The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-27-2002 Planning Commission PacketCITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Ci~~ic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Garakani, Jackman, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe, Zutshi and Chair Barry ABSEiV''r: Commissioners Jackman ~ Zutshi, and Director Sullivan STAFF: Planners Oosterhous ~ Welsh, and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission ivleeting of February 13, 2002 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or tahing action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staf f. REPORT OF POSTING AGEI~`DA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 21, 2002. REPORT OF 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, pursuant to Municipal Code 15- 90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Monday, a week before the meeting. 1. DR-O1-045 (517-19-042), ELLIS - 14920 Vickery Avenue; -Request for Design Re~~iew to construct a two story single-family Mediterranean-Contemporary style residence. The floor area of the proposed home is 3,431 square feet ~~ith a 1,489 square foot basement. The lot, located in the R-1, 20,000 zoning district, contains 36,368 square feet. The applicant proposes a maximum structure height of 23 feet. The existing two -story structure, garage, pool and shed are to be demolished. (WELSH) (APPROVED 4-1, KURASH OPPOSED) 2. Application #02-021 (Citywide); -The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create standards to permit small wind energy conversion systems in accordance with State Assembly Bill 1207. (WELSH) (CONTINUED FOR REVISIONS) 3. DR-O1-021, BSA-Ol-002 &r V-O1-012 (517-14-080) - HUSTED, Kittridge Road; - Request for Design Review and Building Site Approval to construct atwo-story craftsman style, single-family residence on a'vacant lot. The floor area of the proposed residence and attached two-car garage is 4;810 square feet. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is. zoned Hillside Residential. A variance is requested in order to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet. An exception is also requested to exceed one thousand cubic yards of cut and fill. (OOSTERHOUS) (APPROVED TO CONTINUE TO STUDY SESSION 4-1, ROUPE OPPOSED, REVISION TO RETAINING WALLS REQUESTED) DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner's sub-committee reports COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT AT 10:35 P.M. TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, March 13, 2002, Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ;~ - - LAND USE AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 - 3:00 p.m. PLACE: City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Land Use Committee SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2002 • ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA . AGENDA 1. Application #02-021 - HUSTED Item 3 Kittridge Road 2. DR-O1-045 - ELLIS Item 1 14920 Vickery Avenue LAND USE COMMITTEE The Land Use Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties which are new items on the Planning Commission agenda. The site ~~isits are held Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m. It is not necessary for the applicant to be present, but you are invited to join the Committee at the site ~~isit to answer any questions which may arise. Site visits are generally short (5 to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public hearing. Please contact staff Tuesday morning for an estimated time of the site visit. • • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: ~ Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Garakani, Jackman, Hunter, Kurasch, Roupe, Zutshi and Chair Barry PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES : Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of February 13, 2002 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member o f the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission f or up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or tahing action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staff. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 21, -~ 2002. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the Ciry Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15- 90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appeaz and be heazd at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Sazatoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Monday, a week before the meeting. 1. DR-O1-045 (517-19-042), ELLIS - 14920 Vickery Avenue; -Request for Design Review to construct a two story single-family Mediterranean-Contemporary style residence. The floor area of the proposed home is 3,431 square feet with a 1,489 square foot basement. The lot, located in the R-1, 20,000 zoning district, contains 36,368 square feet. The applicant proposes a maximum structure height of 23 feet. The existing two -story structure, garage, pool and shed are to be demolished. (WELSH) 2. Application #02-021 (Citywide); -The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create standards to permit small wind energy conversion systems in accordance with State Assembly Bill 1207. (WELSH) 3. DR-O1-021, BSA-Ol-002 &r V-O1-012 (517-14-080) - HUSTED, Kittridge Road; - Request for Design Review and Building Site Approval to construct atwo-story craftsman style, single-family residence on a vacant lot. The floor area of the proposed residence and attached two-car garage is 4,810 square feet. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is zoned Hillside Residential. A variance is requested in order to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet. An exception is also requested to exceed one thousand cubic yards of cut and fill. (OOSTERHOUS) DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner's sub-committee reports COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, March 13, 2002, Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA • lY.` • - MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION O 4~ V ~~, DATE: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chairperson Barry called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch and Roupe Absent: Commissioner Zutshi Staff: Director Tom Sullivan, Associate Planner John Livingstone and Planner Lata Vasudevan APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of January 23, 2002. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kurasch, seconded by Commissioner Jackman, the regular Planning Commission minutes of January 23, 2002, were approved as submitted. AYES:Garakani, Jackman, Kurasch and Roupe NOES: None ABSENT: Zutshi ABSTAIN: -Barry and Hunter -- APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of January 9, 2002. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Jackman, the regular Planning Commission minutes of January 9, 2002, were approved with the following corrections: Page 5 -Stated that in 2001, they had 18,000 riders on their trials trails. Page 9 -added text "Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4" just above the first comments made by Ms. Grace San Filippo. Page 10 -Commissioner .Roupe asked Mr. Camargo if the solar system will provide electricity or ~ radiant heat... Page 11-Said that she thinks she Ms. San Filippo will really like this house.... AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman and Roupe NOES: None ABSENT: Zutshi ABSTAIN: Kurasch Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 7, 2002. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar items. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Director Sullivan announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b). *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 • Application #02-006 (366-35-019) OAK CREEK INVESTMENTS; BRIGHTER FUTURE LEARNING CENTER (tenant), 12175 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to establish a learning center in an existing 2,626 square foot office space at the Oak Creek Center. The office space is located in the C-V zoning district. (VASUDEVAN) Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a learning center (Brighter Future Learning Center), which is considered an institutional facility per the Zoning Ordinance. - • Said that this location will serve as the corporate headquarters, offering tutoring for students as well as training for licensees of other Brighter Future Learning Center locations. • Stated that other uses in the Oak Creek Center include a restaurant, hair salon and architectural firm. The proposed tenant space has been vacant for approximately one year. • Advised that staff finds that this use will benefit the Oak Creek Center and surrounding businesses and that findings can be made to support this application. Commissioner Roupe said there is potential that this use could intensify parking although he believes that it most likely would not. Asked staff how they came to the conclusion that parking needs for this use would not represent intensification from the previous use. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that according to Ordinance, five spaces must be provided for employees. Added that the bulk of the use for this business is in the late afternoon, after school. Commissioner Roupe asked for specific peak times of operation. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 3 Planner Lata Vasudevan replied from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. Commissioner Jackman added that she believes this learning center would be providing one on one tutoring. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:16 p.m. Mr. Brian Kelly, Owner of Oak Creek Center, 14772 Live Oak Lane, Saratoga: • Advised that the former tenant was a real estate office with 50 to 60 agents and that parking was never a problem. • Assured that parking available on site is more than adequate to meet all the needs. • Pointed out that the bulk of the business for this learning center is after school, between the hours of 3 and 6 p.m. • Added that there are three full-time employees on site and that the students are typically dropped off for their tutoring sessions. Mr. Henry Young, Applicant, Brighter Future Learning Center, 10062 Miller Avenue, Cupertino: • Advised that their learning center is operated much like the Sylvan Learning Center and that they provide tutoring in math and English. • Added that they additionally have licensees who operate additional locations of the Brighter Future Learning Center and also publish books and programs and operate a demo classroom. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Young how many students are on site between the hours of 3 and 6 p.m. Mr. Young replied that they operate three time periods every afternoon, 3:30 to 4:30 p.m., 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. and 5:30 to 6:30 p.m. The maximum number of students per class is six. Commissioner Hunter commended Mr. Young for locating in Saratoga and said it was wonderful to have them in town. Mr. Young said that they like Saratoga very much. Added that they have an office in Cupertino right now and that the parents of their Saratoga students are very happy to know. that the Brighter Future Learning Center is coming to Saratoga. Commissioner Kurasch asked staff if this proposal has any impact on the Zoning for the site. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied no. She added that there are Permitted and Conditionally Permitted uses for this zoning. A learning center is a Conditionally Permitted use. Chair Barry pointed out the traffic potential with the overlap of students leaving and arriving between sessions. Commissioner Roupe said that as far as he is concerned this issue of traffic is resolved. With a maximum of six students and only three sessions, his concerns are satisfied. Commissioner Garakani pointed out that is the potential for three classes per hour. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 4 Mr. Young clarified that there are three classrooms but that aII three are typically not used at the same _ time. While they could have up to three classes at a time, they usually only have one or two. Commissioner Garakani asked Mr. Young what the maximum number of students is anticipated in the future. Mr. Young replied 30 to 40 in the future. Commissioner Kurasch asked how many at any given time. Mr. Young replied 18. That represents six students times three classrooms. Commissioner Hunter asked for the ages of the students. Mr. Young advised that the students range up to middle school. In the future, they hope to add SAT preparation courses on weekends for high school students. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:28 p.m. Commissioner Roupe pointed out a discrepancy in the staff report in that the previous use on site was not a bank but rather a real estate office: Commissioner Jackman stated that this business would be an asset to the community. Parents in Saratoga are education oriented and this learning center would bring people into the Oak Creek Center. This learning center represents a good use for the Oak Creek Center and will provide a good service for Saratoga. Commissioner Kurasch suggested attempting to assign a maximum number of students but said that this would be hard to do. Said that there should not be much of a problem with parking, as the provided -- parking on site seems reasonable to serve all-uses. Chair Barry stated that this is not a more intensive use than the previous real estate office. Director Sullivan pointed out Condition 3, which dictates that if this proposed use intensifies, the Use Permit can be brought back before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Garakani asked whether there is adequate exterior lighting for the safety of the children in the evening hours. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that Jake's Pizza is in this center with a lot of evening activity so that it can be expected that the exterior lighting is at a safe level. Commissioner Kurasch asked Director Sullivan how intensification could be evaluated. Director Sullivan re lied that it is determined either b observation or coin Taint. P Y P Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 5 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kurasch, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the Planning Commission approved Application #02-006 to allow a Conditional Use Permit to establish a learning center at the Oak Creek Center at 12175 Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road as proposed. - AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch and Roupe NOES: None ABSENT: Zutshi - ABSTAIN: None . *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 DR-O1-046 & UP-O1-019 (503-24-025) -LEE, 20645 Fourth Street: Request for Design Review approval to add 283 square feet to the fourth floor and 283 square feet to the fifth floor of The Inn at Saratoga. The Use Permit approval is necessary to allow the expansion of a conditional use. The Inn at Saratoga is located on a 29,807 square foot parcel in the CH-1 zoning district. (VASUDEVAN) Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review and a Use Permit to allow a 283 square foot addition to both the fourth and fifth floors of The Inn at Saratoga. • Described the sloping lot, which has a front elevation with the appearance of two stories and a rear elevation with five stories. • Added that the Design Review approval is required when more than 500 square feet are added to an existing structure within a Commercial district. • Advised that staff finds this proposal to be consistent in that it blends with the existing structure with the use of matching composition roofing. The addition has a compatible bulk, height and design and will not negatively affect the existing structure. The proposal is consistent with the Saratoga Village Design Guidelines. • Informed that a Use Permit is required for expansion of an existing Use Permit. • Said that the necessary findings can be made to support this proposal. The exercise room and business office are necessary components for the use of the hotel's guests. • Recommended approval and distributed a photo of The Inn. Commissioner Roupe asked for clarification about the project number protocol. Director Sullivan replied that the new numbering system is in place for anything beginning as of January 1, 2002. Any files submitted prior to that date already had the older file numbering assigned. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing-for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:36 p.m. Dr. Lee, Owner, The Inn at Saratoga, 20 Joyce Road, Hillsborough: • Informed that he purchased The Inn at Saratoga in April 1993 and that he has previously converted two rooms into meeting rooms to meet the needs of today's business guests. • Added that to be competitive in today market, they also need an exercise room for their guests as well as a small office equipped with computers, copiers and fast Internet access. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 6 Commissioner Kurasch asked if there is any change in materials. Dr. Lee replied no. Mr. Warren B. Heid, Project Architect, 14630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga: • Said that the materials being questioned by Commissioner Kurasch represents a firewall between the barn and this building. This is a four-hour firewall that was required in addition to fire sprinklers on the roof adjacent to the barn. • Advised that The Inn was constructed on a steep hill, which is why there is a two-story appearance on one elevation and afive-story elevation on another. • Stated that The Inn at Saratoga has been an asset to the City of Saratoga. • Said that they have incorporated many elements to the roofline in order to break up the facade. • Added that a centrally located exercise room and well-equipped office at The Inn are necessary for guest use. • Said that the porch will remain as it is but that they came forward with an overlap that is in keeping with the ridgeline of the roof. This addition will not detract architecturally and is minimal as far as square footage. • Made himself available for any questions. Commissioner Kurasch said that the entry appears prominent and expressed concerned that the roof will cut off the entry. Mr. Warren B. Heid replied that this element was purposely brought forward and that it cuts the porch roof by two feet. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Heid if he designed The Inn originally. Mr. Warren B. Heid replied yes. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Heid how many years he has been an architect working in Saratoga. Mr. Warren B. Heid replied that he has recently begun his 45`'' year. Commissioner Jackman asked about the break down in occupancy. Dr. Lee replied that 85 percent of their guests come from within the Silicon Valley and about 15 ~ercent are local. During the summer there are more tourists. Pointed out that since September 11` ,hotel occupancy is dramatically down and that last weekend the hotel had but five guests. Commissioner Jackman agreed that both the exercise room and office facilities are necessary to keep the hotel competitive. Chair Barry asked Dr. Lee if he participates in the Village Planning Group. Dr. Lee replied no but added that his manager works closely with the Rotary. Chair Barry suggested that Dr. Lee consider participating. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 7 Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 7:55 p.m. Commissioner Hunter said that she is delighted to have The Inn and agrees that the exercise room and computer room are in order for The Inn to remain competitive. Stated that she is glad to support this request. Commissioner Roupe said that the architecture is a nice fit and agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Hunter. Pointed out that The Inn's addition will look like it was always there and that this will represent a nice addition to the community. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission approved DR-O1-046 and UP-O1-019 to add 283 square feet to the fourth floor and 283 square feet to the fifth floor of The Inn at Saratoga on property located at 20645 Fourth Street as proposed: AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman, Kurasch and Roupe NOES: None ABSENT: Zutshi ABSTAIN: None *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.3 Application #02-003 (510-O1-046) - NEALE, 15081 Pepper Lane: Request for Administrative Design Review and Conditional Use Permit approval to add 683 feet to the existing detached two-car garage. The proposed addition will create athree-car garage. The proposed addition will match the existing design and roof pitch of the existing garage. The 22,101 square foot parcel is located in the $- 1-20,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) Associate Planner John Livingstone presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the this request is for an Administrative Design Review to allow a 683 square foot addition to an existing detached garage and the conversion of a two-car area into a pool house. This addition will add three new parking stalls. • Said that a Use Permit is necessary to allow the 15-foot height of an accessory structure. The height is necessary to establish architectural compatibility with the main structure. This proposal is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. • Said that staff finds this proposal meets Design Review requirements and Use Permit findings. • Advised that the trees will be retained with the exception of one small six-inch fruit tree that will be removed. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that in the Case History within the staff report the date of December 28, 2002, should be corrected to read December 28, 2001. Asked if the impervious coverage listed takes into account the patio and pool. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 8 ; Associate Planner John Livingstone replied yes and added that this project is in good shape as far as impervious coverage is concerned. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:00 p.m. Mr. David Neale, Applicant and Owner, 15081 Pepper Lane, Saratoga: • Declared that he and his wife love their home and the City of Saratoga and have lived here for two and a half years. • Commended Associate Planner John Livingstone and made himself available for any questions. Commissioner Kurasch pointed out that the Arborist has made the recommendation to change spray heads to drip lines near some trees and asked if Mr. Neale is prepared to make that change. Mr. David Neale replied that his Landscape Architect will incorporate that recommendation. Associate Planner John Livingstone said that the Commission could also add this requirement as a specific Condition of Approval. Commissioner Kurasch asked Mr. Neale if he would be reusing the garage doors. Mr. David Neale replied that he did not believe so. He added that some of them are rotted but that they will try to match the doors as best as possible. Commissioner Roupe said that he has come to the realization that his home may well be within 500 feet of this project site and therefore he would recuse himself from any further participation on this hearing process. Commissioner Roupe left the dais at 8:04 p.m. to sit in the audience. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Neale if he knows when his house was built. Mr. David Neale replied that he was not certain but believes it was constructed some time in the 1930s or 1940s. Commissioner Jackman said that she believes the house was constructed before 1927. Added that she is glad that the Neales did not tear the house down or make a big addition to it. Mr. David Neale said that it is hard to specifically date this house. He added that an old plan was found but that it was undated. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:06 p.m. Commissioner Hunter said that she has been attending the Heritage Preservation Commission meetings and a discussion was held on ensuring that gazages are matched to houses. Said that she supports matching the garage to the house in this situation and thanked the Neales for the lovely work on this house. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 9 Commissioner Kurasch suggested that page 18, number 12 be included in the Conditions. Chair Barry thanked staff for taking the initiative to offer the 15 foot height in order to match the garage to this house. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Jackman, seconded by Commissioner Garakani, the Planning Commission approved a Design Review and Conditional Use Permit (Application #02-003) to allow the addition of 683 square feet to an existing detached two-car garage on property located at 15081 Pepper Lane as proposed. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Jackman and Kurasch NOES: None ABSENT: Zutshi ABSTAIN: Roupe Commissioner Roupe returned to the dais at 8:08 p.m. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.4 Application #02-007 (Citvwidel -Resolution Amending the Zoning Requirements related to Rear Yard Setbacks for Two Story Dwellings: The Planning Commission has requested that it consider amending the language of the Zoning Ordinance that regulates rear yard setbacks for two story dwellings. Currently the minimum yard requirements differ for lots that have been developed prior to May 15, 1992 vs. vacant lot and lots created after May 15, 1992. The Ordinance also has different setbacks for single-story and multi-story dwellings. (SULLIVAN) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report as follows: • Reminded the Commission that it had adopted a Resolution of Intent to Amend the Zoning Ordinance regarding rear yard setbacks for two-story dwellings. • Stated that currently there is a difference in minimum yard setbacks if a parcel was created before 1992 and after 1992. • Pointed out that staff has prepared drawings showing existing setbacks and mandatory staggered setbacks. Said that it is unclear whether Section 15.45.040 requires an addition to the setback standards for two-story structures. There is conflict within two sections of Code. Commissioner Roupe asked if what is being proposed this evening will address the problems and make them go away or is there still some ambiguity to address. Director Tom Sullivan said that he credits Staff Planner Ann Welsh for discovering ambiguity between two sections and that staff needs an interpretation from the Commission. With that interpretation, staff will come back with Ordinance clarifications. Commissioner Kurasch pointed out the fact that the language seems to talk about the whole structure and not just the second story element. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 10 Director Tom Sullivan said that the Design section requires that the second story setback move one foot for every foot above 18 feet in height. Commissioner Roupe clarified that this evening's focus is on rear yard setback. Director Tom Sullivan said that this is .correct. He added that the Design Review Ordinance makes no distinction between pre and post 1992. He said that there are two sides to the argument including implementing the Design Guidelines or having a one size fits all standard. Commissioner Roupe asked what the historic interpretation was and whether staff had looked into that subject. Director Tom Sullivan replied no. He stated that the letter of the law must be changed so that it is the same as the interpretation. Chair Barry asked if there is a difference in setback for a one story versus aone-story that is higher than 18 feet. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes. Chair Barry asked if this still applies if the house is moved forward on the site. Director Tom Sullivan replied that there are different rear yard setbacks. Commissioner Jackman asked if it matters whether there are one or two-stories or simply the overall height. Director Tom Sullivan replied that it does matter as there are different setbacks within the Zoning Ordinance. At the present time, with atwo-story structure, the entire structure moves back. What is proposed is that just the second story element is moved back and not the first story. Commissioner Kurasch said it appears that the existing Design Review standard and proposed interpretations aze the same. Director Tom Sullivan said that per the existing Code as written the entire structure of a two-story must be moved beck from the rear property line. Commissioner Roupe suggested not imposing that requirement on smaller lots but to do so for larger pazcels. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that design standard requirements are sometimes more important on smaller lots than on larger lots. Commissioner Kurasch asked why the rear yard setback (25 feet for asingle-story and 35 feet for a two story) is the only one that varies while the front setback for a two story does not. Director Tom Sullivan replied that the only differentiation is for the rear yard setback for atwo-story. - Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 11 - -- Commissioner Kurasch asked if is possible to apply this requirement to the front rather than rear setback since at most hearings the impact of the front is of more concern. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that multi-story concerns are generally privacy impact issues. There is typically a standard front setback for structures. The penalty for taller structures is an increased . setback requirement. Reminded that the Residential Design Guidelines provide the direction for staff. The Commission can decide to abide by them or tweak the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Garakani suggested using the same idea for sideyard setbacks. Director Tom Sullivan said that this is possible if the standard is changed. Commissioner Roupe pointed out that the Commission did not give staff instruction to change sideyard setback standards but it is not a bad idea. Commissioner Kurasch said that the way the Ordinance is interpreted now is simple and consistent with clear recommendations that can be interpreted. Commissioner Roupe stated that nothing stops a flush two-story house as long as the whole structure is brought forward to meet the minimum setback requirements. Chair Barry opened the Public hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 8:40 p.m. Mr. Warren B. Heid, Architect, 14630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga: • Said that he appreciates what Director Sullivan is doing here. • Agreed that privacy and bulk have been problems faced by Planning Directors, Architects and others over the years. Said that the standard has been 25-foot rearyard setbacks for single-story structures and 35-foot rearyard setbacks for two-story structures to get rid of bulk. • Said that the interpretation for two story massing is more difficult to handle on a smaller lot than on a larger lot. The standard one-foot for every foot above 18 has been imposed. Stepping in structures above 18 feet in height is not a problem. • Stated that most existing homes would not meet this Ordinance if it is changed. Commissioner. Kurasch asked why not apply the same interpretation for front yard setbacks as a means to reduce bulk and mass. Mr. Warren B. Heid replied because the issue has never come up as a problem. Commissioner Roupe said why not give architectural flexibility and apply the standard to the single- story element setback. Mr. Warren B. Heid said that each project needs to be reviewed individually. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that the full width of the street that separates front yard to front yard. Agreed that a 10-foot difference between a single story and two-story could be changed. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 12 Mr. Warren B. Heid suggested that Zoning can be changed to Planned Development in order to allow percentages on smaller lots. Director Tom Sullivan said that if the City had large tracts, this suggestion would be great. The City has but a few infill lots and a majority of remodels that need to fit into existing neighborhoods. Commissioner Kurasch said that continuity to front setbacks makes sense. Mr. Steve Benzing, Architect, 144630 Big Basin Way, Saratoga: • Said that he has worked with Warren B. Heid for 17 years. • Pointed out that front elevations are driven by client concern for resale value and are rarely a straight box. • Expressed concern that the proposed changes in interpretation would render many existing homes into non-conforming status that would hinder remodeling work. • Said that the penalty for height applies for any area over 18 feet. This is how it has been interpreted. Chair Barry asked Mr. Benzing if he feels this interpretation could force one similar azchitectural style. Mr. Steve Benzing replied yes. He added that setting back the second story gives more sunlight and ensures privacy.. He added that Saratoga already has the most restrictive design standards. Chair Barry asked Mr. Benzing if he believes that Saratoga has less architectural variety than other communities. Mr. Steve Benzing replied no. He added that Saratoga has more architectural variety but does not allow real radical design. He stated that Montalvo could not be built today. Tall and unique homes are not allow by today's standards. He stated the importance in allowing a little bit of architectural freedom. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Benzing if he would prefer to have the continuation of the existing interpretation or the proposed interpretation. Mr. Steve Benzing replied that the practice should continue to have the penalty apply to area above 18 feet as there are already enough negatives to not sell second stories. The client can choose livable space versus exterior height. He said that he prefers the existing interpretation as it has been used over the Last 15 years. Commissioner Kurasch pointed out that the reaz setback has been 25 feet for asingle-story and 35 feet for a second story. Mr. Warren B. Heid expressed that it is nice to have the City review its policies with new thoughts. He added that he is accustomed to the existing interpretation. Chair Barry closed the Public hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:07 p.m. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 13 Chair Barry said that Saratoga has the blessing, but also the complication, in that the City has no typical tract style neighborhoods but rather it has much variety. She said that she would prefer to not tweak the Ordinance at this time. Commissioner Roupe said if this proposed interpretation is best, he is concerned about putting it off. Chair Barry suggested imposing a time frame to come back with preliminary review of where the conflicts are. This could include changing the definition of structure. Reiterated that she would rather wait. Commissioner Hunter stated that this is an interesting process and she is learning a lot and is glad that there are two architects present this evening. Added that she is not wild about change and prefers keeping the interpretation as it is, if it is working. Agreed with the recommendation to hold off for a while on any changes. Commissioner Jackman said that the Commission Subcommittee should set some deadlines. Commissioner Hunter said that the flexibility of the interpretation is not that bad. Commissioner Jackman cautioned that there should not be too much flexibility as staff tends to turn over. Commissioner Garakani asked for the pros and cons of both the existing and proposed interpretations. Director Tom Sullivan suggested a continuance of this Public Hearing. Chair Barry agreed that this is a good idea to allow more input before making a final decision. Commissioner Kurasch said that the Commission hears community input at each meeting. All can agree that _the impact of a two-story structure is greater than the impact of a single-story structure. Having a simple setback standard is the resolution. Commissioner Garakani said the setback stays the same with both rear yard setback interpretations. Director Tom Sullivan said that it does not stay the same. The difference vrould be that the whole structure (two-story) would have an additional 10-foot setback. Chair Barry asked if the 10-foot number is arbitrary. Commissioner Kurasch recommended requiring the 25-foot rear setback for single-story and 35 foot setback for two-story structures. Chair Barry restated her support for a continuance to solicit additional input. Director Tom Sullivan agreed that input from other practicing architects could be solicited. Commissioner Kurasch added that input from community members would also be helpful. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 14 . Chair Barry reopened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 9:24 p.m. Mr. Warren B. Heid said that he concurs with the concerns expressed by Commissioner Kurasch, whereby the 26-foot maximum height is allowed at the front setback. Chair Barry pointed out that privacy and bulk are always major concerns when reviewing, design proposals. She added that it is important to guard against preventing flexibility and to provide an interpretation that does not penalize architecture. Director Sullivan stated that the Zoning Ordinance establishes a three dimensional envelope where a structure can be designed. Proposed continuing for one month to allow the involvement of more people. , *** DIRECTOR ITEMS There were no Director Items. COMMISSION ITEMS Appointment of Commissioner to Attend Village Economic Planning Committee Meetings Chair Barry suggested appointing a Planning Commissioner to attend the Village Economic Planning Committee meetings and proposed Commissioner Hunter for that assignment due to her depth of knowledge on the history of buildings in Saratoga. Commissioner Jackman said that this is a good idea. Commissioner Hunter accepted the assignment, saying that she is happy to do so. Planners Institute Commissioner Hunter inquired if any Commissioners planned to attend the Annual Planners Institute and whether the City would reimburse the costs of attendance. Director Sullivan replied yes. Commissioner Hunter asked for recommendations on which programs might be most beneficial. She offered free accommodations to any interested Commissioners at a home she has available in the Monterey area. Commissioner Kurasch said that she would be attending the Planners Institute on Thursday. Commissioners Subcommittees a ;; Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002 Page 15 Commissioner Roupe asked if the discussion on basements would continue this evening. Commissioner Jackman said that the latest revision was distributed at the last meeting and that further discussion would occur at the next meeting. Upon further reflection, she advised that she will actually not be in attendance at the next meeting on February 27`h Director Sullivan suggested dedicating a full meeting in March, either the 12`h or 27`h, to an in-depth discussion of Subcommittee reports as well as the continuation of the rear yard setback interpretation. That meeting could have a minimum of specific development review. Commissioner Kurasch suggested splitting up those two topics at separate meetings. COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communication Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair Barry adjourned the meeting at 9:42 p.m. to the next regular meeting set for Wednesday, February 27, 2002, to begin at 7 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • .;' ITEM 1 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: DR-O1-045, 14920 Vickery Avenue Applicant/Owner: Scott and Laura Ellis Staff Planner: Ann Welsh, AICP -Assistant Planner ~~~ Date: February 27, 2002 APN: 517-19-042 Department Head: ~~~~~~ 14920 Vickery Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 12/11/01 1/9/02 2/13/02 2/13/02 2/8/02 The applicant proposes to construct a new 3,432 square foot, two-story residence with a 1,453 square foot basement after demolishing the existing smaller two-story house, shed and pool. The maximum height of the residence is proposed to be 23 feet. The site, located within an R-1-20,000 zoning district contains 32,465 net square feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review application with conditions by adopting Resolution DR-Ol- 045 ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Resolution DR-O1-045 2. Arborist Report dated 1-4-02 3. Plans, Exhibit °A° dated 2-5-02 • • nr~nnn? STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: R-1-20, 000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RLD -Residential Low Density MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 36,368 squaze feet (gross), 32,465 squaze feet (net) AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Average Slope of the lot is 35% GRADING REquIRED: The project consists of removing an existing residence, shed and pool and constructing a new two-story residence and basement. The applicant has requested that the grading plan be submitted at the time of final zoning approval. The grading plan for the existing house has been submitted with the note that there are to be no changes to the existing grading with the new construction. The project involves 496 cubic yards of cut for the basement and 90 cubic yards of fill for the pool. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project consisting of construction of anew single-family residence 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 or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The project site is in an urbanized azea and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and consists of constructing one single-family residence. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The exterior finish proposed is sand finished gray stucco; proposed window trim is off-white. A slate roof is proposed in "China Grey". Pella wood windows are proposed. • nnllRlnn R-1- 20,000 Proposal Code Requirements Lot Coverage: Maximum Allowable 31% 45% House & Garage 2,183 sq. ft. ' Stairwell &t Light well I36 sq. ft. Pool, Walks ~ Patio 1,458 sq. ft. Driveway 3,324 sq. ft. Vickery Lane 3,050 sq. ft. TOTAL (Impervious Surface) 10,151 sq. ft. 14,609 sq. ft. Floor Area: First Floor 2,183 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable Second Floor 1,248 sq. ft. (Basement) (1,453 sq. ft.) TOTAL 3,431 sq. ft. 3,432 sq. ft. Setbacks: Minimum Requirement Front 8S ft. 30 + ~ = 35 ft. Rear 90 ft. 45 + 5 = 50 ft. North Side 20+ ft. 15 + 5 = 20 ft. ll l Height: Two story residence Maximum A owab e 23 ft. 26 ft. • nnnnn~ PROJECT DISCUSSION Design Review This application for Design Review involves construction of a new two-story single- family Mediterranean-Contemporary style dwelling with basement on a very steeply sloped lot. The building site is very constrained by the surrounding topography with the rear of the house being limited by a SO% vertical rise and the front of the house being limited by a SO% vertical drop. Access is via a 250-foot long, 20% grade driveway, which ascends from Vickery Avenue. The site is very secluded with adjacent neighbors being separated by these differences in elevation. Necessary Findings The Zoning Ordinance, Section 15-45.080 identifies the following findings as necessary for granting Design Review approval. (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed main or accessory structure, when considered with reference to: (i) the nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (ii) community view sheds, will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. (b) Preserve natural landscape. The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by designing structures to follow the natural contours of the site and minimizing tree and soil removal; grade changes will be minimized and will be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas. (c) Minimize perception of excessive bulk. The proposed main or accessory structure, in relation to structures on adjacent lots and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the environment. (d) Compatible bulk and height. The proposed main or accessory structure will be compatible in terms of bulk and height with (i) existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those. within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (ii) the natural environment; and shall not (iii) unreasonably impair the light and air of adjacent properties and their ability to utilize solar energy. (e) Current grading and erosion control methods. The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City. (f) Design policies and techniques. The proposed main or accessory structure will conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook. Actual Findings The following findings have been made regarding the proposed new construction. (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The height, elevations and placement on the nnnnnr site of the proposed main or accessory structure, when considered with reference to: (i) the nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (ii) community view sheds, will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privaty. The topography of the building site naturally ensures privacy between adjacent neighbors. The differences in elevation between neighbors combined with the wooded character of the natural terrain create an atmosphere of seclusion on the existing lot and isolation between neighbors. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by designing structures to follow the natural contours of the site and miniminng tree and soil removal; grade changes will be minimized and will be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas. The plans indicate a 35% average slope across the property. Alive-foot retaining wall extends for approximately 130 feet across the rear of the existing house. This retaining wall is to remain intact with the new house. The existing house contains two stories and the- proposed home is to be 23 foot high and two stories. The existing driveway is to remain and be resurfaced. Since the site is very constrained by topography the existing landscape is to remain and the new home is to be built on the same footprint as the demolished home. Thus, the overall impact of the new development will be minimal. (c) Minimize perception of excessive bulb. The proposed main or accessory structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulb and will be integrated into the environment. The style of house is eclectic Contemporary with French and Mediterranean influences. The front entrance is a two-story tower reminiscent of the French style with stucco facade, a slate roof and copper cap. The "L" shaped front facade contains ten arched windows, which are- to be recessed and trimmed in cast stone over stucco. A second story slate deck projects forward in the front over the proposed garage. A wrought iron railing with stone pedestals surrounds the slate deck. Two small wrought iron, stone pedestal balconies project from two of the upper floor bedrooms one facing north and one facing to the east. Most windows on the north, south and west elevations are shown to be recessed and trimmed in cast stone over stucco. The building site is located high above Vickery Avenue and is not visible from the . adjacent roadway; this elevated location serves to minimise the perception of bulk. Also ",' the house is integrated into the surrounding environment since it backs up onto a steep wooded embankment and thereby blends into the landscape. The "L" shaped design of the structure and 23-foot height limit also serve to minim~e the perception of bulk. (d) Compatible bulk and height. The proposed main or accessory structure will be compatible in terms.of bulk and height with (i) existing residential structures on adjacent Iots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (ii) the natural environment; and shall not (iii) unreasonably impair the light and air of adjacent properties to utilize solar energy. • The proposed home is compatible in terms of bulk and height with neighboring residences. Adjacent residences are elevated about 40 feet higher than the Ellis Residence due to the steep slope of the azea and are thus not impacted visually by the proposed home. The proposed home will not impact the solaz access of adjacent neighbors since it is very isolated by the elevation. (e) Current grading and erosion control methods. The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates currentgrading and erosion control standards used by the City. The proposed design retains the natural topography since changes to the grade surrounding the house are m;n;mal. However, a grading plan is recommended due to the significant potential impact of regrading on the existing trees. (~ Design policies and techniques. The proposed home will conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook The proposed project conforms to Residential Design Handbook Policies to minimize the perception of bulk through use of natural materials ~u colors as well as using architectural features such as balconies, a terrace and a tower to break up massing. The plan conforms to Policy #2, integrate structures with the environment through use of natural materials such as stucco facade, stone window trim and slate roof. All structures are integrated on the site since the garage and house are a single structure. Policy #3, avoid interference with privacy is accomplished naturally with the vertical separation between adjacent residences. Existing landscaping is maintained and this also enhances .privacy. Policy #4, preserve views and access to views is addressed by lowering the roofline to 23 feet and creating balconies and a terrace in areas of unobstructed ~~iews. Policy #5, design for energy efficiency is addressed since the rear patio and windows are southwest facing in orientation and the northeastern portion of the building faces the steep slope which acts as a buffer to the elements. Light, air and solar access to adjacent _ _ homes is retained since the single-family house does not encroach on the solar access of neighbors. Thus the above analysis concludes that the findings required for granting design review approval can be met. The City Arborist, Geotechnical Consultant and the Saratoga Fire District have reviewed this application. Their comments are included as, conditions of approval. Geotechnical Review Geotechnical Clearance is approved for this project subject to the following conditions, which are based on a review memorandum from City Geotechnical Consultant, dated February 6, 2002. 1. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall provide supplemental geotechnical evaluations and design criteria to address the following items: • Distances from faults to the site are inconsistent in the referenced report, and recommended seismic ground motion parameters may not be in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall review the fault distances provided in the site geologic report (dated November 2001), clearly identify the controlling fault, and modify seismic design criteria accordingly. • The consultant shall reconsider the use of different foundation types (i.e. spread footings and piers) due to the susceptibility for differential settlement. • The geoteclinical consultant shall clarify the maximum amount (thickness) of fill to be placed on site. • Class II base rock does not form a complete capillary break because it contains fine-grained material. The Project Geotechnical Engineer should clarify the benefits of using clean crushed rock over Class II base rock in the construction of a moisture barrier. • The geotechnical consultant shall provide estimated total and differential settlement magnitudes for foundations. The supplemental geotechnical design criteria shall be summarized by the Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer ' ~' for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall review -and approve all geologic and geotechnical aspects of the final development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements, and design parameters for foundations and retaining walls) to ensure that their ~c~nonR • recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results of the plan review should be summarized by the Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for- review and approval prior to issuance of the grading permit. 3. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geologic and geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspection shall 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 fill, steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter(s) and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to finalization of the grading permit. 4. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant's review of the project prior to Zone Clearance. 5. -The -owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions. Community Development 1. The development plan shall be revised, located and constructed as shown on Exhibit A, incorporated by reference. 2. Impervious Surface Calculation -The impervious surface calculations shall be fuunished on the final plans. The ordinance allows a maximum 45% impervious surface ratio. The breakdown of the impervious surfaces should be furnished on the plans and compliance with the ordinance should be documented. nnnnno • 3. Light Well -The light well depth shall not exceed 3 feet. The light well in front of the house should be revised to meet this standard. 4. Fireplaces: The plans show one fireplace in the living-room and one fireplace outdoors. Only one wood-burning fireplace is permitted per dwelling and the plans should clarify that this limit is not exceeded. 5. Grading and Drainage Plan - A grading and drainage plan shall be furnished with the final plan. This plan shall depict the location of all underground utilities and trenching. This plan should be reviewed by the city arborist for compliance with tree protection policies. 6. Setbacks -Plans should be revised to show front yard setbacks measured from the edge of the Vickery Road easement rather than from the street line. 7. Fencing -Pool fencing -Plans should depict the location of pool fencing which must be five feet in height and completely surround the pool. 8. Retaining Walls -Plans should clarify the location of existing and proposed retaining walls particularly in the vicinity of the swimming pool. There is some discrepancy between the location of the retaining wall on the site plan and the location as shown on the conceptual landscape plan. Fire Protection District The Saratoga Fire District reviewed this application on January 15, 2002 and their requirements are included as conditions of approval: 1. Roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class A prepared or built up roofing. 