.01 U-2007-01 Frank Ho
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application: U-2007-0l, ASA-2007-01, TM-2007-01,
EA-2007-01
Applicant (s): Frank Ho
Owner: Tony Baig
Property Location: 10630 Linnet Lane
APPLICATION SUMMARY:
Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and Tentative Map application to
. Demolish an existing single family home with a detached garage at the rear
. Construct four for sale single family residential units each with attached two car
garages and four bedrooms each.
. Subdivide the property into four lots with a common roadway for access.
Agenda Date: April 24, 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the
. Use permit application, U-2007-0l,
. Mitigated Negative Declaration, EA-2007-01,
. Architectural and site approval application, ASA-2007-01, and
. Tree removal application, TM-2007-0l, in accordance with the model resolution.
Project Data:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning Designation:
Acreage (Gross):
Density:
F.A.R.:
Height:
Stories:
Parking:
Required Parking
Proposed Parking
Project Consistency with:
Environmental Assessment:
Commercialj Residential
P (CommjRes)
Planned (Commercial and Residential)
0.52 Acres (22,647 sq. ft.)
< 25 D.U.jGr.Ac. (Project=7.69 D.U.jGr.Ac.)
F.A.R. - 0.449
60 ft (Project Max. = 25.5 ft)
2 stories
4 spaces per unit
4 spaces per unit + 4 guest spaces (on street)
General Plan: Yes
Zoning: Yes
Categorically Exempt
BACKGROUND:
SITE DESCRIPTION:
This project is located on one 22,647 2:. square foot lot with an existing single family
home with a detached garage on it. The property takes access off a private street that
extends to Linnet Lane, a public street. The property is surrounded by a variety of land
use types: to the north and south is an apartment complex, to the east is a hotel, to the
I~ I
No. Tree Species Size Status Reasons
Diameter
1 Silk Oak 14" Retain (not on site)
2 Silk Oak 12" Retain (not on site)
l-~
Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and Tentative Map for 10630 Linnet Lane
U-2006-14, ASA-2006-25, EA-2007-0l and TR-2007-0l
April 24, 2007
Page 3 of 4
No. Tree Species Size Status Reasons
Diameter
3 Silk Oak 14" Retain (not on site)
4 London Plane 5" Retain (not on site)
5 London Plane 5" Retain (not on site)
6 London Plane 5" Retain (not on site)
7 London Plane 5" Retain (not on site)
8 London Plane 5" Retain (not on site)
9 London Plane 5" Retain (not on site)
10 Deodar Cedar 22" Retain/ Prune
11 London Plane 29" Remove In direct conflict with building footprint
12 Monterey Pine 29.5" Retain
13 Monterey Pine 14.5/9.5" Remove Structurally poor
14 Monterey Pine 21.5" Retain
15 Monterey Pine 15/14" Remove Structurally poor
16 Monterey Pine 20.5" Remove Structurally poor
17 Monterey Pine 9 .5" Retain
18 Deodar Cedar 16" Remove (Staff Topped with branching mainly to the
Recommendation) south. Structurally not good.
19 Monterey Pine .. 19.5" Remove Will be substantially impacted
20 Modesto Ash II" Remove Poor health, structurally poor pnd m
direct conflict with proposed project
21 Modesto Ash 21.5" Remove In direct conflict with proposed project
The applicant is removing three of the trees inventoried since they are in direct conflict
with the proposed design. The applicant is also proposing the removal of four
Monterey Pines since they are structurally poor and will be impacted by the
construction on Lot 2. The arborist has provided specific recommendations in his report
with regard to the protection of the trees that are being retained.
Staff recommends that tree 18, a specimen sized Deodar Cedar, also be removed. This
recommendation is a result of a follow up letter received from the arborist with regard
to the impacts of construction upon the tree and the structural integrity of the tree. The
tree has been topped in the past at about 10 feet and has large side branches. This has
resulted in a structurally poor and visually unattractive tree. Additionally, the tree has
not developed symmetrically since the north side of the tree had to compete with a
Monterey Pine located close to it. Therefore, most of the trees canopy has developed to
the south. Staff will present pictures at the Planning Commission meeting.
The arborist does not feel concerned about the amount of pruning necessary for
constructing the new buildings for the trees being retained provided the pruning is
done under the supervision of a licensed/ certified arborist. Additionally, structures on
lot 2 need to be built on a pier and grade beam foundation within 20 feet of the trunks
of the trees that are being retained on the lot.
C)
/-)
Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and Tentative Map for 10630 Linnet Lane
U-2006-14, ASA-2006-25, EA-2007-01 and TR-2007-01
April 24, 2007
Pa~e 4 of 4
The arborist has prepared a follow up letter with regard to replacements for the trees
being removed. The total value of the trees being removed is $11,120. This is equivalent
to one (1) 60-inch box tree, two (2) 54-inch box trees, one (1) 48-inch box tree and one (1)
24-inch tree. David Babby recommends that oak trees and cedar trees be considered
within the new landscape. Staff recommends that the following trees be planted in the
locations indicated.
