $&',&/72$.72$.7:$/18775:75:75:75:72$.72$.72$.72$.72$.7:,17:$/1877:$/18772$.&/67572$.75:75:72$.7:,172$.72$.72$.72$.7:,172$.72$.72$.72$.75,372$.72$.72$.72$.75:&/67572$.75:7:,175:75:72$.72$.75:75:72$.72$.72$.72$.72$.7:,175((72%(5(029('72$.72$.72$. :::6666(&$5*$5$*(&$53257 $&',&/6$16(:(5*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6/27$311R5=21,1*',675,&7$5($$&5(67+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$THREE OAKS WAY )52176(7%$&. 5($56(7%$&. 6,'(6(7%$&. 6,'(6(7%$&.$63+$/73$7&+1$63+$/73$7&+1),5(+<'5$17( +:22')(1&((:$//( +:22')(1&(( +:22')(1&((63(('%803(-387,/,7<32/(( +:22')(1&(1 +:22')(1&(1'5,3/,1(7<3,&$/ &29(5('3$7,2 ** 67$*,1*$5($7(0325$5<5($5$&&(6608/&+$1'3/<:22'+$7&+('$5($ )5217$&&(66+577:0(0*0352326('6725<5(6,'(1&()) 3$' '6'6'6'6'6'6'6'663636363636363636363 $4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54 3&753&&/6.#&3*/("/%&9*45*/('&/$&4&21',7,2162)$33529$/2:1(5$5&+,7(&7&2175$&725,7,67+(5(63216,%,/,7<2)7+(2:1(5$5&+,7(&7$1'&2175$&72572%()$0,/,$5:,7+7+(,1)250$7,21,17+,65(3257$1',03/(0(177+(5(48,5('&21',7,2163(50,7$5(&(,372)$3/$11,1*25%8,/',1*3(50,7'2(61275(/,(9($33/,&$172)+,65(63216,%,/,7,(6)253527(&7,1*75((63(5&,7<&2'($57,&/(21$//&216758&7,21:25.%123527(&7('75(($87+25,=(')255(029$/25(1&52$&+0(1738568$17727+,6352-(&70$<%(5(029('25(1&52$&+('8321817,/7+(,668$1&(2)7+($33/,&$%/(3(50,7)5207+(%8,/',1*',9,6,21)257+($33529('352-(&7),1$/3/$16(76$6+$//,1&/8'(7+(5(&200(1'$7,216$1'75((,1)250$7,21)5207+($5%25,675(3257%<52%(57:,/621'$7('0$<&23,('2172$3/$16+((77,7/('75((35(6(59$7,21%6+$//,1&/8'(7+(352-(&7'$7$,1%5,()7+(&21',7,2162)$33529$/$1'7+(0$36+2:,1*75((3527(&7,216(&7,2162)7+(&,7<$5%25,675(3257'$7('0$<75((3527(&7,216(&85,7<'(326,7$,65(48,5('3(5&,7<25',1$1&(%6+$//%()2575((6$1'&6+$//%(2%7$,1('%<7+(2:1(5$1'),/(':,7+7+(&20081,7<'(9(/230(17'(3$570(17%()25(2%7$,1,1*%8,/',1*',9,6,213(50,76'0$<%(,17+()2502)&$6+&+(&.&5(',7&$5'3$<0(1725$%21'(6+$//5(0$,1,13/$&()257+('85$7,212)&216758&7,212)7+(352-(&7)0$<%(5(/($6('21&(7+(352-(&7+$6%((1&203/(7(',163(&7('$1'$33529('%<7+(&,7<$5%25,6775((3527(&7,21$6+$//%(,167$//('$66+2:1217+($77$&+('0$3%6+$//%(6+2:1217+(6,7(3/$1&6+$//%((67$%/,6+('35,25727+($55,9$/2)&216758&7,21(48,30(17250$7(5,$/6216,7('6+$//%(&2035,6('2)6,;)227+,*+&+$,1/,1.)(1&,1*02817('21(,*+7)2277$//,1&+',$0(7(5*$/9$1,=('32676'5,9(1,1&+(6,1727+(*5281'$1'63$&('12025(7+$1)((7$3$57(6+$//%(3267(':,7+6,*166$<,1*75((3527(&7,21)(1&('2127029(255(029(:,7+287$33529$/)520&,7<$5%25,67.$7(%($5)%(7:((175((6,167$//81352&(66(':22'&+,3672$0,1,080'(37+2),1&+(6$1'3/$&(3/<:22'6+((7621723)$67(13/<:22'6+((7672*(7+(57235(9(176(3$5$7,1*:+(1(48,30(17'5,9(629(57+,6$5($*&$//&,7<$5%25,67.$7(%($5$7)25$1,163(&7,212)75((3527(&7,21)(1&,1*21&(,7+$6%((1,167$//('7+,6,65(48,5('35,25722%7$,1,1*%8,/',1*',9,6,213(50,76+75((3527(&7,216+$//5(0$,181',6785%('7+528*+2877+(&216758&7,21817,/),1$/,163(&7,21&216758&7,21$//&216758&7,21$&7,9,7,(66+$//%(&21'8&7('2876,'(75((3527(&7,21)(1&,1*81/(663(50,77('$6&21',7,21('%(/2:7+(6($&7,9,7,(6,1&/8'(%87$5(1271(&(66$5,/</,0,7('727+()2//2:,1*'(02/,7,21*5$',1*75(1&+,1*)2587,/,7<,167$//$7,21(48,30(17&/($1,1*672&.3,/,1*$1''803,1*0$7(5,$/6,1&/8',1*62,/),//$1'(48,30(179(+,&/(23(5$7,21$1'3$5.,1*:25.,16,'()(1&('$5($6$5(48,5(6),(/'0((7,1*:,7+&,7<$5%25,67%()25(3(5)250,1*:25.%5(48,5(6&,7<$5%25,67$33529$/35,25723(5)250,1*:25.&5(48,5(6352-(&7$5%25,67216,7(72021,725:25.352-(&7$5%25,67$6+$//%(52%(57:,/62181/(6627+(5:,6($33529('%<7+(&,7<$5%25,67%6+$//9,6,77+(6,7((9(5<7:2:((.6'85,1**5$',1*75(1&+,1*25',**,1*$&7,9,7,(6$1'0217+/<7+(5($)7(5&6+$//3529,'(/(77(5625(0$,/6727+(&,7<)2//2:,1*6,7(9,6,767+(/(77(566+$//'2&80(177+(:25.3(5)250('$5281'75((6,1&/8'(3+27262)7+(:25.,1352*5(66$1'3529,'(,1)250$7,21217+(&21',7,212)7+(75((6'85,1*&216758&7,21'6+$//683(59,6($1<3(50,77('3581,1*2552273581,1*2)75((6216,7(522762)3527(&7('75((60($685,1*7:2,1&+(6,1',$0(7(525025(6+$//127%(&87:,7+28735,25$33529$/2)7+(352-(&7$5%25,67522760($685,1*/(667+$17:2,1&+(6,1',$0(7(50$<%(&8786,1*$6+$533581,1*722/7+(352-(&7$5%25,676+$//%(216,7(72021,725$$//:25.:,7+,1)((72)75((6$1'%,167$//$7,212)7+('5,9(:$<%<75((&,167$//$7,212)7+()281'$7,21)257+(&$53257%<75((6'(;&$9$7,21)257+(1(:'5,9(:$<75((5(029$/75((0((767+(&5,7(5,$)255(029$/$1'0$<%(5(029('21&(%8,/',1*',9,6,213(50,76+$9(%((12%7$,1('1(:75((6$1(:75((6(48$/72$1'*$//216,=('75((6)257536+$//%(3/$17('%()25(),1$/,163(&7,21$1'2&&83$1&<2)7+(1(:+20(%75((66+$//%(5(3/$&('21252))6,7($&&25',1*72*22')25(675<35$&7,&(6$1'6+$//3529,'((48,9$/(179$/8(,17(5062)$(67+(7,&$1'(19,5210(17$/48$/,7<6,=(+(,*+7/2&$7,21$33($5$1&($1'27+(56,*1,),&$17%(1(),&,$/&+$5$&7(5,67,&62)7+(5(029('75((6&7(175((608675($&+$+(,*+7:+(10$785(2))((725025(')28575((66+$//%()5207+(&,7< 6/,672)1$7,9(63(&,(6(7+(5(672)7+(5(3/$&(0(1775((60$<%(3/$17('$1<:+(5(217+(3523(57<$6/21*$67+(<'2127(1&52$&+215(7$,1('75((6)5(3/$&(0(179$/8(6)251(:75((6$5(/,67('%(/2:*$//21 ,1&+%2; ,1&+%2; ,1&+%2; ,1&+%2; ,1&+%2; *21/<'528*+772/(5$173/$1767+$7$5(&203$7,%/(:,7+2$.6$5(3(50,77('81'(57+(287(5+$/)2)7+(&$123<2)2$.75((6216,7('$0$*(723527(&7('75((67+$7:,//%(5(7$,1('$6+28/'$1<3527(&7('75((%('$0$*('%(<21'5(3$,51(:75((66+$//%(5(48,5('725(3/$&(7+(75((,)7+(5(,6,168)),&,(175220723/$177+(1(&(66$5<180%(52)1(:75((6620(2)7+(9$/8()2575((60$<%(3$,',1727+(&,7< 675(()81'5(3/$&(0(179$/8(6)251(:75((6$5(/,67('$%29(%:$7(5/29,1*3/$176$1'/$:16$5(1273(50,77('81'(52$.75((&$123,(6),1$/,163(&7,21$$77+((1'2)7+(352-(&7:+(17+(&2175$&725:$176725(029(75((3527(&7,21$1'+$9(7+(75((3527(&7,216(&85,7<'(326,75(/($6('%<7+(&,7<&$//&,7<$5%25,67)25$),1$/,163(&7,21%%()25(6&+('8/,1*$),1$/,163(&7,21)5207+(&,7<$5%25,67+$9(7+(352-(&7$5%25,67'2$),1$/,163(&7,2135(3$5($/(77(5:,7+7+(,5),1',1*6$1'3529,'(7+$7/(77(5727+(&,7<)257+(352-(&7),/(TreeNo.SpeciesTrunk Diameter (inches)ConditionIntensity of Construction ImpactsSuitability for PreservationAppraisedValueϭϰŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϭ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϵϵϬϭϱŽĂƐƚƌĞĚǁŽŽĚ^ĞƋƵŽŝĂƐĞŵƉĞƌǀŝƌĞŶƐϭϴ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϳ͕ϯϬϬϭϲŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϮ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϮ͕ϯϱϬϭϳŽĂƐƚƌĞĚǁŽŽĚ^ĞƋƵŽŝĂƐĞŵƉĞƌǀŝƌĞŶƐϭϲ͕ϭϭ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϵ͕ϯϬϬϭϴŽĂƐƚƌĞĚǁŽŽĚ^ĞƋƵŽŝĂƐĞŵƉĞƌǀŝƌĞŶƐϭϴ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϰ͕ϭϲϬϭϵŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϮ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϮ͕ϯϱϬϮϬŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϮ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϮ͕ϯϱϬϮϭŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϱ'ŽŽĚ>Žǁ,ŝŐŚΨϯ͕ϲϮϬϮϮŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϭ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϵϵϬϮϯŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϭ'ŽŽĚ>Žǁ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϵϵϬϮϰŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϲ'ŽŽĚ>Žǁ,ŝŐŚΨϵ͕ϭϬϬϮϱŶŐůŝƐŚǁĂůŶƵƚ:ƵŐůĂŶƐƌĞŐŝĂϭϴWŽŽƌ>ŽǁDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞΨϯ͕ϬϬϬTreeNo.SpeciesTrunk Diameter (inches)ConditionIntensity of Construction ImpactsSuitability for PreservationAppraisedValueϭŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϴ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϬϵϬϮŽĂƐƚƌĞĚǁŽŽĚ^ĞƋƵŽŝĂƐĞŵƉĞƌǀŝƌĞŶƐϮϳ͕ϭϱ͕ϭϰ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϮϴ͕ϯϬϬϯŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϴ͕ϴ'ŽŽĚ,ŝŐŚ>ŽǁΨϮ͕ϱϮϬϰŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϱ'ŽŽĚ,ŝŐŚ,ŝŐŚΨϯ͕ϲϮϬϱŽĂƐƚƌĞĚǁŽŽĚ^ĞƋƵŽŝĂƐĞŵƉĞƌǀŝƌĞŶƐϭϵ͕ϭϰ&ĂŝƌDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϴ͕ϰϬϬϲŽĂƐƚƌĞĚǁŽŽĚ^ĞƋƵŽŝĂƐĞŵƉĞƌǀŝƌĞŶƐϭϴ&ĂŝƌDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϮ͕ϰϱϬϳŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϮ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϵϲϬϴŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϲ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϰ͕ϭϭϬϵŶŐůŝƐŚǁĂůŶƵƚ:ƵŐůĂŶƐƌĞŐŝĂϭϱWŽŽƌ>ŽǁDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞΨϮ͕ϵϬϬϭϬŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϴ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϬϵϬϭϭŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϰ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϯ͕ϭϳϬϭϮŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϬ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϭ͕ϲϱϬϭϯŽĂƐƚůŝǀĞŽĂŬYƵĞƌĐƵƐĂŐƌŝĨŽůŝĂϭϮ'ŽŽĚDŽĚĞƌĂƚĞ,ŝŐŚΨϮ͕ϯϱϬ37 :,'(&21&3$9(563(59,2861&21&%$1'3(59,2861((6<0%2/'(6&5,37,21+9$&57:+:$//028177$1.(66+27:$7(5+($7(575$6+5(&(37$&/(5(&<&/,1*5(&(37$&/(352326('(/(&75,&$/6(59,&(352326('*$66(59,&((*6:352326('6(:(56(59,&(352326(':$7(56(59,&($&',&/(;,67,1*$6%(6726&(0(1775$16,7(:$7(53,3((;,67,1*'8&7,/(,521&(0(17/,1(':$7(50$,16$16(:(5(;,67,1*9,75,),('&/$<3,3(9&36(:(50$,1(;,67,1*7232*5$3+,&&21728567:$/187(;,67,1*75((:7581.',$0(7(53523(57</,1((;,67,1*)(1&((0*0:0(/(&75,&0(7(51*$60(7(51:$7(50(7(51(;,67,1**$60$,1*$6N89°39'00"W179.63'S00°01'00"W 260.00'S89°39'00"E 108.05'N82°30'00"E 70.73'N00°21'00"E 250.34' $&',&/72$.72$.7:$/18775:75:75:75:72$.72$.72$.72$.72$.7:,17:$/1877:$/18772$.&/67572$.75:75:72$.7:,172$.72$.72$.72$.7:,172$.72$.72$.72$.75,372$.72$.72$.72$.75:&/67572$.75:7:,175:75:72$.72$.75:75:72$.72$.72$.72$.72$.7:,175((72%(5(029('72$.72$.72$. :::6666(&$5*$5$*(&$53257 $&',&/6$16(:(5*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6/27$311R5=21,1*',675,&7$5($$&5(67+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$THREE OAKS WAY )52176(7%$&. 5($56(7%$&. 6,'(6(7%$&. 6,'(6(7%$&."""$63+$/73$7&+1$63+$/73$7&+1),5(+<'5$17( +:22')(1&((:$//( +:22')(1&(( +:22')(1&((63(('%803(-387,/,7<32/((72$.75((63(&,(6$1''%+',$0(7(575((3527(&7,9()(1&(6(($5%25,675(3257%<27+(5675((180%(56(($5%25,675(3257%<27+(56 +:22')(1&(1 +:22')(1&(1'5,3/,1(7<3,&$/ &29(5('3$7,2 ** 67$*,1*$5($7(0325$5<5($5$&&(6608/&+$1'3/<:22'+$7&+('$5($ )5217$&&(66+577:0(0*0352326('6725<5(6,'(1&()) 3$' '6'6'6'6'6'6'6'663636363636363636363 -&(&/%53&&-&(&/%4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54$13*0350'06/%"5*0/*/41&$5*0/#:5)&$*5: 5)&--40'3&$03%4)"--1307*%&"83*55&/$&35*'*$"5*0/5)"5"--#6*-%*/(4&5#"$,4"3&1&35)&"11307&%1-"/4 3&753&&/6.#&3*/("/%&9*45*/('&/$&4 38 THREE OAKS WAYTHREE OAKS COURT""""BARANGA LANE7+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$7+5((2$.6&28576$5$72*$&$7+5((2$.6&28576$5$72*$&$7+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$7+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$7+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$322/322/+286(322/322/4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54$EAST VIEWWEST VIEWNORTH VIEW4$"-&/0/&"SOUTH VIEW4$"-&/0/&4$"-&/0/&4$"-&/0/&"""39 4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54$4$"-&STREETSCAPE ELEVATION""STREETSCAPE ELEVATION4$"-&4$"-&STREETSCAPE ELEVATION"1301&35:-*/&1301&35:-*/&1301&35:-*/&1301&35:-*/&1301&35:-*/&1301&35:-*/&40 +9$&5(762)),7 *TMBOE)$506,1.':5$1*()5,*-JWJOH3PPNhǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE#FESPPN/Phǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE#FESPPN/Phǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE#BUI/P$MPTFU$MPTFU)BMMXBZ/Phǭ)$FJMJOH'MBU#BUI/P.BTUFS#BUI$MPTFU#BUI/P$MPTFU1BOUSZ-JWJOH3PPNhǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE0GGJDFhǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE%JOJOH3PPNhǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE#FESPPN/Phǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE$PWFSFE1PSDI'PZFS$PWFSFE1BUJP )BMMXBZ/Phǭ)$FJMJOH'MBU#FESPPN/Phǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE)BMMXBZ/Phǭ)$FJMJOH'MBU.BTUFS#FESPPNhǭ)$FJMJOH$PGGFSFE#BUI/P#BUI/P*/,'(5 */,'(5$:1,1**/,'(5*/,'(5*/,'(5*/,'(5$:1,1**/,'(575$1620*/,'(5*/,'(575$1620*/,'(5 */,'(5*/,'(575$1620*/,'(5*/,'(575$1620*/,'(5$:1,1**/,'(5*/,'(5*/,'(52+'*/,'(575$1620*/,'(575$1620*/,'(53,&785(75$16203,&785(75$1620*/,'(575$1620*/,'(575$162075$1620 $:1,1* 3527586,217<3,&$/$7:,1'2:/2&$7,2164IPFT:' $BS(BSBHFhǭ)$FJMJOH7BVMUFE $BS$BSQPSU -BVOESZ.BJOU3N'22575$16205PJMFU'8$/6,1.8*$ */,'(575$1620*/,'(575$1620$8&/035)44$"-&1st FLOOR PLAN: MAIN HOUSE4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54 41 6%,58Ò%,%#42)#Ò&2%3(Ò!)2Ò$%#+ -/5.4%$Ò3+9,)'(4Ò3):%ÒÒ8Ò,&:504:.#0-46<0%2/'(6&5,37,213/,!2Ò0!.%,Ò Ò3):%ÒÒ8Ò2//&Ò0)4#(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,39$//(<5,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(5,'*(+,39$//(<+,39$//(<+,35,'*(+,35,'*(5,'*(5,'*(+,39$//(<+,39$//(<+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,39$//(<5,'*(+,39$//(<5,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,39$//(<+,39$//(<+,39$//(<5,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,39$//(<5,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,39$//(<+,39$//(<5,'*( 5,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(5,'*(+,39$//(<+,39$//(<+,35,'*(+,35,'*(+,35,'*(5,'*(62/$53$1(/62/$53$1(/62/$53$1(/62/$53$1(/ 7<3 7<3+,35,'*('6'6'6'6'6'6Ò$)!Ò$/7.30/54Ò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°39'00"W179.63'S00°01'00"W 260.00'S89°39'00"E 108.05'N82°30'00"E 70.73'N00°21'00"E 250.34' $&',&/72$.72$.7:$/18775:75:75:75:72$.72$.72$.72$.72$.7:,17:$/1877:$/18772$.&/67572$.75:75:72$.7:,172$.72$.72$.72$.7:,172$.72$.72$.72$.75,372$.72$.72$.72$.75:&/67572$.75:7:,175:75:72$.72$.75:75:72$.72$.72$.72$.72$.7:,175((72%(5(029('72$.72$.72$. :::6666(&$5*$5$*(&$53257 $&',&/6$16(:(5*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6*$6/27$311R5=21,1*',675,&7$5($$&5(67+5((2$.6:$<6$5$72*$&$THREE OAKS WAY )52176(7%$&. 5($56(7%$&. 6,'(6(7%$&. 6,'(6(7%$&.$63+$/73$7&+1$63+$/73$7&+1),5(+<'5$17( +:22')(1&((:$//( +:22')(1&(( +:22')(1&((63(('%803(-387,/,7<32/(( +:22')(1&(1 +:22')(1&(1'5,3/,1(7<3,&$/ &29(5('3$7,2 ** 67$*,1*$5($7(0325$5<5($5$&&(6608/&+$1'3/<:22'+$7&+('$5($ )5217$&&(66+577:0(0*0352326('6725<5(6,'(1&()) 3$' '6'6'6'6'6'6'6'663636363636363636363 4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54127((;,67,1*/$1'6&$3,1*,1&/8',1**5281'&29(5$1'75((6725(0$,1$6,612$'',7,21$//$1'6&$3,1*3/$11('/05&4&&53&&1305&$5*0/1-"/ 4)&&5" '0353&&3&.07"-"/%53&&1305&'$5*0//05&4"/%%&5"*-4$ 3&753&&/6.#&3*/("/%&9*45*/('&/$&4 49 4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/54$4$"-&SOUTH ELEVATION: MAIN HOUSE"NORTH ELEVATION: MAIN HOUSE4$"-&"50 $4)&&5/00'4)&&54%&4*(/&%#:$"%'*-&1-054$"-&$)&$,&%#:%3"8/#:%"5&(3(3(3/"3&7*4*0/4%"5& %&4$3*15*0//04)&&5%&4$3*15*0/%FTJHO3FWJFX"QQMJDBUJPO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"13&1"3&%#:"EBNT4USFFU%FOWFS $PMPSBEP1IPOF&NBJMHVTSPCBUUP!HNBJMDPN%FTJHO%SBGUJOH(VT3PCBUUP$-*&/5.BOJTIBBOE4BOEFFQ+BJO5ISFF0BLT8BZ4BSBUPHB $"1IPOF/05&4 3&.07&%"%6 "%%3&44$*5:$0..&/544$"-&EAST ELEVATION: MAIN HOUSE"WEST ELEVATION: MAIN HOUSE4$"-&"51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: June 12, 2019 Application: PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, and ENV18-0002 Address/APN: 14630 Big Basin Way / 517-08-005 Owner/Applicant: Paul & Joe Hernandez From: Debbie Pedro, Community Development Director Report Prepared By: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner 14630 Big Basin Way 59 Report to the Planning Commission 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a two story, 26 feet tall, 2,922 square foot mixed-use commercial building on a 5,000 square foot parcel located at 14630 Big Basin Way at the corner of Sixth Street. A 518 square foot single-family home which is listed on the City’s Heritage Resource Inventory and known as the John Henry House is located on site. The John Henry House will be deconstructed and then reconstructed in the southwestern corner of the site to provide space to construct the new commercial building which will include a basement, a first-floor restaurant and second story office space. The uses of the relocated John Henry House will include public meeting and conference space. Two protected trees are proposed to be removed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt Resolution No. 19-014 adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration ENV18-0002 for the Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project (Attachment 1); and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 19-015 approving Design Review PDR13-0023, Use Permit CUP13-0004, and Arborist Report ARB13-0004 subject to conditions included in Attachment 2. Review by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to City Code Section 15-46.020. PROJECT DATA General Plan Designation: CR (Commercial Retail) Zoning: CH-2 Parcel Size: 5,000 square feet Average Slope: 5.7% PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED Site Coverage Commercial Building John Henry House Covered Trash Enclosure Total Proposed (structures) 2,302 sq. ft 518 sq. ft. 112 sq. ft. 2,932 sq. ft. (59%) 3,000 sq. ft. (60%) Floor Area First Floor Second Floor Basement (exempt) John Henry House Total Floor Area 1,718 sq. ft. 1,204 sq. ft. (1,330 sq. ft.) 518 sq. ft. 4,770 sq. ft. No limit specified in the CH-1 Zoning District Pedestrian Open Space 2,068 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. Height 26’ 26’ Setbacks Front: Exterior Side: Left Side: Rear: 15’ 2’ 0’ 1’10” 15’ None Required None Required None Required Grading Cut 777 CY Fill 0 CY Export 777 CY No grading limit in the CH-1 zoning district 60 Report to the Planning Commission 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 3 SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The 5,000 square foot project site is located at 14630 Big Basin Way at the corner of Sixth Street. The average slope of the site is 5.72%. Surrounding land uses include the Saratoga Oaks Lodge to the east, a commercial office to the south, residential condominiums to the west on the opposite side of Sixth Street, and commercial uses to the north on the opposite side of Big Basin Way. Located on site is an existing one-story 518 square-foot single-family home with a detached garage. Constructed in 1869 in the Pioneer Cottage architectural style, which according to the Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record (DPR) included as Attachment #3, was a common architectural style in early Saratoga. The building is listed on the Saratoga Heritage Resources Inventory. Known as the John Henry House, the building has lap-siding, a covered porch and a root cellar accessed from the west side of the house. Though historically a residence, most recently the building was used as an architect’s office. The John Henry House is owned by the operators of the adjacent Saratoga Oaks Lodge. Since acquiring the building in 2012, the owner has used this building for storage. Six protected trees are located on site which include Coast live oak, Camphor, London plane, Olive, and Flowering pear. Architecture/Design John Henry House The project includes relocation of the John Henry House to the southwestern corner of the site to provide space for the construction of a 2,922 square feet two-story commercial building. The detached garage constructed circa 1935 is not part of the original structure and would not be rebuilt. A historical assessment and evaluation report of the house was prepared in November 2018 by Evans and De Shazo which is included as Attachment #4. This report concluded that since the house would be relocated within the parcel where it was constructed, its relocation and restoration would not be a significant impact on a historic resource with respect to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The historical assessment states that the “new” location of the John Henry House would still be compatible with the original character of setting which would allow it to remain listed on the Saratoga Heritage Resources Inventory. New Mixed-Use Building The proposed 26 feet tall two-story mixed-use commercial building would have a Craftsman architectural style and include a basement, a first-floor restaurant, and second story office space. The primary entrance to the building would face Big Basin Way. The building footprint is located toward the front of the site and setback 15 feet as required by the CH-2 development standards. Architectural features to support the Craftsman style include a front-gabled low-pitched roof, unenclosed eave overhangs, exposed roof rafters, and decorative roof braces. A second story balcony would face Big Basin Way. A ‘wrap around porch’ would extend from the front entrance and continue along the Sixth Street building frontage. Architectural materials include ‘red cedar’ shingle siding, aluminum clad wood windows and doors with divided lites, wood railings at the front entrance steps and porch, and a composition shingle roof. A copy of the project plans is included as Attachment #8. The applicant has provided a color and materials board, which will be available for review at the site visit and during the public hearing. Below is a list of the proposed exterior materials. 61 Report to the Planning Commission 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 4 Detail Colors and Materials Exterior Red Cedar Shingle Siding (grey) Windows / Doors Aluminum Clad Wood Framed w/ Divided Lites (white) Roof Composition Shingles grey) Parking In December 2018 the City Council adopted an ordinance amending the parking standards for the CH zoning districts (The Village). This ordinance eliminated the availability of surplus parking and established one set of parking standards for restaurants, retail, office and personal service businesses. The new parking standards are applicable for all development applications within the C-H districts submitted after November 21, 2018. The project application was submitted to the City in October 2013. The project is exempt from providing onsite parking because the previous development standards with respect to surplus parking in the C-H district are applicable to the project. Utilizing the surplus parking standards, a total of 14 parking spaces would have been required based on the project’s floor area. These spaces are provided by the surplus parking that was previously available for new projects in the Village. Saratoga Village Design Guidelines The project is consistent with the recently adopted policy statements of the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines which encourage new construction that is compatible with the scale and character of surrounding structures, traditional architectural building designs are preferred, and existing buildings of historical significance are preserved. Trees Two trees protected by City Code have been approved by the City Arborist for removal. These include a 23” Camphor and a 22” London plane which conflict with the location of the new sidewalk and building, respectively. Replacement tree are required. Details of the arborist’s findings and descriptions of the trees to be preserved are included in the Arborist Report (Attachment #5). Heritage Preservation Commission The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) conducted a site visit and reviewed the project at their meeting of December 11, 2018. Marilyn Marchetti, the HPC Chair, recused herself as she lives within 150 feet of the subject property. Minutes from the HPC meeting is included as Attachment #6. The HPC recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission with the following conditions which have been added to the resolution. • Wood windows with true divided lites shall be used in the John Henry House • A different shade of roofing materials shall be used for the John Henry house to help differentiate it from the proposed building. 62 Report to the Planning Commission 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 5 Conditional Use Permit Mixed-use projects such as the proposed application is listed as a conditional use in the CH zoning district subject to the granting of a use permit. The findings required for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit Approval pursuant to City Code Section 15-55.070 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: a. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that because the proposed uses of office and commercial are both already existing within the Commercial-Historic (CH-2) zoning district. b. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project has been reviewed and conditioned by the required agencies. The proposed development would not be detrimental to public safety, as it will comply with all applicable local and state regulations. c. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this Chapter. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that because appropriate conditions have been placed on the proposed conditional use permit to ensure compliance to City Code requirements. Any intensification of the proposed conditional use would require an amended Conditional Use Permit application. d. That the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that it has been determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project so as to not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. Design Review The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 15-46.0480 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: a. Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs, material, color, and appurtenances. The project meets this finding in that the project will include two structures with classic American architectural styles, the first structure is a 2,922 square foot two-story mixed-use building with a Craftsman style, and the second structure is the existing 518 square foot one-story John Henry House in the Pioneer style which will be relocated on site. The exterior materials and wall colors of the two buildings will complement each other but are enough of a differentiation to set the John Henry House apart and to draw attention to its architectural individuality and historical identity. The John Henry House will maintain its existing white color horizontal wood siding exterior materials while the commercial building will feature 63 Report to the Planning Commission 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 6 grey colored cedar shingles. The roofing materials for both buildings will feature composition shingles but will be of differing shades to further set the two buildings visually apart. The color of the trim, windows, and doors of the new commercial building will match the exterior color of the John Henry House and these matching colors help in uniting the two buildings. The ground exterior surfaces adjacent to both buildings will feature red colored brick pavers. b. Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the signs shall have a common or compatible design and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance. The project meets this finding in that although the development plans indicate that one wall sign would be located on the front elevation of the commercial building facing Big Basin Way, a separate application for a sign permit will be required to ensure that all proposed signage are compatible in design, location, and harmonious in appearance. c. Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water-conserving plant, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. Other than the project two protected trees proposed for removal which conflict with the construction of the project – the remaining protected trees will be incorporated into the landscaping. Most of the area outside the building footprints will be covered with permeable pavers. Drought tolerant landscaping in natural appearing groups would be located adjacent to both buildings and face Sixth Street and Big Basin Way. d. Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be nonreflective. The project meets this finding in that the proposed colors and materials such as grey colored cedar shingle siding, white colored horizontal wood siding, grey colored asphalt roof shingles, and red colored permeable pavers will blend with the existing landscaping of the Village and surrounding commercial and residential properties and be nonreflective. e. Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. The project meets this finding in that the project will feature composition shingle roofs and no mechanical equipment is proposed on the roofs that would require screening. f. The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. The project meets this finding in that the project will be compatible with other developments in the Village. The area is mostly comprised of two-story structures of approximate the same height and bulk. The proposed new building will be consistent as it is 26 feet in height and two stories. Neighbor Notification A Public Notice was sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. In addition, the public hearing notice and description of the project was published in the Saratoga News. The Planning Department did receive a letter from a neighboring property owner at 14650-B Big Basin Way with concerns related to the lack of off-street parking, potential project related impacts on a residential area, and the removal of trees. A copy of the letter is included as Attachment #8. 64 Report to the Planning Commission 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 7 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. It has been determined that, based on the information contained in the Initial Study (Attachment 1, Exhibit A), the project would not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to avoid or reduce to a less-than-significant level the project’s potentially significant effects on the environment. These mitigation measures are hereby incorporated and fully made part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The project applicant will incorporate and implement as part of the project each of the identified mitigation measures, which would be adopted as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 19-014 2. Resolution No. 19-015 3. Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record (DPR Form) 4. Report by Evans & De Shazo, Inc 5. Report from the City Arborist 6. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes 7. Story Pole Certification 8. Letter from property owner at 14650-B Big Basin Way 9. Project Plans 65 Page | 1 RESOLUTION NO: 19-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE SEBASTIAN’S MIXED-USE PROJECT, APPLICATION NUMBER: ENV18-0002 14630 BIG BASIN WAY (APN# 517-08-005) WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has considered a proposed Design Review approval to construct a two story, 26 feet tall, 2,922 square foot mixed-use commercial building on a 5,000 square foot parcel located at 14630 Big Basin Way at the corner of Sixth Street. A 518 square foot single-family home which is listed on the City’s Heritage Resource Inventory and known as the John Henry House is located on site. The John Henry House will be deconstructed and then reconstructed in the southwestern corner of the site to provide space to construct the new commercial building. The commercial building will include a basement, a first- floor restaurant and second story office space. The relocated John Henry House will be used as a public meeting and conference space. Two protected trees would be removed. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA regulations prior to any Public Hearings on the project. The site is zoned CH-2 with a General Plan Designation of CR (Commercial Retail). Design Review approval is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15-46.020. The foregoing work is described as the “Project” in this Resolution. WHEREAS, an Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) were prepared for the Project by the City of Saratoga, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code sections 21000-21177), CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations sections 15000-15387), and any other applicable requirements. WHEREAS, the IS and a notice of intent to adopt an MND were duly noticed and circulated for a public review period from May 17, 2019 through June 12, 2019. WHEREAS, all Interested Parties desiring to comment on the MND were given the opportunity to submit written and oral comments on the adequacy of the MND up to and including the close of the Public Hearing on the Project before the Planning Commission on June 12, 2019. WHEREAS, the IS and MND represents the City’s independent judgment and analysis. WHEREAS, on June 12, 2019 the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on the Project, during which opportunity was given to address the adequacy of the MND. All comments on the IS and MND raised during the public and agency comment period and at the Public Hearing(s) on the Project were considered by the Planning Commission. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission was presented with and/or had the opportunity to review all the information in the administrative record. ATTACHMENT 1 66 Page | 2 2 NOW THEREFORE, after the conclusion of such Public Hearing, the Planning Commission considered all oral and written comments and a staff recommendation for approval of the MND and reviewed and considered the information in the IS and MND, public and agency comments on the IS and MND, the administrative record, and the staff report for completeness and compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and all other applicable requirements. Section 1: the Project has been the subject of a Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15070 and following of Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines). The MND has been completed in compliance with the intent and requirements of CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and all other applicable requirements. The Planning Commission has considered the information contained in the ND and the record in considering the Project and related actions. Section 2: the documents constituting the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based are kept in the City of Saratoga Community Development Department and are maintained by the Community Development Director. Section 3: pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission finds on the basis of, and after review of, the whole record before it (including the Initial Study, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, any and all comments received, and in light of expert and other evidence submitted), that there is no credible, substantial evidence that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment as to any issue raised. Section 4: after careful consideration of the matter, the Planning Commission hereby approves to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project, which was presented to the Planning Commission on June 12, 2019, and circulated for a public review period from May 17, 2019 through June 12, 2019 and is on file with the Community Development Department. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga, this 12th of June 2019 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________________ Sunil Ahuja Chair, Planning Commission 67 Draft Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project 14630 Big Basin Way Owners: Paul and Joseph Hernandez Public Review Period May 17, 2019 to June 12, 2019 Exhibit A 68 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 2 The City of Saratoga, as the Lead Agency, has prepared this Initial Study for the Sebastian’s Mixed- Use Project. In accordance with the policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, this document, combined with the attached supporting data, constitutes the initial study on the subject project. This initial study provides the basis for the determination of whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. PUBLIC REVIEW In accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, a 20‐day public review period for this IS commenced on May 17, 2019 and will conclude on June 12, 2019. During this period, the Initial Study will be available to local, state, and federal agencies and to interested organizations and individuals for review. All written comments must be received prior to 5:00 P.M. on June 12, 2019. Please submit written comments to: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Following the conclusion of the public review period, the Planning Commission will consider the adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project at a regularly scheduled meeting. The Planning Commission shall consider the Initial Study/MND together with any comments received during the public review process. Upon adoption of the MND, the Planning Commission may proceed with project approval actions. 69 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 3 A. PROJECT OVERVIEW 1. Project title: Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Saratoga; Planning Division 13777 Fruitvale Avenue; Saratoga, CA 95070 3. Contact person and phone number: Christopher Riordan criordan@saratoga.ca.us / (408) 868-1235 4. Project location/APN: 14630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, CA 95070 517-08-005 5. Project sponsor name and address: Paul and Joseph Hernandez 13020 La Vista Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 6. General plan designation: Commercial Retail (CR) 7. Zoning: Commercial Historic (CH-2) 8. Description of project: The project applicants, Paul and Joseph Hernandez, are proposing to develop a mixed-use development at 14630 Big Basin Way consisting of commercial and office space. The location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The project would require relocation on site of an existing single-family home constructed in 1869 known as the John Henry House that may be eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources. The house is also classified as a City Heritage Resource on the Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory. The project would include construction of an approximately 2,922 square foot two story building with a 1,330 square foot basement. The proposed building would include uses available to the occupants of the adjacent Saratoga Oaks Lodge to include a ground floor restaurant which would serve both breakfast and lunch, meeting space, and a basement wine tasting lounge. The existing John Henry House would be relocated to the southwest corner of the site and would also be available to the occupants of the Saratoga Oaks Lodge as public meeting and conference space. Surrounding land uses and setting: The project site is located at 14630 Big Basin Way (State Highway 9). Regional freeway access to the site is provided by State Highway 85 from the north via Saratoga-Sunnyvale and from the east via Saratoga Avenue. Regional access from the south is from State Highway 17 via Saratoga-Los Gatos Road. The site is located approximately 250 feet south of Saratoga Creek. The project would be in the Saratoga Village which, as noted in the Village Area Plan, includes many older buildings, including the John Henry House, Nardie House (c.1895), and Fabretti House (1881). The Village area supports a diverse mix of residential, commercial, professional office, and institutional uses. 70 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 4 Sixth Street generally marks the western limit of commercial development along Big Basin Way. The Saratoga Oaks Lodge is located adjacent to the site on Big Basin Way. The Cinnabar Tasting Room is located to the east of the Saratoga Oaks Lodge. Other uses in this block include professional offices and a fitness studio. Most of the block is developed with single-family homes fronting on Sixth Street, Saint Charles Street, and Fifth Street. There is a small apartment building on Saint Charles Street. East of Fifth Street, Big Basin Way is developed entirely with commercial and mixed uses, including restaurants, retail stores, and professional offices. A condominium complex of nine two-story buildings is located immediately to the west of the project site, at the southwest corner of Big Basin Way and Sixth Street. The Saratoga Oaks townhomes is located about 600 feet to the west. Madronia Cemetery is located about 900 feet to the south. Generally, the area to the south and west of the site is predominantly developed with single-family homes. The project would be located on a 5,000 square foot lot with an average slope of approximately six percent in the CH-2 zoning district. The site is located on a fully developed block that supports a mix of retail businesses, single-family homes, apartments, and a hotel. The block serves as a transition from existing retail development to the east and residential development to the west and south. The project site has a frontage along Big Basin Way of 50 feet and a frontage along Sixth Street of 100 feet. The existing primary building on the site is a one-story, 970 square-foot single- family home constructed in 1869 in the Pioneer Cottage architectural style. It is known locally as the John Henry House, after the original owner and builder of the house, an engineer at the nearby Saratoga Paper Mill which was destroyed by fire in 1883. The simple, small one-story lap-sided building has a covered porch and a root cellar accessed from the side of the house. At an unknown date, a garage was added to the rear of the building, forming and L-shaped structure. The front porch was also added after the original construction. Though historically a residence, in recent years, the building has been used as an architect’s office. The John Henry House is owned by the operators of the adjacent Saratoga Oaks Lodge. Since acquiring the building in 2012, the owner has used this building for storage. 9. Other public agencies whose review is required San Jose Water Company; West Valley Sanitation District; Pacific Gas & Electric, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department. 71 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 5 Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: Architect’s Rendering 72 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. Please see the checklist beginning on page 10 for additional information. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required Signature: Date: May 17, 2019 Printed Name: Christopher Alan Riordan 73 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 7 1. AESTHETICS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? DISCUSSION: a-d) The project site is in an established neighborhood developed with a mixture of commercial retail, office, and residential buildings. The terrain in the immediate vicinity of the site is level to gently sloping upward toward the south. The site lies within a narrow valley defined by Saratoga Creek, which flows west to east approximately 250 feet to the north of the site and is flanked by dense riparian corridor of trees and other vegetation. The Santa Cruz mountain range rises to the west and south, and some of the lower foothills provide a visual backdrop from certain locations in the Village area. Limited views of these foothills are available from Sixth Street adjacent to the project site, though more expansive views are blocked by existing residential development along Sixth Street. From Big Basin Way in the immediate vicinity of the project site, the view to the west is characterized by street trees flanking the street and, in the middle distance, the dense canopy of trees along Saratoga Creek. Toward the east, the view consists of Big Basin Way. Commercial buildings lining the roadway are more visible along the south side of the street, while the residential and commercial buildings on the north side are largely obscured by mature trees. In both directions, Big Basin Way was in the most prominent visual feature. While the consideration of scenic views is inherently subjective the more natural a vista is, the more it could be considered scenic by most viewers. In the case of the project area, due to the dense canopies of trees and the small town feel of the Village, some viewers could consider the area to be scenic despite the degree of development. It is conservatively assumed that the project site and surrounding area constitute a scenic vista. Therefore, for the purposes of CEQA, the issue for consideration is whether the project would have a substantial adverse effect on this scenic vista. The project would preserve the existing residence on the site by relocating it to the southwest corner of the site. This relocation would serve to preserve the existing house while creating space large enough to construct the project. The existing garage will be removed. An oak tree at the front corner 74 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 8 of the lot would be retained. Other existing trees that would be retained include an olive tree in the southeast corner, an olive tree near the front of the lot, adjacent to Big Basin Way, and a large oak that is located on the adjoining site, with a canopy that extends over the southeast corner of the project site. The retention of these tree, particularly the large oak tree, would help to maintain some of the existing character of the site. As shown in the architect’s rendering of the project, the proposed shingle-style building with a veranda porch would be an attractive, modestly scaled building that would be aesthetically compatible with some of the older buildings in the vicinity, including the adjacent residence on Sixth Street and the current and former residences located on the north side of Big Basin Way between Fifth and Sixth Streets. While implementation of the project would substantially alter the existing visual character of the site, it would not represent a substantial adverse change, either in the character of the site or in the sites contribution to existing viewsheds that encompass the project site, whether those views are considered scenic vistas or not. State Highway 9, which is also named Big Basin Way near the project site, is a State designated Scenic Highway. One of the implicit standards of significance for aesthetic impacts, as established in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, is whether a project would substantially damage scenic resources within a State scenic highway, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings. The project site has both trees and historic buildings on the site that would be either be relocated on site and/or removed. While the proposed relocation of the John Henry House could be considered an adverse effect on cultural resources, however, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, the relocation of the John Henry House would not constitute a significant impact, for all the reasons set forth. The most visually prominent trees would be retained and a building which evokes local historic architectural character would be developed on the site. Travelers entering the City would be greeted by a building oriented toward eastbound traffic on Highway 9 by means of an open, wrap-around veranda porch and many large windows with divided lights. From an aesthetic standpoint, it may be argued that the project could improve the visual character of the site as experienced by travelers on Highway 9. Therefore, the project would have a less-than significant visual impact on the scenic highway. Since the project is located on Big Basin Way it is subject to the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines. The purpose of the Guidelines is to provide a set of standards by which property owners and architects can use for remodeling existing buildings or designing new buildings to achieve the community’s vision for the Village. The Guidelines contain objectives for architectural design, storefronts, signage, and the preservation of existing historic structures. Based on the discussion of the project contained in this document it has been determined that the project is consistent with the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on scenic vistas and on the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings. 75 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 9 2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? DISCUSSION: a-e) The project site has been developed with a residential home (most recently used as a storage building) for many decades. There is no agricultural land or productive forest land on site, which is in an area fully developed with urbanized uses. There is no agriculturally zoned land on or near the site. 76 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 10 The project site and all surroundings are designated “Urban and Built-Up Land” by the Department of Conservation (DOC), a department of California Resources Agency.1 The DOC’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) publishes Farmland maps and the most recent map was prepared in 2016. There is no farmland on or in proximity to the project site; there therefore no potential to convert Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. The Land Use Element of the General Plan notes that there are no timber production areas within the City. There is no potential for the project to adversely affect timber resources. 3. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? DISCUSSION: a. The City of Saratoga, including the project site, is within the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Air District). Regional Air Districts prepare air quality plans specifying how state air quality standards would be met. The Air District’s most recent adopted plan is the Bay area 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate (2017 CAP). The 2017 Air District CEQA guidelines specify Clean Air Plan Consistency methods for plan level evaluation only. Guidance for project-level analysis focuses on attainment of criteria air pollutant emissions thresholds and health risk standards. Development projects, such as the proposed project, are consistent with the 2017 CAP if emissions are within the screening thresholds presented in the 2017 Air District CEQA guidelines. 1 California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, “Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2016” (map). 77 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 11 The proposed project is below the Air District’s thresholds for operational and construction air pollutant emissions and the Air District’s standard dust emissions controls are included as mitigation (see “b” below). With implementation of this mitigation measure, as modified, the proposed project would not conflict with the 2017 CAP. Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Future development of the site shall include applicable control measures from the Air District’s current air quality plan. These control measures can include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Provision of bicycle facilities within the development; b. Incorporation of “cool roofing” and “cool paving” technologies into the project; and c. Inclusion of shade trees in landscaping plans. b. The Air District is responsible for monitoring emissions and developing air quality plans for the San Francisco Bay area, including Santa Clara County and has published comprehensive guidance on evaluating, determining significance of, and mitigating air quality impacts of projects and plans in CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines). The CEQA guidelines were initially adopted in 1999 and subsequently updated in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2017. The 2017 Air District CEQA guidelines, Table 3-1 Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors and GHG Screening Level Sizes, identifies land uses by size that are typically not expected to result in criteria pollutant emissions that would exceed the Air District's thresholds. Table 3-1 provides an indication of when a project's construction and operational emissions should be quantified based on identified size criteria. Table 3-1, "Operational-Related Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Screening Level Sizes" on page 3-2 of the 2017 Air District CEQA guidelines contains the screening criteria. The screening threshold for a general office building is 53,000 square feet. The proposed project would include 3,440 square feet of general office space. Therefore, the project would fall below the threshold and would have a less-than-significant operational impact on air quality. Table 3-1 also contains screening criteria for construction impacts of new development projects. For office buildings construction impacts are less than significant for projects of 277,000 square feet. The proposed project would include 3,440 square feet of general office space. Therefore, the project would fall below the threshold and would have a less-than-significant operational impact from construction emissions. However, the Air District recommends the implementation of the following mitigation measures for all proposed projects whether construction related emissions exceed applicable thresholds of significance. The following mitigation measure will be implemented to ensure the proposed project's contribution to construction-related air emissions would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures AQ-2. The following basic construction mitigation measures shall be incorporated in project construction documents: 78 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 12 a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day; b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, debris, or other loose material off-site shall be covered; c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited; d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 mph; e. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points; g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a citified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation; and h. Post a publicly visible sign with telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. c. The 2017 Air District CEQA guidelines considered the emission levels for which a project's individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable in developing thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region's existing air quality conditions. The proposed project is the construction of commercial building space and does not exceed the Air District's thresholds for criteria air pollutants (see "b" above). Therefore, the proposed project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. d. Operation of the development is not expected to cause any localized emissions that could expose sensitive receptors to unhealthy air pollutant levels, because no significant operational sources of pollutants are proposed onsite. Construction activities would result in localized emissions of dust and diesel exhaust that could result in temporary impacts to adjacent land uses that include sensitive receptors (residential uses). The short-te1m air quality effects during project construction would be avoided with implementation of the Mitigation Measure AQ-2 under checklist item "b" above. The proposed project would not result in localized, concentrated operational emissions that would expose sensitive receptors to unhealthy air pollutant levels. e. The proposed project includes the construction of one new commercial building and would not result in any objectionable odors during the operational phase. During project construction, there 79 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 13 may be nuisance diesel odors associated with operation of diesel construction equipment on-site (primarily during initial grading phases), but this effect would be localized, sporadic, and short- term in nature. Therefore, temporary impacts from nuisance diesel odors on adjacent residential receptors would be less than significant. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? DISCUSSION: a-f) The project site is a 5,000 square-foot rectangular lot situated in an area fully developed with a mixture of commercial, office, and residential uses. Most of the site is occupied by a residence and garage, and the remainder of the site is covered by landscaping including a sparse grass lawn, ornamental shrubs, and ten trees including oaks, cedar, sycamore, bay, and olive. 80 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 14 The trees and existing landscaping provide limited habitat for common wildlife species adapted to urban life. The site is in a developed urbanized area and does not support any sensitive habitats or provide habitat for any rare or endangered plant or animal species, and the proposed project would not affect or substantially diminish plan or animal habitats, including riparian or wetland habitat. The proposed project would not interfere with any resident or migratory species habitat, or affect any rare, threatened, or endangered species. A total of six trees protected by City Ordinance are located on site. Of these six trees, the project would include the removal of two trees. These include a 23-inch camphor in good condition and a 22-inch London plane in fair condition. Both trees conflict with construction and the City Arborist has approved their removal. The remaining four trees will be fenced during construction to minimize construction related impacts. Replacement trees with a value of $14,470 are required. Implementation of the City Arborist recommendations would reduce any adverse impacts associated with biological resources to be less than significant. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including that interred outside of formal cemeteries? DISCUSSION: a) The John Henry House is located on site. The John Henry House is listed on the Saratoga Heritage Resources Inventory but is not a designated Landmark, located on a heritage lane, or in a heritage district. Per the DPR Record, the John Henry House is in the vernacular National or Pioneer architectural style commonly found in early Saratoga. It was built in 1869 of locally milled redwood and the original front portion of the structure is lap-sided with double-hung wood windows with thin muntins which typify early construction. The house is raised above a root cellar. A garage was later added onto the rear of the building in an "L" shape. A well is in the rear yard. In 2009, a report by Archives & Architecture indicated that the structure appeared to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources under Criterion (3) as the house embodies the distinctive characteristics of an early National-style cottage from Saratoga's Early American period. The structure was inspected by Thrasher Termite and Pest Control, Inc. in July 2017 and it was determined that termites, dry rot, and fungus from roof leaks has caused damage to sheetrock 81 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 15 panel walls, ceiling boards, wall framing and floors. The structure is built of single wall construction and bears on a perimeter mudsill and brick pier foundation. The project includes deconstruction, relocation, and reconstruction of the John Henry House to the southwestern corner of the site facing Sixth Street to make room for the construction of a 2,922-mixed-use commercial/office building. The detached garage constructed circa 1935 and not part of the original structure would not be rebuilt. The reconstructed John Henry House would be used as office space. A current condition assessment, evaluation, and Secretary of Interior Standards review, dated November 26, 2018, was prepared by Evans and De Shazo, Inc. The report states that relocation of a historical resource may constitute an adverse impact to the resource. However, since the 1869 John Henry House is being relocated within the parcel where it was constructed, the relocation and restoration mitigate the Project below a level of significance as the “new” location is compatible with the original character of setting, which should allow the resource to remain local listed. This adheres to the public policy of the City of Saratoga to recognize and preserve the heritage of the city as set forth under Chapter 13 of the Municipal Code. The report by Evans & De Shazo assessed, evaluated, and addressed Standards compliance for the proposed project at the recommendation of the City of Saratoga to ensure compliance with CEQA, and local ordinances, and address potential impacts to historical resources. Although the house retains integrity of location and design, based on a field survey, research, and thorough analysis, it was determined that due to lack of integrity of the 1869 John Henry House it does not meet the significance for listing on the California Register of Historic Place (CRHR) under any criterion. At their meeting of December 11, 2018, the City of Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission considered the November 26, 2018 report prepared by Evans & De Shazo and the application to preserve the John Henry House by relocating it on the existing site to make room for the construction of the proposed project. The Heritage Preservation Commission agreed with the findings of the report that relocating and preserving the John Henry House onsite would not be a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The Heritage Preservation Commission’s recommendation of approval included the following two conditions that have been incorporated into the project: 1) Wood windows with true divided lites shall be used in the John Henry house; and 2) A different shade of roofing materials shall be used for the John Henry house and the new commercial building. b-d) The City of Saratoga General Plan states that the City’s heritage is to be preserved by providing for the protection of cultural resources representing significant elements of City and regional history. Although no evidence of potentially sensitive cultural resources are associated with the project site, there is the possibility of an accidental discovery or recognition of archaeological resources or human remains during construction activities. The following mitigation measures would reduce the potential impact to a less than significant level. 82 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 16 Mitigation Measures CR-1. Due to the remote possibility that significant buried prehistoric cultural resources might be found during construction activities, the following language shall be included in all construction documents associated with development of the project site: "If prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during construction, work shall be halted at a minimum of 200 feet from the find and the area shall be staked off. The city shall notify a qualified professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented." Implementation of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of project site developers. CR-2. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following language shall be included in all construction documents associated with redevelopment of the project site in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.S(e): "If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of Santa Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the City of Saratoga or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The City of Saratoga or its authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the City of Saratoga or its authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner." Implementation of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of project site developers. 83 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 17 19. ENERGY: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? DISCUSSION: a-b) Implementation of the project would not be considered to result in wasteful or inefficient consumption of energy. The project consists of a 2,922 square foot mixed-use commercial building with a 1,330 basement and a 518 square foot detached building to be used as conference/meeting space. Energy consumption for these uses are expected to be commensurate with other building with similar uses and wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operation is not to be expected. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 84 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 18 c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? DISCUSSION: A geotechnical investigation report was prepared for the proposed project by Redwood Geotechnical Engineering, Incorporated in October 2013, and is included as an appendix of this initial study. The report presents the results of the investigation to evaluate subsurface soil and geologic conditions in the area of the project and provides recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. a. Potential impacts from exposure to geologic risks are as follows: (1) Surface Fault Ruptures. The project is not located within a currently established State of California Earthquake Fault Zone for surface fault rupture hazards. No active faults are known to pass directly beneath the project site. (2) Ground Shaking. The report by Redwood Geotechnical Engineering, Incorporated identified that the primary seismic hazard at the site appears to be from strong ground shaking. The site is located about two miles northeast of the active San Andreas Fault and about 17 miles southwest of the Hayward and Calaveras Fault Zones, respectively. These larger fault systems have generated moderate to severe earthquakes on several dates in the recorded history of the area. Traces of the Berrocal Fault have been mapped about one mile to the southwest. Smaller local fault traces mapped in the site vicinity may also be capable of generating moderate to severe ground shaking at the site. Future strong ground shaking is therefore considered very likely during the next 30 years. Implementation of the seismic design parameters per Chapter 16 of the California Building Code would reduce any adverse impacts associated with seismic shaking to be less than significant. Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence that the 85 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 19 recommendations in the October 2013 project geotechnical report are included in the project grading and building plans. (3) Liquefaction. Liquefaction occurs primarily in relatively loose, saturated, cohesionless soils which can be subjected to a temporary loss of strength due to the buildup pore pressures, especially as a result of cyclic loading such as induced by earthquakes. Evaluation of liquefaction potential on the subject site was based on the soil type, density of the site soils, and the presence of groundwater. Based on the data obtained during the field and laboratory investigations by Redwood Geotechnical Engineering, the liquefaction potential at the site does not exist. (4) Landslides. There are no know landslides near the project site, nor is the project site in the path of any known landslides. The site has an overall average slope of 5.72% b. Construction activities such as grading, and excavation could result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Additionally, erosion can be a natural process caused by wind, water, or gravitational forces, which can result in soil removal or erosion of soil from a site. The primary geological effects of erosion are loss of topsoil, rut formation, and potential destabilization of slopes. Subsequent deposition to another site is sedimentation. The proposed project includes grading throughout the project sit. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure erosion impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure GEO-2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit an erosion control plan to ensure that erosion is controlled during grading and construction activities and does not result in deposition of soil off site. c. Consequences of liquefaction can include ground surface settlement, ground loss and lateral slope displacements. Based on the unlikely potential for liquefaction, there is little if any potential for lateral spread, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. d. The project site soils are not considered expansive. Although project site soils are not considered expansive, impacts associated with expansive soils or other soil hazards, such as slab cracking, would be minimized by applying engineering and construction techniques as presented in the Geotechnical report and presented in Geo-I. e. The proposed project would not include septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. f. The site has been developed as a single-family home since 1869. The site is relatively level with an average grade of 5.72%. City staff has visited the site and observed that there are no unique geological features existing on site. While no known paleontological resources have been observed on site, there is potential that paleontological resources could be discovered during 86 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 20 excavation, resulting in a potentially significant impact. If paleontological resources are encountered, implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-3 would reduce impacts to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure GEO-3. If paleontological resources are encountered during project subsurface construction, all ground-disturbing activities within 60 feet shall be redirected and a qualified paleontologist contacted to assess the situation, consult with agencies as appropriate, and make recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. Project personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials. Adverse effects to such deposits shall be avoided by project activities. Paleontological resources are considered significant if they may provide new information regarding past life forms, paleoecology, stratigraphy, or geological formation processes. If found to be significant, and project activities cannot avoid the paleontological resources, adverse effects to paleontological resources shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include monitoring, recording the fossil locality, data recovery and analysis, a final report, and accessioning the fossil material and technical report to a paleontological repository. Public educational outreach may also be appropriate. Upon completion of the assessment, a report documenting methods, findings, and recommendations shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Saratoga Community Development Director. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: An assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is included in the body of environmental document. While Caltrans has included this good faith effort in order to provide the public and decision-makers as much information as possible about the project, it is Caltrans determination that in the absence of further regulatory or scientific information related to GHG emissions and CEQA significance, it is too speculative to make a significance determination regarding the project’s direct and indirect impact with respect to climate change. Caltrans does remain firmly committed to implementing measures to help reduce the potential effects of the project. These measures are outlined in the body of the environmental document. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 87 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 21 DISCUSSION: a. The project site would create greenhouse gas emissions largely from the generation of electricity for the commercial development and vehicle trips. Solid waste would make up a small amount of the total generation of greenhouse gas emissions The BAAQMD identifies screening levels for evaluation of operational GHG emissions based on project size as described in the Air Quality section of this initial study. The applicable land use category of the Air District's screening criteria tables for the project is general office. The project is below the Air District's screening thresholds for such uses and would have a less than significant impact related to operational GHG emissions. During site preparation and construction of the project, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker / builder supply vehicles, which typically use fossil-based fuels to operate. Project excavation, grading, and construction would be temporary, occurring only over the construction period, and would not result in a permanent increase in GHG emissions. In addition, compliance with Mitigation Measure AQ-2 (described above in Section 3, Air Quality) to limit air quality impacts during construction as required by Air District (e.g. watering exposed areas, covering haul trucks carrying loose material, limiting speed in construction areas, minimizing idling times, etc.) would further reduce construction GHG emissions. The impact from construction emissions associated with the project, therefore, would be less than significant. b. The City of Saratoga does not have an adopted greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan. The Air District is the only regional agency that to date has developed a plan for GHG emissions reductions that can be utilized by the City. The Air District has published comprehensive guidance on evaluating, determining significance of, and mitigating GHG impacts of projects and plans. The guidance is contained in the 2017 Air District CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project is below the screening criteria listed in the 2017 Air District CEQA guidelines, Table 3-1. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significan t Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 88 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 22 d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? DISCUSSION: a-b. The proposed project is a commercial development that does not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous waste. Nominal amounts of hazardous material in the form of fuels and other construction materials are routinely used during construction processes. These materials do not pose an elevated risk to public health and safety. c. The project site is a commercial building that will not be a source of hazardous emissions; therefore, there is no impact. d. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires that the Department of Toxic Substances Control compile and regularly update a list of hazardous waste facilities and sites. A search of the Envirostor website (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2018) revealed that the project site is not on the list. Therefore, no impact would occur. e/f. The project site is not within an airport land use plan, is not within two miles of a public airport, and is not near a private landing strip. The nearest airports are San Jose International Airport ten miles to the northeast, and Reid-Hillview Airport 16 miles to the east, northeast. g. The City participates in the Santa Clara County Operational Emergency Plan. The plan is an all hazards document describing the County's Emergency Operations organization, compliance with relevant legal statutes, other guidelines, and critical components of the Emergency 89 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 23 Response System. Development of the project would not impair the implementation of this plan. h. The project site is located within the Wildland-Urban Interface Area and is subject to the requirements of Chapter 7A of the California Building Code. The Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area is a geographical area that has been identified by the State of California as a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Approximately a third of the City of Saratoga land area is within the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. To reduce the impacts to buildings within the Wildland- Urban Interface Fire Area, building and fire code requirements include automatic sprinkler, fire alarm systems and construction techniques such as ignition-resistant materials, non-combustible construction and other fire-resistive methods during construction. Therefore, development on the project site is not expected to expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 90 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 24 g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow DISCUSSION: a. The proposed project is the construction of a commercial building on 0.114 acres and the developer would not be required to obtain a State NPDES Construction General Permit since the threshold for requiring such a permit is the disturbance of 1 acre or more. The proposed project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements as described in c) and e) below. b. The proposed project would utilize public water provided by the San Jose Water Company and would not use groundwater for any phase of the project. Regarding surface water that recharges the groundwater, the project site is not located in a groundwater recharge area. Consequently, the project would have no impact on groundwater supplies or recharge other than its indirect impact on the use of groundwater by the San Jose Water Company. The Water Company receives water from Santa Clara Groundwater Basin supplied by the Santa Clara Valley Water District. According to the water district's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, there is adequate groundwater recharge within the Basin, and groundwater elevations have been steadily on the rise for the past 40 years. Consequently, the proposed project would not deplete groundwater resources nor substantially interfere with groundwater recharge and the impact is less than significant. c-e. The project site is currently developed with minimal impervious surfaces. Surface runoff is conveyed to existing storm water drainage system or to the rear and sides of the site with no capture system. The proposed project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces. With implementation of the proposed project, impervious surfaces would cover approximately 58 percent of the project site through structural coverage and minimal hardscape. The project employs the use of permeable pavers for walkways and patio. The proposed project includes onsite bioretention and treatment of surface runoff to minimize any untreated surface runoff into the public storm system. New development of the project site is required to comply with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit and the Construction General Stormwater Permit. The Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit and the Construction General Stormwater Permit require that any development on the project site incorporate Low Impact Design techniques, provide erosion 91 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 25 control measures during construction, and ensure that runoff does not exceed the rate and duration of that existing runoff. Further, the required Low Impact Design techniques require pre-treatment of runoff before it enters the City's or Caltrans' sto1m water system. The proposed project plans include a conceptual storm water management plan (sheets T-4, T-5, and T-6 of the project plans in Appendix A). Storm water treatment control measures include, self- retaining, self-treating, and bio retention. The storm water management plan will be reviewed by City staff to ensure it meets the City's requirements for storm water management. These requirements will ensure that the proposed project will have no impact on downstream flooding, including impacts on downstream creeks. These requirements will also ensure that the proposed project would not create or contribute substantial amounts of runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned sto1m water drainage systems. g/h. Large scale flooding is not a significant hazard in the City (General Plan, page 27). According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the project site is not located within a 100-year flood plain and future development on the project site would not result in the placement of housing or structures within the 100-year flood hazard area. i. The City of Saratoga General Plan does not mention dam failure as an issue of concern. Figure 5L-2 of the Santa Clara County Draft 1994 General Plan EIR shows the area near the project site to not be at risk of flooding from dam failure. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding because of the failure of a levee or dam. j. The project site is located inland and is not at risk of inundation by a tsunami. Seiches are large waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. No major water- retaining structures are located immediately up gradient from the project site. Flooding from a seismically-induced seiche is unlikely. The project site is not located at the base of a hill and the area surrounding is developed with single-family homes on sites heavily vegetated. The project site would not be subject to inundation by mudflow. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 92 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 26 DISCUSSION: a. The project site containing a one-story single-family home and a detached garage. Surrounding land uses include a hotel, commercial office, condominiums, and retail. The proposed project would include the construction of a new 2,922 mixed-use project and the relocation on site of the existing single-family home and would not physically divide an established community. b. The current land use designation for the project site is Commercial Retail with a maximum building site coverage of 60%. The proposed project proposed building with a site coverage of 58%. c. The project site is not located within the boundaries of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. Therefore, no habitat conservation plan conflicts/impacts would occur. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? DISCUSSION: a-b. The City of Saratoga does not contain any designated important mineral resources that need to be protected. Mineral resources in the City are limited primarily to sandstone and shale. There are several closed quarries within Saratoga and there are no mines or quarries known to be operating in the City or its Sphere of Influence. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts to known mineral resources or result in the loss of availability of a locally important resource recovery site. 12. NOISE: Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 93 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 27 c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? DISCUSSION: a. The standards of the City of Saratoga General Plan Noise Element utilize the Day-Night Level (DNL) noise descriptor. The Noise Element of the General Plan includes the existing roadway noise and noise contour distances for various roadway segments within the City (Table NE-A1) including the portion of Big Basin Way which borders the project. Based on the table, the project can expect a DNL of 68 dB as measured 50 feet from the roadway center line. The Noise Element includes land-use compatibility guidelines (Table NE-2) which lists a DNL of 68 dB as being in the range of being conditionally acceptable for commercial and office uses. Policy 2.4 of the General Plan Noise Element requires that commercial development be designed and constructed to reduce daytime interior noise levels in accordance with State CALGreen standards prescribing an interior noise level standard of L eq(h) 50 dB as the maximum allowable hourly average noise level during any hour of operation. Implementation of standard building design and construction techniques per CALgreen standards will ensure that noise impacts are less than significant. b. The proposed project would not result in ground-borne vibrations during the operational phase. The equipment expected to be used during construction associated with the project, would generate ground-borne vibration levels lower than the 0.20 in/sec criterion (Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, DOT, May 2006). Therefore, the impacts will be less than significant. c. The primary source of ambient noise levels associated with the project would be traffic noise. The General Plan Noise Element includes projected future noise contours. The portion of Big Basin Way adjacent to the project is expected to have a DNL of 69 in 2030 which is still conditionally acceptable for commercial land uses. See discussion in above Paragraph A which would ensure that noise impacts are less than significant. d. Short-term noise impacts may be created during demolition and relocation of existing structures and construction of the proposed project. Per the City’s existing noise standards, construction and grading activities shall not exceed one hundred dBA measured at any point twenty-five feet 94 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 28 or more from the source of noise. The Noise Element of the Saratoga General Plan states that the ambient noise level for Big Basin Way is 69 dB so noise levels in the project in excess of the ambient level are to be anticipated. Potentially significant, but temporary noise excesses will occur at the properties adjacent to the site during construction of the project. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would ensure that the impact is less than significant. Mitigation Measure N-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the following measures shall be included in the grading and construction plans: (1) All work on site should be restricted to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction activities are prohibited on Sunday and weekday holidays. (2) All construction noise control measures currently imposed on the project shall be maintained pursuant to the City’s noise ordinance. (3) No material deliveries are allowed on Sundays or Weekday Holidays. residences from on-site noise generation. (4) Keep mobile equipment (haul trucks, concrete trucks, etc.) off local streets near residences as much as possible. e. The project site is not located within an airport land-use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public-use airport, and therefore, would not expose people residing in the project area to excessive noise levels. f. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and therefore, would not expose people residing in the project area to excessive noise levels. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 95 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 29 DISCUSSION: a. The project is a commercial project which will include no new dwelling units to induce population growth. As the project is an infill parcel, the proposed project would not extend public infrastructure or foster growth beyond that planned in the General Plan. b. The project is proposed on an infill commercial site so would not displace existing housing. c. See b. above. The project would not displace any people. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks? e. Other public facilities? DISCUSSION: a/b The Santa Clara County Fire Department provides fire protection to the City of Saratoga. The closest fire station to the project site is the Saratoga Fire Station located at 14380 Saratoga Avenue which is approximately .5 miles east of the project site. The Santa County Sheriff provides law enforcement services to the City. The project is an urbanized infill site therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered police or fire facility. c-e The project will include no residential development which could increase the demand for schools, parks, or public facilities. 96 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 30 15. RECREATION: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? DISCUSSION: a-b) The project does not include residential construction that could affect population and/or housing. The project would have no effect on the use of existing neighborhood, regional or other recreational facilities, nor does the project require construction or expansion of recreational facilities. 16. TRANSPORTATION: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 97 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 31 e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? DISCUSSION: a-f Project trip generation was estimated to result in 15 peak hour trips by applying to the size and use of the proposed project the appropriate trip generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation, 10th edition (2017). The General Plan Circulation and Scenic Highway Element requires a transportation analysis to all new development projects resulting in 25 or more new net peak-hour trips. Due to the minimal trip generation with the project, the project would result in a less than significant impact to traffic circulation. 18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21704 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: 1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources code section 5020.1(k), or 2) A resource determined by the lead agency, or in it discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision © of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe. DISCUSSION: a) The 5,000 square foot site is in an established urbanized area. Located on site is an existing 1,002 square foot commercial building and a detached garage. Established retail and residential land uses surround the site. There are no known tribal resources on site. 98 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 32 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with enough permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? DISCUSSION: a. Sanitary sewer services are provided by the West Valley Sanitation District. The district has adequate capacity to service the site and so the proposed project would not cause the district to exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. b/d/e The Santa Clara County Valley Water District and San Jose Water Company provide water service to the City of Saratoga. The District is responsible for designing and building local water reservoirs and water distribution facilities and operating water treatment plants. The District then sells treated water to local water retail agencies that serve communities using their own distribution systems. San Jose Water Company is the water retailer that provides water to Saratoga residents. c. The City uses a storm water collection system, in conjunction with the natural creek drainage system, to manage storm water runoff. Storm water collected through this system ultimately drains into the San Francisco Bay. Any redevelopment on the project site would implement the required General Plan policies and would be required to install adequate storm water 99 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 33 infrastructure. In addition, as discussed in Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed development on the site will require a Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit and a Construction General Stormwater Permit that requires any new development on the site to incorporate Low Impact Design techniques and ensure that runoff does not exceed the rate and duration of that existing. Therefore, the proposed project would not create or contribute run-off water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems and would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems and the impact would be less than significant. f. Solid waste and recycling service are provided by West Valley Collection and Recycling (WVC&R). WVC&R is a joint venture between Green Team of San Jose and Green Waste. Solid waste is picked up Monday through Friday weekly, depending on the Saratoga neighborhood. Paper, plastic, metal, glass and green waste, such as lawn trimmings, can be recycled. All recyclables collected are transmitted to the Material Recovery Facility located in San Jose, where they are sorted and processed into new materials. E-waste is not collected by WVC&R at this time but may be dropped off by residents at the Material Recovery Facility. g. Solid waste and recycling services is available to the project site and would continue with redevelopment of the project site consistent with the proposed project. Redevelopment of the site would be consistent with the proposed General Plan and would need to comply with all federal and state regulations as well as any local goals and policies related to solid waste. Therefore, there is no impact because the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable regulations. 20. WILDFIRE: Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? 100 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 34 d) Expose people to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post- fire slope instability, or drainage changes? DISCUSSION: a-d) All new buildings within the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Area as identified in the Safety Element of the City of Saratoga General Plan are subject to the requirements of Chapter 7A of the California Building Code. The WUI area is a geographical area that has been identified by the State of California as a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. About 1/3 of the City is located within the WUI Fire Area. Almost all areas of the City on the western side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road are within the WUI Fire Area. The project site is in the WUI Fire Area. To reduce wildfire treats to buildings and occupants, buildings are to be constructed with automatic fire sprinklers and fire alarm systems in addition to construction materials that include ignition-resistant materials, non-combustible construction and other fire-resistive methods. The Safety Element identifies Big Basin Way as an evacuation route for the occupants of the eastern hillsides. No new driveway is proposed to be constructed on Big Basin Way which could impede traffic so there will no impact on the City’s emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project will be located on a developed site within the City’s Village Area so the projects impact to expose occupants to pollutants from a wildfire is a less than significant impact. The site is 5,000 square feet with frontage on two street with no requirements for the construction of additional infrastructure which may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. The site and surrounding sites are on level site so there is no impacts from runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. 20. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 101 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 35 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION: a) A total of six trees protected by City Ordinance are located on site. Of these six trees, the project would include the removal of two trees. These include a 23-inch camphor in good condition and a 22-inch London plane in fair condition. Both trees conflict with construction and the City Arborist has approved their removal. The remaining four trees will be fenced during construction to minimize construction related impacts. Replacement trees with a value of $14,470 are required. Implementation of the City Arborist recommendations would reduce any adverse impacts associated with biological resources to be less than significant. The site is in a developed urbanized area and does not support any sensitive habitats or provide habitat for any rare or endangered plant or animal species, and the proposed project would not affect or substantially diminish plan or animal habitats, including riparian or wetland habitat. The proposed project would not interfere with any resident or migratory species habitat, or affect any rare, threatened, or endangered species. There is no evidence to suggest that the proposed project has the potential to eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. However, during grading activities, there is always the potential to inadvertently disturb previously unknown historic and prehistoric resources. In the event this should occur, mitigation measures are included herein to ensure the impact would not be significant. b) The proposed project's impacts and potential impacts in the following areas have the potential to be cumulatively considerable: impacts to sensitive biological resources; and short-term construction related air quality and noise impacts. However, mitigation measures presented herein would ensure that the proposed project's contribution to cumulative impacts is not considerable. c) The proposed project is a commercial building and does not have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Although there is some potential for air quality impacts to nearby sensitive resources during construction activities, a mitigation measure has been included herein to ensure the impact is not substantial. 102 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project, 14630 Big Basin Way Page 36 E. SOURCES 1. City of Saratoga General Plan (Land Use, Circulation, Open Space & Conservation, Noise, and Safety Element). 2. Project Plans, dated Oct 22, 2018. 3. City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance and Map 4. City staff reviews of the project. 5. Condition Assessment Evaluation Report for the John Henry House, prepared by Evans & De Shazo, November 26, 2018. 6. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Douglas Herring & Associates, dated March 20, 2014. 7. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. May 2017. 8. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate. April 19, 2017. 9. California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2018. EnviroStor Database; Accessed February 2019. http://www.environstor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/ 10. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2018. FEMA Flood Map Service Center; Accessed February 2019. https://msc.fema.gov/ 11. California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. May 1, 2017. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the Stat - January 1, 2017 and 2018; Accessed February 2019. http://dof.ca. govforecasting/Demo graphics/Estimates/E-1. E. APPENDIXES A. Project Plans B. Mitigation Monitoring Program 103 Attachment A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project 14630 Big Basin Way Mitigation Measure Monitoring Responsibility Status AIR QUALITY AQ-1. – Future development of the site shall include applicable control measures from the Air District’s current air quality plan. These control measures can include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Provision of bicycle facilities within the development; b. Incorporation of “cool roofing” and “cool paving” technologies into the project; and c. Inclusion of shade trees in landscaping plans. Project Planner and the Building Department. A project representative shall provide written verification to the City that these measures have been complied with prior to Final Project Approval. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance and throughout construction. AQ-2. – The following basic construction mitigation measures shall be incorporated in project construction documents: a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day; b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, debris, or other loose material off- site shall be covered; c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited; d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 mph; e. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not Project Planner and the Building Department. A project representative shall provide written verification to the City that these measures have been complied with prior to Final Project Approval. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance and throughout construction. 104 Mitigation Monitoring Program Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project 14630 Big Basin Way 2 | P a g e in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points; g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a citified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation; and h. Post a publicly visible sign with telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. CULTURAL RESOURCES CR-1. – Due to the remote possibility that significant buried prehistoric cultural resources might be found during construction activities, the following language shall be included in all construction documents associated with development of the project site: "If prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during construction, work shall be halted at a minimum of 200 feet from the find and the area shall be staked off. The city shall notify a qualified professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented." Implementation of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of pr oject site developers. Project Planner and the Building Department. Daily onsite implementation of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of project site developers. Once grading activities have been completed on site, the applicant shall provide a letter of written verification that these measures have been complied with prior to Final Project Approval. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance, throughout construction prior to Final Project Approval. CR-2. – In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following language shall be included in all construction Project Planner and the Building Department. Daily onsite implementation 105 Mitigation Monitoring Program Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project 14630 Big Basin Way 3 | P a g e documents associated with redevelopment of the project site in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.S(e): "If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of Santa Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the City of Saratoga or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The City of Saratoga or its authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the City of Saratoga or its authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner." of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of project site developers. Once grading activities have been completed on site, the applicant shall provide a letter of written verification that these measures have been complied with prior to Final Project Approval. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance, throughout construction prior to Final Project Approval. GEOLOGY AND SOILS GEO-1. – Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence that the recommendations in the October 2013 project geotechnical report are included in the project grading and building plans. Project Planner and the Building Department. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance, 106 Mitigation Monitoring Program Sebastian’s Mixed-Use Project 14630 Big Basin Way 4 | P a g e Evaluation of liquefaction potential on the subject site was based on the soil type, density of the site soils, and the presence of groundwater. Based on the data obtained during the field and laboratory investigations by Redwood Geotechnical Engineering, the liquefaction potential at the site does not exist. throughout construction, and prior to Final Project Approval. GEO-2. – Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit an erosion control plan to ensure that erosion is controlled during grading and construction activities and does not result in deposition of soil off site. Project Planner and the Building Department. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance, throughout construction, and prior to Final Project Approval. NOISE N-1. – Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the following measures shall be included in the grading and construction plans: (1) All work on site should be restricted to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction activities are prohibited on Sunday and weekday holidays. (2) All construction noise control measures currently imposed on the project shall be maintained pursuant to the City’s noise ordinance. (3) No material deliveries are allowed on Sundays or Weekday Holidays. residences from on-site noise generation. (4) Keep mobile equipment (haul trucks, concrete trucks, etc.) off local streets near residences as much as possible. Project planner, plan check engineer, grading inspector and building department. Required as conditions of approval. Reviewed prior to permit issuance and throughout construction. 107 RESOLUTION NO: 19-015 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR13-0023, ARBORIST REPORT ARB13-0004 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP13-0004 14630 BIG BASIN WAY (APN# 517-08-005) WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has considered a proposed Design Review approval to construct a two story, 26 feet tall, 2,922 square foot mixed-use commercial building on a 5,000 square foot parcel located at 14630 Big Basin Way at the corner of Sixth Street. A 518 square foot single-family home which is listed on the City’s Heritage Resource Inventory and known as the John Henry House is located on site. The John Henry House will be deconstructed and then reconstructed in the southwestern corner of the site to provide space to construct the new commercial building. The commercial building will include a basement, a first-floor restaurant and second story office space. The relocated John Henry House will be used as a public meeting and conference space. Two protected trees would be removed. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA regulations prior to any Public Hearings on the project. The site is zoned CH-2 with a General Plan Designation of CR (Commercial Retail). Design Review approval is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15-46.020. The foregoing work is described as the “Project” in this Resolution. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an Initial Study for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and it has been determined that, based on the information contained in the attached Initial Study, the project would not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to avoid or reduce to a less-than-significant level the project’s potentially significant effects on the environment. These mitigation measures are hereby incorporated and fully made part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and recommends the Planning Commission adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Resolution No. 19-014). WHEREAS, on June 12, 2019 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for the project and it has been determined that the project would not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Section 3: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Goals and Policies: Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings; and Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall ATTACHMENT 2 108 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 2 protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development; Policy LU2.1 which states that non-residential development shall be confined to sites presently designated on the General Plan Map for non-residential uses; Goal LU 12.1 and Policy LU 12.1 which states the importance of protecting the City’s historic and cultural resources and enhancing the visual character of the City by encouraging compatibility of architectural styles that reflect established architectural traditions; Section 4: The project is consistent with the recently adopted policy statements of the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines which encourage new construction that is compatible with the scale and character of surrounding structures, traditional architectural building designs are preferred, and existing buildings of historical significance are preserved. Section 5: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project and landscaping will be harmonious with other buildings on the same site; only one sign is being proposed; existing landscaping will be preserved and proposed landscaping will feature water-conserving plants with an irrigation system; the exterior colors will blend with the natural landscape and be non-reflective; roofing materials shall be composition and not HVAC equipment will be located on the roof, and the development will be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR13-0023, ARB13-0004 and CUP13-0004 located at 14630 Big Basin Way (APN 517-08-005) subject to the findings and conditions included in Exhibit 1. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 12th day of June 2019 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Sunil Ahuja Chair, Planning Commission 109 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 3 Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PDR13-0023, ARB13-0004 and CUP13-0004 14630 BIG BASIN WAY (APN# 517-08-005) GENERAL 1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the Community Development Director. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent. 2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga City Code incorporated herein by this reference. 4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney. 110 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 5. The owner/applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding drainage, including but not limited to complying with the city approved Stormwater management plan. The project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the site, that is created by the proposed construction and grading project, such that adjacent down slope properties will not be negatively impacted by any increase in flow. Design must follow the current Santa Clara County Drainage Manual method criteria, as required by the building department. Retention/detention element design must follow the Drainage Manual guidelines, as required by the building department. 6. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated September 7, 2018. All proposed changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with City Code. 7. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit for staff approval, a Lighting Plan for the projects exterior areas. Proposed exterior lighting shall be limited to full-cut off & shielded fixtures with downward directed illumination so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. All proposed exterior lighting shall be designed to limit illumination to the site and avoid creating glare impacts to surrounding properties. 8. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 9. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall prepare for review and approval by City staff a Construction Management Plan for the project which includes but is not limited to the following: a. Proposed construction worker parking area. b. Proposed construction hours that are consistent with City Code. c. Proposed construction/delivery vehicle staging or parking areas. d. Proposed traffic control plan with traffic control measures, any street closure, hours for delivery/earth moving or hauling, etc. To the extent possible, any deliveries, earth moving or hauling activities will be scheduled to avoid peak commute hours. e. Proposed construction material staging/storage areas. f. Location of project construction sign outlining permitted construction work hours, name of project contractor and the contact information for both homeowner and contractor. 10. All fences, walls and hedges shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code Section 15-29. 111 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 5 11. A locking mailbox approved for use by the US Postal service shall be installed and in compliance with Saratoga Municipal Code section 6-25.030. The mailbox shall be installed prior to final inspection. CEQA 12. Air Quality – 1.. Future development of the site shall include applicable control measures from the Air District’s current air quality plan. These control measures can include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Provision of bicycle facilities within the development; b. Incorporation of “cool roofing” and “cool paving” technologies into the project; and c. Inclusion of shade trees in landscaping plans. 13. Air Quality – 2.. The following basic construction mitigation measures shall be incorporated in project construction documents: a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day; b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, debris, or other loose material off-site shall be covered; c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited; d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 mph; e. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points; g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a citified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation; and h. Post a publicly visible sign with telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 14. Cultural Resources – 1. Due to the remote possibility that significant buried prehistoric cultural resources might be found during construction activities, the following language shall be included in all construction documents associated with development of the project site: "If prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during construction, work shall be halted at a minimum of 200 feet from the find and the area shall be staked off. The city shall 112 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 6 notify a qualified professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented." Implementation of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of project site developers. 15. Cultural Resources – 2.. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following language shall be included in all construction documents associated with redevelopment of the project site in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.S(e): "If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of Santa Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the City of Saratoga or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The City of Saratoga or its authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the City of Saratoga or its authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner." Implementation of this mitigation measure will be the responsibility of project site developers. 16. Geology and Soils – 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence that the recommendations in the October 2013 project geotechnical report are included in the project grading and building plans. 17. Geology and Soils – 2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit an erosion control plan to ensure that erosion is controlled during grading and construction activities and does not result in deposition of soil off site. 18. Geology and Soils – 3. If paleontological resources are encountered during project subsurface construction, all ground-disturbing activities within 60 feet shall be redirected and a qualified paleontologist contacted to assess the situation, consult with agencies as appropriate, and make recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. Project personnel 113 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 7 shall not collect or move any paleontological materials. Adverse effects to such deposits shall be avoided by project activities. Paleontological resources are considered significant if they may provide new information regarding past life forms, paleoecology, stratigraphy, or geological formation processes. If found to be significant, and project activities cannot avoid the paleontological resources, adverse effects to paleontological resources shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include monitoring, recording the fossil locality, data recovery and analysis, a final report, and accessioning the fossil material and technical report to a paleontological repository. Public educational outreach may also be appropriate. Upon completion of the assessment, a report documenting methods, findings, and recommendations shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Saratoga Community Development Director. 19. Noise – 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the following measures shall be included in the grading and construction plans: (1) All work on site should be restricted to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction activities are prohibited on Sunday and weekday holidays. (2) All construction noise control measures currently imposed on the project shall be maintained pursuant to the City’s noise ordinance. (3) No material deliveries are allowed on Sundays or Weekday Holidays. residences from on-site noise generation. (4) Keep mobile equipment (haul trucks, concrete trucks, etc.) off local streets near residences as much as possible. FIRE DEPARTMENT 20. The owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements dated November 15, 2013. ARBORIST 21. All requirements in the City Arborist Report dated November 27, 2013 are hereby adopted as conditions of approval and shall be implemented as part of the approved plans. PUBLIC WORKS 22. Applicant / Owner shall obtain an encroachment permit for any and all improvements in any City right-of-way or City easement including all new utilities prior to commencement of the work to implement this Design Review. 23. Per Design Review PDR13-0023, no improvements are required in the public right-of-way, except those shown on the plans dated May, 2019, which includes new curb and gutter along 6th Street and repairs or modifications to walkway along Big Basin Way. 114 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 8 24. Damages to driveway approach, curb and gutter, public streets, or other public improvements during construction shall be repaired prior to final inspection. 25. All new/upgraded utilities shall be installed underground. 26. Applicant / Owner shall maintain the streets, sidewalks and other right of way as well as adjacent properties, both public and private, in a clean, safe and usable condition. All spills of soil, rock or construction debris shall be removed immediately. 27. All project that create and/or replace more than 2,500 square feet of impervious surface shall install one or more of the following site design measures: a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. f. Construct bike lanes, driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces. 28. The Owner/Applicant shall incorporate adequate source control measures to limit pollutant generation, discharge, and runoff (e.g. landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration where possible, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates appropriate sustainable landscaping practices and programs, such as Bay- Friendly Landscaping). 29. Construction Site Control • Owner shall implement construction site inspection and control to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains per approved Erosion Control Plan. • The City requires the construction sites to maintain year-round effective erosion control, run-on and run-off control, sediment control, good site management, and non-storm water management through all phases of construction (including, but not limited to, site grading, building, and finishing of lots) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures. • City will conduct inspections to determine compliance and determine the effectiveness of the BMPs in preventing the discharge of construction pollutants into the storm drain. Owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 115 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 9 30. Prior to the Building final, all Public works conditions shall be completed per approved plans. 31. All project that create and/or replace more than 2,500 square feet and less than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface shall install one or more of the following site design measures: a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. f. Construct bike lanes, driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces. 32. The Owner/Applicant shall incorporate adequate source control measures to limit pollutant generation, discharge, and runoff (e.g. landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration where possible, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates appropriate sustainable landscaping practices and programs, such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping). 33. Construction Site Control • Owner shall implement construction site inspection and control to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains per approved Erosion Control Plan. • The City requires the construction sites to maintain year-round effective erosion control, run-on and run-off control, sediment control, good site management, and non-storm water management through all phases of construction (including, but not limited to, site grading, building, and finishing of lots) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures. • City will conduct inspections to determine compliance and determine the effectiveness of the BMPs in preventing the discharge of construction pollutants into the storm drain. Owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 34. Prior to the Building final, all Public works conditions shall be completed per approved plans. BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTAL 35. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following: a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A” on file with the Community Development Department. b. Arborist Report, dated November 27, 2013 printed onto a separate plan page. c. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the Building Division. d. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages. 116 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 10 e. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note shall represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this Design Review Approval. 117 Resolution No. 17-016 14630 Big Basin Way – Application # PDR13-0023, CUP13-0004, ARB13-0004, ENV18-0002 June 12, 2019 Page | 11 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP13-0004 14630 BIG BASIN WAY (APN# 517-08-005) 1. The City shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose, any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 2. Any intensification of this use shall require an amended Conditional Use Permit. Examples of intensification of use include, but are not limited to, increasing or changing the hours of the use the hours of the use, physical changes to the site or structure of the use to accommodate more employees or customers, and changes in operations or equipment that result in ongoing increases in traffic, noise, or other physical effects. 3. Conditions may be modified only by the Community Development Department unless modification is expressly otherwise allowed by the city code including but not limited to section 16-05.035, as applicable. 4. A Building Permit must be issued, and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Notice of Approval or the Use Permit will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 5. The use shall always operate in compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other governmental entities having jurisdiction. 6. All noise levels will comply with Saratoga Municipal Code (SMC) Section 7-30.040 regarding noise standards and SMC Section 7-30.060 regarding exceptions to special activities. 7. The hours of operation of the restaurant are limited to the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. 8. An approved sign permit is required prior to the installation of any site signage. All signage shall be conformance with Article 15-30 (Signs) of the Saratoga City Code and the Village Design Guidelines. 118 Mount Diablo State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION PRIMARY RECORD NRHP Status Code 4of Henry House*Resource Name or # HP-88-01 P1. Other identifier: *P2. Location: Santa Clara County*a. County Cupertino*b. USGS 7.5' Quad 1980 Photorevised .8 S.T .2 W.R Big Basin Way c. Address:SaratogaCity 95070Zip 10S d. UTM:(give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone mE/mN southeast corner of Big Basin Way and Sixth Street. e.Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) (Assigned by recorder): and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a location map as necessary.) ;; ; This one-story cottage is in the vernacular National or Pioneer style commonly found in early Saratoga. The symmetrical side-gabled form features a relatively steep gabled room and shallow eaves. It is built of locally milled redwood and the original front portion of the structure is lap-sided with 6/6 double-hung wood windows with thin muntins that typify early construction. The house is raised above a root cellar. Additions made to the original structure over the years have been in keeping with the original architecture. There is a front walkway of red brick leading to a front step and planter boxes also of red brick. A garage has been added onto the rear of the building in an "L" shape. The siding on the addition is beveled horizontal board. The front porch has been remodeled. The windows to the east were closed to comply with fire regulations when the use changed from residential to office. There is a white picket fence around the two sides of the front yard, and a well in the back yard. *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements, include design, material, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) HP6. 1-3 story commercial building*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.)*P4. Resources Present: None Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List): *Attachments: Archives & Architecture: City of Saratoga Statement of Historic Context, 2009. *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none".) View facing south, July 2009. P5b.Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) Historic Prehistoric Both *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Source: Ruth M Long Trust et al PO Box 2095 Saratoga CA 95070 *P7. Owner and Address: Archives & Architecture, LLC PO Box 1332 San Jose, CA 95109 *P8. Recorded By: (Name, affiliation, and address) 10/26/09*P9. Date Recorded: Reconnaissance *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) 1869, 140 years old. * Required InformationDPR 523A (1/95) Not for Publication Unrestricted 1 517-08-005APN# B.M. F. Maggi, L. Dill, & J. Kusz Date Primary # HRI # Trinomial Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 14630 ATTACHMENT 3 119 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD 3CS*NRHP/CRHR Status Code Henry HouseResource Name (Assigned by recorder) 4of John Henry House B1. Historic Name: 14630 Big Basin Way B2. Common Name: Single family residential B3. Original Use:OfficesB4. Present Use: National (Pioneer)*B5. Architectural Style: Constructed in 1869. House enlarged to include a garage. *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) No Yes Unknown*B7. Moved?n/aDate:n/aOriginal Location: Water well *B8. Related Features: Unknown B9a. Architect:Unknownb. Builder: Architecture*B10. Significance: Theme Saratoga VillageArea: 1869Period of Significance:CommercialProperty Type:(3)Applicable Criteria: (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The Henry House is listed on the Saratoga Heritage Resources Inventory, included as a part of HP-88-01. It qualified under Criteria a, b, and e: a) the property exemplifies and reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, aesthetic, and architectural history of Saratoga; b) the property is identified with persons significant in local history; and e) the property contributes to the unique physical characteristics of The Village. The Henry House also appears eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources under Criterion (3), as the house embodies the distinctive characteristics of an early National-style cottage from Saratoga's Early American period. (Continued on page 4, DPR523L) DPR 523B (1/95)*Required Information B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (list attributes and codes) Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission, Historic Resources Inventory form, 1988. *B12. References: Listed Heritage ResourceB13. Remarks: Franklin Maggi*B14. Evaluator: October 26, 2009*Date of Evaluation: (Sketch Map with north arrow required.) (This space reserved for official comments.) 2 HP2. Single family property Primary # HRI # Page 120 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION LOCATION MAP 4of DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information * Map Name:Multiple n.t.s.