2. Early warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the City of Saratoga code Article 16-60. (Alternative requirements, sprinkler systems). 3. Early warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. 4. Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in newly constructed attached/detached garages (2 heads per stall) workshops, or storage areas which are not constructed as habitable space. To ensure proper sprinkler operation, the garage shall have a smooth flat, horizontal ceiling. The designer is to contact San Jose Water Company to determine the size of service and meter needed to meet fire suppression and domestic requirements. 5. Automatic s rinklers are re wired for the new dwellin . A 4-head calculated 13R P q g sprinkler system is required. Documentation of the proposed installation and all 0000 n calculations shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. A licensed contractor shall install the sprinkler system. NOTE: If no improved turnarounds are possible, then 13R with no exceptions and FDC on Street Level shall be required. 6. Driveways shall have a 14-foot minimum width plus 1-foot shoulders. 7. Slopes from 0% to 11% shall use a double seal coat of OAS or better on a 6" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling. 8. Slopes from 11% to 15% shall be surfaced using 2.5" of A.C. or better on a 6" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling. 9. Slopes from 15% to 17% shall be surfaced using a 4° PCC concrete rough surface on a 4" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling 10. Curves: Driveway shall have a minimum inside radius of 21 feet. 11. Turn Around: Construct a turn around at the proposed dwelling site having a 33" outside radius. Other approved types must meet the requirements of the fire district. Details must be shown on the building plans. 12. Parking: Provide a parking area for two emergency vehicles at the proposed dwelling site or as required by the fire district. 13. Security Gate: Gate width shall not be less than 14 feet. Gate shall be through a Medeco lock box purchased from the fire department. Details shall be shown on the building plans. 14. Curves: Driveways shall have a minimum inside radius of 21 feet. 15. Turnouts: Construct a passing turnout 10 feet wide and 40 feet long as required by the fire district: A turnout is proposed to the rear of Lot 1. 16. Turn-around: Construct a turn around at the proposed dwelling site having a 33-inch outside radius. Other approved types must meet the requirements of the fire district. Details shall be shown on the building plans and approved by the fire aistrict. The plans depict aturn-around adjacent the Lot 4 access drive. 17. Parking: Provide a parking area for two emergency vehicles at the proposed dwelling site or as required by the fire district. City Arborist Report The City Arborist inspected this property on December 19, 2001 and issued a report received on January 9, 2002. . The arborist report makes the following observations. The Ellis proposal exposes 17 trees ~nnn~ .~ to some level of risk by construction. Of these trees, 8 trees are on the site and 9 trees are on adjacent properties. No trees are to be removed by implementation of the proposed design. Four of the potentially impacted trees are identified as exceptional specimens and 11 of these trees are identified as fine specimens. The value of the 17 trees identified on the map, which accompanies the report, is placed at $59,919. A bond equal to 25% ($14,980) of the total value of the trees should be retained to assure their protection. . The report makes a number of recommendations, which shall be followed and ~. incorporated into the plans.- This includes but is not limited to the issues addressed - below. 1. The existing driveway should be retained and the new driveway surface should be constructed over the top of the existing surface.. 2. The soil and slope within the following distances from the trunks of trees # 10,11, and 12 must be retained and left undisturbed. Trees # 10,12 -12 feet from the trunk and Tree # 11- 20 feet from the trunk. 3. The retaining wall on the west side of Trees # 10,11, and 12 must be relocated to assure compliance with recommendation # 2. 4. The soil on the east side of the retaining wall nearest Tree # 14,15 and 16 must not be disturbed. 5. A utility plan must be required and reviewed by the city arborist as a condition of approval. Trenches for any utilities (gas, electricity, water, phone, TV cable, etc.) must be located outside the canopy drip lines of retained trees. 6. The fire service utility be tunneled at a depth of 5 feet below the existing grade and the sender and receiver pits be located as shown on the attached plan. 7. The soil excavated for the basement, the footings, or the swimming pool must not be spread or piled, even temporarily, under the canopies of trees. 8. Removal of free # 13 is recommended regardless of construction. 9. Construction period fencing shall be provided and located as noted on the map, which accompanies this report. 10. There must be no grading, trenching or surface scraping inside the canopy drip lines of retained trees (either before or after the construction period fencing is installed or removed), unless specifically indicated on the enclosed plan. Where this may conflict with drainage or other requirements, the city arborist must be consulted. 11. Any old irrigation lines, sewer lines, drain lines, etc. under the canopies of the existing trees, if unused, must be cut off at grade and left in the ground. 12. Trenching for a drainage system must be located outside the protective fencing as noted on the attached map. For any trees where this cannot be achieved, the city arborist must be consulted prior to trenching. The Arborist's report of December 19, 2001 contains other tree preservation recommendations, which shall become conditions of approval and are included as an attachment to this staff report and will be contained in the Building Permit Plan set. Conclusion The proposed residence is designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Section 15- 45.080 of the City Code. The residence does not interfere with views or privacy, preserves the natural landscape to the extent feasible, and will minimise the perception of bulk so that it is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal satisfies all other zoning regulations in terms of allowable floor area, setbacks, maximum height and impervious coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review application with conditions by adopting Resolution DR-OI- 025. • nnnn.~ n • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK t • 00001.4 Attachment 1 • RESOLUTION N0.02 - APPLICATION NO. DR-O1-045 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ellis; 14920 Vickery Avenue WHEREAS, the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review approval for the construction of a new 3,432 square foot residence on a 32,465 squaze foot parcel; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and Whereas 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 or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and involves the construction of one single family home and associated out buildings; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review approval, and the following findings have been determined: Policy 1, Minimize the perception of bulk The style of house is Contemporary with French and Mediterranean influences. The front entrance is a two-story tower reminiscent of the French style, the "L" shaped front facade contains recessed azched windows and a second story slate deck which aze azchitectural features which break up massing and thereby tlLinimize the perception of bulk. Policy 2, Integrate structures with the environment The building site, being elevated high above Vickery Avenue, is not visible from the adjacent roadway. This natural seclusion of the site minim~es the impact of the structure on the surrounding land uses. The fact that the house backs up onto a steep wooded embankment blends it into the wooded location and thus integrates it into the surrounding environment. Policy 3, Avoid interference with privacy The entire building site is designed to ma~amize privacy. Proposed outdoor living spaces do not impact the privacy of adjacent properties since the house is vertically sepazated from its neighbors. Balconies and porches are designed to oooo1s maintain neighbor's privacy. Policy 4, Preserve views and access to views The structure is integrated into the hillside in such a way that it minim~es view blockage. Porches and balconies are located to maximize, views while minimizing privacy impacts. Policy 5, Design for maximum benefit of sun and wind The proposed home will not impact the solaz access of adjacent neighbors due to the vertical separation. The east facing reaz of the house abuts a steep embankment, which acts as an energy saving buffer to the.-elements. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the Ciry of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section I. After careful consideration of the site plan, azchitectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Scott and Laura Ellis for Design Review approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: Community Development 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown or_ Exhibit "A" date stamped February 20, 2002 incorporated by reference with the exception of recommended revisions which shall be incorporated into a revised Exhibit "A". 2. Prior to submittal for Building Permits, the following shall be submitted to the Planning Division staff in order to issue a Zoning Clearance: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page and containing the following revisions: i. All the recommendations of the City Arborist shall be followed. The Arborist report dated December 19, 2002 with accompanying map shall be incorporated into the plans. ii. The site plan shall be "wet" stamped and signed by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor. • iii. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans 3. Light Well -The light well depth shall not exceed 3 feet. The light well in front of the house should be revised to meet this standard. 4. Fireplaces: The plans show one fireplace in the living room and one fireplace outdoors. Only one wood-burning fireplace is permitted per dwelling and the plans should clarify that this limit is not exceeded 5. Grading and Drainage Plan - A grading and drainage plan shall be furnished prior to - Zoning Clearance. This plan shall depict the location of all underground utilities and trenching. This plan should be reviewed by the city arborist for compliance with tree protection policies. 6. Setbacks -Plans should be revised to show front yard setbacks measured from the edge of the Vickery Road easement rather than from the street line. 7. Fencing -Pool fencing -Plans should depict the location of pool fencing which must be five feet in height and completely surround the pool. 8. Retaining Walls -Plans should clarify the location of existing and proposed retaining walls particularly in the vicinity of the swimming pool. There is some discrepancy between the location of the retaining wall on the site plan and the location as shown on the conceptual landscape plan. 9. No fence or wall shall exceed six feet in hei ht and no fence or wall located within an g Y required front yard shall exceed three feet in height. 10. No structure shall be permitted in any easement. 11. A storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, and incorporating the New Development and Construction -Best Management Practices. If all storm water cannot be retained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, an explanatory note shall be provided on the plan. 12. The basement shall not be converted to a secondary dwelling unit as defined by the City's Municipal Code in absence of abiding by the City's Secondary Dwelling Unit process and obtaining the requisite building permits. The deed to the property shall include a statement to such. The deed restriction shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and shown on the Title Report prior to issuance of building permits. Fire Protection District The Saratoga Fire District reviewed this application on January 15, 2002 and their requirements are included as conditions of approval: 1. Roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class A prepared or built up roofing. AA/1A~ w 2. Early warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the City of Saratoga code Article 16-60. (Alternative requirements, sprinkler systems). ~_ 3. Early warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. 4. Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in newly constructed attachedldetached garages (2 heads per stall) workshops, or storage areas, which aze not, constructed as habitable space. To ensure proper sprinkler operation, the gazage shall have a smooth flat, horizontal ceiling. The designer is to contact San Jose Water Company to determine the size of service and meter needed to meet fire suppression and domestic requirements. 5. Automatic sprinklers aze required for the new dwelling. A 4-head calculated 13R sprinkler system is required. Documentation of the proposed installation and all calculations shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. A licensed contractor shall install the sprinkler system. NOTE: If no improved turnazounds aze possible, then 13R with no exceptions and FDC on Street Level shall be required. 6. Driveways shall have a 14-foot minimum width plus 1-foot shoulders. 7. Slopes from 0% to 11% shall use a double seal coat of O~scS or better on a 6" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling. 8. Slopes from 11% to 15% shall be surfaced using 2.5" of A.C. or better on a 6" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling. 9. Slopes from 15% to 17% shall be surfaced using a 4" PCC concrete rough surface on a 4" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling 10. Curves: Driveway shall have a minimum inside radius of 21 feet. 11. Turn Around: Construct a turn around at the proposed dwelling site having a 33" outside radius. Other approved types must meet the requirements of the fire district. Details must be shown on the building plans. 12. Parking: Provide a parking area for two emergency vehicles at the proposed dwelling site or as required by the fire district. 13. Security Gate: Gate width shall not be less than 14 feet. Gate shall be through a Medeco lock box purchased from the fire department. Details shall be shown on the building plans. 14. Curves: Driveways shall have a minimum inside radius of 21 feet. 15. Turnouts: Construct a passing turnout 10 feet wide and 40 feet long as required by • • nnnn~ Q the fire district. A turnout is proposed to the rear of Lot 1. 16. Tum-around: Construct a turn around at the proposed dwelling site having a 33-inch outside radius. Other approved types must meet the requirements of the fire district. Details shall be shown on the building plans and approved by the fire district. The plans depict aturn-around adjacent the Lot 4 access drive. 17. Parking: Provide a parking area for two emergency vehicles at the proposed dwelling site or as required by the fire district. City Arborist Report The City Arborist inspected this property on December 19, 2001 and issued a report received on January 9, 2002. The arborist report makes the following observations. The Ellis proposal exposes 17 trees to some level of risk by construction. Of these trees, 8 trees are on the site and 9 trees are on adjacent properties. No trees are to be removed by implementation of the proposed design. Four of the potentially impacted trees are identified as exceptional specimens and 11 of these trees are identified as fine specimens. The value of the 17 trees identified on the map, which accompanies the report, is placed at $59,919. A bond equal to 25% ($14,980) of the total value of the trees should be retained to assure their protection. The report makes a number of recommendations, which shall be followed and incorporated into the plans. This includes but is not limited to the issues addressed below. 1. The existing driveway should be retained and the new driveway surface should be constructed over the top of the existing surface. -- 2. The soil and slope within the following distances from -the trunks of trees # 10,11, and 12 must be retained and left undisturbed. Trees # 10;12 -12 feet from the trunk and Tree # 11- 20 feet from the trunk. 3. The retaining wall on the west side of Trees # 10,11, and 12 must be relocated to assure compliance with recommendation # 2. 4. The soil on the east side of the retaining wall nearest Tree # 14,15 and 16 must not be disturbed. 5. A utility plan must be required and reviewed by the city arborist as a condition of approval. Trenches for any utilities (gas, electricity, water, phone, TV cable, etc.) must be located outside the canopy drip lines of retained trees. 6. The fire service utility be tunneled at a depth of 5 feet below the existing grade and the sender and receiver pits be located as shown on the attached plan. 000019 7. The soil excavated for the basement, the footings, or the swimming pool must not be spread or piled, even temporarily, under the canopies of trees. 8. Removal of Tree # 13 is recommended regardless of construction. 9. Construction period fencing shall be provided and located as noted on the map, which accompanies this report. 10. There must be no grading, trenching or surface scraping inside the canopy drip lines of retained trees (either before or after the construction period fencing is installed or removed), unless specifically indicated on the enclosed plan. Where this may conflict with drainage or other requirements, the city arborist must be consulted. 11. Any old irrigation lines, sewer lines, drain lines, etc. under the canopies of the existing trees, if unused, must be cut off at grade and left in the ground. 12. Trenching for a drainage system must be located outside the protective fencing as noted on the attached map. For any trees where this cannot be achieved, the city arborist must be consulted prior to trenching. The Arborist's report of December 19, 2001 contains other tree preservation recommendations, which shall become conditions of approval and are included as an attachment to this staff report and will be contained in the Building Permit Plan set. CITY ATTORNEY 1. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the Ciry or held to be the liability of Ciry in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 2. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the violation. Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, Ciry and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90.of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. _ -- PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 27th day of February 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent • Date nnnn~~ • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • 000022 • ~""'~ ~~- BARRIE D. COHTE AND ASSOCIATES ~" Horticultural Consultants- (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 _ 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 Attachment 2 TREE SURVEI' AND PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY 14920 VICKERY AVENUE SARATOGA Prepazed at the Request of Community Planning Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Sazatoga, CA 95070 • Site Visit by: Michael L. Bench Consulting Arborist December 19, 2001 Job # 12-O1-252 Plan Received: 12-13-01 Plan Due: 1-16-02 Mailed: 1-4-02 ~~~a~~ ~ JAN 0 9 2002 • CITY OF SARATOGA ''IMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT --. ~ r ~ t TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVAT~UN RECO1rIIbtENDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA Assignment At the request of the Community Development Department, Planning Division, City of Saratoga, this report reviews the proposal to demolish an existing home with a swimming pool and to construct a new home with a basement and to construct a new swimming pool in the corrtext of potential damage to or the removal of existing trees. This report further provides information about the condition of the trees on site, and makes recommendations by which damage to the retained trees can be restricted to prevent decline. Comments and suggestions contained in this report presume that the locations of trees in relation to proposed construction aze accurately presented on the plans provided. Summary This proposal exposes 17 trees to some level of risk by construction. No trees are to be removed by unplementation of this design. Procedures aze suggested to mitigate the damage that would be expected to the retained trees. A bond equal to 25% of the value of the retained trees is suggested in accordance with the levels of the expected risks. Observations There are 8 trees on this site and 9 trees located on adjacent properties that may be subjected to some level at risk of damage by proposed construction. The attached map shows the location of these trees and their approximate canopy dimensions. Trees #2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17 were not included on the map provided and have been added. Their locations are approximate. The 17 trees are classified as follows: Trees #1, 2, 4-7, 11, 12, 16, 17 - Trees #3, 8 - Tree #9 - Tree # 10 - Tree # 13 - Trees # 14, 15 - coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) valley oak (Quercus lobata) Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) California black oak (Quercus kelloggii~ Tasmanian blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) blue oak (Quercus douglasii) The health and structure of each specimen is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (Excellent - Extremely Poor) on the data sheets that follow this text. The combination of health and structure ratings for the 17 trees aze converted to individual descriptive ratings as follows: • • • PREPARID BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 nnnn~~ • TREE SURVEY AND PR£SERVAI tON RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY 2 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA Exceptional Fine Fair Marginal Poor S ecimens S ecimens S ecimens S mmens S ecimens 7, 11, 15, 16 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 13 2 9, 10, 12, 14, 17 Exceptional specimens must be retained at any cost and whatever procedures are needed to retain them in their current condition must be used. Fine specimens must be retained if possible but without major design revisions. Mitigation procedures recommended here are intended to limit damage within accepted horticultural standards in order to prevent decline. Fair specimens aze worth retaining but again without major design revisions. Mitigation must prevent further decline. Marginal specimens aze typically worth retaining but could be removed if necessazy to facilitate construction. Mitigations recommended here are intended to prevent significant decline. Trees #l, 2, 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16 are located on the adjacent properties. I recommend that these must be treated as Exceptional regazdless of their condition. In addition to these 17 trees, there aze 3 small multi-stem California buckeye trees (Aesculus californica) adjacent to the driveway. Although these aze not large enough to be protected by the city ordinance these trees are in exceptional condition and aze well worth retaining. Also, there are several lazge oak trees both on this site and on adjacent properties that aze in fine if not in exceptional condition. These trees aze not included at this time, because it does not appeaz that they would be affected by proposed construction. However, this does not imply that these trees aze not protected by the city ordinance. All trees that are large enough aze protected trees and must be treated as such. That means that no activity is allowed beneath the driplines of any of these trees without the.approvai of the city azborist. Tree # 2 has two concrete filled cavities. This procedure has been proven in recent yeazs to increase the hazazd potential of trees with cavities. The concrete observed here is " relatively fresh. This obviously has been done by someone who is ignorant of the fact that this procedure is no longer done and is unawaze of the long-term risk. Tree #2 is located on an adjacent property and is, thus, not the responsibility of Mr. and Mrs. Ellis. However, this tree poses a hazard to anyone who passes on this shazed driveway. Tree # 13 had been topped at about 3 feet above grade. The center of the tree is now a decaying stump. The existing tree consists completely of 80-foot tall watersprouts that are poorly attached to the decaying stump. I consider this tree hazardous to both the Ellis PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 nn~~.-.~ ~~ ~. TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVA"1 lON RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY - 3 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA residence and to the neighboring residence, which is located approximately 30-40 feet ~ - from Tree #13. In my opinion, Tree #13 must be removed and the stump must be ground, regardless of construction. A few other Tasmanian blue gum specimens aze seen to the east of Tree #13. All have been topped. All have very poor structure. I recommend that all of these be removed. However, there aze some fine oak trees (not included individually in this evaluation) near these eucalyptus trees that must not be damaged in the process. Risks of Proposed Construction There are no trees that are directly in conflict with proposed construction. However, several trees may be severely damaged or destroyed by construction procedures if no protection is provided. , The primary risks to existing trees aze as follows: The existing driveway is to be re-paved. If the existing asphalt were to be stripped from the driveway, all of the adjacent Trees #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 may suffer significant root losses, because a large percentage of the root systems of these trees in all likelihood exist directly under this existing pavement. Demolition of the existing driveway, the grading, the application of new base rock, and the re-compaction of these materials would be highly damaging to these trees. The least damaging alternative to the trees would be to apply the new driveway surface material over the existing surface. Although the existing surface has multiple cracks, it appeazs to be reasonably "smooth" without major potholes or heaving of the paving. 2. It appears that the retaining wall on the east side of the existing pool must be replaced. If it is intended to cut into the existing slope to create a larger outdoor living space, Trees #10, 11, and 12 may be severely damaged or lost. This is not clearly presented on the plans provided, but the widening of the existing pool area by cutting into the existing slope and by constructing a retaining wall appears to be the intent. The dark line designated by #13 on the .Site Plan prepazed by Ward Surveying appeazs to propose a new retaining wall adjacent to the existing fence. This would destroy Trees #10, 1 1, and 12. 