1. One 60-inch box valley oak tree planted along the western property line of Lot 1
2. One 54-inch box valley oak tree planted along the western property line of Lot 2,
3. One 54-inch box deodar cedar planted along the southern property line of Lot 3,
4. One 48-inch box deodar cedar planted in the northeastern corner of Lot 4, and
5. One 24-inch box deodar cedar planted along the southern property line of Lot 2
between trees 14 and 17.
NOISE
The project site is located close to Interstate 280. According to an acoustical analysis
done in 1996 for the development of the apartment complex and the seven residential
units that adjoin the subject property, the noise levels in the area will remain the same
. until 2010. Staff has used this acoustical analysis to, review this project.
The Community Noise Equivalent Level in the area is in the 59-69 CNEL range. The
General Plan considers this CNEL acceptable with conventional construction, but with
closed windows and fresh air supply. Additionally, the Uniform Building Code
mandates that the CNEL inside multi-family residential buildings needs to be 45 CNEL
or lower. Though single-family dwelling units are exempt from this requirement, state
law states that city staff can impose standards on any development as they deem fit.
Staff has added a condition of approval to ensure that construction plans for the
buildings incorporate design features to meet or exceed the requirement of a CNEL of
45 or lower inside the buildings. Staff has also incorporated the applicable
recommendations from the noise report into the model resolution to minimize interior
sound levels.
ENCLOSURES:
Model Resolution
Exhibit A: Consulting Arborist's reports/letters
Initial Study with Exhibits
Recommendation of the Environmental Review Committee
Plan Set
Color Elevations/Color Board
Tentative Map
Submitted by: Piu Ghosh, Assistant Planner ~
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development .() ~
/-+
U-2007-01
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT FOUR SINGLE F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT
10630 LINNET LANE
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: U-2007-01 (EA-2007-01)
Applicant (s): Frank Ho (Tony Baig)
Property Location: 10630 Linnet Lane
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
for a Use Permit, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the
Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held
one or more public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and has satisfied the following requirements:
1. The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the
Cupertino General Plan, the Valko Development Agreement and the purpose of this
title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, application no. U-2007-01 is hereby approved; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning
Application U-2007-01, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting
of April 24, 2007 and are incorporated by reference herein.
1~5
Resolution No.
Page 2
V-20q7-01
April 24, 2007
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on plan set "Linnet Subdivision, Cupertino, California" stamped
"Received April 16, 2007", consisting of 14 pages labeled AO.O, AO.1, A1.0, A1.1,
A2.1, A2.2, A3.0, A3.1, A4.0, A4.1, A5.0, T1.1, T1.2 and four color elevations labeled
E-1 to E-4, except as amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION
The applicant shall receive an allocation of 3 units of the 170 residential units
allocated for the North Valleo Park Area.
3. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Approval is granted to construct 4 units.
4. SHARED ACCESS DRIVEWAY
The proposed shared access driveway shall be fully installed and constructed ~o the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of final occupancy.
5. TREE REMOVAL AND REPLANTING
Tree removal: Approval is granted to remove six trees from the site. Trees 11, 13, 15,
16, 19, 18, 20 & 21 are approved to be removed. Trees 10, 12, 14 & 17 are to be
retained and protected per the arborist's recommendations in the arborist report
dated February 22, 2007.
In the event that any of the protected trees must be removed during the construction
process due to reasons deemed appropriate by the Director of Community
Development, then comparable diameter replacement tree(s) or field grown tree(s)
shall be planted at the same location or at locations visible to the public at the
discretion of the Director.
Tree Mitigation: The following five trees shall be planted to mitigate the tree
removal.
1. One 60-inch box valley oak tree along the western property line of Lot 1
2. One 54-inch box valley oak tree along the western property line of Lot 2,
3. One 54-inch box deodar cedar along the southern property line of Lot 3,
4. One 48-inch box deodar cedar in the northeastern corner of Lot 4, and
5. One 24-inch box deodar cedar along the southern property line of Lot 2
between trees 14 and 17.
Tree protection plan: As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan
shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. In addition, the
following measures shall be added to the protection plan:
. F or trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be
installed around the drip line of the tree prior to any project site work.
. No parking or vehicle traffic shall be allowed under root zones, unless using
buffers approved by the Project Arborist.
{ " ("
Resolution No.
Page 3
U - 2007-01
April 24, 2007
. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is
needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City's consulting arborist
shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of
the tree.