* Scale:Varies* Date of Map: Henry House*Resource Name or #(Assigned by recorder)3 Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 121 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET 4of DPR 523L (1/95)*Required Information (Continued from page 2, DPR523b, B10) Historical Background The original owner and builder of this house was John Henry, the engineer at the nearby Saratoga Paper Mill. He purchased the land from Hannah McCarty and built his home here in 1869. The home is built of local clear heart redwood and square nails typical of the period. There is still a well at the rear of the property. Mr. Henry sold his residence shortly after the Saratoga Paper Mill burned in 1883. Various families have since owned the property including the Mevio and Patterson families. The Patterson family was the last to use this building as a residence, and it is was converted to the offices of prominent Saratoga architect Warren Heid. Integrity Although somewhat altered with a new porch and rear additions, the cottage retains adequate character-defining architectural design, workmanship and materials, as well as a historic location and setting within Saratoga Village, and the property continues to represent the historical associations and feelings of this former residence. * Recorded By F. Maggi, L. Dill, & J. Kusz Henry House*Resource Name or #(Assigned by recorder) Continuation Update10/26/2009* Date Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 4 122 Evans & De Shazo, Inc 6876 Sebastopol Avenue, Sebastopol, CA 95472 707-812-7400 www.evans-deshazo.com A CURRENT CONDITION ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION, AND SECRETARY OF INTERIOR’S STANDARDS REVIEW FOR THE 1869 JOHN HENRY HOUSE LOCATED AT 14630 BIG BASIN WAY, SARATOGA, SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUBMITTED TO: Paul and Joe Hernandez SUBMITTED BY: Stacey De Shazo, M.A. Principal Architectural Historian stacey@evans-deshazo.com November 26, 2018 ATTACHMENT 4 123 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. Page ii Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 1 REGULATORY SETTING ............................................................................................................................................. 3 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT .......................................................................................................................... 3 LOCAL REGULATIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 City of Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission ................................................................................................ 4 SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS ............................................................................................................................ 4 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation .................................................................................... 4 METHODS ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ............................................................................................................. 6 EARLY AMERICAN PERIOD (1848 – 1900) ............................................................................................................................ 6 Brief History of Saratoga .......................................................................................................................................... 6 FOLK ARCHITECTURE ............................................................................................................................................... 9 VERNACULAR (NO SPECIFIC PERIOD) ...................................................................................................................................... 9 NATIONAL ARCHITECTURAL STYLES (1850 – 1890) ................................................................................................................ 9 SARATOGA “PIONEER” ARCHITECTURAL STYLE (1860S – 1880S) .............................................................................................. 9 LITERATURE SEARCH AND REVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 10 LOCAL RESEARCH ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 ONLINE RESEARCH .......................................................................................................................................................... 10 RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE SEARCH AND REVIEW .............................................................................................. 11 BRIEF PROPERTY HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................. 11 PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION ............................................................................................................................................. 13 Heritage Resource Inventory (updated in 10/17) and Archives & Architects, 2009 ............................................... 13 EDS Comments ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 CURRENT CONDITION ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................... 13 1869 JOHN HENRY HOUSE ............................................................................................................................................... 13 North Elevation (Primary Façade) .......................................................................................................................... 14 West Elevation ........................................................................................................................................................ 14 South Elevation ....................................................................................................................................................... 14 East Elevation ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 ca. 1935 Detached Garage ..................................................................................................................................... 21 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................... 22 EVALUATION OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE .......................................................................................................... 23 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................. 23 124 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. Page iii CRHR EVALUATION......................................................................................................................................................... 24 INTEGRITY ...................................................................................................................................................................... 25 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 APPENDIX A: Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms 125 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 1 INTRODUCTION Evans & De Shazo, Inc. (EDS) conducted a Current Condition Assessment (Assessment), Evaluation, and Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards) review of the 1869 John Henry House and ca. 1935 detached garage located at 14630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California within Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 011-300-011-000 (Project Area). The proposed project entails changes to the property that include the deconstruction and relocation of the 1869 John Henry House within the current parcel and the demolition of the ca. 1935 detached garage (Project) to allow for the construction of two-story mixed-use building. The 1869 John Henry House is currently listed on the Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory1 and is therefore considered a Historical Resource under Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resource Code. Since the building is considered a Historical Resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Assessment and Standards review were conducted to determine if the proposed Project will impact historical resources. The following report was completed by EDS Principal Architectural Historian, Stacey De Shazo, M.A., who exceeds the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards in Architectural History and History and has over 18 years of professional experience. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The 1869 John Henry House and ca. 1935 detached garage are located at 14630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California within a corner lot known as APN 011-300-011-000 that is bounded by Big Basin Way to the north and 6th Street to the west (Figure 1). In November 2013, a previous project application was submitted to the City of Saratoga that was reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC). The previous project included the removal and relocation of the 1869 house outside of the current Project Area and the demolition of the ca. 1935 detached garage to allow for redevelopment of the parcel. The 2013 application was approved by the HPC with a motion recommending that the Saratoga City Council consider options for moving and reconstructing the John Henry House. The City Council considered potential locations that included the Heritage Orchard, the Civic Center lawn area (northwest corner of Fruitvale and Allendale), and the future Quarry Park site; however, the 2013 project did not go forward.2 The current proposed Project consists of the deconstruction, relocation, and reconstruction of the 1869 John Henry House and the demolition of the ca. 1935 garage. The 1869 John Henry House will be reconstructed within the current parcel where the ca. 1935 detached garage is currently located. The remaining north/northeast portion of the property will include the construction of a new commercial building. As such, the City of Saratoga recommended an Assessment and Standards review of the 1869 house and ca. 1935 detached garage to determine the current condition of the buildings within the Project Area and to address potential impacts to historical resources through a Standards review. 1 Archives & Architecture, Heritage Resources Inventory, City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California; 2009. 2 A letter from the Saratoga City Council, dated January 15, 2014 and titled “John Henry House Relocation Feasibility Report” 126 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 2 Figure 1. Project Location map. 127 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 3 REGULATORY SETTING California Environmental Quality Act CEQA and the Guidelines for Implementing CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5) give direction and guidance for evaluating a project’s potential adverse impacts to the environment and the preparation of Initial Studies, Categorical Exemptions, Negative Declarations, and Environmental Impact Reports. Pursuant to California State law, the City of Saratoga is legally responsible and accountable for determining the environmental impact of any land use proposal it approves. Cultural resources are aspects of the environment that require identification and assessment for potential significance under CEQA (14 CCR 15064.5 and PRC 21084.1). There are five classes of cultural resources defined by the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). These are:  Building: A structure created principally to shelter or assist in carrying out any form of human activity. A “building” may also be used to refer to a historically and functionally related unit, such as a courthouse and jail or a house and barn.  Structure: A construction made for a functional purpose rather than creating human shelter. Examples include mines, bridges, and tunnels.  Object: Construction primarily artistic in nature or relatively small in scale and simply constructed. It may be movable by nature or design or made for a specific setting or environment. Objects should be in a setting appropriate to their significant historic use or character. Examples include fountains, monuments, maritime resources, sculptures and boundary markers.  Site: The location of a significant event. A prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing building, structure, or object. A site need not be marked by physical remains if it is the location of a prehistoric or historic event and if no buildings, structures, or objects marked it at that time. Examples include trails, designed landscapes, battlefields, habitation sites, Native American ceremonial areas, petroglyphs, and pictographs.  Historic District: Unified geographic entities which contain a concentration of historic buildings, structures, or sites united historically, culturally, or architecturally. According to California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5, cultural resources are historically significant if they are:  Listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (Public Resources Code 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et. seq.);  Listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP);  Included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resource Code; or 128 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 4  Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in-light of the whole record. Local Regulations City of Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission The Heritage Preservation Commission functions as a liaison working in conjunction with the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the agencies and departments of the City. The Commission implements the City's Heritage Preservation Ordinance. The Commission's scope includes the survey of properties within the boundaries of the City of Saratoga for the purpose of establishing an official inventory of heritage resources. The Commission can recommend that these resources be designated by the City Council as a historic landmark, heritage tree, heritage lane, or historic district. As designated by City code, the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) determines which properties should be included on the Heritage Resource Inventory. The HPC recommends to the City Council which properties should be designated as a historic landmark, heritage lane, or historic district. The 1869 John Henry House is currently a locally listed heritage resource. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Since the building is a Historical Resource for the purposes of CEQA, any “substantial adverse changes” need to be considered (PRC § 21084.1 and 21083.2(l)). According to the CEQA Guidelines, demolition, destruction, relocation or alteration that impairs the significance of an historical resources constitutes a “substantial adverse change”; however, a project that conforms with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to the Treatment of Historic Properties (the Standards) can generally be considered to be a project that will not cause a significant impact to historical resources (14 CCR § 15126.4(b)(1)). The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation The Standards (Department of Interior regulations, 36 CFR 67) defines "Rehabilitation" as "the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural values." Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation is considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource. The Standards pertain to historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy, and encompass the exterior and the interior, related landscape features and the building's site and environment, as well as attached, adjacent, or related new construction. The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal 129 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 5 change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. METHODS The Assessment and Standards review was conducted by EDS Principal Architectural Historian, Stacey De Shazo, M.A. Ms. De Shazo conducted a local literature search and review that included documentation available at the City of Saratoga Public Library and the City of Saratoga, as well as information on file at the EDS office, Online Archive of California, Saratoga Historical Society, and various other online sources to ensure the document provides an understanding of the history of the property. Ms. De Shazo also conducted a site survey to document the current condition of the 1869 John Henry House and ca. 1935 detached garage and to assess the two buildings. Updated Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms (Appendix A) were prepared for the 1869 John Henry House and ca. 1935 detached garage that includes physical characteristics, character-defining features, and condition of the 1869 house and ca. 1935 130 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 6 detached garage. BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA The following brief history of the City of Saratoga was taken in part from the 2009 Archives & Architecture, Heritage Resources Inventory context prepared for the City of Saratoga, Santa Clara County, California, but is also expanded based on research conducted by EDS. It is intended to provide an overview of the development of the City of Saratoga. Early American Period (1848 – 1900) The early American Period in California is marked by the end of the of the Mexican-American War when the U.S. took possession of the territories of California and New Mexico in the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848). The Treaty provided the resident Mexicans with American citizenship and guaranteed title to land granted to them during the Mexican period. Shortly before the signing of the Treaty, on January 24, 1848, James W. Marshall discovered gold along the American River in California. News of the discovery brought thousands of immigrants (known as “49ers”) to California from all over the U.S, as well as other countries. In 1849, San Jose became the first capital of the state of California and the first California State Legislature convened there on December 15, 1849. In 1850, when California became a state, Santa Clara County became one of the original 27 counties created. Brief History of Saratoga The Village of Saratoga originated in California’s Early American period in 1847 when William Campbell founded a mill and established a lumbering community called Campbell’s Gap just below what is now known as Long Bridge, located above Saratoga Village along Highway 9. But at the time, the lack of roads made it difficult to transport the lumber to markets. In 1850, Martin McCarty leased Campbell's mill and he obtained a franchise from the Court of Sessions to build a toll road from the mill down to the small settlement at the mouth of the canyon. A tollgate was then erected at the location of present day 3rd Street and Big Basin Way (formerly Lumber Road). The toll was $3.00 for a two-horse team and $6.00 for a four- horse team. The new road made it easier to transport lumber and encouraged the growth of industry in the area. This same year, Martin, along with his wife Hannah, surveyed, platted, and registered the community of McCartysville (Figure 2). The success of the sawmill brought other industries to the area that included a lime quarry, tannery, furniture factory, and paper and flour mills. On March 13, 1865, the villagers voted to rename the community Saratoga. The name was selected because of the similarity in the mineral content of the water, located at the mineral springs a mile above the village, to that of Congress Springs at Saratoga, New York. During this time, the Saratoga Paper Mill (Figure 3), Saratoga's only steam-powered industry, was situated near Sixth Street and Big Basin Way near the Project Area. The mill flourished from 1868 to 1883 until the plant was destroyed by fire. During the mill’s heyday, it employed as many as 20 men at one time, working a 12-hour day and earning from $2.00 to $2.50 a day.3 3 Saratoga Historical Society, Accessed May 15, 2018, http://www.saratogahistory.com/History/called_saratoga.htm#industrialtown 131 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 7 In 1900, as the Saratoga economy embraced the change from a lumber town to one that included orchards, vineyards, and other agriculture (Figure 4). During this same year the Saratoga Blossom Festival was started. In 1904, the Peninsular Interurban railway was constructed, which brought tourists to the area. Saratoga remained a small community until after World War II, when the community grew with the return of the veterans and development of new housing. In the early 1950s, Santa Clara was poised to annex the town as part of San Jose, which forced residents to organize and, in 1956, Saratoga City Council voted to incorporate the small town. Figure 2. 1863 Plat of the Saratoga, showing the original parcel where the John Henry house is located . 132 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 8 Figure 3. Saratoga Paper Mill ca. 1880 located at Big Basin Way and 6th Street. Figure 4. ca. 1909 postcard of the Saratoga foothills showing the fruit orchards and agricultural fields (courtesy of the San Jose Public Library, California Room) 133 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 9 FOLK ARCHITECTURE The following section is intended to provide a brief understanding of the Folk architectural styles that include Vernacular and National styles, of which that latter has been applied to the 1869 John Henry House. Vernacular (no specific period) Vernacular, also often referred to as National style, is one of the most common designs of structures identified during the survey. They are prevalent in each of the six identified Neighborhood Planning Areas. Like their Masonry Vernacular counterparts, Frame Vernacular buildings are designed without imitating a specific style. They are typically built by nonprofessionals and, in many cases, by the occupants themselves (McAlester 1990: 5). These structures tend to be simple, largely unornamented, and constructed out of readily available materials. Vernacular architecture is characterized as a functional shelter for people, animals and stores, ‘built to meet needs’, constructed according to the availability and performance of materials and formed in response to environmental and climatic conditions However, the definition of the term “vernacular architecture” is not universally agreed and may be extended to include the “everyday”: city neighborhoods, market towns, roadside diners, suburban housing developments, barns and anonymous industrial complexes. As such, use of the term is carefully considered when evaluating buildings that appear to have “no style” or one that does not fit the traditional known architectural styles. Whether a thatched cottage, an early “pioneer” balloon-framed house, or a trailer park, vernacular architecture is typically defined as those buildings that are outside the main-stream of professional architecture and based on local influences, such as available materials and environmental factors. National Architectural Styles (1850 – 1890) The “National” architectural style is often interchanged or combined with Vernacular style and labeled Vernacular National but is considered part of the Folk architectural style. Single-wall structures can be found throughout the Pacific Northwest, West, and the South. In California, the National architectural style is associated with the expansion of the west. Buildings are often constructed of single-walls, plank walls, or box house construction. These modest structures, of which some were meant to provide temporary shelter, typically consisting of floor structure constructed on a rubble stone or wood foundation; however, equally common was no foundation. They are built in a box-like form with wall panels constructed on the ground and then stood up to form rooms. The panels were attached to one another, leaving no room for corner posts or vertical structural members. Often, door and window openings were cut out of after the wall was constructed. The roof and floor structures provided rigidity to the box. Other variations in form include gable front, gable front and wing addition, and the hall-and-parlor family house with an addition at the rear of the house. Saratoga “Pioneer” Architectural Style (1860s – 1880s) This section is intended to expand on documentation provided within the Archives & Architecture, City of 134 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 10 Saratoga Statement of Historic Context and DPR forms4 that were part of the City of Saratoga city-wide historic resource inventory in 2009. The local Saratoga “Pioneer” building type referenced by Archives & Architecture in the City of Saratoga Statement of Historic Context and DPR forms, is defined as a style that dates from “as early as the pre- railroad American era, from the 1850s to the 1870s, although National-style houses continued to be built as late as the 1880s.” According to Archives & Architecture: “of the earliest American-era buildings, the most common are Vernacular National style designs, known sometimes in the city [Saratoga] as ‘Pioneer’ cottages.” The ‘Pioneer’ style is described as consisting of wood-balloon framing with “moderately to steeply pitched, gabled roofs covering, simple rectangular floor plans or L-shaped plans; however, changes in construction techniques and the availability of locally milled materials allowed somewhat larger footprints. The ‘Pioneer’ buildings consists of exterior cladding material that is often channel-rustic siding, boxed eaves, simple projecting porches, and plain, flat-board trim characteristic of this era. Windows usually consisted of relatively narrow two over two or six over six double-hung wood sashes.”5 Since ‘Pioneer’ architecture is not a recognized architectural style, and most often these types of buildings are referred to as Vernacular or National, for the purposes of this report the architectural style of the 1869 John Henry House will be referred to as National, as an accepted architectural style and also noted within the Archives & Architecture documents from 2009. LITERATURE SEARCH AND REVIEW As part of the Assessment, research was conducted at local repositories, as well as online to review published local histories, maps, photographs, and other available information that revealed the property history associated with the 1869 John Henry House and the ca. 1935 detached garage to provide additional context for the Assessment and Standards review. Local Research Local research was conducted at the April 10, 2018 to review primary source documents available at the City of Saratoga Public Library such as the Polk's City Directories for City of Saratoga (Santa Clara County, Calif.), historic maps, and photographs, as well as additional documentation related to the history of the Project Area and its vicinity. Online Research In addition to local research, online research conducted utilizing the following sources:  www.newspapers.com 4 Archives & Architecture, LLC, City of Saratoga Statement of Historic Context and Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms, (2009). 5 Ibid 135 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 11  www.ancestry.com  www.calisphere.com (University of California)  http://wordpress.napahistory.org/wordpress/ (Napa County Historical Society)  http://www.library.gov/ (California State Library)  http://saratogavillage.info/Aboutus.html Saratoga Village Development Council (SVDC)  http://www.saratogahistory.com/ The Saratoga Historical Foundation RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE SEARCH AND REVIEW As part of the literature search, EDS reviewed Sanborn maps, city directories, and deeds, as well as documents available online to provide additional information regarding ownership history associated with the built environment resources with the Project Area that are detailed in the section below. Brief Property History During the 1850s, it appears that the Project Area was part of a larger 240-acre parcel owned by W.C. Palmer but remained undeveloped. Sometime in the 1860s, Martin and Hannah McCarty purchased a portion of the land and platted the local community, which later became Saratoga. In 1869, Martin and Hannah sold small parcels for development within the growing community town of which one of the parcels was purchased by John Henry and his wife Johanna. John, who was born in New York in 1845, was a trained engineer and employed at the nearby Saratoga Paper Mill (see Figure 3). Johanna was born in Ireland in 1840 and is listed on the 1880 U.S. Census as a housewife. John, Johanna and their daughter Minnie, who was born on November 16, 1869, lived in the house for approximately 14 years. In 1883, after the Saratoga Lumber Mill burned down, John and Johanna sold their house in Saratoga and moved to Alameda, California. Throughout the early twentieth century (Figure 5 and Figure 6), several families have owned the property including Jack and Isabel Mevio. During this time, there were two accessory buildings that are no longer extant, and it appears this is when the ca. 1935 garage was constructed, and the lot size was slightly reduced along the south (rear) elevation of the house. Around 1960, the property was owned by Thomas and Frances Patterson. The Patterson’s were the last family to use the 1869 John Henry house as a residence as it was convert to a business office in the late 1970s by prominent Saratoga architect Warren Heid. Heid, who was born in 1924, was the award-winning architect who designed homes and buildings across the Bay Area from the Plaza Del Roble and The Inn at Saratoga to the former San Jose Mercury News building, the Ponderosa Lodge at Mount Hermon, and Saint Andrew’s Episcopal Church. He operated his business out of the former residence for over four decades. He passed away this year (2018) at the age of 94. The current owner is Paul Hernandez, who also owns the adjacent Saratoga Oaks Lodge. 136 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 12 Figure 5. Figure showing the location of the 1869 John Henry House on the 1918 Sanborn Map. Figure 6. Figure showing the location of the 1869 John Henry House on the 1918 (updated in 1930) Sanb orn Map. 137 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 13 Previous Documentation Heritage Resource Inventory (updated in 10/17) and Archives & Architects, 2009 In 1988, the 1869 John Henry House was listed on the City of Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory (HPC Resolution HP-88-01), and in 2009, as part of a city-wide Historic Resource Inventory completed by Archives and Architects, DPR forms (Appendix B) were completed that identified the building as being eligible for significance, under local criteria (a), (b), and (e) (listed below): a) the property exemplifies and reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, aesthetic, and architectural history of Saratoga; b) the property is identified with persons significant in local history; and e) the property contributes to the unique physical characteristics of The Village6. The DPR forms state that the 1869 John Henry House “appears eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources under Criterion (3), as the house embodies the distinctive characteristics of an early National-style cottage from Saratoga's Early American period.” The integrity, as required as part of the evaluation for significance, states, “Although somewhat altered with a new porch and rear additions, the cottage retains adequate character-defining architectural design, workmanship and materials, as well as a historic location and setting within Saratoga Village, and the property continues to represent the historical associations and feelings of this former residence.” EDS Comments Although the 2009 DPR forms are of value, the documentation lack the details necessary to be considered an evaluation to determine significance as defined by CEQA. Regardless, since the building is locally listed, it is considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. CURRENT CONDITION ASSESSMENT EDS Principal Architectural Historian, Stacey De Shazo, M.A., conducted a site visit on April 10, 2018 to assess the current condition of the 1869 John Henry House and ca. 1935 garage. The buildings were photographed, and the physical characteristics and current condition was documented. A current description of the 1869 John Henry House and the ca. 1935 garage are provided in the following section. 1869 John Henry House The 1869 John Henry House is a one-story cottage constructed in the National architectural style (Figure 7). The house is a rectangular, symmetrically planned building with a side gabled, steeply pitched roof. The roof 6 Although it is inferred that the “The Village” is a smaller portion of the current City of Saratoga and referenced often in the context by Archives and Architecture, it is not defined in regard to development or the boundaries. 