3. If the retaining wall on the west side of Tree #14 were to be replaced, the root systems of Trees #14, 15, and 16 may be significantly if not severely damaged. However, it appears that this retaining wall may be retained. 4. Tree #17 exists approximately 8 feet from the existing garage. Demolition of the existing garage and/or proposed landscaping of the area on the south side of the trunk of Tree #17 (following demolition and construction) may damage the root system, PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 r. ~- TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA 4 5. The utilities to this site must be upgraded. With the exception of the proposed fire service utility trench, the locations of trenches for utilities are not shown on the plans provided. This must not be left up to contractors or to utility service providers. All utilities must be planned as a condition of approval and must be installed as planned. The proposed fire service utility trench would cut across the root zones of Trees #1, 2, 4, 5, b, and 7. If constructed as proposed, Trees #2, 4, and 7 would not be expected to survive. 6. The soil excavated for the basement, for the footings, and for the new pool must not be spread or piled under the canopies of trees. Fill soil over the root systems of trees has the effect of smothering the absorbing roots. All of the retained trees would likely be subjected to one or more of the following damaging events that are common to construction sites: 1. The stockpiling of materials or the storage of equipment over the root systems. 2. The dumping of construction materials, especially waste materials, (such as painting products, mortaz, concrete, etc.), beneath the canopies. • 3. The construction traffic, including foot traffic, across the root systems, and the pazking of vehicles or construction equipment under the canopies. 4. The trenching across root zones for landscape irrigation. 5. The grading of the surface soil resulting in the removal of quantities of absorbing root tips, which are located just under the soil surface. 6. Broken branches or bazk injuries as a result of construction equipment passing too close. 7. Landscaping, including the use of incompatible plant species, trenching across tree root zones for irrigation, excessive soil disturbance of tree root zones, grading to create contours, etc. Virtually any landscape feature inside a tree's root zone results in a percentage of root damage. If the percentage is significant, the affected trees will decline or die. All of these 7 potentially damaging events must be prevented. Recommendations The fallowing mitigation suggestions are intended to reduce the extent of construction damage to acceptable levels, so that retained trees can reasonably be assured of survival without decline. If any changes to the existing plans occur, the following recommendations may require alteration. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECObII~d~iDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY 5 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA 1. I recommend that the existing driveway be retained and that the new driveway surface be constructed over the top of the existing surface. 2. -The soil on the slope within the following distances from the trunks of Trees #10, 11, and 12 must be retained and left undisturbed: Trees # 10, 12 -12 feet from the trunks Tree #11 - 20 feet from the trunk 3. The retaining wail on the west side of Trees #10, l 1, and 12 must be relocated to assure the compliance with Recommendation # 2. 4. The soil on the east side of the retaining wall nearest Trees # 14, 15, and 16 must not be disturbed. 5. A utility plan must be required and reviewed by the city arborist as a condition of approval. Trenches for any utilities (gas, electricity, water, phone, TV cable, etc.) must be located outside the canopy driplines of retained trees. 6. I recommend that the fire service utility be tunneled at a depth of 5 feet below the existing grade and that the sender and receiver pits be located as shown on the attached plan. 7. The soil excavated for the basement, the footings, or the swimming pool must not be spread or piled, even temporarily, under the canopies of trees. 8. I recommend the removal of Tree #13 regardless of construction. 9. I suggest that construction period fencing be provided and located as noted on the attached map. Fencing must be chainlink, a minimum height of 5 feet, mounted on steel posts driven 18-inches (minimum) into the ground. The fence must be in place prior to the arrival of any other materials or equipment and must remain in place until all construction is completed and given final approval. The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. Fencing must be located exactly as shown on the attached map. 10. There must be no grading, trenching, or surface scraping inside the canopy driplines of retained trees (either before or after the construction period fencing is installed or removed), unless specifically indicated on the enclosed plan. Where this -may conflict with drainage or other requirements, the city azborist must be consulted. 11. Any old irrigation lines, sewer lines, drain lines, etc., under the canopies of the existing trees, if unused, must be cut off at grade and left in the ground. 12. Trenches for a drainage system must be located outside the protective fencing as noted on the attached map. For any tree where this cannot be achieved, the city arborist must be consulted prior to trenching. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTIIVG ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 f~ t TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOhRv(ENDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY 6 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA 13. Any pruning must be done by an ISA certified arborist and according to ISA, Western Chapter Standards, 1998. 14. Landscape pathways and other amenities constructed under the canopies of trees must be built completely on grade without excavation. 15. Landscape irrigation trenches (or any other excavations), under existing tree canopies must be no closer than 15 times the trunk diameter, if the trenching direction is across the root zone. However, radial trenches (ie., like the spokes of a wheel) may be done closer if the trenches reach no closer than 5 times the trunk diameter to the tree's trunk, and if the spokes are at least 10 feet apart at the perimeter. 16. Sprinkler irrigation must be designed not to strike the trunks of trees. Further, spray irrigation must not be designed to strike beneath the canopies of oak trees. 17. Lawn or other plants that require frequent watering must be limited to a maximum of 20% of the entire root zone and a minimum distance of 9 times the trunk diameter away from the trunks of oak trees. For Tree #17, the required distance is 8 feet. 18. Bender board or similar edging material must not be used beneath the canopies of existing trees, because its installation requires trenching of 4-6 inches, which may result in absorbing root damage. 19. I suggest that the species of plants used in the root zones of oak trees be compatible with the environmental and cultural requirements of the oak species indigenous to this area. A publication about plants compatible with California native oaks can be obtained from the California Oak Foundation, 1212 Broadway, Suite 810, Oakland 94612. - 20. Landscape materials (cobbles, decorative bark, stones, fencing, etc.) must not be installed directly in contact with the bark of trees because of the risk of serious disease infection. 21. Drain dissipators or downspouts must be relocated, if trees are in the path of discharge. The discharge must be directed a minimum of 15 feet to the side of the trunk of any tree. 22. Materials or equipment must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped under the canopies of trees, or buried on site. Any excess materials (including mortar, concrete, paint products, etc.) must be removed from site. Value Assessment The values of the trees are addressed according to ISA standards, Seventh Edition. PREPARID BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 nnnn~r- ~' _; TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOhII~NDATIONS AT THE ELLIS PROPERTY '~ 14920 VICKERY AVENUE, SARATOGA No trees are to be removed during construction. However, if any tree is destroyed or significantly damaged, replacements which equal the tree's value is recommended. The combined value of the trees is $59,919. I suggest a bond equal to 25% ($14,980)_of the total value of the trees that will be retained to assure their protection. Respectful ed ~~ Michael Bench, As ocia~e~ ~ (~ B D. Coate, Principal MLB/msl Enclosures: Glossary of Terms Tree Data Accumulation Charts Tree Protection Before, During and After Construction Protective Fencing Radial Trenching Beneath Tree Canopies Map ., ~~ PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTIIVG ARBORIST DECEMBER 19, 2001 nnnn.~.-. ._ N ~1 O~ N r-I e-1 0 ~-, Q (!1 V Qi 0 -1 v n~ 0 11 ~- lc~) ~ulaolaa ivnowaa E ~rnow3a aN3rlwoo3a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a u ----- ~ a3znua3d sa33N » ~ y B » ~ y ~ ~ y ~ s ~_ (S-L) a31dM SO33N n x n n a n u (s-t) 3Sd3S1O adllOO lOOa ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o m (S-L) 43a3nOO adllOO lOOa ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_________________y~ X x x x x x x a (5`t)AdO3O HNflal m _ -~~ q - (S-L) OOOM Od3O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ---___~-_-^-~ ~° N N (° Y N l7 ~ a (4-L) 3Sd3S10 NMOaJ 33x1 N y w w ~ ~ w (5-L) S1O3SN1 n n n n n u n (s-L) ulaolad oNlNnad ~ ~ $ tl k O3O33N S318dO ______ ' g ~ v 1H~JI3M-ON3 3nOW3a ___________ ~~_ U X c o `JNISIda NMOaO l.1 _~______-_'~' 'v ~ NOLLdaO1S3a NMOaO d ~ ~ g ~ o g `8 ~JNlNNIHl NMOaO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y °JNINd3l0 NMOaO n n n n n u u (6$) ENdLLda OadZdH -y~._-~~~~_~ ~ ~ ~ (OL Z)'JNLLda NOLLIONOO ~ tl tl ~ ~ p ~ ~ tl ~ ~ tl ~ ~ tl ~ N Y ~ _^~ ~ ~ c ° v (s-L) 3aruonrus N h tl N tl N tl N tl N tl tl _~--~_~W_~__~_., X X X X X X X (5-L) H1ld3H ~ ~ Od3adS c~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N g -~-----------~------ 1 ^ h m N h ~~ u l0 l7 1H~J13H ~ M Pv w ~ w C Y w ~ w ~ N Ri y tl 1334 Z® a313wma ---- ~ u $ u n °1 u u u e ~ H8O c o ~ c c c c c . c H84 N N N N W N N N X X X X X X X W31SAS-LLIflW "' ePa~s a~oQe ~Z/L~ ®H8O o m ~ o to ~ o ~ o a ~ o ro R o ~ o a W N c c c c c c e E W f/! ~ 1~ m s <~ ~ ~ ~ 4 q YN YN m Y a oc ~y o o ~ o 0 o ~ '~ a ~ m ~ g ~ ~ $ > ~ U Q - U O U ~ N W f N m A rl N M ~ o O `" 3 e p~ v~ m 6 rr N O ~ h h h ~ e r e pwp~ ~ $ .~ {i[-~ H `egf n C ": WW ~ ~ry ~~~~~ h e e i0 ~ ~ .D ODs s • 04~nN°~~ ~ n ~ ~ N t l 4 r-I .~ O ~-, d v .V+ N rn i~ "G b ~~ .~ rr i~r F D ~, -~ (cN AllaOlad ItlAOW3a C Mwo N ' ~ ~ ~ !St ~ ~ 3 m 3 e a3a ltlnaw3a aN3 ~ m > > > bS > .- > ~ ~ ___-- a3ZIlLLa33 S033N ~ N a a N a ~ ' N a S ~ N a g ' N a ~ r- a ~ N N a g z -- ~~ (5-L) a31VM S033N n n u n x u n llOO lOOa ) ( - ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~ L 3S1l3Si0 alf 5 r ^ ~ m --- (S-L) 03a3A00 atfllOOlOOa ~ ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ X X X X X X X 0 d (4L)AV030HNn21L m a _ ------- (5-L) OOOM OM30 ~ ~ n m ~ N ~ ~ Q -----»----.~ -- f7 N N f0 f7 ffi d (5-L) 3SV3SIO NMOaO 33x1 N N N N N N N ---_-- (5-L) S103SNI 11 x N N u n U cs-I) ulaolad oNlNnad m # 03033N S318V0 g i --° 8 g 8 ~ 8 $ c 1N~J13M-ON3 3AOW3a X X X X X X x a m V 'JNISIVa NMO?!O O ~ ---------- NOLLVaO1S3a NMOa~ -- ~ ~ g m ~ ~ d 'JNINNIHl NMOaO y N ~ y NN y ~JNINt/3l0 NMOaO ~ 11 11 u u x 11 u (6~) ~JNLLVa OaYZHH ~_ ~ ~_ o - - - ------~-» (OL-Z)'JNLL~fa NOLLIONOO ° m o a m ~° ~ m ~ N m °~ ~ ~ n m a ° m ~' v a a v a a a u ---------------- _ ~ U (S-L) 3an1~na1S N m m m N O m N m v m N m (S-L) H1lV3H av3ads _--____-__~___-----»»- p N ~ h po In N p lh ~ M Q ~ nn O) $Q ~ p l0 --- ~ p l0 l r m N Y N 1H`JI3H ~t N ~ N N N Y N N N O N ~ N ~ 1333 Z~ a313WV10 ~ n ~~" u ~ n ~ u n ~ n ~ u m -------- ~ H8O c ~ c_ 2 c ° m c N c c m -___-__»-_-__»__-_» e H~ N N N N N N N N m N N O ~ N N -- A p X X X X X X X W31SAS11lnW x x -------------- ap2JB anoQB ,Z/L-6 ®H90 o ~ ~ o N In ~ o N ~ o ~ ~ m o G O ° N m ° ~ c`~ . - C C C C C ~ C W H ;~ ~ OV ~ c Y F m M ~ ~ ~ ~ ar ~ 9 ~ $ ~ ~ ~~~ g m ~ o o ~ m ~ ~ E m ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ m ~ m (L U C7 U hm- ~ Q . O W O N [7 ~T F ~ 00 e p; ~n w W a .-1 • N p lA 7r.-;is ~ py hh .n ~ ~ r w ~~ ~~ o h h Y~! u .,, .. . ~~~~ . . i>rlutiN~n nn~~.-~~ - ---- - ._~.._.~: - - .._...__._n -- ~~ _ r- N N O i--~ OJ Q 6J N O~ t» "C d a ~~ .+ •'y L^ t-+1 Q o~ icL)uraoradivnowaa e ~vnow3a arr3wnoo3a N ~ ~ -----~_ m > m > ° M3ZI1LL2133 S033N N ~ N e Fb N N (S-L) 2~31HM S033N ° " u (S-L) 3SV3SI0 LIVllO~ lOOa ~ ro (S-L) 032i3A00 2iMlOO lOOa ~ ~ ~ x x _ x x d (S-L)AV03O NNnM1 _____ ------ - a (S-L) DOOM OV30 ~ O. (S-L) 3Stl3S10 NMOLIO 33ZLL __r__~ N N N N _ (S-L) S103SNI " o " " (S-L) ALIZ:IOIad `JNINn2rd # 03033N S318V0 __~__ Z 1H'JI3M-ON3 3nOW32~ ~ $ $ ~ -------~~~_~~ x x x X a JNISIFRi NMOL10 U _~__~~_ 5 NOLLF/aOlS31:1 NMOaO C -~--~»_-_~ -_- A 7 N ~ _ d `JNINNIHl NMOLfO ° ^ h A pp N N N `JNINbr3l~ NMO?!O " " u n (B-£) ~JNLLVa OaVZVH ---- ---_---- ^ ~ y - (Ol-Z) ~JNLLd2i NOLLIONOO N gg bi ~ a ~ ~ _~~_~____ 73 ~ c~ c~ c r°j (S-L) 32rn10n2LLS e N N e e --------~~-----~---- X X X X (S-t) H1lV3H ~ av3ads a ~ N ~ < A ~ ~ h 1Ji~J13H g N ~ N ~ N N ~ 1333 Z® a313WV10 "-""------- " r n ~ u ~ n n E "----- - c c c c _~~_~~_ H8O e o e e _ 0 ~- HEO N ~ N N N _~~ ~~ X X X X w3iscs-uinw x epe~8 enoga .7JLi ~ H9O ~ Ss e~ ~ e~ ~ ~ ~ e c c c ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ E ~ s o '~ A e g °C 3 8 ~ ~ > / '~F~~~ U O~~~~ '~ b 1° A ~ F ~ a ~ o 3 o p; F w m t r+ N pQ O ~ v Q 1A y h Y X X w e~so B ~ ~~~h ~ o$~ ~N1 ri !+~5+~ Yf h h V h ~ ~ W ~ iI ii a~N~~ _ ~ .~ BARRIE D. CL.. ~~E AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 ' GLOSSARY Co-dominant (stems, branches) equal in size and relative importance, usually associated with either the trunks or stems, or scaffold limbs (branches) in the crown. Crown -The portion of a tree above the trunk including the branches and foliage. Cultivar - A named plant selection from which identical or nearly identical plants can be produced, usually by vegetative propagation or cloning. Decurrent - A term used to describe a mature tree crown composed of branches lacking a central leader resulting in around-headed tree. Excurrent - A term used to describe a tree crown in which a strong central leader is present to the top of a tree with lateral branches that progressively decrease in length upward from the base. Girdling root - A root that partially or entirely encircles the trunk and/or large buttress roots, which could restrict growth and downward movement of photosynthates. • Included bark -Bark which is entrapped in narrow-angled attachments of two or more stems, branches, or a stem and branch(es). Such attachments are weakly attached and subject to splitting out. Kinked root - A taproot or a major root(s) which is sharply bent and can cause plant instability and reduction of movement of water, nutrients, and photosynthates. Root collar -The flared, lower portion of the base of a tree where the roots and stem merge. Also referred to as the "root crown". Leader -The main stem or trunk that forms the apex of the tree. Stem -The axis (trunk of a central leader tree) of a plant on which branches are attached. Temporary branches - A small branch on the trunk or between scaffold branches retained to shade, nourish, and protect the trunk of small young trees. These branches are kept small and gradually removed as the trunk develops. DeSnition of Woody Parts Trunk -The main stem of a tree between the ground and the lowest scaffold branch. SraSold branches - In decurrent trees, the branches that form the main structure of the crown. Limb - A major structural part. Branch - A smaller part, attached to a limb or scaffold branch. Branchlet - A small part, attached to a branch. Twig -Avery small part attached to a branchlet. Leaf- The main photosynthetic organ of most plants. „~~~~~, p ~ O ~ .N •U ~ C p ~ Cl o al ~ >. a~.a~. 5 0 Q •y ~ ~ a a~rL c ~ ~ -.. j C U O O O ~ y ~ ~ ~' N 3 o ~ ~ o U ._ a~ ~v • c ~' ~ O ••i •ri y~ U q c~ > m ~ Ga ~ ~ m ' v ~ •~ a ~ ~ v v m " ~, o ~ r a O ~ ^ ~i ~ .~ Q [r O Q !•' cv N duo ~ U V E H~ ~ y ~.c A O ~ ~~ C~ U ~ ~~~ N ~ V Q ~ N ~ '~Vv ~+ C a Q U Qz p Q /~i. y ° y~~ ,~~!~ ~ U -~ • - r--. ~~~- ~, ~, ~. ~ ~ ~g~~ -~~g~ N 0 ~~.s~ 2 i~ N C ~ U ~$' no ~co~a O ~ N O d) ~ M C N w, p 2r~'~ ~ ~ c $ o •a Lo ~~vw ~-- oo - r_-- t' ,~, ,4~ _.~ ` o ~ •rl L Q( LJ tb v c ~ u v 3 Col 7 ~ ~ w w O C v O -. O u ul o °G u ~ C~i ai > sv. a ~, ec .c ,o ~ ~ o r-+ +~ ~ 3 cO c N u cC Cl r-i - VI V v q v ~ c O ~ •~+ S cq u u 3 u v zr v cl -+ v v .-: •~+ u -+ .o p 3 ~ • • 6 G ai ro ~v cc +~ •~+ v ul . ~ u v : •,~ vl ~+ •c o ~+ •v. •v o u a. •r•1 ,•3 ~ N C1 4+ R1 ~ OC Ol: ~ •fl ~ ~ Cl •{'•~ 0:; 3•i wt 0: L y: ~ ~ o o ~ s o s. w a.i .~ u i v cn d C) G vl F •p L 7 u u v •~ o v n; •~ R C w+ •-~ o s.. u v •o Cl Cl O tG M Ri w u o c v .-, c, w vl •--• •~ u v 4 ~ • p O 3 •i >+ ~ l •-~ C C1 O O. o -+ u •a w a u ~n o a c v ul c c ~ w i ~ 6 0 ~ ~ O u [ a l 0 0 :~ .~ a .~ x, ~ 1 • .. / 1,f ~ ~rr ~ w' ~ ~/ . r ~ v ~ ~ ~ ,t • ~~ '~ .. , i ' ~`;~~r .~ ri~~~•~j~r~I v- f/ \ 1 I ~ ~ \~ ~'~ ~/ I I i o: v c u •~+ G u v •~ w, ~ T 3 ti O R- ~; J1 i f0 O t ~ j ~ 7 ~ Y ~:L O ~ ~ U U U ` ~ f0 G H -, v U ~. L O L ~ t6 ~ O ~ L ~ y y ~ O c ~ ~, v O p d U c0 ~ H '~ a-°o~ c o ~ ~ c d U ~ N v ~ ~ 3 ~_ Cl ~"~ ro M m b K m a __ = A~W a~ rr < _ ~ :n cn Z ~ ; W 7c~n ~~7 __ _ ~~~ ., ~z .-i ~~' N ~ i+ i\..li ~ 1 ~ ~ ' a r ° -3 ~~ ~ W -~ •1t ~ 1 ~t,~ . .' . `~ w ~ D ~~ w ~ ~ ~ a~ m 7 a ~, Q 7~ A~ O p f~D ~ fD ~ ~. ~ ~ n w (D ~ X p~ A d (D pl a~ a .°_• o 3 cu A cD 1 111 T ~ )i(l ~ _y ~i O ~ ~ ~, o w Q ~. w a II~~I I ~ f ~ t~ ~ ~. c~ ~. _ ... . ~~ ~, .~ y~ ~~ ~.`~ ~• `' ~ ~ s~ ~ ~ i '~ t 1 ~ ,~ ~ 1, 1, ,` . ~`~ ~ ~~. o~~ ~~ fn ? ~ 0 C y ~ V1 N_ ~ O ~ a ~ ~ C> x O n ~ ~ ca ~ fD (D ~ j' A fD O X A N d ~_ (D m ~' to O (D O N ti i ~ •~ ;,. 1. . I;,G, : I ~ , }'!.~ f Barrie D. Coate [ ` `~~ w i F.r Associates ~ _~--- ..._...~,--. ~~~'` I Radial Trenching (408) 353-1052 ~ --..- ,~..._.._--.-- DhP Li `\\ ~ ~ `' 235,35 Summit Road /~--- -' he --- `'' r I~ I The Do's and Don'ts of Irrigation - ~ 1 :~ ~~~ _~; , .Los Gatos, CA 9503.3 `-,,:.;;ter- _ _ •:~:~..~~-- _ j - ._. ~ F; 4, Trenching Beneath Tree Canopies _ _-~' ... - - - _ - _;~ S ¢'J°` I ORTICULTLRAL CONSULT s ~ „.;,~---" •~~ . -~,,,~;~._. ~'''.., ~'` '~~,~,_ ~ ~ , ~s`'~ 4 I Certified Consulting Arbo st, '.~^_ -- ~J ... - -=<:~;1 __ ~:{ ;~,,, tr I ; ~ %~'' ~~~~-~ ~- ,Shallow ~' :.. ~ ~ E~ I ~ e fit. ~ I ~ 1 ~ 5 v s•- 5 ~ '- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... ~.1~. s 9 f ~: 'I Y~.~jD~'%``, ~ I1I 1 4 ~ ~~w '~ f ~ ~ .r LC r-~- ~.-e: ^,~~ri/- r _Y~ , .;..~..-~°.:absorbin `„1~1{ },~„ a b~d~ti=';~~,.~, ..- r ~ ti ~~ ~3F ;~,r 1 Root Protection Zone ~ .-=~'~ :% __ t ~,I ~a.. ~3~~ ~ ~r~;t ' rs 1 ~ to . 1\b ~r, ~, , ~ r~ ,, ~.i ~ ,_ _r,.!'``- _ _:;~: ; O ,., ,rgot{ ti s' ,i~~~ .~~1-~ +~4 ~~; ~tl:} ~~~ t~ {_ ~ ~w ~ ~ 1 ri line, ~ .,~!` _.- _ ~'a .~: ~ ,._ ~, ~,~ J ,,~ ~ t: ~>, .: ~ it..:;31 /~: times the D p ..,., .,-~-; ~ ,y . 'y'',_w,,,,,,; - ~ k` ,', ~~ ' r$~~~-L.T" ~ 'ss'! r~' ~~. ~`.±f~ ~ p' "a V / :~` i''! "I~il. .~1t .'~ ~~w.y~, I;, ~ ;~..4.~. ~- x~f,~ ~ ,~ ~,. t a~.st`~ t .% ~~i,/.r ,*~ :r .~ ":i. r~:Ufk ~~ .!~~ ~'L ...~x, ,r . ;z.. . a~ - - ~k~>,a4~. Y .Diameter= ---, ~, '~~ ..~ - •- ' ,tc., ;. ~_~a~., w .. ,•;+°. -' ., - .,,~ ~~ ya ~,ipr~~!ti?A c .~.?i. tr~• ,. `" .:c3i ~,~.~. . .y ,~ :~~ t . ~>j w~„'~w•-s.".~... ~',... sS fi, ..~ ~, - t~,tsx ;°~r~i;~i~ .~ 1- `~: "f~ r,:~ ~1,. '~ y 1. t~ .S~ !M ~+~ .r ~: 1tKw8~. ~y i., r _,1 J, i~^lY , - ~ ~~~'~.J;~ ~~~r;!~'R. .l 1 ~ ~i r a _ ~ ~s." .f. Y~ ~ ~ . I i ~~ ' t. ~ ~ •4 t, t.,Ne 1, ~ ys.. ~ 1, ~~! ' 1 ,~., ~ r ~..,r F ~w /~; .;~ d ~7'! s ~ - :~ :a.. I r ,~, t ".~~ -'.H .+~CF...`~% :;I ."~~,+,. ~.n j ~ ry!'", iyn "~~-,tiir"~. ~~.1 kJ > ~r~~;:~~~r ~ >~ hii ~~:. ./' -,' ;~; 5~: imes,trun ..>~.•.,.~,. ~,~ :~-> i ~~ ,.,,,~~ h _ ~. ,~, k diameter ., k ,^~--~ :,<~_ ~ '~. . , .~ rti &. n ~ -~a - *• .:~ ~ .. ° ~x.tr~~ . ~ • C` r. ''"+~ } :3~ ..'~..~~' y~..,.4, (~ ,,del ~ ,a. •VLS ~ ~ '~ ~ .~. ~;1' { 7 L,!e~'i ta' r %1 , .r,t~F,s ,4 ~:~ ?~, i ~ •..e 'y. t-k+.g ,> ,.~ .~; '~k+,,:>=-~F ~. 1~~-v ~.'$•^ ~ ,;q, F j ._1 a ~t+;~ / ~~i: . ti. '.9,ry;. a {.~,~: .; S(. !s,,..~~i' "' .,Af' `~ ~'~,. >V~. u ) i 714t•~,;7< ~i.- f~ ` v;, ~ i~ r~',3'.: ; 1 S ` .: r +/~~F / C~ ~ } :''~'7~ . ,, f~,~yit,- ~y~~, s,.;.,ye '~~' ~C. ~7~ ~ I ' ,,,se~~.~ .~yz~;.'Y~ ~,: `~ v~. ~-i 3 .a ~~~ .F! /'/ i.': ~- ~l. ~~~.y'~~{a <. ~. '!r~~ .~rit. ~. >y. t f*:. SF ~`~'„~' C. i ~ ~- '/ . /V ,~ ~~5~, ,,.9~1,~ 1 ~ -:I ~A , A ~. f/Zx~~ r~ i t. 1. ,ti M:. ~' 1r' r. + ~: < V ~ .. - ~ ~ 4 L O s f... ,i ?tom d a ' •i ji "ti..~,y . 1 ay } tI i i' a, z . *~+-~„ti r? - _ + i ''F f,? llr Fn3' `~ F' ~ r _ r rrigatton' ateral~;lines, may be installed ~~ ~~, ~ ~ `~; ~,~` lateral I~ne 12~inch~e` ~~~ 1 12 mches.,dee ) in"hand du trenches in areas ~~~' ,! ~ ~ ,% . ; '~ r ~ ' >>"`<$,r ~, ";``t}y'' g - p g":. ~: ~--Okay 'J ~~*~ ~' ~ t, ~~>~ ~~ ~ : v ra I ~ontanin~.~shallow:'absorbin rootS.if ! .• !' '' :f 1r:;' ~f~} ~~r~;~~aa,',~~ 2~a~;5 he:trenches are ~at right angles to the trunk . - ~H~~ :~ 1 ~~~~` '-~ ' `'~~~'.~< ` ~ f ~s opposedto.cutting across the root mass area. ~- ~ ; ~ ~ , ; , ,~ ~I~ 1~1 BFI : ~ '' - ~~~ainlines`(18-inches deep) must be installed outside ~ }~, F , ~' >f the root protection zone, In` no case; may sprinklers wet ' ' ,a ~ ~ ~ ~ ;,,: ~ ~ `.. ! e area within-5 limes the trunk,diameter::of the trunk.l '' ,. I _ - ~ ~ r ~" ~ ' .. ~ '.' Isy Sr4X X'~ ; ~ ~yJ ~ ~ i i~Y'',ys~i. ~ P> s'~Sl''~' F r s ~ ~ ' 4 4 t .. Plan location of trenching to avoid all possible arts beneath tree canopies. This includes trenches for utilities, irrigation lines, cable TV and roof drains. Plan construction period fence locations which will prevent equipment travel or material storage .- beneathtree canopies. - . . -- - InstaU fences before any construction related equipmen is allowed on site. 'Ibis includes pickup . trucks. - . Inform subcontractors in writing that they must read this document. Require n~um of signed copies to demonstrate that they have read the document. - Prune any tree parts, which conflict with construction bedvveen AugusE and January. Except for pines which may be pruned between October-January. Only an ISA certified arborist, using. ISA pruning instructions maybe used for his work. If limbs are in conflict with the construction equipment before the certified arborist is an-site, carpenters may cut off offending parts of 6" diamcter or less, leaving an 18"long stub, which should be recut later by the arborist. - Under no circumstances may any party remove more than 30% of a trees foliage, or prune so that an unbalanced canopy is created. DURING • Avoid use of any wheeled equipment beneath tree canopies. Maintain fences at original location in vertical, undamaged condition until all contractors and subcontractors, including painters are gone. - Clear root collars of retained trees enough to leave 5-6 buttress roots bases visible at 12" from thetrunk: - ~ -- Irrigatetrees adjacentto construction activity during hot months (June-October).~Apply 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter (measured at 4 '/:') once par ?week period by soaker hose. Apply water at the dripline, or adjacent to construction not around the trunk. Apply mulch to make a 3" deep layer in all areas beneath tree canopies and inside fences. Any ~ . organic material which is non toxic may be used.. - - :~,'. ~ - AFTER Irrigate monthly with 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter with a soaker hose, placed just inside the dripline. Continue until 8" of rain has fallen. Avoid cutting irrigation trenches beneath tree canopies. Avoid rototilling beneath tree canopies since that will destroy the small surface roots which absorb water. :: - . :. Avoid installation of turf or other frequently irrigated plants beneath tree canopies. - nnnn-~~ i • • `~. 1 1~/~ . off, , 4 , r~ ,;~ K; . ,~\ $ ~ ~', ~, ~, r', '~~ 'a .`\ t :, ~ • `, ``~~~', ~ ~°a E ~ ~~ w ~A e y _~ Y ~ O G ~; ~ ^ T Z~ S '~ n iii=fr+• ~• dBE:E~1Ed 9EEap~B~ ,:~ . ~ I~ ~~ ~' ~; s ,~ i \ ', ,~F ~` ~ . e~, ' ,,1 i~ ,~ ~' pgs i n ~ I ~ ,g - q i i ~ ' ~ ~ ~~~ \ `` d~E~ 5>€ •' 0 eaaEi _ aace/ecc~`a:~~ LL y p ~ e ? ~ i~d71~ R A$A~R _~~_ D ~ E ~ - ~' ' ~ - - e R AA A9 uN~ ` ~ `__ _. ~~iitr C~ ~~ _E. po ',Yr„~~ 3. :~ ~ ~a r~ ~ C ~~ 1M9I'GO•E .0.~'~ {f ~, ~ p r ~ 3 ° ^Y33 ~R yT ;~° d $ ~ ~I~ _ _ y ~&: ~ ~ 3 - - ' _ 3 .. ... _ ~ ... .-- .- ._ _ __ _. - ~ 6~- ~ ~ ~ I R _.. -.~ .. _....._ .. rJi I _ < _ _ - wl ~sij3~ _ ~ E DON ANDItE ARCFIITECT 723 East LI~e wre., w.uo.v~, cw 9sm6 0 Liege M p7371 Rif-726.2021 ~. THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • nnnn~~ iZOZ-SZL-i£S LL£LI~ # asaaarI OLOS6 VJ `g~3~~S `aog'I ~aaI~IA OZbtii 9LOS6 ~~ `ai[~+n~sAA ..a~~, a~s-j ~~ ~zc III -~ S.in6'j ~ ~oaS :ao -1 Z~~.LIH~~ ~2IQ~i~ Is{~Q aauapisag t t o , p Z- : ~ • a u!~ a alZ a~ ^ ~- s s ~_ CC r .~~:~ , ~ ~ R o 5 8 ..: :~~y . i ~ _ o ,~ - _ ~ .n ~ ~ Z €~x ~ Z d ~ „~~~ ~~ ~~ a ~g"y~ ~ ~ •;~~~ V bd ~ ~~ge G ~ ~ ~ ~• ~ $a--¢ ~E~~5 oe..?~! S <7u347~<'sII4 Q4 < ~3{ - ;..y • ~~:~~. ~~'~. F 5 ~O u°i as SC~1 ~ys ~ ~60 ~~ ~ ~ ~ A ,1 vi 1° o pp 0~ef Q~ ~ ` ~ cGGep777 ~ +8i a ~ ` " ~ = N (~V ~° g ~ W z~s~bZ ~~ 3~4:~.8a ym E B.Q b A~-~ ~ 0 0 6j Vl ~ S =i o_ ~ZRO~~ S3 ~z6.~~ ~~ee ~ ~~ a~ il~.. ^ $ ~ ~ ~ y{~Yp wr ~ ~ ~~:~~ jj > _ 1'~'u•°' a.oo.rawa ~pp~ ~mY~ ~ 6 ~~ 8 gg ~~ii CK ^' ~ ~ .Ya a 3 d`~. ,°y ~ p ~ a ° ',,: ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~~~y ~ ~ ~ ! . ~ , ~ my~E 3 '9 r~~5~~ ~8~ ~°~~n$S~1la~ ~,.. ~ = vi ~ c > ~r <ge ~_ •=a ~ ~ ~ ~ ez ~FlS~ `~~- ~.~; , 3 < a'a ~Fe~ ~ `~~ 4~~~~~a~~~~s ja W~ ~ ~n S m '~' ~ CS i CSI € €~_ ~< ~Y° - a SEE ~s~ g~aQ d ,'I ~ ~', F~ >~~ ~<~ a~~g ~~ a a8~~j ~~ s~ ~ e s ~~ ~~; ~~ag 1 ~ ~ ~ •: ~~ ~a~ ~~~ ~~ ~e€ ~~~~o gala d~ab~aea; ~ ~~ ~ G: qR ~ ' _ ~:~ ~ h ffi~~uv~2tl;;,G6 Emu ~[.G ~~ ~ fR I + i .. €x~ ° r ~~ - ~&X E? a~. _~ ~ ~- _ ,+`` ~~~~~ ~` gi ~ ooe ° '3pG ~j m g~e ~ y ~~ Rg '`S~~t' ;~~~ ~ - 1 '~4'` ~ ~ .,.. ~~~'=J°°" 3~ a d~~ ~ ~~~ ~ Z ~ i 1e~ r 9 ,`~ ~ •. ~`~` ~ •- ~~ a ' @ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ @ `± , t',~~' ' ~, -\~~,~?,\~,~ ' ~`~ ~ qua ~q~ ~~ ~~ ~a$ ~ ~~~~ajgC ~~ ,~- f ~ ~ ~ ~~~ .e ~ / : p ~ ~, + + +"i• ~_~ < ~Y@@ ~ ~ Sg~• e`er ~~ !.y ~ Q ~ / SCd`. ~. / ''~ ~~ ,' /~ ; ~~ i -~._ s (/] ~,~wg~~ €~E ~ -.~, ''9:~~"ELTC~<36 • ~ - t ~ ®~ ~, ~~, ' • 1, i/ ~~ -f ygg ~$j °~- x;0~.i L ~ ` /j// t •~ '' ,l ~/ ~' "~ q !y€i -p F~E g 69~ °~ g~ ~~ a _: ~r0 ~b s'ye.lpr (fN. /' _ i~~~ r/,~ / '1 a S p~'o~ ~`~ •~' B~' 29 Ie E3 ~r c e ~ ~:~ 4 +.:N. A; . -'~~~,~ !. ,~' •,:' ~~' dir. #/ ~ ~ ~~~~~ E~ ~~~ ~; BE~~ gp ~B I~ ~ 3 ~ (~ tee. _ '~ 1 .%, i ~/ /': / 3 ~ 2- ~ ~i ~ ~~ $~ E@ = a ~ `~`, , - ice,.,;'' / ~ o ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ,' ~% ' ~ ~ 4y~~a ~p~ $=~ ~~ ~_~_ ~~ =~ ~ ~ g`e s e ~ ~~.' >' .~" - /i / ~ ~/ / .