138 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 14 consists of shallow eaves and is clad in asphalt shingles. The building is constructed of local redwood, using single-walled “box” construction, which is a typical construction type of communities that sprung up around early sawmill communities, and is clad in horizontal shiplap of milled redwood (Figure 8). The house rests on a raised rubble and post-and-pier foundation, but some exterior walls, particularly the addition along the south elevation (rear façade), appear to rest directly on the soil. North Elevation (Primary Façade) The shed style front porch, supported by four square posts, appears to have been added in the 1920s or 1930s (Figure 9). There is also a contemporary brick staircase and steel pipe railing that leads to the front entry door. The door is not original and is a contemporary “Ranch” style door. There are also brick planter boxes below the exterior windows that rest on the “brick” porch flooring that were likely added during the 1960s (Figure 10 and Figure 11). There are two original six over six double-hung wood windows with thin wood muntins and shutters that appear to be original to the house; however, the windows are in very poor condition. West Elevation The west elevation consists of horizontal shiplap siding, three six over six double-hung wood windows flanked by shutters, of which one window was likely originally located on the south elevation of the original house prior to the shed addition, and was reused along the west elevation (Figure 12 and Figure 13). The windows are in poor condition with broken panes of glass and cracked muntins and frames. There is a circular wooden gabled roof vent along this elevation that appears to be original to the house. This elevation also consists of a root cellar that is accessed through exterior doors situated along the original section of the house along this elevation (Figure 14). South Elevation The south elevation consists of a porch/shed addition that appears to rest directly on the soil. The addition was likely added in the late 1930s or 1940s, which is also confirmed by the Sanborn maps. The addition consists of board-and-batten exterior cladding and a low shed roof. This elevation has one fixed multi-light window, one square one over one wood window, and a rear door that leads to the interior of the house (Figure 15). East Elevation The east elevation has been modified significantly and consists of an exterior wall that has been entirely clad in rough stucco over the original wood wall, which was likely applied in the 1980s (Figure 16). The exterior wall is void of any windows and any ornamentation; however, there is a square-shaped roof vent that appears to have been cut-in after the stucco was applied. 139 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 15 Figure 7. Photo showing the north elevation, primary façade, facing south. Figure 8. Photo showing the north elevation, primary façade, facing south. 140 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 16 Figure 9. Photo showing the north elevation, porch detail, facing south/southeast. Figure 10. Photo showing the front porch, facing west. 141 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 17 Figure 11. Photo showing the contemporary brick stairs and brick planter. Figure 12. Photo Showing the west elevation, facing north/northeast. 142 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 18 Figure 13. Photo showing an original wood window with shutters. Figure 14. Photo showing the root cellar along the west elevation. 143 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 19 Figure 15. Photo showing the late 1930s or 1940s addition. Figure 16. Photo showing the east elevation, facing south/southwest. 144 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 20 Figure 17. Photo showing the east elevation, facing south/southwest. Interior of the 1869 House The interior floor and structure of the building slants to the south from the front entry door to the rear entry door and is likely due to the lack of foundation supports and the fact that some walls appear to rest directly on the soil, particular at the rear addition. The area within the root cellar provided a view of the jumble of floor joists, brick supports, and posts, in addition the basement was partially flooded due to recent rains. 145 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 21 Figure 18. Photo showing wood post on wood and conrete base, visible from the root cellar. ca. 1935 Detached Garage The ca. 1935 detached garage is a front-gable building with a contemporary garage door and v- notched, tongue-and-grove siding (Figure 19). There is a moderate-pitch roof with exposed rafter tails. The building is clad in asphalt shingles that are in poor condition. There is a concrete foundation that consists of a stem wall and concrete slab floor. There is a six-light fixed window and wood paneled door with louvers along the east elevation that allows access from the backyard to the garage (Figure 20). Overall the ca. 1935 garage appears to be in fair condition. 146 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 22 Figure 19. Photo showing the west elevation of the ca. 1935 detached garage, facing east. Figure 20. Photo showing the east elevation of the ca. 1935 detached garage, facing south. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS Due to the findings in this assessment and the lack of details determining significance in the 2009 Archives and Architects document, Ms. De Shazo determined that a significance evaluation was necessary to complete the Standards review and make recommendations in accordance with the Standards as they 147 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 23 relate to the proposed Project. EVALUATION OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE The 1869 John Henry House and ca. 1935 garage were evaluated for eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The buildings were evaluated within the context of the historic setting and property history as provided in this report. The following section provides an overview of historic significance of the buildings. The period of significance of 1869 to 1880s was applied to the 1869 John Henry house for evaluation; the ca. 1935 detached garage is outside of the defined period of significance and was therefore not evaluated as associated with the 1869 John Henry House but was included as part of the evaluation for the purpose of CEQA and evaluated as an individual building. California Register of Historical Resources The CRHR is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the CRHR through several methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the CRHR. Properties can also be nominated to the CRHR by local governments, private organizations, or citizens. To qualify for listing in the CRHR, a property must possess significance under one of the four criteria and have historic integrity. The process of determining integrity consists of evaluating seven variables or aspects that include location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. According to the OHP, the criteria for evaluation for eligibility for listing in the California Register are based upon National Register criteria and include seven characteristics are defined as follows:  Location is the place where the historic property was constructed.  Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plans, space, structure and style of the property.  Setting addresses the physical environment of the historic property inclusive of the landscape and spatial relationships of the building(s).  Materials refer to the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern of configuration to form the historic property.  Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history.  Feeling is the property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.  Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. The following section examines properties eligibility for listing on the CRHR. 148 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 24 CRHR Evaluation The following section examines the eligibility of the 1869 John Henry house for listing on the CRHR. The ca. 1935 detached garage was evaluated as an individual resource for the period of significance of ca. 1935. After a thorough analysis, it was determined that 1869 John Henry house does not appear to meet the criteria of significance for listing on the CRHR within the period of significance for 1869 to the 1890, nor does the nor the ca. 1935 detached garage meet the eligibility requirements for listing as an individual resource for the period of significance of ca. 1935 for the following reasons. 1. (Event) That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. Although research revealed that the 1869 John Henry house was constructed on one of the first lots platted in the Saratoga (see Figure 3) and was constructed in support of the flourishing lumbering community, which was an important event to local and regional history, the ability of the 1869 house or property to convey its association related to the early community and development of Saratoga associated with the lumbering industry lacks integrity (as detailed in the integrity section below), which has diminished its ability to convey potential significance. The ca. 1935 detached garage is not associated with any events in Saratoga. Therefore, neither the 1869 John Henry house, the ca. 1935 detached garage nor the property appear eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion 1. 2. (Person) That are associated with the lives of significant persons in our past. While John Henry was the engineer for the Saratoga Lumber Mill for approximately 14 years, there is no information that suggests he was an important figure in Saratoga or the Santa Clara valley, nor has any information been uncovered that suggests he was a significant figure associated with the lumber industry locally or within Santa Clara County. In addition, although the building was used by Warren Heid, a well-known local architect, as an office building for approximately 30 years during the late 1970s to 2012, its association with Warren Heid under the California Register criteria (CCR § 4852) would require that, for the resource to achieve significance within the past 50-years, sufficient time must have passed to obtain a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource, which is not the case with its association with Warren Heid. The ca. 1935 detached garage is likely associated with Jack and Isabel Mevio, who are not considered significant persons in the past history of the City of Saratoga. Therefore, the 1869 John Henry house, nor the ca. 1935 detached garage appear eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion 2. 3. (Construction/Architectural) That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. After a throughout analysis it was determined that the original 1869 John Henry house, based on the historic field survey, was designed within what appears to be the National architectural style (1850 to 1890), although it is a modified example of this style. The National style buildings are often constructed 149 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 25 of single-walls, plank walls, or box house construction; however, there is a lack of integrity (discussed in the detail in the integrity section) to convey significance within this criterion. The ca. 1935 detached garage, which has been modified, is not associated with a particular style. Therefore, the 1869 John Henry house, nor the ca. 1935 detached garage appear eligible under Criterion 3. 4. (Information Potential) That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Criterion 4 most commonly applies to resources that contain or are likely to contain information bearing on an important archaeological research question. While most often applied to archaeological sites, Criterion 4 can also apply to buildings that contain important information. For a building to be eligible under Criterion 4, it must be a principal source of important information, such as exhibiting a local variation on a standard design or construction technique can be eligible if a study can yield important information, such as how local availability of materials or construction expertise affected the evolution of local building development. The 1869 John Henry house, nor the ca. 1945 detached garage have the ability to convey information potential that is unique or unknown in regard to an architectural style or building technique. In addition, the property was not evaluated for archaeology, and so it cannot be determined if the property contains associated archaeological deposits that will yield, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. Integrity The following section provides details that specifically address integrity. • Location. The property that includes the 1869 John Henry house retains integrity of location because the built environment resource remains in the original location where it was constructed. Therefore, the ca. 1869 John Henry house has integrity of location. • Design. The 1869 John Henry house was designed in the National architectural style and is a modest example of this architectural style. There have been significant alterations to the building that include the introduction of inappropriate materials such as brick and stucco, and the introduction of elements such as a brick staircase, brick planter boxes, brick porch flooring, a contemporary “Ranch” style front door and a porch added in the 1920s or 1930s that covers the original transom window over the front door. The original porch was likely a “modest” design, but would have rested above the transom window. The current porch style does not fit with the original design of the house and detracts from the original form and detail of the house that is visible from public right-of-way. Overall, there appear to be enough elements in the form, materials, and plan to retain some of the original National design integrity. Therefore, although not a good example of this design, the building does appear to retain some aspects of integrity of design. • Setting. The surrounding area during the period of significance from 1869 to 1890 has changed significantly with the addition of modern buildings and businesses, and the lack of lumber mills that were once located near the 1869 John Henry house (Figure 21 and Figure 22). Many of the changes in 150 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 26 the neighborhood appear to have occurred in the late twentieth century and include the construction of the adjacent Saratoga Oaks Lodge, contemporary housing, and modern office buildings. Therefore, the 1869 house does not retain integrity of setting. Figure 21. Photo showing the current setting of the 1869 John Henry House (adjacent and east of the house). Figure 22. Photo showing the current setting of the 1869 John Henry House (west of the house) 151 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 27 • Materials. The 1869 John Henry house retains some material from the period of significance from 1869 to 1890 such as original wood windows and wood cladding; however, the entire east façade of the house has been covered in inappropriate stucco that may have been applied over the original wood cladding, although the cladding and windows were likely removed. In addition, there is an inappropriate front porch addition and details such as a brick paver porch flooring, brick stairs, and ‘pipe’ hand rails, brick planters, and a contemporary “Ranch” style front door that are not original to the period of significance. Overall, the 1869 John Henry house does not retain integrity of materials. • Workmanship. The important workmanship of the 1869 John Henry house is present on the windows and the wood cladding along the north and west elevations; however, the front porch addition, and south and east elevations have been altered substantially. Due to these substantially alterations and other modifications the house the building does not retain integrity of workmanship. • Feeling. Feeling is the quality that a historic property has in evoking the aesthetic or historic sense of a past period. The 1869 John Henry House was originally associated with the early history of Saratoga that developed in support of the lumbering industry. The changes to the area is one of the conditions that has diminished the sense of feeling associated with the building, particularly as it appears to have originally been the westernmost end of the town and located near the Saratoga Lumber Mill that burned down in 1883. The building, although located on what was once called Lumber Road, is now surrounded by contemporary buildings within a developed part of Saratoga and the feeling that the building was once part of early Saratoga development associated with the lumber industry is no longer present, as mills are no longer extant in this area and the rural environment has been developed into a suburb with houses, shopping centers, office buildings, businesses, and new roads. Therefore, the feeling of the building and the property from period of significance from 1869 to 1890 is no longer present. Therefore, the 1869 John Henry house does not retain integrity of feeling. • Association. The 1869 John Henry house does appear to have a direct link with significant events associated with the development of Saratoga and is not sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an average observer for association with this early development of Saratoga as a lumbering community; therefore, the building does not have integrity of association. The 1869 house retains integrity of location and design; however, it does not retain integrity of setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Due to these factors, the building does not appear to be eligible for the CRHR under any criterion, which is further explained in the conclusions section. However, CEQA allows for locally listed resources to be determined historical resources, which was determined by the HPC Resolution HP-88-01. Therefore, the building remains a historical resource as defined by CEQA. Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation Review The following Standards review is to be applied to the building as a locally listed historical resource only, as EDS determined that the 1869 John Henry house does not retain enough integrity to convey significance for listing on the CRHR. As such, the following section addresses the proposed Project within the context of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as a locally listed resource with the assumption that the building will be moved. 152 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 28 The Standards are presented and EDS' analysis of the proposed Project is listed below each of the ten Standards. The Standards review was applied to the 1869 John Henry House only. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. EDS Response: The historical use of the 1869 John Henry house as a residence changed in the 1970s to commercial use; therefore, this Standard does not apply to this Project. Evaluation: Standard 1 does not apply. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. EDS Response: The current plan is to deconstruction, relocate, and reconstruct the 1869 John Henry House within the current parcel where the ca. 1935 garage is located. Since the relocation is with the original parcel this would not constitute an adverse impact to the resource under CEQA. Evaluation: The proposed Project complies with Standard 2. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. EDS Response: No conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings are included in the Project. Evaluation: The proposed Project complies with Standard 3. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. EDS Response: There are no features or changes to the building outside of the period of significance that have gained significant in their own right that need to be retained. If the building is moved the front porch, brick features, stucco wall, and rear addition could be demolished and only the original portion of the house should be restored. It is also noted that the style of the original porch is not known as research did not uncover any historic photos during the period of significance. Evaluation: The proposed Project complies with Standard 4. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. EDS Response: The distinctive features and finishes associated with the 1869 John Henry house include the original rectangular form, wood cladding along the north and west elevations, windows (although many of the windows appear deteriorated beyond repair), and the transom above the centered front entry door will be preserved and restored in accordance with the Standards as feasible. If not restorable, the materials will be in-kind replacements. In addition, any windows that cannot be restored should be replaced with double-hung, wood windows or double-hung wood 153 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 29 clad windows that give the appearance of wood windows. Note in-kind replacement means windows that are designed in the same style, size, material, and placement as the current original windows. Evaluation: The proposed Project complies with Standard 5. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. EDS Response: After the building is deconstructed and the plan for reconstruction is fully understood based on the condition and feasible re-use of the materials, every attempt should be made to repair character-defining features such as the six over six double-hung wood windows, transom window over the front entry door, and exterior wood cladding. It is likely that the entire roof truss system will need to be rebuilt due to its current condition. The original side-gabled form and pitch should be retained, but materials can be replaced in-kind. The east elevation consists of inappropriate stucco material that likely destroyed any original wood cladding under the stucco or may have been removed during the application of the stucco. In addition, it appears that the windows along the east elevation were removed as a result of this application, so will need to be replaced in-kind. The south elevation shed addition, which was constructed in the 1930s, should not be reconstructed but instead only the original form of the building should be retained to bring it back to the period of significance from 1869 to 1890. Also, a lack of pictorial evidence will likely require the introduction of new details along the primary façade (north elevation) that would need to be differentiated from the original style by use of design, color, texture, and other elements where warranted. This includes a new door, potential porch overhang, and the restoration of the transom. Evaluation: Based on the proposed plans by Metro Design Group, architecture Tom Sloan, AIA, (August 2, 2018), the proposed Project does comply with Standard 6. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. EDS Response: Lead paint and possibly mold will need to be remediated prior to the original house can be being reconstructed. The treatment will be in accordance to the Standards within Preservation Brief 10, Exterior Paint Problems on Woodwork. Evaluation: The proposed Project does comply with Standard 7 based on the understanding that the treatment details that would need to be developed to comply with Preservation Brief 10. 8. Significant archaeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. EDS Response: There are no known archaeological resources within the Project Area. However, if 154 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 30 ground disturbing activities occur beyond minimal surface grading, buried archaeological deposits could be present, due to the age of the house. Evaluation: The proposed Project does comply with Standard 8. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. EDS Response: The Project would not likely destroy historic materials associated with the original form of the 1869 John Henry house as it will be restored on site within the original parcel (Figure 23 and Figure 24). New work will be differentiated but will have continuity to the original design. In- kind replacement materials on the exterior will be limited to wood cladding, wood windows, and wood doors. Alternatively, any current wood windows that cannot be restored, can be replaced with wood clad vinyl woods; however, any new ‘replacement’ windows would need to match the original multi-light, double-hung wood windows design, shape, function, trim, and placement (inset) as to read as the original wood windows as these elements are replace in-kind Evaluation: The proposed Project does comply with Standard 9. Figure 23. Architectural drawing by Metro Design Group showing the John Henry House 155 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 31 from the north and west elevations. Figure 24. Architectural drawing by Metro Design Group showing the restored John Henry House. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. EDS Response: The Project architectural plans show a two-story, rectangular shaped commercial building that will allow for site view of the 1869 John Henry House. Because the integrity of setting is already compromised (see integrity setting) there is no impact to property or environment. In addition, the restoration of the original form of the 1869 John Henry House will allow for the original form to return to the period of significance, which will create a positive impact on the setting. Evaluation: The proposed Project does comply with Standard 10. CONCLUSIONS Substantial adverse change includes demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of an historical resource would be impaired (PRC § 5020.1(q)). While demolition and destruction are fairly obvious significant impacts, it is more difficult to assess when change, alteration, or relocation crosses the threshold of substantial adverse change. The CEQA Guidelines provide that a project that alters those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance (i.e., its character-defining features) can be considered to materially impair the resource’s significance. Relocation of an historical resource may constitute an adverse impact to the resource. However, since the 1869 John Henry House is being relocated within the parcel where it was constructed, the relocation and restoration mitigate the Project below a level of significance as the “new” location is compatible with the original character of setting, which should allow the resource to remain local listed. EDS assessed, evaluated, and addressed Standards compliance for proposed Project at the recommendation 156 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 32 of the City of Saratoga to ensure compliance with CEQA, and local ordinances, and address potential impacts to historical resources. Although the house retains integrity of location and design, based on a field survey, research, and thorough analysis EDS has determined that due to lack of integrity of the 1869 John Henry House does not meet the significance for listing on the CRHR under any criterion. However, the “new” location within the original parcel is compatible with the original character and use of the historical resource, therefore, the resource would retain its local eligibility for listing and could allow for its future eligibility on the CRHR if pursued. In addition, the ca. 1935 garage is not associated with the period of significance of the house and is not individually eligible for local or CRHR listing so the demolition of this building would not be an impact to historical resources under CEQA. However, since the 1869 John Henry House is a locally listed resources and therefore is considered a historical resource under CEQA, a Standards review was conducted to address potential impacts to the 1869 John Henry House based on the proposed Project. It was determined that if the house is relocated within the current parcel and restored in accordance to the Standards the Project would meet the Standards and therefore would not be considered an impact to historical resources. This adheres to the public policy of the City of Saratoga to recognize and preserve the heritage of the city as set forth under Chapter 13 of the Municipal Code. 157 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY California Historical Society 2015 U.C. Digital Library. Electronic document, http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll65/id/19436. Accessed April 12, 2018. McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester 2009 A Field Guild to American Houses. New York, Alfred A. Knopf. Munro-Fraser, J.P. Sanborn Fire Insurance Company 1918 Saratoga, California. Sanborn Map & Publishing Company, New York. 1918 (updated 1930) Saratoga, California. Sanborn Map & Publishing Company, New York. Tyler, Norman et al. 2009 Historic Preservation, An Introduction to the History, Principals, and Practices. W.W. Norton & Company, New York. Thompson and West. Historical Atlas of Santa Clara County. San Francisco: Thompson and West, 1876 [San José: Smith and McKay Printing Co., reprinted 1973]. 158 Evans & De Shazo, Inc. 1 Appendix A: DPR Forms 159 Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 ARBORIST REPORT It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the information in this report and implement the required conditions. Application #: ARB13-0068 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 14630 Big Basin Way Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owners: Leaann Hernandez and Paul Hernandez Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 517-08-005 Email: leaann@leaannhernandez.com paulh3@me.com Report History: #1 Date: Plans received October 30, 2013 Report completed November 27, 2013 PROJECT SCOPE The applicant has submitted plans to the City to demolish the existing house and garage. They plan to build a new commercial building with a dining room and office space and a separate retail building. Two trees (camphor #2 and London plane #3) protected by City Code are requested for removal to construct the project. These trees meet the criteria allowing their removal as part of the project once all permits have been obtained. CLEARANCE – with conditions This project has clearance from the arborist to proceed, with the conditions noted below in the Conditions of Approval section. PLAN REVIEW Plans Reviewed: Architectural, civil and landscape plans were prepared by Metro Design Group and dated October 21, 2013. Plan sheets reviewed for this report include Sheet A-1, Cover Sheet; Sheet C-1, Grading and Drainage Plan; Sheet C-2, Drainage and Erosion Control Notes and Details; Sheets A-2 and A- 2.1, Site Plans; Sheets A-3 and A-3.1, Proposed Floor Plans; Sheets A-5, A-5.1 and A-5.2, Elevations; Sheet A-6, Sections; and Sheet L-1, Landscape Plan. A Boundary and Topographic Survey (Sheet 1 of 1) was prepared by Westfall Engineers, Inc. and dated July 2013. Sheet C-2 includes tree protection notes that are not consistent with this report. They should be deleted or replaced with the sections of this report that pertain to the issue addressed. Page 1 of 7 ATTACHMENT 5 160 14630 Big Basin Way TREE INFORMATION Tree Inventory: A total of 6 trees protected by City Code were inventoried for this report. They included two coast live oaks (#1 and 5), one camphor tree (#2), one London plane (#3), one olive (#4), and one flowering pear (#6). Data for each tree can be found in the Tree Inventory Table attached to the end of this report. Locations of trees and protective fencing can be seen on the attached copy of the site plan. Tree #6 is not shown on the site plan, but is the City tree in the strip between the sidewalk and the street. Tree Removals: Two trees protected by City Code have been requested for removal to construct the project. See the Findings section below for a detailed discussion. Tree Protection: Chain link fencing is required around individual trees or groups of trees for protection during construction, and work is not permitted within these fenced areas. Fences are to be posted with signs indicating that they are for the protection of trees and may not be taken down or moved without prior approval from the City Arborist. Areas that require fencing are shown on the map attached to the end of this report. No equipment is permitted on site until after the City Arborist inspects and approves tree protection fencing. See the Conditions of Approval for details. A Project Arborist will be necessary for this project. They will be required to monitor parts of the project and provide a letter to the City verifying that the nearby trees were adequately protected during work. The owners have indicated that they plan to use Blair Glenn from Saratoga Tree Service as their Project Arborist. Oak tree #1 is in good condition and grows right up against the sidewalk. To best protect it no excavation should occur any closer than 15 feet from its trunk (measured from the outside rather than the center). The trunk of the tree has begun to grow over the sidewalk, and will complicate any work done next to it. If the sidewalk is replaced as part of the project, the work must be monitored by the Project Arborist so that the integrity of the tree can be preserved. Trees #4 (olive) and 5 (coast live oak) can be adequately protected during construction, as long as excavation remains at least 8 feet from the olive and 30 feet from the oak. Addition of fill soil and compaction of the ground under these two trees should be avoided, as they can have a significant detrimental impact on the trees. If a patio is desired under these trees, care should be taken so that compaction is minimized and percolation can still occur following installation. Tree #6 (flowering pear, City street tree) is in fair condition. Its main stem has broken or been cut, and the tree no longer has good structure. The site may be better served by removing this tree and planting a new tree at the end of the project. Security Deposit for the Projection of Trees: Pursuant to City Code section 15-50.080(d), a tree protection security deposit is required for this project. Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Department, the required security deposit prior to receiving building permits. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings account, a certificate of deposit account or a bond. This deposit will be held until completion Page 2 of 7 161 14630 Big Basin Way of the project and acceptance by the City. A tree protection security equal to $50,510 is required for trees #1 – 6. Appraised Values: Appraised values were calculated using the Trunk Formula Method and according to the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), 2000. This was used in conjunction with the Species Classification and Group Assignment, published by the Western Chapter of the ISA, 2004. FINDINGS Tree Removal Whenever a tree is requested for removal as part of a project, certain findings must be made and specific tree removal criteria met. Two trees are in conflict with this project. They include one camphor tree (#2) and one London plane tree (#3). Both trees meet the criteria allowing them to be removed and replaced as part of the project, once building division permits have been obtained. A third tree, a City tree growing in the park strip (flowering pear #6), also qualifies for removal and replacement as part of the project. Tree #2 is a camphor tree that grows close to the oak that will be retained and preserved. It has numerous dead branches in the upper canopy throughout the tree and is in conflict with the project. It is not in good enough condition to redesign the project around the tree, and if it were retained and did survive, it would likely cause significant damage to surrounding walkways as it matured. Tree #3 is a London plan in good health and with good structure. It grows in a somewhat central spot on the property and is in conflict with the proposed buildings. If retained and preserved, this tree would likely suffer and die due to construction impacts, or cause damage to anything built if it survived and thrived. Tree #6 is a City-owned and maintained flowering pear growing in the park strip. It is in fair condition, but has lost its main stem and its structure is compromised as a result. It may be best for the tree and the project if this tree was removed at the start of construction and a new tree was planted at the end of the project. The table below summarizes which of the tree removal criteria are met for each tree, allowing its removal. All three trees meet the criteria for removal, overall, and may be removed and replaced as part of the project. The tree removal criteria are attached to the end of this report for reference. Table 1: Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met Tree # Criteria met Criteria not met 2 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 3, 8 3 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9 3, 5, 8 6 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8 Replacement Trees: The total appraised value of trees #2, 3 and 6 is $14,470. New trees equal to this appraised value will be required as a condition of the project. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property and be of any species. Replacement values for new trees are listed in the box below. If there is not enough room to plant new trees on the site some of the value may be paid into the City’s Tree Page 3 of 7 162 14630 Big Basin Way Fund. The owner has indicated that they would like to plant some Italian cypress trees along the side property line for screening. This is acceptable. Figure 1: Replacement Values of Trees New Construction Based on the information provided, and as conditioned, this project complies with the requirements for the setback of new construction from existing trees under Section 15-50.120 of the City Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. This entire arborist report, including the Tree Inventory Table and attached map showing locations for tree protection fencing shall be copied on to a plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation” and included in the final job copy set of plans. 2. Sheet C-2, Tree Protection Notes shall be corrected to match the Conditions of Approval listed here or deleted from the plans. 3. The designated Project Arborist shall be Blair Glen or Lucy Leeburg of Saratoga Tree Service. 4. Tree Protection Security Deposit - $50,510 a. Shall be for trees #1 – 6. b. Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department before obtaining Building Division permits. c. Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project. d. May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City. 5. Tree Protection Fencing: a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached map. b. Shall be established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. c. Shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 2-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. d. Shall be posted with signs saying “TREE PROTECTION FENCE - DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, KATE BEAR (408) 868-1276”. e. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection of tree protection fencing once it has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits. f. Tree protection fencing shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final inspection. Replacement Tree Values: 15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 Page 4 of 7 163 14630 Big Basin Way g. If contractor feels that work must be done inside the fenced area, call City Arborist to arrange a field meeting. 6. No protected tree authorized for removal or encroachment pursuant to this project may be removed or encroached upon until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved project. 7. Receipt of a Planning or Building permit does not relieve applicant of his responsibilities for protecting trees per City Code Article 15-50 on all construction work. 8. All construction activities shall be conducted outside tree protection fencing. These activities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching, equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and parking. 9. The Project Arborist shall monitor the activities listed below and provide a letter to the City documenting the work, verifying that the trees were adequately protected during the work, and including photos. a. All work within 15 feet of coast live oak #1. b. All work within 8 feet of olive #4. c. All work within 30 feet of coast live oak #5. 10. Trenching to install new utilities or connect existing utilities to new shall not be permitted inside tree protection fencing, unless authorized by the City Arborist prior to submitting to the Building Division for review. 11. Where excavation under trees has been approved, all roots measuring two inches or more in diameter shall be retained and worked around. Utility lines (or other components of the project) shall be placed under retained roots or farther away from the roots. Roots measuring less than two inches in diameter may be cut using a sharp pruning tool. 12. If the gas line must be replaced, where it is within 15 feet of tree #1, it shall either: a. Be bored at a depth of 3 feet or more below grade, OR b. Be excavated using an Air Spade® to a depth of two feet under the supervision of the Project Arborist, leaving all roots measuring 2 inches or more in diameter intact, and laying new pipes under intact roots. 13. Where under the canopy of a protected tree, the driveway, walkways or other parts of the project shall remain entirely on top of the existing grade and constructed of pervious materials. It is acceptable to contain pavers or other materials with a concrete curb on top of grade. 14. Any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site shall be performed under the supervision of the Project Arborist and according to ISA standards. 15. Trees #2, 3 and 6 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed and replaced once Building Division permits have been obtained. Page 5 of 7 164 14630 Big Basin Way 16. New trees equal to $14,470 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and occupancy of the new home. 17. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 18. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach on retained trees, and may be of any species. If there is insufficient room to plant new trees, some or all of the replacement value for trees may be paid into the City’s Tree Fund. 19. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half of the canopy of oak trees on site. 20. Water loving plants and lawns are not permitted under oak tree canopies. 21. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies. Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies. 22. At the end of the project, when the contractor wants to remove tree protection fencing and have the tree protection security deposit released by the City, call City Arborist for a final inspection. ATTACHMENTS: Tree Removal Criteria Tree Inventory Table Map showing locations of trees and protective fencing around trees Page 6 of 7 165 14630 Big Basin Way TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article 15-50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and replacement during construction. (1) The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services; (2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property; (3) The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes; (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area; (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices; (6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree; (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article; (8) Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in section 15-50.010; and (9) The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. Page 7 of 7 166 TREE INVENTORY TABLE 14630 Big Basin Way November 26, 2013 TREE NO.TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueCoast live oak 1 Quercus agrifolia 23 45 80 60 Good High Moderate $7,600 Camphor 2 Cinnamomum camphora 23 45 50 70 Fair Low High X $7,200 London plane 3 Platanus acerifolia 22 40 80 80 Good Low High X $6,700 Olive 4 Olea europaea 14, 11 40 70 70 Fair Moderate Moderate $4,040 Coast live oak 5 Quercus agrifolia 27, 22 80 80 80 Good High Low X $24,400 Flowering pear 6 Pyrus calleryana 7 15 70 50 Fair Moderate High ?$570 Total appraised value $50,510 Should any tree listed above be removed or damaged beyond repair, owner will be required to replace that tree with trees equal to its appraised value. Replacement Tree Values 15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 167 14630 Big Basin Way Legend Tree Canopy Tree Protective Fence 2 1 3 4 5 Tree #6: A City-owned street tree is not shown on this map, but is locat- ed in the park strip. It is a flowering pear that is to be protected during construction or removed and replaced with new tree at end of project. 168 Page 1 of 3 City of Saratoga HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Final MINUTES Date: Tuesday, December 11, 2018/ 8:30 A.M. Type: Regular Meeting Place: Linda Callon Conference Room - 13777 Fruitvale Avenue 1.Site Visit(s): a.14320 Peach Hill Road b.14630 Big Basin Way (John Henry House) 2.Call to order: Chair Marchetti called the meeting to order at 9:25 AM 3.Roll Call: Present: Chair Marilyn Marchetti, Commissioners, Annette Stransky, Alexandra Nugent, Dr. Jo Rodgers, and Rina Shah Absent: Paula Cappello Staff: Debbie Pedro, Director of Community Development, Nicole Johnson, Planner II, Chris Riordan, Senior Planner and Sandy Baily, Special Projects Manager 4.Oral Communications: None 5.Approval of minutes from November 13, 2018 meeting. Shah/Stransky moved to approve the minutes. Motion passed. Ayes: Shah, Stransky, Nugent, Marchetti, and Rodgers. Noes: None. Absent: Cappello. Abstain: None. 6.New Business: a.14320 Peach Hill Road – HPC considered an application to relocate garage doors from the rear of the house to the front of a house. Nugent/Stransky moved to recommend approval. Motion passed. Ayes: Shah, Stransky, Nugent, Marchetti, and Rodgers. Noes: None. Absent: Cappello. Abstain: None. ATTACHMENT 6 169 Page 2 of 3 14630 Big Basin Way (John Henry House) – Commissioner Marchetti recused herself from the meeting as she lives within 150 of the property. Commissioner Rodgers acted as Chair. The Commission considered an application to dismantle, reconstruct and relocate the John Henry house on the same property. Christopher Riordan discussed the proposal. Tom Sloan, architect, discussed the history of the project and the vision of the property owner. Stacey De Shazo, Architectural Historian, reviewed the historic evaluation process and the California Register and how it related to the John Henry house. Jill Hunter, member of the public, commended the property owner for being sensitive in designing a project which preserved the integrity of the John Henry house. The HPC discussed the following items: • Potential archeological findings during construction – Staff explained it was part of the CEQA review process and would be addressed as a condition of approval. • Potential visual impact to the John Henry house with the new building – important to draw public attention to the house by providing plaquing. • Exterior materials and colors – It was agreed that there should be a contrast between the John Henry house and the proposed building. Marilyn Marchetti, member of the public, reinforced the concern of archeological findings. Marchetti expressed concern that the size of the proposed building would overshadow the John Henry house and will change the character of the neighborhood. Marchetti commented that the location of the entry of the house should be relocated to Sixth Street. Paul Hernandez, property owner, informed the HPC on the current construction methods compared to the proposed construction. Hernandez agreed that the John Henry house should be turned to face Sixth Street if it could be permitted to do so. De Shazo responded that changing the orientation of the John Henry house would not comply with the Secretary of Interior Standards. If the orientation was changed it would be a “harder sell” to get on the California Register. Her goal is to reduce the amount of impact in getting on the California Register. Shah/Stransky moved to recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. Wood windows with true divided lites shall be used in the John Henry house. 2. A different shade of roof color shall be used for the John Henry house and the proposed building. Motion passed. Ayes: Shah, Stransky, Nugent, and Rodgers. Noes: None. Absent: Cappello. Abstain: None. Recused: Marchetti. Marchetti returned to the meeting. 7. Staff Comments: a. None 170 Page 3 of 3 8. Old Business: a. Project status update – no discussion 9. Commission Items a. Commissioner Marchetti discussed ideas to thank Commissioner Cappello. A potluck was recommended. b. The Commission was reminded that the transition of the City Council was this Thursday. c. Commission requested to work on items at their January meeting to discuss at the joint meeting with the City Council. 10. Adjournment Chair Marchetti adjourned the meeting at 10:59 A.M. Minutes respectfully submitted: Nicole Johnson, Planner II City of Saratoga 171 ATTACHMENT 7 172 ATTACHMENT 8 173 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/24/20191:42 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-1 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/24/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 SHEET INDEX VICINITY MAP PROJECT DESCRIPTION AREA TABULATIONS SHEET INDEX, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, VICINITY MAP & TOPO SURVEY & BOUNDARIES BUILDING SECTIONS A-A & B-B GENERAL NOTES 1. SITE AREA 3. FLOOR AREA AS-NOTED A- 1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS DETAILS, STREETSCAPE REQUIRED: FRONT: 15'-0" SIDES: 0'-0" REAR: 0'-0" PROPOSED: FRONT: 15'-0" SIDE-INSIDE: 0'-0" SIDE-OUTSIDE: 2'-0" REAR: 1'-10" OFFICE / UNOCCUPIED APPROX. 148 YEARS 970 SQ. FT. ( + 405 SQ. FT. GARAGE) REQUIRED : PROPOSED: CONSULTANTS, GENERAL NOTES AND TABULATIONS FIRST FLOOR AND BASEMENT PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN A- 3. A- 3.1 A- 4 A- 5 A- 5.1 A- 6 PAUL HERNANDEZ & JOE HERNANDEZ (408) 836-5420 13020 LA VISTA DRIVE SARATOGA, CA 95070 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 517-08-005 CH-2 YES RESTAURANT / OFFICE MEETING ROOM 5,000 SQ. FT. 26'-0" 25'-11 1/2" V-B A-2 AT RESTAURANT B AT OFFICE SPACES YES - NFPA 13 PROPERTY OWNER: PHONE: MAILING ADDRESS: PROJECT ADDRESS: ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. ZONING LOCATED WITHIN DESIGNATED WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREA PROPOSED USE: SITE AREA SETBACK REQUIREMENTS: MAX HEIGHT: CONSTRUCTION OCCUPANCY SPRINKLERED EXISTING USE AGE OF RESIDENCE TO BE RECONSTRUCTED AREA OF EXISTING STUCTURE 1,330.00 BUILDING HEIGHT: LOWEST ELEVATION PT. @ BUILDING CORNERS: 518.43' HIGHEST ELEVATION PT. @ BUILDING CORNERS: 520.67 AVERAGE ELEVATION PT. : 519.55 ALLOWABLE TOP MOST ELEVATION PT. OF THE STRUCTURE: 545.55 6. PARKING 7. PEDESTRIAN OPEN SPACE A- 5.2 GROSS AREA : NET AREA : = 5,000.00 SQ. FT. (0.114 AC.) = 5,000.00 SQ. FT. (0.114 AC.) 1,000.00 SQ. FT. (20 %) 2,068.00 SQ. FT. (41 %) 1,718.00 1,204.00 00.00 SITE PLANA- 2 T-1 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY COVER SHEET NOTES PROJECT INFORMATION AREA TABULATIONS PROJECT DESCRIPTION VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX CONSULTANT DIRECTORY A- 2.1 SITE- LIGHTING PLAN & OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM C-1 PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 1 2 3 4 5 ROOF COVERING SHALL BE FIRE RETARDANT AND COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED FOR CLASS A ROOFING. (CITY OF SARATOGA CODE 16-15.080) EARLY WARNING FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED. EARLY WARNING FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL HAVE DOCUMENTATION RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED INSTALLATION AND SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR APPROVAL. (CITY OF SARATOGA CODE 16-60) AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CITY CODE CHAPTER 16. AN NFPA 13R SPRINKLER SYSTEM WITH 4 HEAD CALCULATION IS REQUIRED. DOCUMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED INSTALLATION AND ALL CALCULATIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR APPROVAL. THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND UNDERGROUND WATER SUPLLY MUST BE INSTALLED BY A LICENSED CONTRACTOR. (CITY OF SARATOGA CODE 16-20.165 FOR DESIGNATED HAZARDOUS FIRE AREA) PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: APPROVED NUMBERS OR ADDRESSES SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS IN SUCH A POSITION AS TO BE PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ROAD FRONTING THE PROPERTY. (CFC 901.4.4) THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREA AND WILL COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 7A CONSULTANT DIRECTORYPROJECT INFORMATION NEW GROUND LEVEL RESTAURANT SPACE - REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW BREAKFAST AND LUNCH ONLY WITH OPERATING HOURS LIMITED TO 6:30 am UNTIL 3:00 PM DAILY. A SECOND STORY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE SPACE USE; BASEMENT WINE TASTING LOUNGE THE HISTORIC JOHN HENRY HOUSE WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS A CONFERENCE AND MEETING SPACE SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE SHARED TRASH ENCLOSURE W/ STREET ACCESS AND ARBOR WITH 3' HIGH PICKET FENCES THAT FACE THE STREETS ** *BASEMENT DOES NOT COUNT AS A STORY OR FLOOR AREA FLOOR AREA EXISTING DEMO PROPOSED TOTAL SQ. FT. FIRST FLOOR SECOND FLOOR TOTAL FLOOR AREA 00.00 BASEMENT 4,770.00 WESTFALL ENGINEERS, INC. 14583 BIG BASIN WAY #3 SARATOGA, CA 95070 (408)867-0244 PHONE 2. AVERAGE SITE SLOPE AVERAGE SLOPE FOR SITE = 5.72 % 4. SITE COVERAGE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE : JOHN HENRY HOUSE = 518.00 SQ. FT. MAIN BUILDING & COVERED PORCH = 2,302.00 SQ.FT. COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE = 112.00 SQ.FT. PROPOSED TOTAL: = 2,932.00 SQ.FT. = 3,000.00 SQ. FT. (60 %) SLOPE AT LANDING AREAS:1% MIN, AWAY FROM THE STRUCTURE 2% MIN, AWAY FROM THE STRUCTURESLOPE AT PAVED AREAS: SLOPE AT LANDSCAPE AREAS:5% MIN, AWAY FROM THE STRUCTURE 5. ELEVATION HEIGHTS LANDSCAPE PLANL- 1 AVERAGE SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE = 4.80 % PER CIVIL ENGINEER - SEE SHEET T-1 AND C-1 S =0.00229 x 2 x 142.5 0.114 = 5.72 % 1,002.44 EXISTING GARAGE 405.00 405.00 00.00 4,770.00 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA (WITHOUT BASEMENT LEVEL) =3,440.00 SQ. FT. 14 SPACES EXISTING : HISTORIC BUILDING (JOHN HENRY HOUSE) TO BE RECONSTRUCTED ON THE SITE UTILIZING EXISTING EXTERIOR SIDING AND TRIM MATERIALS EXISTING GARAGE (STORAGE USE) TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED: REMOVE EXISTING TREES AS SHOWN ON SITE PLAN. MIXED USE PROJECT REQUEST FOR PARKING ALLOCATION PER MUNICIPAL CODE SEC. 15.35.20.k : ALLOWABLE HEIGHT STORIES ABOVE GRADE PER TABLE 503 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS SYSTEM HEIGHT INCREASE PER CBC 504.2 TOTAL STORIES ABOVE GRADE PROPOSED HEIGHT (STORIES ABOVE GRADE) 1 2 1 223 1 2 1 ** B OCCUPANT LOAD PER CBC 1004: FUNCTION OF SPACE FLOOR AREA IN SQ. FT. PER OCCUPANT OCCUPANT LOAD KITCHENS, COMMERCIAL 200 GROSS 412 2 HISTORIC HOUSE 100 GROSS 5518 GROUP A-2 B ASSEMBLY (TABLE & CHAIRS)15 NET 894 60 ASSEMBLY (TABLE & CHAIRS)15 NET 401 27 (INSIDE) (PORCH) 11331 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 100 GROSS 111120 CODE ANALYSIS ** FLOOR AREA SOIL ENGINEER REDWOOD GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, INC. JOE RAFFERTY 624 SENECA CT SAN JOSE, CA 95123 (408)848-6009 PHONE C-2 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS 1,002.44 484.00JOHN HENRY HOUSE 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 518.00 518.00 4 ,770.00 SF floor area / 350 SF PER PARKING STALL = 13.63 PARKING STALLS ASSEMBLY (TABLE & CHAIRS)15 NET *1,330.00 1,204.00 1,718.00 HISTORIC CONSULTANT EVANS & DE SHAZO STACEY DE SHAZO. MA 6876 SEBASTOPOL AVENUE SEBASTOPOL, CA 95472 (707) 812-7400 ATTACHMENT 9 174 175 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : C-1 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 N- -----C-2 1-C-2 3 -C-2 2-C-2 4 - C-2 6 C-2 7 ----- - EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN -TYP. U.N.O. INDICATES PROPOSED PLANTER- TYP. INDICATES PLANTED AREA- TYP. INDICATES PERMRABLE PAVERS AT MIN. 48" WIDE MAX. 5% SLOPED ACCESSIBLE PATH- TYP. INDICATES PROTECTIVE TREE FENCING -TYP. INDICATES TEMPORARY FIBER ROLLS- TYP. INSTALL FIBER ROLLS AROUND INLET- TYP. TW=520.70' BW=511.25' TW=520.70' BW=511.25' TW=520.70' BW=511.25' TW=520.70' BW=511.25' TW=522.25' BW=519.25' TW=522.25' BW=511.25' INDICATES JUNCTION BOX/ CLEANOUT - TYP. OF 2 - SEE DET. INDICATES STORMFILTER CATCH BASIN - SEE DET. (TYP.) U.N.O. INDICATES 'VORTECH 1000' STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM (TYP. OF 1) - SEE DET. INDICATES SUMP PUMP PERFORATED 4" DIA. SCHED. 40 P.V.C. SUBDRAIN SLOPED TO DRAIN MIN. 1/4" PER FOOT TO STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM @ RETAINING WALLS -TYP. RIM=520.92' INV=518.17' RIM=520.92' INV=517.42' RIM=518.24' INV=511.29' RIM=518.25' INV=508.00' INV=508.08' RIM=511.50' INV=509.50' RIM=511.50' INV=509.25' 12.5 LF - 6" PVC S=0.02 10 LF - 4" PVC S=0.02 46 LF - 4" PVC S=0.02 PERFORATED 4" DIA. SCHED. 40 P.V.C. SUBDRAIN SLOPED TO DRAIN MIN. 1/4" PER FOOT TO STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM @ RETAINING WALLS -TYP. SOLID 6" DIA. SCHED. 40 P.V.C. PIPE SLOPED TO DRAIN MIN. 1/4" PER FOOT TO STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM -TYP. INDICATES 6" HIGH WOOD CHIP MULCHES -TYP. INDICATES 6" HIGH WOOD CHIP MULCHES -TYP.35'35'MON.BRICKBRICK BRICKDWYDWY 520 WH.CH.RAMPS I X T H S T.B I G B A S I N W A Y 520 PGE(E)BLDG.(E)BLDG.BOXLIGHTGUTTER CURB VOLT.HIGHCROSS WALK CROSS WALK SDWK 1'BERMSTOP 36"OAK 18"OLIVE SSMH 24"OAK SDMH TCDI WM CATV CO STR.LIGHT. WM 7"TREE STR. ELEC WM FH WV WV SSMH 522 518 PROPOSED BUILDING FF = 521.00' BASEMENT FS =511.67' PAD = 510.67' FS = 521.25' PAD = 520.34' STORMWATER RETENTION NOTE: DISPOSITION AND TREATMENT OF STORMWATER WILL COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM ("NPDES") STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION STANDARDS BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM. CH-2 DISTRICT DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS FS = 520.95'PAD=519.79'FS = 520.95' PAD=519.79' F.BRICK = 520.92' PAD=520.25' LIGHTWELL JB1/ CO SP DS CB1 CB2 TO STORM DRAIN LINE SCB VORTECHS 1000 37.5 LF - 6" PVC S=0.02 59 LF - 6" PVCS=0.104JB2/ CO 35 LF - 6" PVC S=0.917 JB3/ CO JOHN HENRY HOUSE GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN & EROSION CONTROL MEASURES LEGEND A SS SS SD GG WW 240 240 DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED ABBREVIATIONS EARTHWORK QUANTITIES EXPORT NOTE: GEOTECHNICAL FIELD INSPECTION - THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT SHALL INSPECT, TEST (AS NEEDED), AND APPROVE ALL GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION. THE INSPECTIONS SHOULD INCLUDE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY BE LIMITED TO: SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING, SITE SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCAVATIONS FOR FOUNDATIONS AND RETAINING WALLS PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF STEEL AND CONCRETE. THE CONSULTANT SHALL VERIFY THAT FILL MATERIALS PLACED ON SLOPING GROUND ARE PROPERLY KEYED AND BENCHED INTO SUPPORTIVE MATERIALS, AS NECESSARY. TOTAL TOTAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY EARTHWORK/ GRADING ACTIVITIES, THE PERMITEE SHALL ARRANGE A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING. THE MEETING SHALL INCLUDE THE CITY OF SARATOGA GRADING INSPECTOR (408-868-1201) , THE GRADING CONTRACTOR AND THE PROJECT SOILS ENGINEER. THE PERMITEE OR REPRE- SENTATIVE SHALL ARRANGE THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY EARTHWORK/GRADING ACTIVITIES. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN APPLIES ONLY TO THE EXCAVATION, PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF NATURAL EARTH. THIS APPROVAL DOES NOT CONFER ANY RIGHT OF ENTRY TO EITHER PUBLIC PROPERTY OR THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF OTHERS. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE APPROVAL OF ANY IMPROVEMENTS. ANY PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTES ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITIES AND ALL OTHER PERMITS/ APPROVALS SHALL BE OBTAINED. IT SHALL BE THE REPONSABILITY OF THE PERMITEE TO IDENTIFY, LOCATE AND PROTECT ALL UNDERGROUNG FACILITIES. THE PERMITEE SHALL MAINTAIN ALL STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND OTHER PUBLIC RIGHT OS WAYS IN A CLEAN, SAFE AND USABLE CONDITION. ALL SPILLS OF SOIL, ROCK OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY. ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CLEAN SAFE AND USABLE CONDITION. ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO COMPLY WITH STANDARDS STABLISHED BY THE BAY AREA QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR AIRBORNE PARTICULES. ALL KNOWN WATER WELL LOCATIONS ON SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED OR ABANDONED ACCORDING TO CURRENT REGULATIONS ADMINISTRED BY THE SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT. CALL 408-265-2600 X 2660 TO ARRANGE FOR DISTRICT OBSERVATION OF WELL ABANDONMENT. THIS PLAN SHALL NOT APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF ANY TREES. APPROPRIATE TREE REMOVAL PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. ANY REQUIRED TREE PROTECTION MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. THE PROJECT ARCHITECT , TOM SLOAN HAS DESIGNED THIS PROJECT TO COMPLY WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY . ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES SHALL BE OBSERVED AND APPROVED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY GRADING OR EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES. UNOBSERVED OR UNAPPROVED WORK SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED UNDER OBSERVATION OF THE PROJECT SOILS ENGINEER. ALL CONSTRUCTION SITE ARE TO BE WINTERIZED WITH APPROPRIATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES IN PLACE BY OCTOBER 15TH TO APRIL 15TH OF EACH YEAR. GRADING ACTIVITIES ARE ONLY ALLOWED MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 7:30 AM TO 6:00 PM. A.B. A.C. B.C. B.O. B.V.C. C.B. C.L. C.O. CONT. D.I.P. D.S. D/W E.C. ELEV. E. E.V.C. F.F. F.G. F.H. F.C. F.L. F.S. G.B. G.V. H.P. I.D. INV. L.F. L.P. MAX. M.H. AGGREGATE BASE ASPHALT CONCRETE BOTTOM OF CURB BLOW OFF BEGINNING OF VERTICAL CURVE CATCH BASIN CENTERLINE CLEAN OUT CONTINUOUS DUCTILE IRON PIPE DOWN SPOUTS DRIVEWAY END OF CURVE (HORIZONTAL) ELEVATION EXISTING END OF VERTICAL CURVE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FINISHED GRADE FIRE HYDRANT FACE OF CURB FLOW LINE FINISHED SURFACE GRADE BREAK GATE VALVE HIGH POINT INSIDE DIAMETER INVERT LINEAR FEET LOW POINT MAXIMUM MANHOLE MIN. MON. M.V.C. N.T.S. P. P.C.C. P.C.R. P.V.C. P.V.I. R R.C.P. R/W S S.D. S.D.M.H. S.F. SHT. S.S. S.S.M.H. STD. S/W T.C. TW TYP. U.N.O. V.C. V.C.P. W W.M. W.V. W.S. MINIMUM MONUMENT MIDDLE OF VERTICAL CURVE NOT TO SCALE PROPOSED PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE POINT ON CURB RETURN POLYVINYL CHLORIDE POINT OF VERTICAL INTERSECTION RADIUS REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE RIGHT OF WAY SLOPE STORM DRAIN STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SQUARE FEET SHEET SANITARY SEWER SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STANDARD SIDEWALK TOP OF CURB TOP OF RETAINING WALL TYPICAL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE VERTICAL CURVE VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE WATER WATER METER WATER VALVE WATER SERVICE NOTES: PROPERTY LINE CENTER LINE SECTION LINE EDGE OF PAVEMENT CURB AND GUTTER DRAINAGE FLOW DIRECTION FENCE (TYPE) SANITARY SEWER LINE STORM DRAIN LINE SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE STANDARD HOODED INLET LARGE HOODED INLET FLAT GRATE INLET GAS LINE WATER LINE SUBDRAIN GRADE ELEVATION APN NO: 517-08-005 0 CY DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE TIED TO SOLID DRAIN LINE AND CONNECTED TO STORMWATER TRETMENT SYSTEM AS SHOWN ON PLAN . ALL STORMWATER SHALL DRAIN AWAY FROM PROPERTY LINES AND BE RETAINED ON SITE. STANDARD GRADING PLAN NOTES TYPE OF WORK PROPOSED CUT PROPOSED FILL MAXIMUM CUT 97 CY 11'-0"- BUILDINGS WALKS AND PATIOS TOPO SURVEY & BOUNDARIES WESTFALL ENGINEERS, INC. 14583 BIG BASIN WAY #3 SARATOGA, CA 95070 (408)867-0244 PHONE EXCAVATION (AT BASEMENT & RET. 'A')680 CY 777 CY 777 CY 97 CY MAXIMUM FILL 680 CY 0 CY 777 CY 777 CY - VICINITY MAP - 176 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : C-2 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 3 N.T.S.4 JUNCTION BOX/ CLEANOUT N.T.S.5 CATCH BASIN DETAIL 2 N.T.S. FIBER ROLL @ INLET 1 N.T.S. FIBER ROLL DETAIL N.T.S. STORMFILTER CATCHBASIN DETAIL N.T.S.6 VORTECHS 1000 STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM DETAIL N.T.S.7 ROOT ZONE 12" MIN 18"12"2" min.12" MIN 18"PROTECTIVE TREE FENCING DRIVEWAY WHERE OCCURS PER PLAN IF WITHIN FIVE FEET OF EDGE OF TREE,THE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ON TOP OF GRADE TREE DRIPLINE NATURAL GRADE PROTECTIVE TREE FENCING PER ARBORIST REPORT TO BE SIX FOOT HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE MOUNTED ON EIGHT FOOT TALL, TWO INCH DIA. GALV. POSTS, DRIVEN 24INCHES INTO THE GROUND AND SPACED NO MORE THAN 10 FEET APART DECORATIVE METAL GRATE (E) GROUND BRICK PAVERS (TYP.) O/1" SAND O/4" GRAVEL FIBER ROLLS 3/4" X 3/4" WOOD STAKES STAKED AT 1/4 POINTS REMOVABLE DECORATIVE METAL GRATE (E) GROUND 6" DIA PVC OUTLET LAWN (TYP.) 4" DIA SCHEDULE 40 PVC SOLID DRAIN LINE NOTES: 1. TREE PROTECTIVE FENCING SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ARBORIST PRIOR TO OBTAINING BUILDING DIVISION PERMITS. 2. NO EXCAVATION SHALL OCCUR WITHIN FIVE FEET OF TREE CANOPIES FOR INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES OR DRIVEWAY. 3. U.O.N. IN ARBORIST REPORT, NO FILL SOIL SHALL BE PLACED ANY CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET OUTSIDE THE EDGE OF THE CANOPY OF ANY TREE ON PROPERTY. 4. UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED, ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES MUST BE CONDUCTED OUTSIDE THE DESGINATED FENCED AREA (EVEN AFTER FENCING IS REMOVED). THESE ACTIVITIES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING: DEMOLITION, GRADING, TRENCHING, EQUIPMENT CLENAING, STOCKPILING AND DUMPING MATERIALS (INCLUDING SOIL FILL), AND EQUIPMENT/VEHICLE OPERATION AND PARKING. 5. THE DISPOSAL OF HARMFUL PRODUCTS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CHEMICALS, PAINT RINSE WATER, FUEL, CEMENT WATER RINSE, HERBICIDES, OR OTHER MATERIALS, IS PROHIBITED BENEATH TREE CANOPIES OR ANYWHERE ON SITE THAT ALLOWS DRAINAGE BENEATH TREE CANOPIES 6. SEE ARBORISTS REPORT DATED JUNE 23, 2010 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 2% MIN SLOPE INLET BOX MANAGEMENT OF ACTIVITIES IN THE ROOT ZONE Slope Varies Min.4" max.SPACING ALONG SLOPES: 4:1 OR FLATTER = 20'-0" MAX. 4:1 - 2:1 15'-0" MAX. 2:1 OR GREATER = 10'-0" MAX PROVIDE WEEKLY INSPECTION & REINSTALL IF NECESSARY REPLACE EVERY 3 MONTHS. ACCUMULATED SILT SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN IT REACHES A DEPTH OF (6") SIX INCHES PROVIDE 2'-0" MIN. LAP AT FIBER ROLL SPLICES SLOPE BANK VARIES RICE STRAW WATTLES (FIBER ROLL) 8" MIN SET WATTLES INTO SLOPE 2" MIN. / 4" MAX. 3/4" X 3/4" WOOD STAKES (24" MIN. LENGTH) AT 48" O.C. (TYP) 2% MIN SLOPE OUTLET INLET MIN.2. RETAIN AND PROTECT NATURAL VEGETATION PRINCIPLES OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL SITE THAT WILL BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION DURING THE RAINY SEASON MUST BE WINTERIZED BY OCTOBER 15 4. INFILTRATE RUNOFF FROM INPERVIOUS SURFACES 3. SEED AND MULCH CEARED AREAS 6. DEEP RUNOFF VELOCITIES LOW 7. PROTECT DRAINAGEWAYS AND OUTLETS FROM INCREASED FLOWS 8. TRAP SEDIMENT ON SITE AFTER GRADING IS COMPLETED, SEED AND MULCH THE DENUDED AREAS ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURES OUTLINED UNDER "REVEGETATION." THE MULCH WILL PROTECT THE SOIL UNTIL THE VEGETATION GETS ESTABLISHED. THE VEGETATION WILL PREVENT EROSION IN FUTURE YEARS. GRASS PROVIDES THE BEST SHORT-TERM PROTECTION. AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, REPLACE THE GRASS WITH THE DESIRED LONG-TERM VEGETATION AS PART OF THE LANDSCAPING AROUND THE STRUCTURE. ON UNDISTURBED LAND MUCH OF THE RAINWATER SEEPS INTO THE GROUND. ROOFS, PAVED WALKWAYS AND DRIVEWAYS AND PACKED SOIL ARE IMPERVIOUS TO INFILTRATION. RUNOFF FROM THESE SURFACES GREATLY INCREASES EROSION POTENTIAL FOR THIS REASON THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD REQUIRES THE RUNOFF FROM IMPERVIOUS SURFACES BE INFILTRATED INTO THE GROUND. LOCATE INFILTRATION TRENCHES BELOW ROOF EAVES AND ALONG DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. IF A ROOF DRIP LINE OF DRIVEWAY IS ON A STEEP SLOPE, INSTALL A LINED DITCH TO ROUTE THE RUNOFF TO A DRY WELL OR TO AN INFILTRATION TRENCH LOCATED ALONG A SLOPE CONTOUR. INSTALL THESE PERMANENT INFILTRATION SYSTEMS AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED (SEE SAMPLE PERMANENT DRAINAGE PLAN). 5. MINIMIZE LENGTH AND STEEPNESS OF SLOPES LONG OR STEEP EXPOSED SLOPES (OR DRIVEWAYS) HAVE HEIGHT EROSION POTENTIAL. TO SHORTEN RUNOFF PATHWAYS DOWN LONG OR STEEP SLOPES. CONSTRUCT BARRIERS, SUCH AS STRAW BALE OR FIBER ROLL DIKES, ACROSS THE SLOPE. THESE BARRIERS INTERCEPT RUNOFF BEFORE IT CAN REACH AN EROSIVE VELOCITY AND DIVERT IT. DEVELOPMENT CHANGES THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RUNOFF. WHEN LAND IS PAVED OR VEGETATION IS REMOVED AND SOIL IS COMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC, THE VOLUME OF RUNOFF INCREASES. RUNOFF FLOWING OVER HARD OR SMOOTH SURFACES SUCH AS PACKED EARTH OR PAVEMENT INCREASES IN VELOCITY, GRADING MAY CAUSE RUNOFF TO CONCENTRATE IN A SINGLE CHANNEL INSTEAD OF BEING DISPERSED OVER A BROAD AREA. THESE CHANGES IN RUNOFF CAN CAUSE CHANNEL EROSION UNLESS PROTECTION MEASURE ARE INSTALLED. COMMON FORMS OF CHANNEL PROTECTION ARE: A. LININGS (GRAVEL, CONCRETE, ASPHALT) B. PIPES OR CULVERTS C. OUTLET PROTECTORS (SUCH AS ROCK APRONS) SEE DETAIL MIN. SEEDING RATE (LBS./1000 SQ.FT. 0.6 0.6 3. WHEN TO PLANT 2. SEED TYPES TO USE 4. STRAW MULCH SEED TYPE 5. OTHER MULCHES 1. REVEGETATION TEMPORARY CONTROL MEASURES GROUP 1 SOD-FORMING WHEATGRASS: 'LUNA' PUBESCENT, 'TOPAR' PUBESCENT, OR 'OAHE' INTERMEDIATE GROUP 2 BUNCHGRASS: POTOMAC ORCHARDGRASS, SHERMAN BIG BLUEGRASS OR 'RESTED WHEATGRASS ALL OF THE ABOVE PLANTS ARE PERENNIAL GRASSES. THE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, U.S. FOREST SERVICE MAY PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THESE AND OTHER SUITABLE PLANT TYPES. 1. TIME GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SOIL EXPOSURE NATURAL VEGETATION IS THE MOST EFFICIENT FORM OF EROSION CONTROL AND IS ALSO THE MOST DIFFICULT TO RE-ESTABLISH. FOR THIS REASON, ONLY THE AREA REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE STRIPPED, STAGE GRADING SO THAT ONLY THE PORTION OF THE SITE THAT CAN BE CONSTRUCTED ON ONE YEAR IS CLEARED OF VEGETATION. VEGETATION IS A DESIRABLE FORM OF EROSION CONTROL BECAUSE IT KEEPS SOIL IN PLACE AND MAINTAINS AN ATTRACTIVE, NATURAL-LOOKING LANDSCAPE. VEGETATION REDUCES EROSION BY: A. ABSORBING RAINDROP IMPACT B. REDUCING RUNOFF VELOCITY C. REDUCING RUNOFF VOLUME BY INCREASING INFILTRATION INTO THE SOIL REVEGETATE CLEARED AREAS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER GRADING. SEE "WHEN TO PLANT." KEEP ALL VEHICLE TRAFFIC OUT OF AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN REVEGETATED. THE ENERGY OF FLOWING WATER DRAMATICALLY INCREASES AS VELOCITY INCREASES. IF VELOCITY DOUBLES, THE EROSIVE ENERGY QUADRUPLES, AND THE WATER CAN MOVE PARTICLES 64 TIMES AS LARGE. VELOCITIES CAN BE KEPT LOW BY: A. KEEPING FLOW VOLUMES LOW (SUCH AS PRESERVING SITE VEGETATION OR BE DIVIDING RUNOFF INTO SEVERAL CHANNELS RATHER THAN ONE) B. CONSTRUCTING FLOW BARRIERS AT FREQUENT INTERVALS LINING CHANNELS WITH ROUGH MATERIAL, SUCH AS ROCKS SOME EROSION DURING CONSTRUCTION IS UNAVOIDABLE. SEDIMENT-LADEN RUNOFF MUST BE DETAINED ON-SITE SO THE THE SOIL PARTICLES CAN SETTLE OUT BEFORE THE RUNOFF REACHES ANY WATERWAY OR SOMEON DES'S PROPERTY. USE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CONTROL MEASURES TO KEEP SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE SITE: THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF REVEGETATION IS EROSION CONTROL. GRASS PROVIDES THE BEST PROTECTION FOR THE FIRS FEW YEARS. GRASSES GERMINATE AND GROW QUICKLY AND PROVIDE A FAST AND COMPLETE GROUND COVER. TREES AND SHRUBS ARE EFFECTIVE FOR LONG-TERM EROSION CONTROL, BUT GRASSES ARE NEEDED FOR INITIAL SOIL PROTECTION UNTIL THE SLOWER GROWING TRESS AND SHRUBS BECOME WELL ESTABLISHED. DECORATIVE :LANDSCAPING: WITH TREES AND SHRUBS CAN BE DONE LATER CERTAIN CLIMATES AND TERRAINS CAN MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR PLANTS TO BECOME ESTABLISHED. THE STEEPER THE SLOPE, THE MORE DIFFICULT IT IS. THE GREATEST CHANCE OF SUCCESS WITH REVEGETATION WILL BE IF THE ANGLE OF DISTURBED SLOPES IS KEPT TO A MINIMUM. THE FOLLOWING GRASS SEED MIXES ARE SUITABLE FOR NEARLY ALL SITES IN THE AREA. SELECT ONE SPECIES FROM EACH GRoUP AND COMBINE. THE TIME OF PLANTING DEPENDS ON IRRIGATION. WITH IRRIGATION, ONE MUST CONTINUE TO IRRIGATE UNTIL THE GRASS IS WELL ESTABLISHED. IT IS POSSIBLE TO PLANT SEEDS ANY TIME IN THE TEMPERATE CLIMATE OF THE BAY AREA, BUT FOR BEST RESULTS- (WITHOUT IRRIGATION): A. PLANT SEEDS AS LATE AS POSSIBLE IN THE FALL. OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER ARE GENERALLY GOOD MONTHS TO SEED. SEEDS PLANTED TOO EARLY IN THE FALL MAY GERMINATE WITH FALL RAINS AND THE YOUNG SEEDLINGS CAN THEN BE DILLED BY FROST, OR B. PLANT SEEDS IN MARCH OR APRIL. MAY IS GENERALLY TOO LATE AS THERE PROBABLY WILL NOT BE ENOUGH RAIN TO GERMINATE THE SEED AND ALLOW THE PLANTS TO GROW TO A SIZE THAT CAN SURVIVE THE SUMMER DRY PERIOD. STRAW IS THE BEST MULCH MATERIAL. APPLY ONE BALE OF STRAW PER 1,000 SQ. FT. DISTRIBUTE THE STRAW EVENLY SO THAT IF FORMS A LAYER 1" TO 2" THICK. SOIL SHOULD STILL BE VISIBLE THROUGH THE STRAW MAT. IF YOU APPLY TO MUCH MULCH, IT MAY PRODUCE A MAT TOO DENSE FOR SEEDLINGS TO PENETRATE. ANCHOR THE STRAW BY PUNCHING IT INTO THE SOIL EVERY 1" TO 2" WITH A DULL, ROUND-NOSED SHOVEL (TO AVOID CUTTING THE STRAW) OR BY COVERING IT WITH NETTING (JUTE, PLASTIC, MESH, WOVEN PAPER, OR CHICKEN WIRE). FASTEN THE NETTING TO THE GROUND WITH WIRE STAPLES. BECAUSE THE SOILS IN MANY AREAS ARE QUITE HARD, YOU MAY HAVE TO USE NETTING TO ANCHOR THE STRAW. WOOD FIBERS, WOOD CHIPS AND PINE NEEDLES ARE OTHER REUSABLE MULCH MATERIALS. WOOD FIBER MULCH IS APPLIED HYDRAULICALLY IN A SLURRY THAT ALSO CONTAINS THE SEED AND FERTILIZER. IT IS SUITABLE FOR USE IN STEEP SLOPES OR LARGE AREAS AND MUST BE APPLIED BY CONTRACTOR, (THE APPLICATION RATE OF WOOD FIBER MULCH IS 3,000 LBS./ACRE). WOOD CHIPS AND PINE NEEDLES CAN PROTECT THE SOIL FROM EROSION, BUT THEY ALSO INHIBIT PLANT GROWTH. THEY CAN ONLY BE USED WHERE A GRASS COVER IS NOT DESIRED. APPLY WOOD CHIPS SO THAT SOIL IS COMPLETELY COVERED. APPLY PINE NEEDLES IN A LAYER 2" TO 3" THICK. YOU CAN SAVE THE ORGANIC MATERIALS FROM GRADED AREAS ON THE PROPERTY TO USE AS A MULCH LATER, BUT YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO SUPPLEMENT THEM WITH WOOD CHIPS TO ACHIEVE AN ADEQUATE GROUND COVER. EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN EROSION CONTROL NOTES GRADING WILL BEGIN ON OR AFTER APRIL 15. FIBER ROLLS WILL BE INSTALLED PER PLAN. SEE DETAILS #2, 3. FIBER ROLLS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT AREA DRAIN AT TWO LOCATIONS. FIBER ROLLS WILL BE INSTALLED IN THE TRENCH TO PREVENT RUNOFF FROM LEAVING THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE. THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY WILL BE GRAVELED DURING CONSTRUCTION, PROVIDING A BASE FOR PAVING AS A DRIVEWAY. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES / MULCH & SEEDING SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO OCTOBER 15. AT THAT TIME THE PERMANENT EROSION AND RUNOFF CONTROLS WILL BE INSTALLED AND THE DRIVEWAY WILL BE PAVED. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION WILL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED. TREE PROTECTION NOTES Fencing Around Trees During Construction: A temporary fence shall be erected around each tree to be retained. The fence should be located at the drip line ora minimum of 5’ from the trunk which ever is greater. The fence should be erected so it will not be easy for construction workers to remove or relocate. This fencing must be erected before any construction equipment enters the site and must not be removed until final landscape grading is complete. Soil compaction and trenching through root zones are the major causes of tree stress in the construction period. It should be explained clearly to all contractors and workers on site that these fences are important and are not to be removed. Trenching of any sort and for any reason must be planned to avoid traversing areas within the tree drip lines. Provide a copy of the Demolition Permit obtained from the West Valley Sanitation District. Additional requirements include: - Dust control on site at all times. - Safety on site including preventing access to site when and if it constitutes a public nuisance or hazard. - Properly capping sanitary sewer and/or filling septic system to Health Department standards. - Once the sewer line is capped, please call the West Valley Sanitation District at (408) 378-2407. - Once the structure and debris has been removed, please call the City Building Department at (408) 354-2805 to arrange a final inspection. AS SHOWN DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS 177 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:26 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-2 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 - ----- - - ---------- ----20'-0"15'-0"4'-0" 2'-0"28'-8"1'-10" REAR SETBACK 1'-0" SIDE SETBACK 2'-0" SIDE SETBACK 15'-0"69.76 sq ft EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED - TYP. INDICATES EXISTING 6' HIGH FENCE TO BE REMOVED (TYP.) U.N.O. EXISTING OAK TREE TO REMAIN -TYP. U.N.O. INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION (TYP.) @ BUILDING EDGE =518.43' PROPOSED ARBOR- SEE DETAIL INDICATES JOINT TRENCH FOR NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICE FOR (N) GAS , (N) ELECTRIC, PHONE & CABLE SERVICE INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION (TYP.) @ BUILDING EDGE =522.47' (N) BACKFLOW PREVENTOR W/LOW PROFILE ENCLOSURE -COLD ROLLED STEEL- DARK GREEN COLOR -SEE DET. INDICATES LINE OF ADJACENT BUILDING PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: APPROVED NUMBERS OR ADDRESSES SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS IN SUCH A POSITION AS TO BE PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ROAD FRONTING THE PROPERTY. (CFC 901.4.4) INDICATES COVERED PORCH- TYP. INDICATES PROPOSED PLANTER- TYP. INDICATES PLANTED AREAS - TYP. INDICATES BRICK PAVERS AT MIN. 48" WIDE MAX. 5% SLOPED ACCESSIBLE PATH- TYP. EXISTING STRUCTURE AND HARDSCAPE - TYP. INDICATES PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE NEW 3' HIGH PICKET FENCE - SEE DETAIL INSTALL NEW 6' HIGH FENCE (TYP.) U.N.O. INSTALL NEW 6' HIGH FENCE (TYP.) U.N.O. -SEE DETAIL INDICATES PROPOSED ELECTRIC METER INDICATES PROPOSED GAS METERS INDICATES EXISTING WOOD PICKET FENCE TO BE REMOVED SSMH WV WV FH WM ELEC STR. 7"TREE WM STR.LIGHT. CO CATV WM TCDI SDMH 24"TREE 24"OAK 3"CDR 24"SYC SSMH 6"OAK 6"BAY 18"OLIVE 36"OAK N 76°10'00" E 50.00'N 13°50'00" W 100.00'N 76°10'00" E 50.00' STOP 1'BERMSIDEWALK CROSS WALK CROSS WALKHIGHVOLT.CURB GUTTERLIGHTBOX(E)BLDG.(E)BLDG.PGE (E)GAR. 520 B I G B A S I N W A Y S I X T H S T.RAMPWH . C H . R A M P WH.CH.520 DRIVEWAY DWYBRICKBRICK BRICKMON.35'35'N 76° 10'00" E 125.00'522N 13°50'00" W 100.00'518 PROPOSED 2-STORY BUILDING SETBACK VERIFICATION NOTE: PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION BY THE CITY, THE LLS OF RECORD SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION THAT ALL BUILDING SETBACKS ARE PER THE APPROVED PLANS. NET SITE AREA = 5,000 SQ. FT. GROSS SITE AREA = 5,000 SQ. FT. MIN. FF = 521.00' BASEMENT FS =511.67' PAD = 510.67' STORMWATER RETENTION NOTE: DISPOSITION AND TREATMENT OF STORMWATER WILL COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM ("NPDES") STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION STANDARDS BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM. CH-2 DISTRICT CH-2 DISTRICT 5"TREE DN 1 A-2.1 LIGHTWELL 1 A-5.2 2 A-5.2 3 A-5.2 FS = 521.25' PAD = 520.50' EG UP RECONSTRUCTED JOHN HENRY BUILDING FRONT YARD SETBACKCOVERED PORCH COVERED PORCH FRONT SETBACKPLANTERPLANTERPLANTER0'-0"SETBACKOFFICE "A"N1/8" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN SITE PLAN SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" FENCE DETAIL VICINITY MAP 178 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:26 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-2.1 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 HATCHED AREA INDICATES OPEN SPACE AREA OF 2,616.40 SQ. FT. (52.33 %) - TYP. N 76°10'00" E 50.00'N 13°50'00" W 100.00'N 76°10'00" E 50.00'N 13°50'00" W 100.00'PROPOSED DINIG/ OFFICE BUILDING B I G B A S I N W A Y NET SITE AREA = 5,000 SQ. FT. GROSS SITE AREA = 5,000 SQ. FT. PROPOSED DINIG/ OFFICE BUILDING B I G B A S I N W A Y A PROPOSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHT 'A' FIRST FLOOR- TYP. OF 14 LEGEND A A A A AS PROPOSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHT 'A' BASEMENT- TYP. OF 2 Ab PROPOSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHT 'A' SEC . FLOOR- TYP. OF 3 As AS A A A A A Ab A TOTAL: 30 UPUP HISTORIC JOHN HENERY HOUSE HISTORIC JOHN HENERY HOUSE DN EG B B B B B BB Ab EG A B PROPOSED CLG. MOUNTED LIGHT 'B' FIRST FLOOR- TYP. OF 8 PROPOSED CLG. MOUNTED LIGHT 'B' BASEMENT- TYP. OF 2 PROPOSED CLG. MOUNTED LIGHT 'B' SEC. FLOOR- TYP. OF 2 B Bs Bb Bb Bb Bb NNAS SHOWN SITE DIAGRAMS OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM BACKFLOW ENCLOSURE SITE LIGHTING DIAGRAM SCALE : 1" = 10'-0" OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM SITE LIGHTING DIAGRAM SCALE : 1" = 10'-0" BACKFLOW ENCLOSURE SCALE : N.T.S. PROPOSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHT 'A' KICHLER LIGHTING SEASIDE 1 LIGHT OUTDOOR WALL LANTERN IN OLDE BRICK 9022OB OUTDOOR WALL 1LT PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION: MANUFACTURER KICHLER COLLECTION SEASIDE CATEGORY OUTDOOR WALL LIGHTS SKU 9022OB UPC 783927012966 DESIGN INFORMATION: OLDE BRICK DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT (INCHES AND POUNDS): DIMENSIONS WEIGHT 0 LENGHT WIDTH HEIGHT 8.00 12.00 BULB INFORMATION PRIMARY SECONDARYNUMBER OF BULBS 1 100WMAX WATTAGEFINISH: 1 A-2.1 PROPOSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHT 'B' HALO 3" SQUARE REGRESSED LENSE ADJUSTABLE BAFFLE TRIM OUTDOOR CEILING FIXTURE PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION: MANUFACTURER HALO CATEGORY DAMP PROOF LIGHTS SKU H3012 - WHBB DESIGN INFORMATION: WHITE HOUSING BLACK BAFFLE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHT (INCHES AND POUNDS): DIMENSIONS WEIGHT 4.50 " LENGTH WIDTH HEIGHT 0.20" NUMBER OF BULBS - 50WMAX WATTAGEFINISH: 4.50 " 179 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-3 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 16'-6"19'-2"7'-10" 43'-6" 15'-01/2"8'-10"54'-61/2"20'-11/2"83'-6"48'-3"8'-01/2"7'-1"20'-11/2"83'-6"4'-6" 1'-0" 15'-01/2"3'-21/2"26'-3"15'-6"32'-9"8'-51/2"11'-51/2"12'-10"44'-6" A A-6 A A-6 KITCHEN OPEN DINING ROOM JOHN HENRY HOUSE PUBLIC MEETING & CONFERENCE SPACE GRARDEN TERRACE PORCH PORCH PLANTERPLANTER UP FF = 521.00' FS = 521.25' PAD = 520.50' TRASH ENCLOSURE G E RESTROOM ELEVATOR WALK IN FREEZER PREP / DW DOWN DOWN UP LOBBY PLANTERB A-6 B A-6 56'-31/2"34'-5"21'-101/2"20'-61/2"19'-71/2" 35'-8" 16'-6"19'-2" 40'-2"6'-10"2'-0"39'-5"8'-81/2"56'-111/2"WINE TASTING LOUNGE MECHANICAL ROOM UP BASEMENT FS =511.67' PAD = 510.67' BAR ELEVATOR STORAGE RESTROOM RESTROOM RESTROOM OUTDOOR TERRACE UP MOP /JANITORSTORAGE A A-6 A A-6 B A-6 NNA B D FIRST FLOOR A= B= 1,718 SQ. FT. 518 SQ. FT. BASEMENT D=1,330 SQ. FT. *BASEMENT DOES NOT COUNT AS A STORY AND FLOOR AREA TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA = (WITHOUT BASEMENT) A= B= C= D= TOTAL FLOOR AREA= TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA (WITHOUT BASEMENT) = A= B= C= D= TOTAL FLOOR AREA= 1,718 SF 518 SF 1,204 SF 1,330 SF 4,770 SF 1,718 SF 518 SF 1,204 SF 1,330 SF 4,770 SF 3, 3440 SQ. FT.3, 3440 SQ. FT. FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0" FLOOR PLAN BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR AREA DIAGRAMBASEMENT FLOOR AREA DIAGRAM FIRST FLOOR PLAN BASEMENT 180 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-3.1 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 A A-6 A A-6 7'-3"7'-91/2"28'-51/2" 43'-6" 17'-4"12'-71/2"5'-81/2"7'-10"3'-0"5'-10"47'-51/2"3'-0"45'-3"8'-01/2"56'-31/2"56'-31/2"43'-6" 7'-3"36'-3" MULTI-GENDER RESTROOM OPEN OFFICE SPACE BALCONY FF = 532.25' ELEVATOR DOWN B A-6 B A-6 NC SECOND FLOOR C=1,204 SQ. FT. TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA (WITHOUT BASEMENT) =3, 3440 SQ. FT. A= B= C= D= TOTAL FLOOR AREA= 1,718 SF 518 SF 1,204 SF 1,330 SF 4,770 SF 1/4"=1'-0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLAN SECOND 181 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-4 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 - - - - - - - - - - - A A-6 A A-6 B A-6 B A-6 2'-6" 2'-0"1'-0"1'-0"1'-0"1'-0" INDICATES POST AT PORCH (TYP.) INDICATES SECOND FLOOR BUILDING LINE (TYP.) 4 : 12 PITCH (TYP.) U.N.O. INDICATES FIRST FLOOR BUILDING LINE AT PORCH (TYP.) 5 1/4" OGEE GUTTER (TYP.) INDICATES DOWNSPOUT (TYP.) MAXIMUM HEIGHT = 546.45' INDICATES TRELLIS BELOW (TYP.) INDICATES BUILDING LINE (TYP.) INDICATES FIRST FLOOR BUILDING LINE (TYP.) CLASS 'A' COMPOSITION SHINGLE STYLE ROOFING (TYP) 4':12' 10'-8":12'10'-8":12' 10'-8":12'10'-8":12' 4':12' 4':12' 4':12' 4':12'8':12'8':12'ELEVATOR HOIST SPACE NROOF PLAN 3/16"=1'=0" ROOF PLAN 182 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-5 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 F.F. @ 521.00'26'-0" MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT48'-0"2'-0" INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 518.43' INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 520.67' INDICATES AVERAGE HEIGHT ELEVATION 519.55' MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT = 545.50' INDICATES PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) 1 2 3 4 5 5 6 6 8GAS METER 54 F.F. @ 521.00'26'-0"15'-0"85'-0" F.F. @ 521.25' INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 520.67' INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 518.43' INDICATES AVERAGE HEIGHT ELEVATION 519.55' MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT = 545.50' 1 2 5 3 4 5 5 5 5 6 INDICATES PROFILE OF EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED (TYP.) 5 3 REDWOOD SIDING 0F HISTORIC BUILDING NEW WOOD DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS (TYP) INDICATES HISTORIC BUILDING (JOHN HENRY HOUSE) TO BE RECONSTRUCTED AND REMAIN ON SITE INDICATES OUTLINE OF EXISTING BUILDING MAX ALLOWABLE HEIGHT = 545.55 1 2 3 4 5 6 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRAMED W/ DIVIDED LITES WHITE COLOR BY 'KOLBE' & KOLBE' ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRAMED W/ DIVIDED LITES WHITE COLOR BY 'KOLBE' & KOLBE' CLASS 'A' COMPOSITION SHINGLE BY 'GAF' - ' LIFETIME DESIGNER SHINGLES' GRAND CANYON STORMCLOUD GREY COLOR ROOF: EXTERIOR WALLS: WINDOWS: DOORS: WINDOW AND DOOR TRIM, POSTS, TRELLIS, PICKETS, RAFTER TAILS, RAILINGS, GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS LANDSCAPE DETAIL, PLANTERS, PAVEMENT RECLAIMED RED BRICK WHITE PAINT -'SHERWIN-WILLIAMS' OIL BASED ENAMEL - IBIS SW 7000 NUMBER 1, BLUE LABEL RED CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING, 6" EXPOSURE W/SEMITRANSPARENT STAIN 'CABOT HEDGEGROW' EXTERIOR FINISHES 3/16"=1'=0" NORTH ELEVATION (STREET) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION (STREET) 183 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-5.1 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 48'-6"1'-6" INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 520.67' MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT = 545.55' INDICATES PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) 1 2 5 F.F. @ 521.00' 3 4 5 5 INDICATES PROFILE OF EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED (TYP.) F.F. @ 521.00' 85'-0"15'-0" F.F. @ 521.00' INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 518.43' MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT = 545.55' 1 2 5 3 5 5 5 6 5 INDICATES PROFILE OF EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED (TYP.) INDICATES RECONSTRUCTED HISTORIC BUILDING (JOHN HENRY HOUSE) 5 4 LIGHTWELL BELOW GRADE F.S. @ 521.25' 1 2 5 INDICATES PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) 6 NEW HORIZONTAL SIDING TO MATCH HISTORIC BUILDING - ONE HOUR CONSTRUCTION F.S. @ 521.25' 1 2 5 INDICATES PROFILE OF EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED (TYP.)INDICATES UNCOVERED & RECONSTRUCTED TRANSOM WINDOW NEW DOOR NEW WINDOWS AND SHUTTERS TO MATCH JOHN HENRY HOUSE 1 2 3 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRAMED W/ DIVIDED LITES WHITE COLOR BY 'KOLBE' & KOLBE' CLASS 'A' COMPOSITION SHINGLE BY 'GAF' - ' LIFETIME DESIGNER SHINGLES' GRAND CANYON STORMCLOUD GREY COLOR ROOF: EXTERIOR WALLS: WINDOWS: DOORS: WINDOW AND DOOR TRIM, POSTS, TRELLIS, PICKETS, RAFTER TAILS, RAILINGS, GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS LANDSCAPE DETAIL, PLANTERS, PAVEMENT NUMBER 1, BLUE LABEL RED CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING, 6" EXPOSURE W/SEMITRANSPARENT STAIN 'CABOT HEDGEGROW' EXTERIOR FINISHES 4 5 6 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRAMED W/ DIVIDED LITES WHITE COLOR BY 'KOLBE' & KOLBE' ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRAMED W/ DIVIDED LITES WHITE COLOR BY 'KOLBE' & KOLBE' ROOF: EXTERIOR WALLS: WINDOWS: DOORS: WINDOW AND DOOR TRIM, POSTS, TRELLIS, PICKETS, RAFTER TAILS, RAILINGS, GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS LANDSCAPE DETAIL, PLANTERS, PAVEMENT RECLAIMED RED BRICK WHITE PAINT -'SHERWIN-WILLIAMS' OIL BASED ENAMEL - IBIS SW 7000 3/16"=1'=0" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION JOHN HENRY HOUSE NORTH ELEVATION JOHN HENRY HOUSE SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH RETAIL 'A' ELEVATION SOUTH RETAIL 'A' ELEVATION JOHN HENRY HOUSE 184 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-5.2 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 950706'-0"1'-0"2'-0"6'-0"1x2 P.T.D.F. EACH SIDE OF 1x8 2x4 P.T.D.F. FLAT ON TOP 2x8 P.T.D.F. KICK BOARD 4x4 P.T.D.F. POST @ 8'-0" O.C. 1x2 P.T.D.F. EACH SIDE OF 1x8 2x4 P.T.D.F. FLAT ON TOP OF POSTS 4x4 P.T.D.F. POST @ 8'-0" O.C. 1x8 P.T.D.F. STAGGERED COLUMN TUB FOR FENCE POSTS 2x4 P.T.D.F. FLAT ON TOP OF POSTS 1x8 P.T.D.F. STAGGERED INDICATES GRADE ELEVATION 2x4 P.T.D.F. FLAT ON TOP 2x8 P.T.D.F. 12" DIA. CONCRETE PIER - SLOPED AT TOP PLAN VIEW ELEVATION SECTION 5'-3"9"11"3'-8"11"9"5'-3"7'-0"3'-0"2'-5"R 7'-11"3'-0" HIGH WOOD PICKET FENCES WHITE PAINT -'SHERWIN-WILLIAMS' OIL BASED ENAMEL - IBIS SW 7000 - TYP. 6 x 6 WOOD POSTS -TYP. OF 8 WHITE PAINT -'SHERWIN-WILLIAMS' OIL BASED ENAMEL - IBIS SW 7000 - TYP. TYP.TYP. F.F. @ 521.00' 15'-0"85'-0" INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 521.00 INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 518.43'INDICATES AVERAGE HEIGHT ELEVATION 519.71' MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT = 545.71' 1 2 5 3 4 5 5 5 5 6 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEAS SHOWN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS DETAILS PICKET FENCES ELEVATION ARBOR ELEVATION GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE STREETSCAPE ARBOR AND PICKET FENCES ELEVATIONS SCALE : 3/8" = 1'-0"1 2 GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE DETAIL SCALE : 1/2" = 1'-0"3 STREETSCAPE - BIG BASIN WAY SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"4 STREETSCAPE - SIXTH STREET5SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"185 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : A-6 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 F.F. @ 521.00'26'-101/2"F.F. @ 532.25 8'-3"1'-1"10'-0"1'-1"8'-0"12'-7"T.P. @ 540.08'11"F.S. @ 511.67' INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 518.43' INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 519.67' INDICATES AVERAGE HEIGHT ELEVATION 519.72' MAX. ALLOWABLE = 545.55' INDICATES EXISTING GRADE INDICATES PROPOSED GRADE PROPOSED HEIGHT = 545.50'INDICATES PROPOSED AND ALLOWABLE MAX. HEIGHTOFFICE DINING BASEMENT WINE TASTING PORCH RESTROOOM KITCHEN F.F. @ 521.00' F.F. @ 532.25' T.P. @ 540.08'26'-0"8'-3"1'-1"10'-0"1'-3"11'-81/2"1'-8"F.S. @ 521.25' F.S. @ 511.67' MAX. PROPOSED HEIGHT = 545.50' INDICATES LOWEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 518.43' INDICATES AVERAGE HEIGHT ELEVATION 519.55' INDICATES EXISTING GRADE INDICATES PROPOSED GRADE INDICATES HIGHEST PT. ELEVATION @ BUILDING EDGE 520.67'INDICATES ALLOWABLE MAX. HEIGHTDINING OFFICE BASEMENT WINE TASTING JOHN HENRY HOUSE CONFERENCE & MEETING ROOM BALCONY PORCH SECTION A-A SECTION B-B 3/16"=1'=0" SECTIONS SECTION A-A SECTION B-B 186 Sebastians Mided Use 5-15-19.pln5/15/20191:27 PMSEBASTIAN'S MIXED-USE BUILDING METRO GROUP DESIGN ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS.. 1475 S. BASCOM AVE SUITE 208 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408)871-1071 phone www.metroarchitects.com DATE : SCALE : PROJECT NO : DRAWN BY : L-1 The plans, ideas and design on this drawing are the property of the designer,divised solely for this contract. Plans shall not be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose for which they were not intended without the written permission of METRO DESIGN GROUP. c REVISIONS SHEET NUMBER CHECKED BY : ARCHITECT :TOM SLOAN 19673 5/15/2019 TS DZ 14630 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA, CA 95070 N-------- 8 7 6 2 1 4 5 3 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 4 4 3 5 1 2 5 6 8 2 3 4 56 7 8 9 10 9 10 8 - 20'-0" EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED - TYP. EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN -TYP. U.N.O. INDICATES TRELLIS ABOVE INDICATES PROPOSED PORCH- TYP. INDICATES PERMRABLE PAVERS AT MIN. 48" WIDE MAX. 5% SLOPED ACCESSIBLE PATH- TYP. INDICATES COLORED CONCRETE AREA @ TRASH ENCLOSURE PROPOSED PLANTER - TYP. - ANNUAL COLOR INSTALL NEW 6' HIGH FENCE (TYP.) U.N.O.35'MON.BRICKBRICK BRICKDWYDWY 520 WH.CH.WH . C H . R A M P RAMPS I X T H S T.B I G B A S I N W A Y 520 PGE(E)BLDG.(E)BLDG.BOXLIGHTGUTTER CURB GUTTERCURBVOLT.HIGHCROSS WALK CROSS WALK SDWK 1'BERMSTOP 36"OAK 18"OLIVE 6"BAY 6"OAK SSMH 24"SYC 3"CEDAR 24"OAK 24"TREE SDMH TCDI WM CATV CO STR.LIGHT. WM 7"TREE STR. ELEC WM FH WV WV 522 518 520.92' 8" OAK LEGEND PROPERTY LINE (E) GRADE CONTOUR LINE PROPOSED GRADE CONTOUR LINE FENCE EXISTING HOUSE TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED BUILDING PROPOSED WALKWAY AREA PROPOSED COLORED CONCRETE AREA WITH BROOM FINISH 516 EXISTING TREE DRIP LINE PROPOSED SHRUBS PROPOSED GROUNDCOVER PROPOSED ANNUAL COLOR @ PLANTER PROPOSED PERENNIAL @ CONTAINERS PROPOSED TREE 12" O.C.QUART 21 GALACER PALMATUM JAPANESE MAPLE TREES MIX OF ASSORTED PERENNIAL FLOWERS- 1 GALPITTOSPORUMPITTOSPORACEAE CRASSIFOLIUM 1 GAL 19RHODODENDRON 1 GALIRIS HYBRIDS PLANT LEGEND QTY TALL BEARDED IRIS DWARF PERIWINKLE FLATS 12" O.C. GROUNDCOVER 23 COMMON NAME SIZE SHRUBS KEY BOTANICAL NAME RHODODENDRON 'LODER'S WHITE' VINCA MINOR 7 ERIGERON KARVINSKIANUS 12" O.C.FLATSSANTA BARBARA DAISY ANNUALS @ PLANTERS - TYP. PERENNIALS @ CONTAINERS - TYP. OF 9 -6" O.C.FLATSMIX OF ASSORTED ANNUAL FLOWERS SEE SHEET A-2.1 - TREE PRESERVATION - FOR MORE INFORMATION (E) TO REMAIN TREE SIZE STATUSTREE NAMETREE NO. EXISTING TREE LEGEND 24"OAK CEDAR 3"(E) TO BE REMOVED 24"TREE (E) TO BE REMOVED 24"SYCAMORE (E) TO BE REMOVED OAK 6"(E) TO BE REMOVED BAY OLIVE OAK 5"TREE TREE TREE 6" 18" 36" 5" 7" (E) TO REMAIN (E) TO REMAIN (E) TO REMAIN (E) TO BE REMOVED (E) TO BE REMOVED DN LIGHTWELLG UP HISTORIC JOHN HENERY HOUSE EG PROPOSED 2-STORY BUILDING LANDSCAPE PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0" LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" 187