(~<: ~ 5 ~ ~~ ~'~ E& S 3~ i~ -EJ 2P iEE ~ i //~ ~ . x a~ R uu ,~'/ .' '' ~ ~ ~ ~,~H'/' Bf Re yyy~glg Cg Ix ids 2~~ s ~~ ~ ~' j{'~2 & ~ '~ ' ' "/ ~~ ;:l f'e ~a l•3~I ~~`~ ~Ie c f fo ee~ ~.f s F ~ ~~ ~ ~ Set'~~~y5F:7~z ! /~~' .(S ~ ' `g 3 F 38n~I=' ~p-'F 3 °~ , ° `'CS~~ =n~~$ ~!@YF:~m"s~ ~ - ,~~' $,`C ,: 8 ~ ~ ~! ss I ~~a° 9 f€ t 3 pg~3~~g~ 88 c`=~~~G$~e'~8 ~~ y '~ i~% / ~ .>' ~ 2 7 a~ ~~ ~ d~~~~~ ~'~ ~3 qig ~=dss~~i~~~:~:~~si~e~;s J'l < ' % ~ tp 3: ~ ~ _ .de~F ~$a ~d ~;,F~~29 ~f'€g 33 P~' ~wh~i:M J~i.c ~N~ Nd~'d~ v ~ r-` ~ ~ / ~~ -~ ~~~ 6 ~~ § ~ y La° ~71 ~K ~~ d ~EI ~Y ~~ =i _ j sa: ~~ _~.~',,-, •' i _ s E,a aI ~'~~ ®~ ~ ~ys# as a ~ ~gg'~~g~ ~~_~~ 1yJf ea _ ~ ~ ~ pya 9p ~ 6 td'-~ g3 ~~ 1C pp ~ 5$ dg~ .~ b - 4~ Py Etl $3 ~~ i~E ~s ~$ eyy~S~ad ~ ~ 88 ~'~ ~ u -~ ..,~ ~ 8 . - ~~ ~A :~ ~/ g~ ~~ ~~~ ~.a= ~~~ ~€~a ~~~~ • • ~r s ti a v~ ~.~ Z / ±`, ~ j~•a o. a.oe.~anas .tl ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~, i ~ 1~ ~ i ~ ~ o ~~ - ~• @ '< S ~~ ~~~~ 8~ ~5~5 ;~ ~-3 ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~- 6~ ~~~~ ~~. ~ W std 4 ~~ ~~ ~~o~ ~s .~a~ a;a ~~_ `, , e q ~~ ~ s ~ ~ •';l ~,E g ~~~ Y ~~~ a ~~~ ~ e ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~a~ l ~ ~~~~ ~ ~,... - ~ 1 `i ~ '~ i L.°'~ i ~~, ~i i ~ .~ i ' ~ i '+..r ~/ f ;t ;~.{ 1 -~i-~ ~~,; f t~ ; _- ~ ~ i Iii ~~+~; ~~ '~y~~! i. ~~ -' ~, ~ f.~ •~~ ~ ~~ ~ ` ~~/ ~. ~; ,; ~`, ~; ; ~, , r ~ ~ ~ ,,,~ ~; ,, ~; ,; ' i „~ ~ .,. ~, ~- ~~ ~~ t -s~ ~~ ,~ . ~, .,_~ OLOS6 VJ `sRo;slsg'aasZ S~aKa~ OZ6bi siR~ ~.~nBZ ~ ~oaS :.~o,~ aanapisag ~ 4~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '• q ~ ~~ ~ ~~ m ~ 8 A W ~ ~ a ~~ 8 g g~g~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ 6 u ¢8Y~~~~ 8 ~~F55ww ~ ~~~ ~ n ~~ ~~ ?~ ~ ~ p F~ ! ~+Y6~~ ~~~~~°SFaa ~~> ~~ ~ ~~~~3~~a~~ ~ ~a ~~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ • ~~~~g ~~ ~~ ~9 2 b~~g~ ~" =B ~ ~ ~~ d~ ~~ ~~ ~~e .s€e~ a ~a~~ . t ~ a ~ ~~ ~ ~~ W ~~ §~ ~~ E ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~, ~ ~~ ~ ~, w ~~ .~ ~ r/ ~ ,fit, ~;~ y~ ~~, - ; ,w _~ ~ ~,' i i /' ~ /ice j ~~'~/~i! ~ // / / / +d'ii~/ ~ W • / ' l~ ~ ~ /// ~ /// ~1a i / W ~7" r--°~" i / ,• yi~~ ~ t •o;, „~ / . \ ~y ~ i i ~ ~~I ~ ~~ %~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~,• ~ , ;, ~; ~_ ~ ~ ,~, '1 ,1 { ,, ' !~ - ;~, , ~ ~~ ,~ ~ ~. . i ~~ ~~ i 1 ~ ~~', 1t '. ~., ~ ~ ""' ~ i P ~ 1 's' ~~ ~ . , ~, °; ~ ', ~ . , ~ ' { s ~ :. ~, `•, ', i ~• ~ ~ ', '~ ~ ~ ~~ i- / ~ ~ ~ ~ s r ~ o s~~ p ~ ~' ~ ~ y i i ~ ,: ~o TZOZ-BZL-I£S iL£LI~ # asaaatZ 9LOS6 d~ `alMnos;eM ..a~~, ~T8'I isg~ £ZL .I.~~.I.IH~2I~ ~iQ.[~t~ I~iOQ /; ~/ ~+ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ / / ~P // // ~# ~~~ ~~l~ $g~ • ~8~~ ~~ ~f 60 K ~r ~ ~' ..$ z ~~ ~~ ~~ m~~~ ~ ~ d ~a~~~ ~"fir ~~~ ~~ ~~~ e ~ ~~~9~~ $~yy~~ 'Z ~~ ~ e 6 ~~~~ ® ~~$ e ~~~ >C ~ ~~~a~ ~` g 8 ~ ~Qe ~ ~s z~,~ 'F~ ~ ~~ gg~~g~~~ ~~~e F flF cif e~ z~'~e ~ ~ r 9LQS6 ~~ `~IAIIOSj6~ ~dAd ~~ ~~ ~L Z~~.LIH~~ ~2IQI~i~ 1~flQ OLOS6 V~ `~3~~5 `a~'I ~a'~!A OZ6ti~ ~[I~ wnuZ a8 }~oaS :.~03 aauapisag .o ~~ ~~ °~~ s~~ egg= x s ~4s ~~€ ~~g ~ ~ g g $; ~aE ~ ~ 6~~ gE` Z Q ~~~ a ~~~ ~~ $~~ _ ~ 5~. ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ a ~~~ ~gF ~ ~~~ ` ~~ ~~ 5?~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~a~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ s~~ R~~~' s~ ~ ~g S~K~ ~V_. ~~ ' 3 6 ~'p0 ~E ~.~E F7reQ~.t~~6woCt3i ~~ ~ r ~. ~: - ~ff@ ~~ ~~ 5 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ a~ ~ ~•- ~ Qg . ~d ~ a~ ~~ i, y~ ~. ~ ~i , aa a 804 8 ,~ ~ ,` `;~ `~ ~ ° ~~~ ~ 8R ~°-~ $~gff~ ~ ~ ~~1 ~~ ~~ ~ - as a .; ~ a ~ ~ ~~ ~ _ ~a o ' L~ U ~ ` 8 4 ~ 5 3 a CSe yay ~" ~~ ~ ' +'~~~ ~~~ '~. `~' `,, ~~,' ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~~~ ~~ lea ~~ 9s~= ~~~~ ~~ ` <L 2 ~ .~§ ~ ~ ,' i~ ~ ~ fly ~~ `i ~` ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ' y~ / i ~ S ~ `+ ` ? b ~ `~ ~ ki ~ ~ ~ , it s s ~~g ~~ ~ a ~s -~,,.. ,i •~ e ~ ~ ~ ' / ~ ~ 2u ~ ~ ~~ • r i i ~ I !SlgS tb^^ ~ L ~ 8 5 RggS /. ~ / ~ s~ Za 9 r'. ~~ / ~ ~'' .1,r' ~ ,, pw r H/ ~ ~~ #~./~ yam/ ~,/y} 1 "i ~ j/' .e ~ ~i ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ , ' ~ ~,~• _ pyr~_gg""' ~ s'~ .gam ti(~ ~~~§ +~~ i ~ '~ • ~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~: ~~i ~ ~- i /~ r ~~~ / 8 i / ~ " ~ ~~~ ~~` ~~ ~:~- ~~ a ~~~a ~ ~~~~~ r • • ., . . ~~ ~; ~ rl ~ . g ., I ~f ~til ~ k~{ ~~~ ~~ ~j~: ~$a: ~~~ ~ x.. , . ~' ~ ~ ~~ g. ~~ ~: d ~ ~.~~ { ~ Q°o .~ ~}~ ~~ i~ ' I ~~~a ~ =~ 1 t~~ ~~ ~ i ..~. :- ,.:..... C' ~~ i ~ ~ ~~:~ t ~ . ~, rc ~ ~ ~~ / ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ I i ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ / / ® ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ /f ~~ l ~ / ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ / / ®/ /.~ ~ / ~ / ~ ~ • • • iZOZ-8ZL'i£8 iL£Li~ # asoaal~7 9LOS6 d~ `a~~teoos~e,N'•a~~ a~e7;sad £Z4 s~~s~ox~ ~xax~ uoQ OLOS6 Va `spa;sass saasZ ~~lalA OZ6tii ~~ nang-~ ~t boas :aa,~ aauapisag z a w a 0 0 J ~, J W z ~' ~ ~ S~~N~~~ -Nw ~ fi N s ~~C~~NS~~ ~ 4 w .~ 0 _~ 4 i Z~} • ~ IZOZ~ZL-I£8 IL£LI~ # asuaa~~ OLOS6 V~ `e~oae.~Bs'aue7 ~CaaxalA OZ6bI 9LAS6 ~~ `a~enos;eM "awd a~eZ;set fZL SiII~ E.Illgrj ~ ~O~s :.IO -1 .tiO~.LIH~~ ~2IQI~I~' I~IOQ aauapisag z d a a a 0 :o a w a ~~ ~ ~ x ~ s ~ ~-s~ ~~ ~s ~~ N ~ u S N °~'~V ~, • • • TZOZ-BZL-T£S TL£LI~ # asuaa!Z OLOS6 dJ `g$~T~gS ~aueZ ~a~l~!A OZ6hT 9LOS6 V~ `a~naos;eM ~•an~ ~Ig'I;set £ZL SIIi -~ S.IRY.rj 2~ ~O~S '.IO -1 .L~~.LIFI~~ ~2IQ1~I~ I~IOQ aauapisag a -_° 2 Y YO ^ l~ _- ~ r^ Y ri4, < Y u ~ 0 TZOZ-SZL-i£8 TL£Li~ # ~~a~!'I OLOS6 V~ `~ai~BS `annZ ,C.~a~~)A OZ66T 9cos6 v~ `~m,-no~gnn `~~~ a~~ s~~ £zL siR~ s.~nBZ ~ boas :ao3 ,L~~.LIH~2I~ ~2IQ1~I~ I~IOQ ~ aauapisag N Z L V U d U dl 3 ~ 6 eeZZ~ e tae ~....:: >~,(~p.1E~ _ ~ z _ _ ~ o ~ __< .-- ~ Y bI O BF ~ C CO ~8 . ~ ^ s ge9 .. ~~ ~F, Z_ ~ ~ ~ p ~ i __ .. 3 w 5 ~z 0 a- w z 0 F Q 9 W :a ~w . 'F ,~ • • • ~. i a 5 izoz-szc-i£s u£ct~ # as~a~~~ OGOSb ~'a'sflo~eaeS ~ausZ ,~aa~a~A OZ6bi 9LOS6 b~ `a~~~nuos~eM °•an~ a~6'I;scs~ £ZL s!~I~..:g.~D~Z $ }~Oas Li0 -~ :L~~,LII3~~' ~QI~I~' I~IOQ ~ aauapisa~ J' • ~ • r a a a w O a T ; -" `~ l~ ;~ ~, ~~ ~ f _, °i '! ~~ o '~ S ~, ~ :. r ~_ I~ ~_ ,~ ~i ^~~ ±~ ILA ~~ ~ ~' ;~ ~ it i ~` ~ . .~ ~ ~~ ~;' ~. -- \ ~. \~ _!- ,I ~ I ~ ' i ~~ ~ i ~{ ~~ ~~ ~~ .. rte- ;. ~~ I~~;;%~ ~~ n / I~ '~ ~_ _~ ~ _ o-, z~ IZOZ-SZL-T£S IL£LI~ # asuaa~Z 9LOS6 Y~ `amnaos;e,~ '•an~ axsZ ;s8~ £ZL Z~~ZIH~2I~' ~2IQl~I~' 1~IOQ OLOS6 ti'a's9o;wag'aa~ ,CiaxalA OZ6bT siR~ g.~n~Z ag boas :ao3 aauapisag • ~ ~ TZOZ-BZL-T£S TL£LI~ q asuao!'I OLOS6 d~ `g~T~gS °aue7 ~Cia~a~A OZ6bi 9LOS6 ~~ `amnuos~eb `•antl ~Ig'I lsg~ £ZL Si[i'1 L'.IIIS'j 28 ~p~s ;.IO -J Z~~Z~~~ ~2IQl~ i~IOQ aauap~sag t N -' c /~1~ a=' ~ i ~ u~ 0 \ I ~ ~ ~- • r 0 V --- -_' -----~----- -_ __ c __ ,~_-~.~ -- -- - - i f--r- i ~ ~ / ~ / / / ~ ~. e m ~ ~: ' j / I / p ~ ~----F -~ • ~ ~ O a ~ \ I `~ ~ z ' ~` \ \ o ~~ P ~( --- i -- ~ i . 8; -- ~I ~ _ ,. ~. , _ _ ~ , ~ ___ _ ;; - ,I f , _~_ _, . , ~~ ~ ___. __ ~ --- ~; .;, . ~ _ , ~' ~~~~ f , ;, i ~I~ I ~ ~I% U LO C"' U fs7 ~. A _d 1+~ z 0 F W d z 0 F U W • • • ~~\ ITEM 2 • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. #02-021-Resolution Amending the Zoning Ordinance to Permit Small Wind Energy Systems Location: All Residential Zones Applicant/Owner: Saratoga Planning commission Staff Planner: Ann Welsh, Assistant Planner, AICP ~,~ Date: February 27, 2002 APN: N/A Discussion Assembly Bill 1207 was enacted on October 5, 2001 in response to the energy shortage. The Bill is intended to ensure that municipalities enact zoning measures which pro~~ide for small wind energy systems (windmills) for on-site home, farm or small commercial use. The Legislature and State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission are promoting this technology to help achieve the goal of increased in-state electricity generation, reduce demand on the state electric grid, increased consumer energy independence and nonpolluting electricity generation. In June 2001, the Energy Commission adopted a Renewable Investment Plan that allows fora 50% buy down incentive for purchasers of "emerging renewable technologies", including small wind energy systems. The intent of the legislature is to ensure that local ordinances regulating small wind energy systems have provisions relating to pazcel size, tower height, noise, public notice and setback requirements that do not unreasonably restrict the ability of homeowners, farms and small businesses to install small wind energy systems. The state policy is to encourage the use of these systems and limit obstacles to their use. Maximum Ordinance Requirements The ordinance may impose conditions on the installation of small wind energy systems that include but aze not limited to notice, tower height, setback, view protection, aesthetics, aviation, and design safety requirements. However, ordinance shall not be more restrictive than the following: a. Notice to property owners -within 300 feet of the property. b. Tower heights of not more than 65 feet shall be allowed on parcels between 1 and 5 acres. .c. Tower heights of not more than 80 feet shall be allowed on parcels of 5 acres or more. d. Setbacks shall be no farther from the property line than the height of the tower. ooooos r' e. Decibel levels for the system shall not exceed 60 decibels (dBa). f. The system's turbine must be approved by the California Energy Commission as qualifying under the Emerging Renewables Fund. g. The application shall include standard drawings and an engineering analysis of the system's tower showing compliance with the Uniform Building Code. The application shall demonstrate that the system is designed to meet the most stringent wind requirements (UBC wind exposure D) the requirements of the worst seismic class (Seismic 4) and the weakest soil class, with soil strength of not more than 1,000 lbs per square foot. h. The system shall comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Administration requirements regarding installation close to airports. i. The application shall include a line drawing of the electrical system in sufficient detail to ensure compliance with the National Electrical Code. j. The ordinance may require the applicant to provide information demonstrating that the system will be used prunarily to reduce on-site consumption of electricity. Conflicts with Easements and other Plans Small Wind Energy systems shall not be allowed where prohibited by the following: 1. A local coastal program 2. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency 3. San Francisco Bay Plan 4. Airport Land Use Commission - 5. Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act 6. Scenic Highway corridor 7. Conservation Easement 8.Open Space Easement 9. Agricultural Conservation Easement 10. Williamson Act -terms of contract 11. Listing of the site in the National Register of Historic Places Repeal Date The section becomes inoperative. on July 1, 2005 and as of January 1, 2006 is repealed unless the date is extended through legislation. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends adoption of this ordinance in order to comply with the state mandate that municipalities do not unduly restrict installation of small wind energy conversion systems. If the City does not adopt an ordinance addressing this issue by the July 1, 2002 deadline any applicant who complies with the minimum guidelines established by the bill shall be granted the use by right. Thus, it is in the cities interest to develop their own regulations for this use in order to control the locations in which these structures can be constructed. • ~~~0~2 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING CHAPTER 15 OF THE SARATOGA CITY CODE RELATING TO SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Article 15-52 is hereby added to the Saratoga City Code to read as follows: "ARTICLE 15-52 SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS • 15 -52.010 Purpose In response to the state's electricity supply shortage, the State of California has adopted California Government Code Section 65892.13 to encourage local governmental agencies to adopt zoning standards which enable construction of small wind energy conversion systems for on-site home, farm and small commercial use. The purpose of this Ordinance is to adopt such zoning standards. 15-52.020 Definitions (a) "Small Wind Energy System" means a wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine, a tower and associated control or conversion electronics, which has a rated capacity that does not exceed the allowable rated -capacity under-the Emerging Renewables Fund of the Renewables Investment Plan administered by the California Energy Commission and which will be used primarily to reduce on-site consumption of utility power. (b) "Tower Height" means the height above grade of the fixed portion of the tower, excluding the wind turbine. 15-52.030 Requirement for Conditional Use Permit A Small Wind Energy System shall require Conditional Use Permit approval in compliance with Article 15-55 (Conditional Use Permits), and a Building Permit. • 15-52.040 Application Requirements A Conditional Use Permit application for a Small Wind Energy System 1 000003 shall include all information and materials required by Section 15-55.040, and the following. (a) Standard drawings and an engineering analysis of the system's tower, showing compliance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and certification by aCalifornia-licensed professional mechanical, structural, or civil engineer. A "wet stamp" shall not be required on the drawings and analysis if the application demonstrates that the system is designed to meet the most stringent wind requirements (UBC wind exposure D), the requirements for the worst seismic class (UBC Seismic 4), and the weakest soil class, with a soil strength of not more than 1,000 pounds per square foot. (b) Aline drawing of the electrical components of the system in sufficient detail to allow for a determination that the manner of installation conforms to the National Electric Code. (c) Information demonstrating that the system will be used primarily to reduce on-site consumption of electricity. (d) Evidence that the provider of electric utility service to the site has been informed of the applicant's intent to install an interconnected customer- owned electricity generator, unless the applicant intends, and so states in the application, that system will not be connected to the electricity grid. (e) Evidence that the proposed height of the windmill tower does not exceed the height recommended by the manufacturer or distributor of the system. 15-52.050 Location of Small Wind Energy Systems A Small Wind Energy System may be located in a Hillside Residential zoning district or an Agricultural District and only outside an "urbanized area" as defined in California Government Code Section 21080.7(b)(2) to mean a central city and surrounding closely settled territory, as defined by the United States Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census in the Federal Register, Volume 39, Number 85, for Wednesday, May 1, 1974, at pages 15202 and 15203, and as periodically updated: A windmill shall not be located on a parcel that is: (a) Within a scenic corridor identified by the Open Space Element of the City General Plan or a scenic highway comdor designated pursuant to Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 260) of Chapter 2 of Division 1 of the 2 . 000004 Streets and Highways Code; (b) Within a Special Studies Zone established in compliance with the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code Section 2621 and following); (c) Subject to a conservation easement established in compliance with Civil Code Section 815 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; (d) Subject to an open space easement established in compliance with Government Code Section 51070 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; (e) Subject to an agricultural conservation easement established in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 10200 and following, that does not specifically authorize wind energy conversion systems; (f) ~ Subject to a Williamson Act contract easement established in compliance with Government Code Section 51200 and following, that does not specifically authorize -wind energy conversion systems; or (g) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or the California Register of Historic Resources, in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, or contains a structure that is so listed. 15-52.060 Noticed Public Hearing The Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the application for a Conditional Use Permit for a Small Wind Energy System in accordance with Section 15-55.060, except that the notice for the public hearing need only be provided to property owners within 300 feet of the property on which the Small Wind Energy System is to be located; and provided, further, that the Community Development Director may choose to also provide additional notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in a newspaper of general - circulation within the City of Saratoga, if the Director determines that this notice is necessary due to circumstances specific to the proposed installation. 15-52.070 Minimum Parcel Size A Small Wind Energy System shall only be located on a parcel that, at minimum, is one acre in size. 3 ooooos • 15-52.080 Standards A Small Wind Energy System shall comply with the following standards: (a) Setback requirements. A windmill shall not be located closer to a property line than the height of the tower; provided that it also complies with any applicable fire setback requirements.pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 4290 (30 feet for structures and related mechanical equipment at the effective date of this Ordinance). (b) Height limit. A Small Wind Energy System tower shall not exceed a maximum height of 65 feet on a parcel less than five acres, or a maximum height of 80 feet on a parcel of five acres or more; provided that, in all cases, the system shall comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements, including Subpart B (commencing with Section 77.11) of Part 77 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations regarding installations close to airports, and the State Aeronautics Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 21001) of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code). (c) Turbine. The turbine proposed for the system shall have been approved by the California Energy Commission (CEC) as qualifying under the Emerging Renewables Fund of the CEC's Renewables Investment Plan, or certified by a national program recognized and approved by the CEC. (d) Noise. Except during short-term events including utility outages and severe wind storms, a Sinall Wind Energy System shall be designed, installed, and operated so that noise generated by the system shall not exceed the 60 decibels (dBA), as measured at the closest neighboring inhabited dwelling, or the maximum noise levels established by Sections 7-30.040 and 7-30.050 for the applicable zoning district, whichever is the strictest requirement. 15-52.090 Abandonment of Use A Small Wind Energy System which is not used for twelve successive months shall be deemed abandoned and shall be dismantled and removed from the property at the expense of the property owner." SECTION 2. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA" -Public Resources Code Section 21000 and following) and the regulations promulgated pursuant to CEQA ("the State CEQA Guidelines"), the City Council hereby 4 000006 ~: - ... - -- approves the Negative Declaration prepared for the adoption of this Ordinance and finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and thereafter passed and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the Day of , 2002, by the following vote: . AYES; NOS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk • 5 oQO4o'7 THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • 000008 • CITY OF SARATOGA INITIAL STUDY 1. Project Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendment -Wind Energy Conversion Systems 2. Lead Agency Name 8~ Address: City of Saratoga, Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 3. Contact Person 8~ Phone # Ann Welsh, AICP, 408.868.1222 4. Project Location Citywide 5. Project Sponsor's Name 8 Address: Saratoga Planning Commission 6. General Plan Designation: NA . 7. Zoning: HR, A Districts 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The zoning amendment is mandated by State Assembly Bill No. 1207 which requires that cities make provisions to permit wind energy conversion systems within state mandated guidelines. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) NA 10. Other.agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Building Department ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance • nnnnn4 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 sign cant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made 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 proposal 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 Ann Welsh, AICP Assistant Planner Printed Name Community Development Department For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" question is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on aproject-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operations impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, and then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If-there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses", may be cross- referenced.) 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative decaration. Section 15063(c) (3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: , a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, -and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potenti~ impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previous prepared or outside document should. where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. nnnn~r n - - Less Than SignKicant W/th Potentially M/tigatlon Less Than No Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Slgnlficanr Incorporated Significant Impact Impact Impact !. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? _ x (source #) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a scenic highway? (source X #14) a) 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 X in the area? Discussion of Aesthetics Impacts: For some development there may be an improvement in the4 aesthetic value of the construction. For the most part there will be no impact what so ever I1. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whetherimpacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies my refer to the Califomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 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 X use? (source #2) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (source #2) X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment " - which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (source #2) X Discussion of Agriculture Resources Impacts: No discussion is required. III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the San Luis Obispo CouniyAir Pollution Control District maybe relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: - a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (source #15} b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (source #15) 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)? x x X A OQ0011 - Less Than S/gn/ffcant Wlth Potentially M/tigat/on Less Than No S/gn/ficant Incorporated Significant Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Impact Impact Impact d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant x concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? x Discussion of Air Gluality Impacts: No discussion is required IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly 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 Dept. of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (source #16) 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 Dept. of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (source X #16) 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 X 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 riative wildlife ~' nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree x 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? (source Discussion of Biological Resources Impacts: No discussion is required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in §15064.5? x 5 l~n~~` ----- - .- r. • Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Less Than S1gnUicant With Potentially Mitlgatlon Less Than No Slgniflcant Incorporated Signi/icant Impact Impact Impact c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion of Cultural Resources Impacts: No discussion is required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: 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 Div. of Mines and Geology Pub. 42. (source #4) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (source #4) • iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (source #4) iv) Landslides? (source #4) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 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? (source #4) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? (source #4) 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? (source #) Discussion of Geology and Soils Impacts: No discussion is required. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: 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 X . x x X X X X x x x x Less Than Slgnlllcant Wlth • Potentially Mitigation Less Than No Issues S/gnlficant Incorporated Significant (and Supporting Information Services): Impact Impact Impact hazardous materials into the environment? - x c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed x school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Gov. Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (source #) x 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? (source #) . x f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (source #8, 11) x g) 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? (source #5) x Discussion of Hazards and Hazardous Materials: No discussion is required. VIII.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: 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)?~ X 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? x 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? x • Less Than Signlllcant Wfth Potentially Mitigation Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Signtitcant Incorporated Impact Less Than No Significant Impact Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water? 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? (source #6) h) Place within a 100-year floor 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? (source #4) j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (source #4) Discussion of Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts: No discussion is required. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would [he project: 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? (source #1, 2) x c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Discussion of Land Use and Planning Impacts: It would alter the way parts of the Residential Design Handbook policies and techniques are imposed. No known impacts are expected. X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 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? X •, b) Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (source #2) X Discussion of Energy and Mineral Resources Impacts: a) There are no known mineral resources within the City limits. XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: x x x x a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local x Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Less Than Signlficant Wlth Potentially Mltigatlon Less Than No Signlficant Incorporated Signlficant Impact Impact Impact general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (source #13) b) Exposure of persons to or generation.of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 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 workirig in the project area to excessive noise levels? (source #13) Discussion of Noise Impacts: No discussion is required. XI1. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: 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)? (source #2, 3) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? x X X X X X X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement _ housing elsewhere? X Discussion of Population and Housing Impacts: It would alter rear yard setbacks, but would not impact the development of housing resources. XIII.PUBLIC SERVICES: a) Would the proposal result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemmental 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 pertormance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? X Police Protection? X Schools? x • • 0 -~ Less Than Significant With Potenfla/!y Mitigation Less Than No Issues and Su ortin Information Services : Significant Incorporated Significant ( PP 9 ) Impact Impact Im acr p Parks x Other public facilities? ~' Discussion of Public Services Impacts: No discussion is required. XIV. RECREATION: 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? (source #12) X b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical X effect on the environment? Discussion of Recreation Impacts: No discussion is required. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? X b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (source #7) x c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? - x d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? x e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (source #5) - f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (source #1) x~. , g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (source #1) X Discussion of TransportatioNCirculation Impacts: No discussion is required.. ~ XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Duality Control Board? X s Issues (and Supporting Information Services): Less Than Significant With Potentially Mitigation Less Than No Significant Incorporated Significant Impact Impact Impact 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? x 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 sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (source #9) g) Comply with federal, state, and local. statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Discussion of Utilities and Service Systems Impacts: No discussion is required. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 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, 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? 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? X x X X • X x X „ ~~~,~,~ - -- - ti '~ ITEM 3 REPORT TO TFIE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: BSA-O1-002; V-O1-012, DR-O1-021; Kittridge Drive ApplicanbOwner: METROPOLIS/HLTSTED Staff Planner: Christy Oosterhous, Associate Planner Date: February 27, 2002 APN: 517-14-080 Department Head: • r~ .~ Kittredge Drive 000001 STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: Hillside Residential GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Hillside Residential Conservation-Single Family MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 8.4 acres (gross), 5.11 acres (net) AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 0% at building site, 74% average site slope GRADING REQUIRED: Total cut and fill proposed is 1,728 cubic yards. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project which includes construction of a new single-faznily residence is exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15061(3) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. The project is exempt from CEQA because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. -Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA pursuant to section 15061(3). MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The proposed materials and colors include cherry stain cedar shingle siding, stone veneer, and white trim. Retaining wall material will be shotcrete with a rock formation finish. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conditionally approve the following requested entitlements: Building Site Approval (BSA-O1-002), Design Review including Site Development Plan (DR-O1-021), and Variance (V-O1-012). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution BSA-O1-002; DR-O1-021, & V-O1-012. 2. Arborist Report, date stamped and received by the Community Development Department on July 11, 2001. 3. Public Comment Letter in Opposition of the Proposed Project, dated January 3, 2002. 4. Reduced plans, date stamped and received by the Community Development Department on December 18, 2001, Exhibit "A". s • • nnnn~n~ q.... - -- File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; ~x DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road --- Lot Coverage: Residence + Garage Driveway Walkway/Steps TOTAL (Impervious Surface) Floor Area: First Floor Second Floor Garage ~~ TOTAL Setbacks: Height: Front Rear Left Side Right Side Residence • Proposal Code Requirements Maximum Allowable 10% 25% 2,683 sq. ft. 5,850 sq. ft. 717 sq. ft. 9,250 sq. ft. 9,250 sq. ft. or 10% 15,000 sq. ft. or 25% 2,242 sq. ft. 2,127 sq. ft. 441 sq. ft. 4,810 sq. ft. 120ft. 240ft. 280ft. 75ft. Maximum Allowable 6,900 sq. ft. Minimum Requirement 120 ft. 150 ft. 56 ft. 56 ft. Maximum Allowable 26 ft. 26 ft. c:~xu5«a5taffn~~ s~.a« ~~~~~~ File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; ~ DR-O1-021: KittrldgeRoad PROJECT DISCUSSION The proposed project is the construction of a two-story craftsman style, single-family residence on a vacant lot consisting of 8.40 acres (gross) and 5.11 acres (net). The floor area of the proposed residence and attached two-car garage is .4,810 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed residence is 26 feet. The site is zoned Hillside Residential and has received Geotechnical Clearance. The property contains approximately three acres of private access easements. The private access road dead-ends at the adjacent property owner's residence (Martin-Rose Project). A fire truck turnaround structure is proposed. The turnaround will be constructed as a deck structure which will be elevated up to approximately 23 feet above the sloping grade below the private access road. The average slope of the property is very steep with the exception of the proposed building pad. The proposed building site is the only level pad on the site. Story poles were constructed to illustrate the visual impact of the house and retaining walls. The story poles indicate the proposed retaining walls and two-story residence will not be imposing as viewed from nearby access roads and residences in the area. Furthermore, the story poles illustrate the proposed residence will be tucked into the hillside minimizing the visual impact of the proposed residence. The proposed project includes retaining walls that vary in height. Retaining walls are necessary for the driveway and residence. Sheet number three of Exhibit "A", the Grading and Drainage Plan, depicts the height and location of the walls on the site. Retaining walls for the driveway and residence exceed the five-foot height limit. Two retaining walls are proposed for the driveway. A retaining wall is planned along the upslope side of the private driveway. This retaining wall is expect to be approximately 20 feet high at its highest location and tapers down in either direction. A retaining wall up to approximately 16 feet high, at its highest location is planned down-slope of the private driveway. . One retaining wall is proposed for the residence. The back wall of the residence will consist of a retaining wall that will vary from nine to 21 feet high. The location of the proposed residence will greatly mitigate the visual impacts of this retaining wall. . ,~ The project architect has explored several design alternatives in an attempt to reduce the quantity and height of retaining walls required. No alternative to the proposed project was successful in reducing the height and quantity of walls proposed. Retaining wall materials include shotcrete with a rock formation finish. This material has the appearance of a natural formation. C.V-Iusced staff report final.dnc ' AAAAl1 w File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; &r DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road The proposed project includes two fireplaces. Sheet A-3 of the architectural drawings indicate one fireplace is proposed to be wood burning and one fireplace is proposed to be gas burning. The total cut and fill proposed at the site is 1,728 cubic yards. The amount of cut required for the residence is 666 cubic yards. The amount of cut required for the driveway is ~890- cubic yards. A total of 1,556 cubic yards of cut are required for the proposed project and 172 cubic yards of fill are required for the driveway. There are at least two-hundred trees on the 8.4 acre (gross) site. The majority of trees on the site are inaccessible due to steep slopes. The proposed project will result in the removal of nine trees. The Arborist has required replacement trees which equal the values of the trees proposed for removal and a $8,227 tree bond to ensure the protection of existing trees on the site. The application consists of the following entitlements: 1) Building Site Approval to construct on a vacant lot subdivided over 15 years ago (Municipal Code Section 14-20). 2) Variance to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet in height (Municipal Code Section 15-29.010(g)) 3) Design Review to construct a new two-story single-family residence (Municipal Code Section 15-45.060). 4) Site Development Plan in order to construct on a hillside lot pursuant to Municipal _._ Code Section 14-25.100 5) Grading Exception to exceed one thousand cubic.yards of cut and fill (Municipal Code Section 15-13-060) Evaluation of Findings -Building Site Approval (a) The proposed single family dwelling is consistent with the goals and policies of the , General Plan and Hillside Specific Plan. The site is in an area designated in the City's General Plan as Residential Hillside Conservation (RHC). The RHC designation allows .5 single-family dwelling units per acre. The proposed project involves the construction of a single-family dwelling on a 5.11 (net) acre site. (b) The site is.physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed. Portions of the property are very steep; however, the slope at the building pad is relatively level. The proposed project has received Geotechnical Clearance. The conditions of the Geotechnical Clearance ensure physical suitability of the site for the proposed development. C:~F'IUS[[d Stdff RpOIC f1O1~dOC nnnnnt- File No. BSA-O1-002; V-O1-012; Fst DR-O1-021: KittridgeRoad -- (c) The design of the building site or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no raze, threatened or endangered species on any state or federal list located on this site and no fish habitat. Wildlife present at the site include deer, skunk, possum, and raccoon whose movement, foraging and migrating patterns will not be substantially affected because a lazge portion of the site will remain in its natural condition. (d) The design of the building site or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health or safety problems. The City Geologist, Engineer, Arborist, and Fire District have all reviewed the proposed plans. Their comments and conditions are incorporated as conditions of approval to ensure physical suitability of the site for the proposed development. (e). The design of the building site or improvements will not conjict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision or building site. The site has several private access easements recorded on the property. The building site or improvements do not conflict with any of the designated right-of--way easements. (~ That a proposed subdivision of land which is subject to a contract executed pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (The "Williamson Act') would not result in the creation of parcels of insufficient size to sustain their agricultural use, except as otherwise provided in Government Code Section 66474.4. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor does it involve the subdivision of property. Therefore, this finding does not apply to the proposed project. (g) The discharge of waste from the proposed building site into an existing community sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by a State regional water quality control board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the State Water Code. Sanitary sewer is available to the site. The proposed single-family dwelling will not result in overburdening the system capacity. Evaluation of Findings Design Review and Site Development Plan (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The height, elevations and ~ , placement on the site ofthe proposed main structure, when considered with reference to: (i) ,' the nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (ii) community viewsheds will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The minimum building site requirements in the project vicinity are lazge (40,000-48,000 squaze feet). The subject property is 8.40 acres (gross). In the surrounding area, topographical constraints result in large portions of undevelopable lands which provide an additional buffer between dwellings. The surrounding azea is sparsely developed with one- and two-story single-family residences. There aze no established C:~I-Iusted staff report finaldoc nnnnnc • File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; Fst DR-O1-021: KimidgeRoad residences in close proximity to the proposed project. The proposed residence is located below adjacent ridgelines. (b) Preserve natural landscape. The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by designing structures to follow the natural contours of the site and minimizing tree and soil removal; grade changes will be_ minimized and will be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas. The proposed building pad is located on the only existing level pad on the site. Utilizing the. existing level pad will minimise disturbance to the site including the amount of grading required. In addition, the proposed materials and colors will blend with the natural environment. (c) Minimize perception of excessive bulls The proposed main structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment. The second-story of the proposed residence is setback from the first story. The roof of the first story, window treatments, stone accents, and gable ends add variation to the elevations and minimize the perception of mass and bulk. (d) Compatible bulk and height. The proposed main structure will be compatible in terms of bulk and height with (i) existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (ii) the natural environment; and shall not (i) unreasonably impair the light and air of adjacent properties nor (ii) unreasonably impair the ability ~of adjacent properties to utilize solar energy. The proposed residence is tucked into the existing hillside and is located below adjacent ridgelines. The residence will blend into the hillside due to the proposed earth tone colors and materials. Please refer to (c). (e) Current grading and erosion control methods. The proposed site. development or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City. The proposed project requires a grading plan to be reviewed and approved by the City. Engineering Division. The plan shall contain all the provisions identified in the geotechnical reports and current erosion control methods used by the City. (~ As recommended in the Residential Design Handbook the proposed project illustrates the following design policies and techniques to minimize the perception of bulk: the building is tucked into the hillside; the roof slope follows natural grade; building floor levels are terraced; elevations are softened by using different materials; natural color materials aze proposed; the height of roof elements aze varied, higher portions of the structure are setback; the project is not designed to attract attention or to stand out; large wall expanses aze punctuated with window treatments, stone accents, and gable ends. As detailed above, the proposed project conforms to the design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook with respect to mass, bulk, privacy and views. c:~x~uas~n~rtr,~aa nnnnnw File No. BSA-O1-002; V-O1-012; &~ DR-O1-021: KittrTdge Road Energy efficient features of the proposed project aze discussed below: Design for maximum benefit of sun & wind: The proposed residence is protected on the south side by a large retaining wall and cliff above. This feature will shade the house in the summer and-minimize the need for air conditioning. Landscape to control exposure to sun & wind: The existing eight-acre site is heavily forested, while the proposed residence will require the removal of nine trees, the overall impact will be minimal. In addition, landscaping has been added to shield the tall retaining wall at the reaz. Unfortunately, the existing building site has very little topsoil over bedrock, therefore the resulting pad does not have much flexibility in terms of planting large trees to protect the house from wind and sun. Allow light, air and solar access to adjacent homes: The proposed residence will have no impact on the adjacent homes, in terms of light, air and sun exposure, as the structure is 75 feet from the neazest property line. Incorporate energy saving devices into the design: The proposed residence will have high-efficiency furnaces to heat the proposed residence. Evaluation of Findings- Variance The applicant requests the following exception to construct retaining walls over five feet in height. (a) There are special circumstances, applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings that strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. Topography at the site is very steep (74%). Due to the steep topography at the site retaining walls in excess of five feet aze necessary to construct the proposed residence and access driveway. (b) The granting of the variance would not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. The variance request would allow the construction of a 4,810 square foot single-family residence. The variance requests would not constitute a special privilege because the Hillside Residential zone district is developed with similar single-family structures of this , ' size. (c) The proposal would not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The City Geologist, Engineer, Arborist, and Fire District have all reviewed the proposed plans. Their comments and conditions are incorporated as conditions of approval. C:U-IustedshaHteport finaLdoc nnnnnQ File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; &~ DR-O1-021: KittrldgeRoad Evaluation of Findings -Exception to exceed 1, 000 cubic yards of cut and fill in Hillside Residential Zone District (MCS 15-13.0500) 1) The additional grading is necessary in order to allow reasonable development of the property or to achieve a reasonable means of access to the building site. The proposed quantity of grading is necessary to provide access to the residence and to expand the existing level building site to accommodate a 4,810 square foot residence. The proposed project enlarges the existing building pad by building into the hillside with a retaining wall. The existing building pad is not being expanded outwazds or towards the downhill slope. 2) The natural land forms and vegetation are being preserved and protected. An existing level building pad is being utilized for the proposed residence. This building pad is located in close proximity to the edge of the lot and an existing access road. As a result, a large percentage of the 8 acre lot will be undisturbed by the proposed project. 3) The increased grading is necessary to promote the compatibility of the construction with the natural terrain. The structure will be located on the low portion of the hillside below ridgelines 4) The increased grading is necessary to integrate an architectural design into the natural topography. The additional grading will serve to tuck the residence into the existing hillside. S) The increased grading is necessary to reduce the prominence of the construction as viewed from surrounding views or from distant communities. Please refer to 4. 6) No building site shall be graded so as to create a flat visible pad surrounding the main residential structure. An existing level pad will be utilized and expanded for the proposed residence. The grading will not result in a flat level pad surrounding the residence. The natural topography and slopes aze maintained outside the immediate building pad and driveway. Conclusion The proposed residence is designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Municipal Code Section (MCS) 15-45.080; MCS 15-70.060 (Variances); MCS 15-13.050(f) (Grading Exception), MCS 14-20.070 and 14-25.100 (Building Site ApprovaUSite Development Plan). The residence does not interfere with views or privacy, preserves the natural landscape to the extent feasible, and will minimise the perception of bulk so that it is compatible with the neighborhood. C:~HUS[td SCdff R()Oit F1I111dOC A AAA A!\ File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; ~ DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conditionally approve the following requested entitlements: Building Site Approval (BSA-01-002), Design Review including Site Development Plan (DR-O1-021), and Variance (V-O1-012). _ ; • c:~,~«a5~re~~r~.a~ r. ~..,.,.. ~. Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. _ APPLICATION NO. DR 01-021; BSA-Ol-002; and V-O1-012 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA RUSTED; Kittredge Road WxEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Building Site Approval, Site Development, and Design Review approval to construct a new 4,810 square foot residence and attached gazage on 8.4 acre (gross) site; and Variance request to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet in height; and a grading exception to exceed 1,000 cubic yazds of cut and fill. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heazd and to present evidence; and WI~REAS, the proposed project which includes construction of a new single-family residence is exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15061(3) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. The project is exempt from CEQA because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA pursuant to section 15061(3). WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application, and the following Building Site ApprovaUSite Development, and Design Review findings have been determined pursuant to the Municipal Code: EvaluatioK of Findings Design Review and Site Development Plan (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed main structure, when considered with reference to: (i) the .nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (ii) community viewsheds will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The minimum building site requirements in the project vicinity aze lazge (40,000-48,000 square feet). The subject property is 8.40 acres (gross). In the surrounding azea, topographical constraints result in lazge portions of undevelopable lands which provide an additional buffer between dwellings. The surrounding area is sparsely developed with one- and two-story single-family residences. There are no established residences in close proximity to the proposed project. The proposed residence is located below adjacent ridgelines. (lfl(1(171 File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; ~ DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road (b) Preserve natural landscape. The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by designing structures to follow the natural contours of the site and minimizing tree and soil removal; grade changes will be minimized and will be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas. The proposed building pad is located on the only existing level pad on the site. Utilizing the existing level pad will minimise disturbance to the site including the amount of grading required. In addition, the proposed materials and colors will blend with the natural environment. (c) Minimize perception of excessive bulk. The proposed main structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment. The second-story of the proposed residence is setback from the first story. The roof of the first story, window treatments, stone accents, and gable ends add variation to the elevations and minimize the perception of mass and bulk. (d) Compatible bulk and height. The proposed main structure will be compatible in terms of bulk and height with (i) existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (ii) the natural environment; and shall not (i) unreasonably impair the light and air of adjacent properties nor (ii) unreasonably impair the ability of adjacent properties to utilize solar energy. The proposed residence is tucked into the existing hillside and is located below adjacent ridgelines. The residence will blend into the hillside due to the proposed earth tone colors and materials. Please refer to (c). (e) Current grading and erosion control methods. The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City. The proposed project requires a grading plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Division. The plan shall contain all the provisions identified in the geotechnical reports and current erosion control methods used by the City. (f) As recommended in the Residential Design Handbook the proposed project illustrates the following design policies and techniques to minimize the perception of bulk: the building is merged into the hillside; the roof slope follows natural ground; building floor levels aze terraced; elevations aze softened by using different materials; natural color materials are proposed; the height of roof elements are varied, higher portions of the structure aze setback; the project is not designed to attract attention or to stand out; lazge wall expanses aze - punctuated with window treatments, stone accents, and gable ends. ~ , ' As detailed above, the proposed project conforms to the design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook with respect to mass, bulk, privacy and views. • c:~x~«as~ffre~ns~ta~ ~1nnn.r .+ G ._ _.___ _ _ _ _ _.._-_ _. ._.. _. File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; &~ DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road Energy efficient features of the proposed project are discussed below: Design for maximum benefit of sun & wind: The proposed residence is protected on the south side by a lazge retaining wall and cliff above. This feature will shade the house in the summer and minimize the need for air conditioning. Landscape to control exposure to sun & wind: The existing eight-acre site is heavily forested, while the proposed residence will require the removal of nine trees, the overall impact will be minimal. In addition, landscaping has been added to shield the tall retaining wall at the rear. Unfortunately, the existing building site has very little topsoil over bedrock, therefore the resulting pad does not have much flexibility in terms of planting large trees to protect the house from wind and sun. Allow light, air and solaz access to adjacent homes: The proposed residence will have no impact on the adjacent homes, in terms of light, air and sun exposure, as the structure is 75 feet from the neazest property line. Incorporate energy saving devices into the design: The proposed. residence will have high-efficiency fiunaces to heat the proposed residence. WxExEas, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application, and the following Variance and Grading Exception findings have been determined pursuant to the Municipal Code: Evaluation of Findings- Variance The applicant requests the following exception to construct retaining walls over five feet in height. (a) There are special circumstances, applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings that strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. Topography at the site is very steep (74%). Due to the steep topography at the site retaining walls in excess of five feet are necessary to construct the proposed residence and access driveway. (b) The granting of the variance would not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the ,' limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. The variance request would allow the construction of a 4,810 squaze foot single-family residence. The variance requests would not constitute a special privilege because the Hillside Residential zone district is developed with similar single-family structures of this size. • c:~x,~uaSmff~~Rr~.aa ~ODU13 File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; Fst DR-O1-021: KittrTdgeRoad (c) The proposal would not-be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties _or improvements in the vicinity. The City Geologist, Engineer, Arborist, and Fire District have all reviewed the proposed plans. Their comments and conditions are incorporated as conditions of approval. Evaluation of Findings -Exception to exceed 1,000 cubic yards of cut and fill in Hillside Residential Zone District (MCS 1 S-I3. DSO(s) 1) The additional grading is necessary in order to allow reasonable development of the property or to achieve a reasonable means of access to the building site. The proposed quantity of grading is necessary to provide access to the residence and to expand the existing level building site to accommodate a 4,810 square foot residence. 2) The natural land forms and vegetation are being preserved and protected. An existing level building pad is being utilized for the proposed residence. This building pad is located in close proximity to the edge of the lot and an existing access road. As a result, a large percentage of the 8 acre lot will be undisturbed by the proposed project. 3) The increased grading is necessary to promote the compatibility of the construction with the natural terrain. The structure will be located on the low portion of the hillside below ridgelines 4) The increased grading is necessary to integrate an architectural design into the natural topography. The additional grading will serve to tuck the residence into the existing hillside. S) The increased grading is necessary to reduce the prominence of the construction as viewed from surrounding views or from distant communities. Please refer to 4. 6) No building site shall be graded so as to create a jlat visible pad surrounding the main residential structure. An existing level pad will be utilized and expanded for the proposed residence. The grading will not result in a flat level pad surrounding the residence. The natural topography and slopes are maintained outside the immediate building pad and driveway. - Now, TxEt~FOxE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of RUSTED for Building Site ApprovaUSite Development Plan, Variance, and Design Review approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: • C:u-Iusted staff report finaLdoc nnnn~ ~ File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; ~ DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A", incorporated by reference. 2. The entitlements contained in this resolution shall not become effective until the City Council has approved the Final Building Site Plan. 3. A storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, and incorporating the New Development and Construction -Best Management Practices. If all storm water cannot be retained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, an explanatory note shall be provided on the plan. FIItE PROTECTION DISTRICT 4. Roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class A prepared or built-up roofing. 5. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 16-60. 6. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. 7. Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in newly constructed attached/detached garages (2 heads per stall), workshops, or storage areas which are not constructed as habitable space. To ensure proper sprinkler operation, the garage shall have a smooth, flat, horizontal ceiling. The designer/architect is to contact San Jose Water company to determine the size of service and meter needed to meet fire suppression and domestic requirements. 8. Automatic sprinklers are required for the new 4,810 sq. ft. residential dwelling. A 4-head calculated sprinkler system is required. Documentation of the proposed installation and all calculations shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. The sprinkler system must be installed by a licensed contractor. 9. Driveways shall have a 14' minimum width plus 1' shoulders. Slopes from 11%-15% shall be surfaced using 4" of PCC concrete rough surfaced on a 4" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling. Driveways shall have a minimum inside radius of 21'. 10. Construct aturn-around at the proposed dwelling site having a 33' outside radius. Other approved types must meet the requirements of the fire district. Details shall be shown on the building plans and approved by the fire district. 11. Provide a arkin area for two emer enc vehicles at the ro osed dwellin site or as P g g Y P P g required by the fire district. Details shall be shown on building plans. A 20' wide all C:U-lusted staff tcport &naLdoc File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; ~St DR-O1-021: KittridgeRoad weathered road shall not be less than 14'. Gate shall be controlled by a remote digital transmitter. Details shall be shown on building plans. PUBLIC WORKS 12. The owner (applicant) shall. submit a satisfactory evidence of a boundary survey of the subject property (the Record of Survey) to the Public Works Department as required per condition of the Certificate of Compliance CC-98-001, recorded September 16, 1998. 13. In connection with the previous condition, the owner (applicant) shall submit four (4) copies of the Record of Survey in conformity with the Subdivision Map Act, along with the additional documents as may be required, to the Public Works Department for examination, prior to Building Site approval. 14. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Map Checking fee, as determined by the Public Works Director, at the time of submittal of the Record of Survey for examination. 1 S. The owner (applicant) shall construct approximately 7S0 lineal feet of 6" water line per standards of the Saratoga Heights Mutual Water Company to connect two existing endpoints of the line. This connection will place the missing section of the upgraded water line. Improvement plans for this connection shall be submitted to the Public Works Department and to the Saratoga Heights Mutual Water Company for approval prior to Building Site Approval. 16. The owner (applicant) shall grant an easement for the proposed water line to the Saratoga Heights Mutual Water Company. A copy of the recorded Grant of Easement document shall be submitted to the City prior to finalization of the Grading Permit. 17. Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for approval and the Grading Permit shall be issued prior to the grading work commencement. 18. Prior to Building Site approval, the owner (applicant) shall fizrnish the City Engineer with satisfactory written commitments from all public and private utility providers serving the site guaranteeing the completion of all required utility improvements to serve the site. 19. The owner (applicant) shall secure all necessary permits from the City and any other public agencies, including public and private utility providers, prior to commencement of ~. ` subdivision improvement construction. Copies of permits other than those issued by the City shall be provided to the Public Works Department. 20. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to New Development and . Construction -Best Management Practices as adopted by the City for the purpose of preventing storm water pollution. C:U lusted staff report final doc . r~~nn~ c File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; &r DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 21. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, landslide mitigation, site drainage improvements, and design parameters for foundations and retaining walls) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. 22. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall identify geotechnically suitable drainage discharge locations and provide recommendations to the Project Civil Engineer for incorporation into the plans. 23. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall confirm that a note describing the owner's responsibility in maintaining the debris catchment fence is included with the project notes and specifications on the final plans. 24. The results of the plan review should be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 25. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspection shall 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 fill, steel and concrete. 26. The Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall specifically inspect and monitor the construction of the chain link fence and rock -- anchors to confirm~that potentially unstable rock wedges are appropriately mitigated. In addition, the Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer shall confirm that the heights of walls are appropriate from a geotechnical standpoint (i.e., as per design, or modified due to field conditions observed during construction). 27. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the Project Engineering Geologist and Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter(s) and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to finalization of the Grading - Pernut. , 28. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant's review of the prior to project Zone Clearance. 29. The owner (applicant) shall enter into .agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, C:~Fius[ed stall report final.dac nnnn.~ ~-, File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; &~ DR-O1-021: Kittredge Road slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. " ARBORIST 30. All recommendations in the City Arborist Report, date stamped and received by the Community Development Department on July 11, 2001 shall be followed and incorporated into the plans. CITY ATTORNEY 31. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be-the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 32. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the violation. Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days_ from-the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 27rd day of February 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: • C:~I-Iusted staHteport finaLdoc nnnn~ ~ File No. BSA-Ol-002; V-O1-012; Fst DR-O1-021: Kittridge Road • Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date • C:~Fiusted staff report finaLdoc • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • nnnn•~~, ~'~ BARRIE D: CvATE AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax 0408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 ~_ ~ . .. Attachment 2 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS AT TIC RUSTED PROPERTY KITTRIDGE DRIVE SARATOGA Prepared at the Request of: Community Planning Dept. City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 • • Site Visit by: Michael L. Bench Consulting Arborist June 12, 2001 Job # 04-97-146-01 Plan Received: 5/-29 Plan Due: 6/29 D ~C~~fl~C~ JUL 1 1.2001 CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~~nn~, '^ ~ ~`- TREE SURVEY AND PRESER`, aON RECOMIvIE!`IDATIONS AT THE HUSTID PROPL__ _ ~' KITTRIDGE DRIVE, SARATOGA Assignment At the request of the Community Planning Department, City of Saratoga this report reviews the proposal to construct a new home on a vacant hillside lot in the context of potential damage to or the removal of existing trees. This report further provides - information about the health and structure of the trees on site, and makes recommendations by which damage to them can be restricted to prevent significant decline. Comments and suggestions contained in this report presume that the locations of trees in relation to proposed construction are accurately presented on the plans provided. Summary There are numerous trees on this hillside property. This proposal exposes at least eighteen trees to some level of risk by construction. Nine trees would be removed by implementation of this design, and three trees would be damaged, and they would not be expected to survive. A total of twelve trees would be lost due to proposed construction. Replacement trees, which equal the values of the trees removed are suggested. Procedures are suggested to mitigate the damage that would be expected to the retained i trees. A bond equal to 100% the value of the retained trees is suggested in accordance with the levels of the expected risks. Observations There are at least two-hundted trees on this hillside site, but most of this site is located on a steep slope. The majority of the trees are inaccessible. At least eighteen trees on this site are at risk of damage by proposed construction. These are located adjacent to the entry roadway, adjacent to the entry driveway, or adjacent to the building pad. The attached map shows the locations of these trees and their approximate canopy dimensions. Each tree has been tagged with a metallic label indicating its assigned number. ,~,. The eighteen trees are classified as follows: Tree #1 big leaf maple (Ater macrophyllum) Tree #2 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) Tree #3 Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) Trees #4-9 coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) Tree # 10 Deodar cedar (Cedrus deodara) Trees #11-18 California bay (Umbellularia californica) PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST JULY 12, 2001 nnnn~•~ ~~ TREE SURVEY AND PRESER'~: TION RECONDuIENDATIONS AT THE RUST®PROPtecTY 2 KITTRIDGE DRIVE, SARATOGA The health and structure of each specimen is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (Excellent Poor) on the data sheets that follow this text. Please note that each trees structure is distinguished from health. The structure rating is a visual evaluation of each tree's ability to remain standing and to maintain its branching without breaking or splitting apart. Damage of this nature can occur despite exceptional health. Also, structure is not an aesthetic focus. A tree that has an excellent structure may not necessarily be aesthetically pleasing. Because the various combinations of health and structure sometimes require interpretation, the combination of health and structure ratings for the four trees are converted to individual descriptive ratings as follows: Exceptional Fine Fair Marginal Poor S ecimens S imens S imens S imens S imens 10 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 1, 3, 4, 5 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 18 Exceptional specimens must be retained at any cost and whatever procedures are needed to retain them in their current condition must be used. Fine specimens must be retained if possible but without major design revisions. Mitigation procedures recommended here are intended to limit damage within accepted horticultural standards in order to prevent decline. Fair specimens are worth retaining but again without major design revisions. Mitigation must prevent further decline. Impacts of Construction __ Trees #6-1 1, 14 -16 are in conflict with proposed construction and their removal is - .planned. Tree # 10 is exceptional. Because of its location, it would be difficult to design a plan that would not significantly damage tree # 10. Since tree # 10 has a trunk diameter of 11 inches at 54 inches above grade, it is relatively young and could be easily replaced. Because of these circumstances, I suggest that tree # 10 be replaced. It appears that root damage to trees #2, 3 and 5 would be so severe that they could not be expected to survive. The retained trees (#1, 4, 12,13, 17, and 18) would likely be subjected to one or more of the following damaging events that are common to construction sites: 1. The stockpiling of materials or the storage of equipment under the canopies. 2. The dumping of construction materials, especially waste materials, such as painting products, mortar, concrete, etc.) under the canopies. 3. The construction traffic, including foot traffic across the root systems, and the parking of vehicles or construction equipment under the canopies. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST JULY 12, 2001 nnnn~~ .--. TREE SURVEY AND PRESER`. _ i70N RECOMMEI•IDATIONS AT THE HUSTID PROP>;.: i Y j ' KIITRIDGE DRIVE, SARATOGA 4. The excavations for foundation or for other construction adjacent to trees. 5. The trenching across root zones for new utilities or for landscape irrigation. 6. The grading of the surface soil resulting in the removal of quantities of absorbing root tips. - 7. Broken branches or bark injuries as a result of construction equipment passing too close. 8. Landscaping, including incompatible plant species, trenching across tree root zones for irrigation, excessive soil disturbance of tree root zones, grading to create contours, etc. Virtually any landscape feature inside a tree's root zone results in a percentage of root damage. If the percentage is sigtificant the affected tines will decline or die. 9. Soil movement down slope during grading to cover the root collars or to cover the root zones. Recommendations The following mitigation suggestions are intended to reduce the extent of construction damage to acceptable levels, so that retained trees can reasonably be assured of survival without decline. If any changes to these plans occur during construction, the following may require alteration. 1. I suggest that construction period fencing be provided and located as noted on the attached map. Fencing must be of chainlink a minimum height of 5 feet, mounted on steel posts driven 18-inches into the ground. Fencing must be in place prior to the arrival of any other materials or equipment and must remain in place until all construction is completed and given final approval. The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. Fencing must be located exactly as shown on the attached map. 2. There must be no grading, trenching, or surface scraping beneath the driplines of retained trees, (either before or after the construction period fencing is installed or removed). Where this may conflict with drainage or other requirements our office . must be consulted - 3. Trenches for any utilities (gas, water, phone, TV cable, etc.) must be located outside the driplines of retained trees unless specifically indicated on the enclosed plan. For any tree where this cannot be achieved, I suggest a project arborist be retained to determine acceptable locations. A 2-foot section of each trench adjacent to any tree must be left exposed for inspections by our office. 4. Excavated soil may not be piled or dumped (even temporarily) under the canopies of / - trees. Loose soil must not be allowed to slide down slope to cover the root collars of retained trees. If this occurs, the soil must be excavated by hand to the original grade and may' require a retaining wall (dried laid stones, such as cobbles or rip rap set without a footing) to prevent further soil encroachment. 5. -Any pruning must be done by an Intennational Society of Arboricultural certified arborist and according to ISA Western Chapter Standards, 1988. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST JULY 12, 2W 1 • -- TREE SURVEY AND PRESF.Ci - .7ON RECOD~A~II~IDATIUNS AT THE HUST® PROI-, . _ f Y KITTRIDGE DRIVE, SARATOGA 4 6. Materials or equipment must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped under the driplines of trees, or buried on site. Any excess materials (including mortar, concrete, paint products,-etc.) must be removed from site. Value Assessment _ The value of the trees are addressed according to ISA Standards, Seventh Edition, 1988. Trees #2, 3, 5-11, 14-16 have a total value of $20,384. An equivalent to this value is three 48-inch boxed native specimens, three 36-inch boxed native specimens, three 24- inch boxed native specimens, and one 15-gallon native specimen. An alternative equivalent is one 72-inch box and one 48-inch boxed native specimens. There are, of course, other possible equivalent combinations. Replacements equivalent to the total value of the lost trees are suggested. However, 36- inch boxed and larger specimens may not be available at the end of the project unless the trees are secured with a grower at the onset of construction. I recommend that it be required that replacement trees be secured within 60 days of the issuance of permits. Acceptable native tree replacements are: Coast live oak - Quercus agri, folia Valley oak - Quercus lobata Big leaf maple -Ater macroplryllum California buckeye =Aesculus californica Coast Redwood -Sequoia sempervirens Retained trees #1, 4, 12,13, 17 and 18 have a total of $8,227. I suggest a bond equal to 100% of their total value to assure protection. Respectfully subm r-.~-~- Mlchael L. Bench, A cia~te~ . ~~ B oate, nncipa CJ MLB/sl Enclosures: Glossary of Terms Tree Data Accumulation Charts Tree Protection Before, During and After Construction Protective Fencing Map PREPARID BY: NIlCHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTIIVG ARBORIST JULY 12, 2W I x'1!1 /'~ ~.~ ~~~. BARRIE D. CuATE AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 GLOSSARY Co-dominant (stems, branches) equal in size and relative importance, usually associated with either the trunks or stems, or scaffold limbs (branches) in the crown. Crown -The portion of a tree above the trunk including the branches and foliage. Cultivar - A named plant selection from which identical or nearly identical plants can be produced, usually by vegetative propagation or cloning. Decurrent - A term used to describe a mature tree crown composed of branches lacking a central leader resulting in around-headed tree. Eacurrent - A term used to describe a tree crown in which a strong central leader is present to the top of a tree with lateral branches that progressively decrease in.length upward from the base. Girdling root - A root that partially or entirely encircles the trunk and/or large buttress roots, which could restrict growth and downward movement of photosynthates. Included bark -Bark which is entrapped in narrow-angled attachments of two or more stems, branches, or a stem and branch(es). Such attachmerrts are weakly attached and subject to splitting out. Kinked root - A taproot or a major root(s) which is sharply bent and can cause plant instability and reduction of movement of water, nutrients, and photosynthates. Root collar -.The flared, lower portion of the base of a tree where the roots and stem merge. Also referred to as the "root crown". Leader -The main stem or trunk that forms the apex of the tree. Stem -The axis (trunk of a central leader tree) of a plant on which branches are attached. Temporary branches - A small branch on the trunk or between scaffold branches retained to shade, nourish, and protect the trunk of small young trees. These branches are kept small and gradually removed as the trunk develops. Definition of Woody Parts Trunk -The main stem of a tree between the ground and the lowest scaffold branch. Scafl'old branches - In decurrent trees, the branches that form the main structure of the crown. Limb - A major structural part. Branch - A smaller part, attached to a limb or scaffold branch. ' Branchlet - A small part, attached to a branch. Twig -Avery small part attached to a branchlet. Leaf -The main photosynthetic organ of most plants. • • C nnnn~,-. _ ~.. - tom. +.+~~ °`_ .~ g,e• . 'a ~ .~ - -.- ~ ,ems,.- ~ ~ 2~-.ies. - - BARRIE D, CvATE AND ASSOCIATES - - tom- ~ - ---. = - -- - Horticultural Consultants - -- . (408) 353-1052 _ - _ ,_ - - Fax (408) 353-1238__-- :: _ - _ - -. - - 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95.033..-~_ --` . TREE PROTECTION BEFORE, DURING, AND AF'T'ER CONSTRUCTION - = _ ~ _ ~. -. - These are general recommendations .- _ ~_ . And may be superseded by site-speciCc instructions BEFORE - - _ - Plan location of trenching to avoid all possible cuts beneath tree canopies. 'I7iis includes trenches for utilities, irrigation lines, cable TV and r_ oof drains: _ ` _ . - - ... - - Plan construction period fence locations which will prev~t egdipm~t travel or material storage beneath tree canopies... :.. ..:; ... - . : - _ - :~; Instal[ fences before any construction related equipme~ is allowed ~ site. 'I7iis includes pickup trucks. _ _ _ Inform subcontractors in writing that they must read this documem. Require return of signed copies to demonstrate that they have read the docum~t. Prune any tree parts, which conflict with construction between August and January. Except for pines which may be pruned between October-January. Only an ISA certified arborist, using ISA pruning instructions maybe used for his work. If limbs are in conflict with the ccestruction equipment before the certified arborist is on-site, carpenters may cut off offending parts of 6" diameter or less, leaving an 18" long stub, which should be recut later by the arborist. Under no circumstances may any party remove more: than 30% of a trees foliage, or prune so that an unbalanced canopy is created. ' __ . _ .. __ . DURING - ::. -.- Avoid use of any wheeled equipment beneath tree canopies. Maintain fences at original location in vertical, undamaged condition until all contractors and ~ subcontractors, including painters are gone., - ~ Clear root collars of retained trees enough to leave S-6 buttress roots bases visible at 12" from ' the trunk: _ - -> . -- - _ Irrigate trees adjacent to construction activity during hot months (June-October). Apply 10 gallons of water par 1"- of tnmk diameter (measured at 4 '/:') once per 2 week period by soaker hose. Apply water at the dripline, or adjacent to construction not around the trunk. Apply mulch to make a 3" deo~ .layer in all areas be4errdtth true canopies and inside fences. Any - organic material which rs non toxic may be used. ~ -. - i ~ ; _ __ - __. ,_ ,. _ , - ~~ . . ~ ~ - - -- AFTER _ _ - - .... -. Irrigate monthly-with 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter with a soaker hose, placed just ~ ~ _ inside the dripline: Continue until 8" of rain has fallen. - _ _ Avoid cutting irrigation trenches beneath tree canopies. Avoid ratotilling beneath tree canopies since that will destroy the small surface roots which _ - ,:. absorb water: ~ - :: _ - - -- ~ Avoid installation of turf or other frequently irrigated plants beneatb tree canopies. - - - O O c ` O ~ .vf U ~ C' O N E >. a~a~ '~ O ~ ~ O ,` n a~ .. ~, ~ a O.~ L L C ~ ~ .-. ~ ~ ~ C j O O O N ~ ~ c ~ `v o3 cd U ~v~iu r., ~ ~ o O . ~ •'•I U ~ r~ ~ > m ~. ~ v m ~ ~ •~ G' ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ Y~ ~ a W ~ M ~ O r Q F ~ A ' ~ C U '' GO N G V o ~ U ~ y ^` y 0 c 'C O ~ y ~ `° O U _W ~ " C7 r. ~ Q:i Q N r.~ ~ L7 C ~ x o ~ ~ y ~ Q O O ~~~~" ~~ = U ~_~_»_ ;v; :: /: cd ~ c c ~E ~g~~ ~~g~ m 41 N Yy Z ~ C O w •~ ~ a d ... o •~Rga a~~o `o ~ . ... O ~ C N r. ~ O w ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ $oao ~ w ~ H ~~ , _., ~__-_- ", i'~ .4, ~ __~ ~, o r ~.. •~ L a: u (Q v c ~.u v w -~+ ~ c •~ u ~v w a~ 3 c C +~ .c w w O G cJ to O ~ Ou .-tea ~ O. O O G ~ +~-+ coo 3 t•'~C C f0 L ~ Ol r•1 ~ y u 4J q GJ •--~ ,.C C O F~ •r+ ,G F+ c9 +•+ u 3 u d w -+ a •.+ u a. 3 ~ • .C L Ol . •.a N LJ 'p 'C O M 3 N ~ a: OL .• -1 ~ ~ O O ~ ~ w u ae u ~ ° u ~ ~" ~.+ a i c C C ~+-~ .-1 O • ~+ w u o c a~ ~ N 7 W O R) G A. ~~ u N w a a H w p d i ~c 6 00 ~ o> a v r-: N .n 01 L •rl G to rl Gl N r--1 ~ O u a A. '~ G 0J ~+ ~ -~ •C 1`• D7 ~ u s cp -+ u ~ •p L 7 Ol t( •r1 cJ N '~ ~0 1~+ Ri c . -+ 4 a Ol O Q. u vi o cCJ i+ cCp ~.~ o u ~~~ \ ~ , i v - 1 ,` ~/ ~ ~ .~-. ~i I ~ I I / i o: o~ c v •~+ C +-+ v •~ Li. N T cJ 3 ~ ~ 'o t ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ao,. ~ -a~, o c c °J=o° N ~.. d U ~ ~ ~ C y ~ Y t v L ~ `~ c OIL co 4f H C Q1 o ~ 0 _ U C ~ ` O N H a a~°i o oc ~ ~ c u a~ aci u ~ 3 a~ =~.~a~ ... N ~ ---- • ~°0, 3 eM . ry n O -,-, GJ .'., it Q ~~ ... V~ '~ '~ .C O r--, Tl v ... L~ ["^ ~+~+ 0 ~~ IrL) uiaolad ltlAOw3a - E 'iVAOW3a 0N3WW003?J g ~' ~ ~' m ~ m ~ ~ zB ~ 6 ---- ----°- r 2J321111213~ S033N w ~ ,~ ~ N ~ N ~g a N 8 N (S-L) a31VM S033N u u u n a u (S-L) 3StJ3S14 NV11001002! ~ ~ h o 0 0 m m m m ~n .n m (S-L) 43213/t00 21M1~001O0a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ___________ X x X X X X a` (s-L)~v~3o ~Nnal m 4 m a (S-L) DOOM OV30 ____~_~~~____ ~ _m ~ ~ ~ ~ j _"___" _ N N N N a (S-L) 3S`d3S10 NMOaO 33x1 H w » M M y - (S-L) S103SNI u n u u n n (S-L).UJ2lOlad JNINnad ° ° ° ° ~ o a m n m a ~ ~ # 03033N S318t10 ------------------- "" _____ m c M_-_~1HJI3M_ON33/tOW32! X X X X X X e °JNISN2! NM0210 V _ a ~ ______ NOIlV2lOlS3a NMOaO c --_ W ---- - _ m a n a _ . -'- - __ `JNINNIHl NMOZIO _ - rn N N h w M N ~JNINV3l0 NM0210 ~~ u n u n u (e-£) `JNllt/a OadZVH ~ ~ ° 00 00 00 -° (OL-Z) JNIlVa NOILUN00 '~' ~ ' ~ ~ 1O ~ f i~ '~ ~ ~"~ v ~ ~ ZS ~ ~ ZS c ,____ V (s-L) 3anl~nals ~ a N f N t0 N ~_ .. X X X X X X (S-t) H11V3H r N r~ N OV321d3 fp+f tD u1 N O f b Q N f+f C N u'J p ~ n 47 N O 1HJI3H N p N y f y ~°n y r M ~ y e 1334 Z~ a313WM0 ____~_~~_~ N u ° n N u co u ~ u ~ u c c c c e c ~ a H90 ___M~ _ ~ ~ H80 ~ N X p °D N x N X N X p ° N X N X ____ __~_ W31SASi1lnW x x H90 o ~ °' o o ~ `o o N 'n o ~ o c 0 ~ C C C C C C O <e.~ Z ~ Z G ~, ~_ ,Z ~ _~ 3~ j~ R ! ~ A c3 a ° L 3 m ~ '~ ~ ~ `e ~ ~ c a ~ v 2ggS ~d E $ 2S 2S ~ 44 06 ~ E J ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~_ ~ J m ~ Q ~I~QQ( V r N l'9 f V7 m 0 J ~- e-~ e-i O e7~ ~--~ ri i O 0 ~-, 9 .~ Q OJ CD ... x 'L! Q f`1 '~ a v ~r .!] 0 ~' IrN JLLRIORId ~1IAOW3t1 --- - E lVA0W321 aN3WW00321 m ~ °' ° ~ c ~ m ~ m ~ ~ ~ > ~ > > > > > E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r- ~ _ ~ ~ a3Zili1>d3d Sa33N N N N N N N ~ F- ~ ~ ~ ~ _- (S-t) 2l31tlM Sa33N u u u u u u (s-t) 3sv~sla av-no~ loos o ~ o ~ ~ m E m ---- - (S-L) 03213A00 21V1100 lOOM ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~,____M X X X X X X 0 ` a (S-L)AV03a ~Nf1211 m _e n ~ _ ~-~ _ _ _ __ _- ~ e7 ~f N N a (S-t) 3Stl3SIa NMO>:1033M1 N N N y M N (S-L) S103SNI ~~ a u n u u (S-t) Al1MORld JNINf12id $ ~ ° ~ ° $ ~ ~ ° --M_ ___~_ _-__ rn a ~ ~ o~ ~ _ _ # a3~33N S318t/O -------------------- -- -° . , m Z ° - ,r~ Sc c 1H JI3M ON3 3/~OW321 ---------- - -- X X X X o JNISIVLI NMO>!!O U c 5 ---- --- NOI1V>:IOlS3a NMOaO c rn 0 o o a r i a o rn ~ ~ -- m °D `JNINNIHl NMOilO ~ m N ~ w~ N N N N N N _ ^~ ~JNINV3l0 NMOMO ~~ ~~ u u u n (8-£) ~JNIlbZ! OabTdH $ ~ ~ o o ___-- ° (OL-Z) `JNllb'2~ NOIIJON00 ~"~ W ~"~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ _ ZS ~ ~ ~ i3 ~ c ° U (s-t) 3anl~nals -- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N _~_M_ _~ X X X X X X (S-t) H1lV3H N N N• UV3LIdS O N ~ ^ O N ~ ~ O N ~ ~ u7 N p ~ O N A ~ p N t° n 1H°J13H O u~ N O ~° N ~H m N $ N ,~+ N ,°° N 133 Z~ il313WM0 ------------~-~ __._- t° ~~ °' n ~ u N Y O u ~ Y E c c c c c c H8a r ------~,_______ ~ ~ ~ m N N N N N p N ~ H80 -------------------------- X X X X X m X -__-__ W31SASy1lf1W x '-~ H80 0 ~ '~' 0 ~ N 0 ~ o o ~ u~ °° o n; N N c~ c c c c C c H O ~ N ~ R V V >s ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ a R ZS R 2S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U 1~ ap W O r r N O ~ F ~ ee u p'°, F W 00 Y • o p !V O ~ M h h Y Y M ~D ~~~~ ~~~~~ r ~ ^ ... ~~~°~ ocut,N~~ nnnn-~., f ............ ..___.. _._._.__._.__~_~. s r~"~_, ~.. (r L) uiaoiaa l~rnow3a i 9 > E 1VAOW3a ON3WW003a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a A ~ ° o ~ > > > > > E ----------M ~ ~„~ r, ~ a 213ZI1112i3j S033N p ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ N N (S-L) 2131VM S033N ~~ a n n n n (S-L) 3sv3s10 a~nlo~ loos m m .m m m m (s-L) a3a3AO~ avllo~ loos ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ x x x x x x c m -_"-------"--_»~~.~_ a e (S-L) OOOM OV30 ~ ~ ~ ~ a`no ~ ~____ --_____- _ ~~ ~ N .- /~ r r m a (S-L) 3S1f3S10 NM0210 33211 w ______ N N N N N N (S-L) S103SNI ~~ n u a n u (S-L) A112101Md °JNIN(121d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c M ~ ~ ~ n w ~ _ i103033N S318V0 m Z ____________~__~_____~_ ' - ____ a 1H JI3M ON3 3AOW32! --____-- X X X X X X c ----- ~ °JNISMa NM0210 U a 5 w_~___ NOIlV2lO1S321 NM0210 ~ ~ o o ~ a `JNINNIHI NM02i0 n ~ coo ~ ~ • N N h N N M °JNINV3l0 NM02i0 ~~ u n u u n (B-£)'JNI1Va 021b'Zt/H ~ ~ ~o ° ° ~ -- a a c - (OL-Z) °JN111R! NOILONOO ~ u~ id ~"~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~* ~ ~ '~ v ______.-__ 73 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ° V is-L) 3anl~nats ~ H N ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ N X X X X X X (S-L) H11M3H OV321dS a~i ~ co+o A r ~ v ~ N ~ N c _ ~ < M Q !'~ l'7 1HJ13H m N t~0 N m N m N ~ N ~ N ~ 133 Z® 2i313WM0 r°~ ~~ ~ u ° u N x ~ u ~ u ~_ _______M_._____ E c c c c ° c c H80 . ~ ~ HEO N N N ~ N ~ N M X X X N X X X W31SASi11(1W x x HEO 0 N ~ 0 r ~ ^ o r ~ ~ o N ~_ ~ o ~ ~ o r coo c c c c c C 0~~.~~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ z ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iy cn 8 ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z R ~ WW m U U U ~ U U ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ m Y F ~ a ~ O 3 ~o r a un E-F w CO r O p N O y H f~l! ~ r r r ~~~~ ~r.~~ ~ o~~ ~~~~~ r r r ~3~~.~ a~,N~~ nnnn ~.. e ~ € e ~ ~ _ d ~ a 5 Y ~ E .$ i ~ ~ U O ~ k ~ ~ o $ d ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~' T I O Vj ' ' ~ , ... u ~ ~ E v , ~ pj t0 U C C ,~ ~ . ~ O M Z ~ O ~ ': N •07+ v, vi ~ ~ ~Q.. ~ O V O ~ ~ ~ O+ J ~ O V _V M~ U ~n N 0 Z m C y p L Y L ~ in to m tJ ~ m I.7 J (~ ~ y C C~ O y m v N J ~ -~ ~ O v 2 y X , ! r' ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ '~~ a ' ~~ p y v ~ i s ~ - d 'r ~ ~ :. _,~, ~aa~j i, h M W '^ p O ~ °' m U v o ~ w c ~ yNj ~ N M C y y L ~N Nom ~ D = ,~ ,;, ~ F ~ ~ GS. , Q U m M O ~ ~ W m en n J' ~ ~ Q ~ 'C C J d « ~ Q 3 g v . w Q. ~ C u u ~,, x~ ~ L L p Y ~ E O CL W = to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ' ~ 1 1 Q 11 m M N ~ ~ '' .yl~;ij~l~ , i ' t i E R --\ .~;~~ ~~ ~ ~. i ~z ~' . ~~ • • JAN - 3- 0 2 T H U 2 3 5 1 C H E E S E M A N S~ E C O • Attachment 3 20800 Kittridge Road Saratoga, CA 95070 January 3, 2002 Tom Sullivan, Community Development Manager Saratoga Planning Commission 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Fax: 867-8555 Dear Mr. Sullivan and members of the Saratoga Planning Commission, Re; DR-01-002 & V-01-012 (517.14-080) - Hunted, Kittridge Road P{ease include this fetter in the record of public comment, as we will not be able to attend the hearing on January 9, 2002, We are strongly opposed to granting the variances to construct retaining walls in excess of five feet and to exceed one thousand cubic yards of cut and fill. The variance allowance is way out of control in this area, Ouring the last year hundreds and hundreds of loatls of dirt and concrete have been trucked up Kittridge Road fo dramatically change the landscape on very steep slopes to allow for gigantic homes that were Issued variances. What is the sense of having standards for building when they can easily be ignored by issuing a variance? a have repeatedly called the Saratoga Building Dept. and been told that there is nothing they can do to stop the constant flow of gravel, dirt and cemgnt trucks upp Kittridge Road, which is a private road. There is something the city can do and l} iat is to stopp issuing variances that allow people _to build monster homes on steep hillsides. Qn top of the problem is the mstabdity of the entire l3ohlman, Quicken and Kittridge road hillside, which is well known. We hope there are enough people.on the Planning Commission who care for the building code standards on steep hillsides and not dust for tax revenue from millionaire homes to. refuse the request for variances. It is imperatve to stop overhauling the terrain on this hillside. Sincerely yours, Gail and Doug Che eman • i THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK :, (i(1(lfl_'24 • • • _~~~ t~-, 'J (LSl9Lf-U59 0 ~ '~ J dIl~I2I03I'Id~ d00Zd2IdS ~ I Z = ~ C .~ Iav7S 4~!H 006 g I I ~uns~HZIH~2Id d11I2IQ ~OQI2II.,I,I?I V ~~ I I I SIZOdON,I.3 ~~NdQIS~2I Q~,LSf1H o No ~ N G\ I I ~ ~`~ _~ w ~, w $ L~~ O ~ C - / ~ m _ o ~ N E-~ r. ~ was L1 ° ~~ cQ~ l i~ l '~ Z p N O N w N = Z / b `'' ~ r I19 I @ _+ w _ / --~ J /J ~ ~-~_ n O Q Q V 'p U Z b ~ Q Cj E b 1 ` ~ _v~ i9 s n ii ro~riN xm o m~ Q Z ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ v n w r ri o W ~~qq nt ~rl 1 a~rsa Q O~ V Q ~~ ° ~9 ~ Q ~ Z O N / \\ // r W ,a J W i j F ~ /' ~I Z .. Ul ~> In j~I ~ // // ~ W 11J w ~ In w .. ~/~ o I~ I m a k~j ~ LLr , ~fl ~%~ ,~/~, .n ' `I m \ ~ U , u~l o n 1Y a > I OC ~ - i' ~:?t' 3 ~ '%;' /' Q QpiQ ~~Qp :' - % o-° of _/ ~~ /. tnQW Qu~1Q9Q7 ! / .. L / /i --ul w~ N ll p[~ul i \/ / ~ / / / / -~.._-- Q Q v1 and l9+-Z NQt- ~ ~ ~~~(+ h~ ~ /j / i-~/ ~~ U~a ~1QQO i /i~~a / %~i/j / i/~ l ° tt°~Z _ i w z a m .I W z ap N ' + ~~33 . - ~ - /~ ~ ~; i ~_ `~ %~i- C1 ~ w ~ ~ u w ~ - -5 85'3205' 1422n - +_ % ~ : / / ~ % ~. bZr ~ / ~ Io _ / ~i . / / ° / ' ~- / I ~ ~ i ~r, .l -- ~ ~ i / 111, ____ ) ~ ~ \l- - i, j, i i ~oJSF,i+ '- --- - - -yaz•ss~.~ -, ~ao.~+ ~: `_ %- -11 ~ _ __ - \` -$~;~ i ~'~ ,/j / _ I; '_-_ -- ~ .. -- - _~-`- - ~ - I ' I . _. ~ . .. ~- I ~ o I' - ~ _ _ -- - _ I __ I I ~ ~ qHt ` "\` I -~ ;_ ~, ~, 1 _ _. _ -_ i 1+ 1 l ,.1 ,- 89 COL M'8L E£18f~ ~ ~(+i -+- _ --~ \\\\~~~ \ I-I- I I %/ {'r Lj,~'J -4'// I/~/, _ _ , .\ _ ~ i _ i ~ •. i' ~ ~% l ~ `i i ~' ~~ ~~ -fix- _~ 1 1 1 ~~ '~. ! ! _~~ ' /I/ %~ - - _ ~ \ ~ ~-- /' i !_- ~~1y _ 599 - rl~ ~ / - ~ _' ~ ~ S ~~ // / ,~ //~I / i . ./- __ _~~ _, ,~~ ~ ! / _. - ~ - ~+ i _ --~ ~~ ~, i i ~I l _ ~, J' ~ --- - - -~ - ;' ~ _-__--_ --- _ _ 1 , ~~ - _ -_ - ` ,/ ~ ~ / ;- _- j _ _ ~ .- ~'~` / i / ~ !~' ice- ---_ -' -~_ ---_ _ ~\ \ ~ \ _ - _ ~ / /~ ~ %~ / ~ ^ \ pox \ m ` II ~ ~ '1 , ~~ ~` ,- '\ ~ ~\ \ ~ ~11\ ~\\ \ ~\ ' ' - % ~; _O Q ~ % ~ t i O ~~ m - I i 1 `'I I i 1 1, ~0 1 1 1 ~~_,.\ ~ \\\~o \~1\ ~~ \ Z Q ~ ~, p a / p ~~ ~ Q m~ q \~ 1 I '' 1 a1 1 ~._, _ \,` \ .\`.~\\ `_1\ \ \\ O Q i / ~ a w Q i~ / `(~°za ~ ' 1 l j l I I ~\ \ J-~ /% ~ wwo~ Qrw ~~ w z \ m - oo.w ~ I `I I' I I I I~ I ~ `• ~ \\ a 9~ o _, ? W (~ z W N a O ox `' :00~ I '. 1 I I I I I° ~ \\ \.~ ~piQri"' CIE / p~~ / Q~°w F wQ3 ~ \ \\ ~ i Ii I I I II j i I l i I, I, ~,~ \; ~. w ~Y ul > .._- i1 ;',~ ~ Y n .~ 0>C Q w ~ Y~"~ ~/ --~, I I, I I, ~; I I I I I I I 1~ ~\ \~ Q F- fi° ~ I -~ // Q 'u i a 3 z i §~~ \ I I ~ I i I I II i I 1 ~~,\ Z l~i_~ III ~ g>< /' ~~ w I I I I! .I ' I I I I` I mss` \. ~ O ~~ n/ ~ / -~ r I , i `mod ~. ' ~. . -\~ .- / /~ .' j- ~ / i / I i $ ~\'' ~\ / ~ / \.__- ~__~ " ; ~/ / ~8,, it I i I ~ I i I ~ \ 1 ~~-.,. \,• ~. \ \ - .~1.. \~ \ \~.~ \ \ /~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ j // i i ~.__ -_~`~, /~ 2d'U' ~~ I .I I G~II i , 1, I I \ \-~_ ,.\ \ \ \~ 1 \ \ / / i ' i %' i _~ i • y E5' , - j i I I ~ i I I II I i \` ~ ~\~~ ~\ \~ 1 ~. ,c~ ~ \, ~~ \ ~ ~ i i~ ~ / /" `- `_~g9 br ~,~ ~ i /i /~ j/J I I' ' , ~ I m`4. I ~` '/r \ ~ ~ ~ b ~. \ / i ~ I/ i / /' / ~ f i~ 11 i ~ I ' dew lil \ \~s \.. \ ~ 91 ~ \ \i~ / /~ i ~ 1 ~,, ~,'~ // ,ii ~N, III , \ ~ , _ I \\~ _ - _= ___ / ij ;.-' ~ 1 1 i ~ ~ I~ ~~ I I - \\\ \\ \ ~~ .\~\ ice.- /~ -' -j _ ~. . / c~ ~.~~ - ~' g \_ -,- ,, :~ ;\ -, ~ w I\ ~ - ``; ~ h itl ft V u +ii vv rca~ 2 • ~ _ I I I ~ ~ i I Lust 9Zf ~Si ~ ~ ~ F N ~ I ~~f~tl,~~t~n~,,~ dII~I2I03I'Id~ dOO1.d2idS ~ ~ ~ (11 T :vtS 43!H /Mi,S a 3xn.i.~aiix~xd ~~1I2IQ ~~QI2I.LZI?I ~ i i SITOd02I.Ld~ ~ d~N3QIS32I Qd,LSfIH o ~ ~~ ~~ I ~ I I I ~ o~~I,N . ~ ~ • i I I ~,-~~-Xn~ i ~ ,a£~ ~zo,; a~~ `dIN2I03I'IV~ `d~OZd2IdS it I I t~auS 48!H 006 I H~RZ~~ZIH~2Id ~l1RIQ ~OQI2I.I.LDI I SI'IOd02IZ~~ ~~N~QIS~2I Q~.LSI1H I i I g I ~ I~ ~ ~ I ~ o N = I ~ _ ~ ~ ~ I o', N .~-.,~s v ( V I _ _ _ _ _ - _ - __ _.__.~.._ta .- I ,. - ____________________ ____ __ ____________________ I _, I _ _ I I ~ N ~ I I ~ O @~ oc Z b ~, ~B O~ i ~ h u~ 3°°` I I _ ,, ,„ ,,, -- - , ,, ,,,, ., _ _ .,,. - - ~ - i Z ;' 3 - -I - - I - - __ ~, - cv Q // _ ® I 1 I / ISM 1 i 1 - / 1 ~ ~ I / _ 1 / I I I I / / / ~ / ~ - / _ I / 1 -- S~OOE _ - i /~ ~ o ' ~ ~ I o -i .~-5 _ ~ r / OL - OC ~ i WI Ul ` ^ ~ I - ~~ ~ ~I I ~ a ~ ~~ ~,_____ - ~ - - - -. _ ~ - - ~ ~ . - - - - ---- _~ ~ -~---i - --- - - -- Z_ Q F °~ a - ~w I ~ _ ~ U ~ ~ 53KI3H5 = I '~' ~ i ~` s m Zo - ~ ~ Qa~ ~ ~o - ~ F \ \~ ~ LL ~ ~ I __ ! Z P lire::-1.::n i.,, ~..,:;c i. I_ I '' O ~ ~ c'7 ~ 1 1 ~ I \ a ~ - ~. `, I ~ / ~ ~ o ~ , oo 3 I Z ~~~/ w~ Z= \ _ _ I ~~ ~ - io------- I I \ Z - ~ ' g \ m = = 3 - - I _ __ --- I 1 I _ ~ s9 ~ _ I 3 Q ~ / I ~- Ov Zz ~ ~ W x ~; I Q a ~ ~IQ ~ j I ~ W ~ ~ I a~ a ~ `° I ~ `' I I Z ~ ~- ~ OL I ~' ~ ~ 0 I I - - = - - - -- - J ~ I -----------J l~11 (Y W a O a a 0 • • • I ~ i ,o£b`6`~`%i~9iea f/I1~I2IO3I'I~d~ ~1OO.I,~12IF~S g ~aan5 48tH 006 axni~aiiii~ad ~~1I2IQ dOQI2I.L.LI?I SI`IOdO2I.Ld d~I~I~QIS32i Qd,LS11H ~~N ~ ~ N~ ~~ . - ~ lLRI-9~£-(K9 p ai j IO£Vd NJ `o7IV oled dI1~I2I03I'Id~ `dOO.Ld2IdS ~ I = _ -I ~ i laailS 4~!H (YX, I ~xn.t~aiix~xd dl1I2IQ dOQI2I~LDI ~ I ' SIZOd02I,Ldy \L d~NdQISd2I Qd.LSf1H o~No ~ N ~~I • ~ ~ i ~ ~,.~Z~-Xtl~ LL8I-9Z£-059 ~' i0£66 tlJ'ollb' oled ~aagS 4~!H 006 I i 32III.L~HJ.IH~2I\/ i ~ SI'IOd02I.I.3 ,~~ Z a ~p w v® ~ i II i t I ~~~I' II ~ ~ _ __ I~ ~ ~ =-;~ II ~ I -_ , ~- i~~ .~ ~i, ~I' ~h r, ~~~ p-. ~ 4y I r , I I I ~ II ~ [~C I ' IM1 t V ^ III ~ !I~ _ -u - - dIl~I2I03I'Id~ `d00Zd2IdS ~nlxa ~~alxisix ~~N~alsax aaisnx _~_~- r ~ - -, - - r __ a~ 3~ z~ ~o n? (Y Z W J W W ~_ ~ ~L~ } z ~ ~ I € ~ ~~o~~ n a O I ~ - - - - _ Z O ; O ~ w w ~ ~ > w ~I ~ w ~ - ^ O w to ---- ~_ 1 ~ Q I L _, L_~ L i ; ZL81-~~£-~tl~ ~ yon LLBl-9Z£-oS9 ~ ~ ~j ~IN2I03I'Id~ dOOZV2IdS I [0£vC, tlJ'olltl ~IBd ~ ~ z ~ Iaa~lS 48!H OGG axni~a.cix~ad ~11I2IQ~OQI2I.L.LI?I ;~ i - slzoaox.l.a ~~N~als~x Q~ssnH to s ~ ~ ~~ b Z cv N ~zQ N? d O 5 O g~ W ~~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I~ I i i. ~ ~~ a =_ - -_~,, _ JII- ~ ~ ~ - IIII. - ~ - - ~ ~ ~ 3 - - - - =~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~~ ~'.u-1ra gal o ° \` d ~~ ~ Z ~ L a ~ _ _ - _ _ I e l =_ •. - ®I ~ \ - ~ __ W O I LL~~.. __ _ 1-O ~ _> - _ i _ i ~~ m = ~ ~ ~, ~~,~~ +i~~rlr= mi ~ -1.11 U11= P„1~\,,I~z ..11 . A o o ~ o _ _ _ aooo ~- i - • I - 1 1 I Ifil =1111 I I °ill°_ I _ ~ , _ - Q _ I t- ~ l9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ I L .III ~ w - I I ~ F ~ _ ' ~I `~ _~'~ 3 . i ~ j: III' 111 Y ~ I 1W- ~ II ~ ~~ ~ ~ _ `~ I '. ~ IIII - r-~i - , , I~ - ~ ~~ ~1 ~ O _ _ ~~h Y-1i uI jl _ I 0~I Q 0 ~~ -J , ~ ~ 1 tl _ _~-_ o ~z Q ! m ~-~ J - _ - ~~n ~ - ~ Ili' i ~ _ ~ 1 _ - -- o _ b ~ ' _ I s x: I~ ' ~ -~--, ~ IId= -II'1 Ida 1 ° _ ,~ ' : =111d I I , ~ '_ 1'11 lip I ~ I - -: - R I -1 11,1-I !':I = 1 - 1 - ~ 11 ~ ~ el -- w ~ `~ V ,1 T I ~ I O QI = Q _ ~d;Ll e e _ - r- ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ I^ - 1111 111 _ ~ _, ~ 1111 _~I~i= i ( Ill\ II!~Vil ~IIII= ill! 1H~1=H 'rIfIWIXdI.J I C-~9L Z O Z O W W O O a a 0 0 ~c a ~ a 0 ~'~ ~ 0 NJ g ~ " ' ` °° Ae 3 3H~ a~op~op • asop uos • wn ny \1h01~1H1/S 111 t/INdO.~I J •H•W 4004-919 (804) xnj 0004-919 (904) ~ N A8 03N91a30 6Z1S6 'tl~ 'asof~ ~oS SOZ a11~S 'PMB ~ea10 saana}S QQQ4 ; W Y~ M ~ z ~, ~h d i 08-'6L-LL5 Ndtl ~ Ae aa ~ '~~I Iing ~ tagtjnt~ ' 13~HS a3n0~ a~oN sd ~ 3~N301S3~1 C731Sf1H o ~ 3lY]5 SN^iI5N3tl 31Y~ .. e wme C W ~~QNp zJp~20 K O~nQ °~W O~/1 °~4~~ Oy ~a~T~z ~~ Q p m~CW2 4 £oriz z?~.~°~ cy ¢~2W< F W O OC a i I ~ J Q Z I ~> zo 3a 22 ~ C7 Q 2Q WO 4 QUO U ~ W z D;I Q W O W ~ D; 12 Z~OWZ U 00 ~~O J ~ ~ W J W ~> >~~~- O ~m ~O~ 2 Zcn atn? H a ~ ~ i _ ~ o ~ ~ m ~ Q° a a °O } 41 W t ~ 2 ~ W W ? J O~ g . C3 ~ W ~ Z O O Q ~ ~ W f Q ~ j O ~ ~ z Q 4 3 W Q2 O W _ -~ ~ U Q ~ ~ R C O K K K 2 p a U 2 =! ~ Q ~ O V 4 9 w W ~ ~ 2 2 0 2 ~ 2 Q W O Q a ~ r' ZI ~ 4 O m W K ¢ ~ ~ 3 ¢ 3 e ~ v~ ~n v~ O o O U ~ K 1- K W o e ~n o m O~ ? W 4" z _ _ .. ' h H CO h .. _ _. . o y, - r, ': o; "s - s I -- - ~ -, ---~ - ~ - - ° g. m ® g N aw~ a ~, O N W U~ 2 ~ Q Q ~ Q J m o ~' ~ ~" 9 _~~ 4i~Q° x ~ a~~ ~~ ooz eQ~~ ~~~ ~~ sa~;l ~~ ~' Wj~ V ~2 ~p2>? 4p~ W 440< ~. b~ °°~°~ a °a~~ 4¢4 4< ~<azQwm~ <~ ~~os~< <~ Rio a e>o ~~c; ~~oa°~4>4 $4 ~~oo~~ W~ ?QUO w~z ~4K W`34~4~4 w2 y2"'~4ti ~° ~2¢Nw ~W40 ~s I"a moi IC"~Q~ez a~ ~~Ua~~ (xjW xe~wo >~o u Quo ''~QaO~s'o ~~ z2~i~~y 2a'o ~~mgQ ~qz zip ~p~a~rc~ oQ ~¢°~oce pp°~ ~°~~~ w°fSaSa N ~ W j~WNAQO ~V ~13'33t~4~ ~ISi~U 2Q~N~ ~~G p~W eK~~ppQ U¢ D)0 aay °I~j~m W4~~ 2ao°vQ OZ~ C V2~ 22=46~F O~ Z~vIWga2 WWIy ~~e~40 ~eW z Q 'm=~ 4~~°i~~ ~2 ~~~~o~$ moo omoc~<i~ o~~ a ~ y~= ~~zW~~~ W{` °m~~QQZ ~~~ y=sue' yao ~¢ ~ 02~ °~Z~k'w~o m°J ~~ '~~~~ owG ~~~o °o~z' OO ~ ¢~i~ ¢zo~zd ~~'m wo ~¢O~m~ac Q~q ¢v°i c0i3o ~~m a¢ ez4°,xo ;~ z Z$ y 2 •- N M v ui ~ri • 2 e hJ°~^~ eo N W ~y~=N~~ ~~ h2ti W v W A°~ OZ~~~MW2 K~ ¢ ~ ~O ~ mJW w U O K U~ K g W N~ a Q W tJWJe~ ~°~m Jm.<N U~ ~~U~j W~C~S2eWyU Om iz ~¢ze m~ ~~U~ ° W~~j~~ ~~ Z~cj }i0~ O~H~OW°W mC o4Cz ~~,w^z z ~ JN~ m ax~x~'ow~Oe~ `9' < x~~'ow ¢o~ ~W°o `~~ CI aiQ~~ ~imi~ 2 Vl ~~ U O ~~~ O W QQW4h K~~~y¢O~< m~ jm'o ~>' zezw mc~4a> Ze ~YYa m $oa~gZ~v^ ~~' 4Wy2W zeWrn¢>O ~~ zw cTi~oQ =rca='o°OzW k'a W~2O~O 2 04¢00 ~Oy ~ a ~ a~' oz o °~~ ~ NS N~n~wN ¢y~yy~~,$2~° oh vm~c~°io~ "~i°~~u$g °~m ~oezz~~ ¢amwam~~ ~4ea m ~ ~ ~ w~~ ~2~m~ U~Q~U Q4~~Q ~~~`~z .<-Z~~~ ~$<'~ ~~<~° N~~3~ OW O ~2?? ~e¢~ ~~0~4° 0 F=. ~tl ~'- Q ~_ _ _, p V a U VI J ~' Q• Q 0 0 CU O ~~~~,1RER*p ~Yd, o@ e o /o S ~~ } ~m d w a ~ ~ 4r m~ $~ a ~' ~J F P~~'~ystR'te a~'~e ~- y, ~ U X o~p W "7 ti ~ ~ W ~ U ~ O z ~ W SO ~ ~ ? ~ w ~~ ?e oa F~ ~ 0 ~ C'U w w ~ N ~ d1 W ~Y W C zd zz~iWZ~o~~k" y" o o~-~-m i~Li a3 chi ~ QO 2 W ~ y W qi cgw ~~~ ~~2~0 W O ~~iU >< Q H° z f/l ~ f k" o 03 4 4 O'i~~H~y~~~~>33 z ?~~ W e ~ F 2¢W° 0O3rc °j i-~O ~~U a W ~my~ OOW O ~ v o x ? ~h~F-~F~i3 W 1n o ~N ~~ y 00 W ~>U ~~~ ~40 4~~ O e efr WO J ~y g V1 N z y a m ~~aQ i eGy <¢ ® ~ a i „ 2~ p 20 ~ z R w ~1/1 yO?W O~ j eW ° ° ~ ~ <tJ ~ z 2 ~ja2 p ASS CjW O j 12 U ~i ~ O_ <Z ~ cf ~ W w~ ~4 N °w O ¢ Wei z ~ W U g~0 CW ~ ~ W O ¢ oo °r ~ ~ °S~ N p~02W 4 ~~ ~mNm4 o ~~ ~03 ~W Z~j ~ yv3 W °G WyW ~ ~Oa g ~ ~a m y ~p~ ~U ~ m S ~2°US-~~~ ~Z4CF- O~~~S2?Q ~O ¢W~ ~ <Z 041 eW'U ~U 2 ~ ]~ ~ W O W zU W ~° O N~Ux2~7f 20444~~ ~~ ~~ U ¢ =WO~c m~Q ¢ ~o~ K~ ~ ~~=z~`S~~~a4~~~ >. ac<s W°q Sy ~y~¢2 ~ W a < U~ti ~-f~ ~U4 O~-Q 2m 24 a ~~ C~ij y WW y ,XaQO D O ~~ ~ 2W ~ y0 2y~~F~ ~el. ~tn m2 ~~ W ~ NOW !nm 41~Um V10, O ~ 2 I~~. W ). 4~p ~ ~ ¢Q 2 °~ Q ~ ~~ ZZ ~~ ~ ON ~ ~W~ ~f9 Q : T ¢x~4~~~e~~ W T UU ¢WWT <O 3 x z¢kUW y ~ CNQ (~ap2 0U ~W a N a ~viCeWKC~O~S~22K eee000 0WWW WlL It li ;,~ Z~F $~~ 2~ UQ ~ OZO ~ QUf2Q ppOqgY U~S 8 W~~ w~ ~~ gg Qa¢f°i ~+'o OW~'i~w ~f`i t4 N ~i v vi td Z ~ 2 Q 4 y v ~ 'x U ~ ~ 2 W ~ ~ p O Z ~ OV F-- W "- W 2 N 2 ti W ^ N M ~, 0 N i m m N ~, 0 m IJ 'H'W A9 G3i1]3H: 'H'W A9 G3rlSS31 '1'3 AE ru+~aa 0310N Sb 31ti~5 SWISU3b a~op~op ~ aso~ uos ~ uungny tiooti-sus (aoti) Xo~ ooo~-sus (so4) 6ZI56 'tl0 'asop uos SDZ a~!n5 'PMB Aaa~O suana}S 0884 .Y. •anI 'ling ag Yus[inxg . J viNaodnd~ 'voolvads OS-'bL-LG5 Ndb~ 3~N3ClIS3b a31Sf1H ~ .~ ~ I ~ x II ~ ~ r- p n ~ y : z < ~. I ° 1 € $ ~ ~ m\W \N Q W ~ mp U M~ ~ _I d Z z r w l w d a0 ~ Z W pQ ai W ~ OU ~ m QS QS W 6 W F F cv ° ~ ~ mw Q ¢ a o ~ m a B 1 ~ ~ a ,~.- ~ o ~ ~ o N= 4 a o^ J oU p Z Z ~i o ~ N ti w 4. ¢a N z~ ~ o ~ 6 =w0 °a~ rc a~ a w z vO (/1U Q O O Vl O VOA ~ ~a~ w Jw p V W ~a0 u nm v~-i ~ m~ a w w lWrn1 ~ w 'c S ° w ~ U F ~ ~ Q 1- i ~ r vc 4 0 ~ J s ~~ > - t7 wca a O Qm -- w m?W 4 ~ m i~ wyV ~ W = N ~ ~ < LLa =oo ~ ! g w ~ ~ ~ ~ czi 1 Z w J ~ s o 0 Q Z QM Q LL U Q V I ~ p N Z ~ rn ¢ <w ~ .. ~ < F w ,°~ ~ ¢ o !n o °°- I z .- N M i ~ W o J I - _U 0] ~ a ~ Q om S g I- 0 N ~ ~ !. ~ Q J I yy< W : _ z 8g N ~ O o ~ ~ K K "b j U m p U ~ m W! J ~ ~~ ~ O Z W~ = W +p o w z z 5 a -1 O F '. ~' rn Z w ~ w ~~ g~ L{ W r-..a,11 w a~~ ~ Z N a w J g ~ j ~ W ? ~ ~ Wd 54 °O. °(9 W U Q Z (~ t~i7z o ~ ~rwi! a ~ LL Sz a p °~ mezzo wI' oo a o ~ o. ~ ~~ a3 z o3 ~aFwvli~~ FN w ¢ ~ al w ~O ~ Z ~~~zw ww w~ N K U W O U Z 0: ¢O¢ F H .:it!.-i-~'..... ~. ,!- ', C~ ~ ~ d ~ O N ~ rU/r Z V O rn v ZI ~: W y~o~j' c4ia °aa moi U ¢ Q N F=iiCO KQ 4~°" ~ 1 zo~b aZ ~ i 8 3NIf10321 Stl 1H913H .,9 z ~ ry ~ i N W ti V W J J N "{ ~ N O n N N O n N n N N N ~'] N N a) 7 i(l N N J Z n a :n v! n b m b b - n b ~ voi a a 0 ~ o b N `Dr n a rn v m +v m c~ m m y~r N b b N N p R H M rp ~ m ~ m O p ~ s ~ o n o o n a ~ o !o o m ~ n m v m o o w m O1 ~ Z N ~ m b N N o n N pp e M N i~ pp M ~ pp < °C Z y W m V Y N M iYr1 ~ ~ N1 M ~ W ~ U Z ~ U g o ~ ~ N U / ~ . U ~ • f o .9 N ~ V ~ I ` ~ , • ~ ~ ~ g ° ~ 8 7 ~ _ 3 m ~ ~ ~q ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ w ~ a ~ + . ~ n ~ c • ~ ~ k c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x a < N r o ~ ~ ~ Jl Ti ' 3 i ~ b i ` ~ b s a Li m ~ x .J n n ~ ~ ~ g ~ ^_ ~ a R R ~ ~ ~ m S w ~ z = a ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~r ~ ~ ~ l ~ n C t x ~ rn i a C ~ !r w ~ i F \ S S a ~ N ~ n m i 7 ^ l d d l ~ ~ ~ d m n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ n ° N „ i a a : ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ a b 3 0 z N N N I o r 9 rn S11 Y ~~Q ~\ m N N ~ ~ ~ ~ O O I ~ N ~H~B rn m m i W ti i~ ~ ~ ~ ~,. ~ r '~ e o p ~$ Z I U q~ .. w ppp~p+ pp 3 0 ~ ¢6 H m~ ~Q~ ~aa ~~m~h~~ ~ ~~~~~~I~] ~g~~~ ~ tSw L( tl~z~W~~S J ~4 ~ Ws~ ~~C~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ x w ~ ~~m ~`ia ~~ .9 0 Yc~ ~q~? 8~3~ CFO ~ i0~ a 4q U ~qgq~ ~~~~ am~~ ~I'!iW ~~ m3r! tY ~3W n O ~~ ~~~~ ~~i~ ~~ ~~g$ ~ ® W w D a ,~ U1 'H'W AB O3M~3tp 'H'W Aa o3•~IS3o '1'3 Ae :w,vaa ,OZ=„t _ 31vJ5 SNOGN3a 3lV I ~ j° t \ 1 1. 1. 1 /-r ` 1 \ \. / 1 I II I ~~ ~ i \~ _ ~ ~ \ `\ I ~~ .\ $ ~~ \ I .\ ~ \ .1 \_ \ .,I \1\II II I ~ I ', • asop uos • wngnv t/INLi0~11t/0 't/`J0111l~HS M s (eob) Xo~ ooob-sus (aor) NH1d 3Jb~Nlt/ad ~p uo5 SOZ al!aS 'PM9 >faai~ su2naeS 0894 o a ~~ 08-tit-LL5 Ndd ~ Q7 "' ~ = o g ~ ~ ~"~ aNd ~Niaea~ °~ °~ 'a$i nt , ~ 3~N3aiS3a a31Sf1H ~ °' 0 0 1 ' \\ \ _ 1 1 I l l I \\ I\ ~ I I I i I .~~ee~x ~ ~ ~ l ~rv 4 .c! ~nY i ~•~I_ 1 I I I I ' ~ j I I I ~ I I ~ QQ 'jS1 ~' ~` !Ii I ~~ ~ ^ , 93N JI _ _ ~~ i I ~{~_ lr;;' ~ ~ I ;lllJ ! - m ~~~ e h _ I ~ i ~ I I I I I , ~ ; ~ ~ l l i. R _ , , ; ~ . 4, , , d ~ i ~ll IV ~ a ;,~ / j ~ I I a ~ I _ ~ ~ i ! I I I i I i I i ~ ry~ ~I II // I ~ 1 I I i / f_ ! f° a~ n, i i l I I ~ ~ ~ I i i 3 w 1 11 i ! jI I ~ \~° \\ 1 I ,/i I `~ II 1 11 1. Ili 1 ~11 ~~ 1,\ I ~~ i,i iii I;~ o\ , ~ ~ ~~ ~,1 ~;~L,~ 1,1,, \;~,\`~ xg~ i I i ~ \~1 , 1 l i ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 \ \ \ ~ i ~ ~.~ --i ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ ~ =,\ CI ~~1 ~ 1~ I~1 1\ 1, \111 ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ` / 1 1 1 1 \ ~ \ \ I = I I ~~ 1 ~ I 1. 1 ~ 1 \ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ \ , ~ g_ ~ 1 1\ o ~~l 1 II\, 1 111 \ \\ \ \ \\ \~ ~1 _ \ , \ ~ _ \ 1 1 ~ 1 _ I 1 \ i \ ~ ~ ^\ \ \ \ 1\ \ I\~ 1 \. 11 1 I\ \ F. \ '1 „ I I 1 111 II. r \\ \ \ ~\ `\`\ g ,`\\ \\` \\` \\\ \\ \\~` \\\ \\\ ~' \~\ \ >; = - `I I ~ >< ~' III, I 1 I~i I ` 11 I~ ~~ ` \ I \ ~ I I I I I I I I I~ \~\\ \`\ ~, I Y'!SZ! -' \ I S 'fi+-f ' 1S ~ \u j 65' Z! 3 I 6S'OSZi 00 rf 'S0, ' , I '~ SZSZI o a ~, I '. ;NQ ~I l4~., I 1 !~ gl ~ 01"6 ZI°d < W~ ,< n - C"9621 a0na I 09+1 ~ S^l~B 1 j O9YiZ! _I _ _ - ~ ~ I' ! - 8' ZI I- j - - -- 1'~ I II ~ _ ~ -- O19fLl O1'9f Ind '6fLl I~ 11 1 L 'LZZ[ , 3 l l1~I O9'CLL! l'Ofdl 1 " w~ ;;, ~" W u• w '~ ! n Z9 ZZI=d Z2 ~ Nf,'~~ Y ~ cYY~ u S S 4y oc coroz ~ :~ oowzL! ~i j ~ \ I I I I I ~ I I ~ \ \ , \\ ~ \, ~~ _ e oa+! sa7en M1 ~ zrozzi 8 I ! \ \ \ \ h i ~ ! ~ ~ 1 , I \, ~ 1` j \ M ~ al'I ~ I 1 1 \\ \\ \\e \ \~ \1 \ \I \I 1 1 1 !!~ '\ ~ - ~ ~ \ ` \ , , !\ am %~ ;' /`' l j i i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ r 1 .1 \~~ `' \ \I ~I ~' ~ ~'\ 1 It '~, \\ 1 \\ \\ I \'; '`' -~ ~ I j , j ~ ~ 1, ~~ i i i I' ~j ~ (' Ill`~1,11 ,~1`1!''~II Ijli ~~~) I' I /i % ~/ i ~' ~ >o %l~~I - f 11 ' ~ / / / / i~ I ill ~ / ~ 11 ~ ! % I ~, ~ ~ ~~ i ~ l ~ 1 / l ri7 W e\ k~ , I l l l l i ~ r 1 ~ ~ i I I a_ i ~~ %i ;~ ~ oo ~ ~ l~ I ~ i I-p ~ I ~~: ~ ,/~ ~ I; rosy"~ / % / L / j ~ .a ~ XS ~ ff ~et; d ~~ ~a °i ~, s ~ `~ Zt O .ajd ~C; • l l m~ S C S ~~ .` d. 9 .'ci.. ii ",~-/ ~ Q - - -- I ~ i a i ~ l i_I ~ I ~ y i I 1l i 1i ~" ~~ ~ - ~ a~ i I 1 I g n ~ ~~ Cr p, _. a ~~~ ~~~^' / ~ ~ 'I 1 ~ ~~~//~i~~,~ ~=_`~`z->°,~ ~' ' i~ .~.~~. __ e~ I ~ ,1 .~~ 1[~~S"~`1 I ' / /~-I, III I I ~ ~ ~l ~~ A ~ ~ e a or / bb ~ 9 `'~r Jj C 1 • ~ I O I~ B . ` , / \~ a' ~e ~~~(' \ ti ~~ .~~~ _ - ~ ~ ~~ ® ~~ a\ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ `p, 1 M1 pA !'~ati ~ Q r ~ °~ O $?$~ ~ B ~~ ` "' \ 6lSZl d ~ mm ' 1~ ~~ ~ FO' LZ~ bll .90 F: I I ~ -m ~ 1'\ ~~~1 " T ~ /`~ m „9~ ~ \\ I I ~ 'OS lmO ` i \ /j y ~ ~\ 1 I \ ^\ SJ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ ~. III 1 ~ ~u3 I `~ \ ~~ \ \. s 1 _ ~ ~ \ j~ \m I \ ~m II \3I ~ \\\ YYr~ :1 .III N\ \ ' ~~~~ \ \ \\ .'.! ~ ~ l~ ~\ 0 4 "C \~~ ~ 9 0 N 1 m 0 m N w • ~ r