. Wood chip mulch shall be evenly spread inside the tree projection fence to a
four-inch depth.
. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers.
. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health.
. A covenant on the property shall be recorded that identifies all the protected
trees, prior to final occupancy.
The tree protection measures shall be inspected and approved by the certified
arborist prior to issuance of building permits. A report ascertaining the good health
of the trees mentioned above shall be provided prior to issuance of final occupancy.
Tree protection bond: A tree protection bond in the amount of $30,000 for all the
trees being retained shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits.
6. LOT 2 FOUNDATION
The applicant shall provide plans prior to issuance of building permits that show
that the foundation of the house and the garage is on pier and above-grade bean
foundation within 20 feet of its trunk.
7. NOISE
The applicant shall implement the following measures:
a. The residential units shall have windows with STC ratings of glazing of a
minimum of 26.
b. Exterior doors shall be solid core with perimeter seals.
c. All frames and seals shall be thoroughly caulked and weather-stripped to
prevent air leaks type transmission of sound.
d. Exhaust ducting at kitchens and bathrooms shall be fitted with acoustical
absorbent linings.
Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall prepare an acoustical report by a
licensed acoustical engineer to demonstrate compliance with the Cupertino General
Plan. All residential units shall be subject to good quality construction practices and
installation of equipment, including sealing of doors, windows, frames and casings
to ensure that the interior average day/night noise level does not exceed 45 dBA
Ldn.
8. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees,
dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant
to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice
of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications,
reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day
approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
1,1
Resolution No.
Page 4
U-2007-01
Apri124,2007
other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you
fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements
of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
SECTION IV:
DEPARTMENT
9. OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, street widening and related structures
shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City
Engineer.
CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS
If street lighting is required, street lighting shall be installed and shall be as
approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to
preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and
shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site
is located.
10. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with
Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits
maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water
Quality Control Board as appropriate.
11. DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
*Pre and Post-development calculations must be provided.
12. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities
Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of
Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of
underground utility devices. Ordinance No. 331 requires all overhead lines to be
underground whether the lines are new or existing. The developer shall submit
detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject
to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer.
13. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of
Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and
inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding
of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction
permits.
Fees:
a. Grading Permit Fee:
b. Checking and Inspection Fee:
$ 6% of On Site Improvement Costs or
$ 2,060.00 minimum
$ 5% of Off Site Improvement Costs or
$ 2,194.00 minimum
1,-6
Resolution No.
Page 5
U-2007-01
Apri124,2007
c. Development Maintenance Deposit:
d. Storm Drainage Fee:
e. Power Cost:
f. Map Checking Fees:
g. Park Fees:
Bonds (Required):
a. On-Site Improvements Bond: 100% Performance Bond
b. Off-Site Improvements Bond: 100% Performance Bond; 100% Labor/Material
Bond
$ 2,000.00
$ 670.80
**
$ 3,348.00
$ 47,250.00
-The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by
the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of
recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or
changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule.
** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights
14. EASEMENTS
The applicant must obtain written approval from each utility company (PG&E,
California Water, Cupertino Sanitary District), Santa Clara County Fire and City of
Cupertino to determine the type and location of easements on said parcel map.
15. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water
Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil.
16. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP)
REQUIREMENTS
a. Permanent Stormwater Quality BMPs Required
In accordance with chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed
Protection, of the City Code, all development and redevelopment projects shall include
permanent BMPs in order to reduce the water quality impacts of stormwater runoff
from the entire site for the life of the project.
b. Stormwater Management Plan Required
The applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan for this project. The
permanent storm water quality best management practices (BMPs) included in this plan
shall be selected and designed in accordance with chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution
Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the City Code.
c. BMP Agreements
The applicant and the City shall enter into a recorded agreement and covenant running
with the land for perpetual BMP maintenance by the property owners(s). In addition,
the owner(s) and the City shall enter into a recorded easement agreement and covenant
running with the land allowing City access at the site for BMP inspection.
/-q
Resolution No.
Page 6
U - 2007-01
Apri124,2007
CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF
ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS
(Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code)
I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV.
Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices
Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works
City Engineer CA License 22046
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of April 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Lisa Giefer, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
G:\ Planning \ PDReport\Res \2007\ U-2007-01.doc
'..../0
ASA-2007-01
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING
AN ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW FOR FOUR NEW SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT 10630 LINNET LANE
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
ASA-2007-01 (EA-2007-0l)
Frank Ho (Tony Baig)
10630 Linnet Lane
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more
public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application;
and has satisfied the following requirements:
1. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, the General Plan, and
zoning ordinance;
3. The proposal will use materials and design elements such as horizontal siding,'
composition roof and simplified building forms that compliment the existing and
neighboring structures;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the design review application is hereby approved subject to the
conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application ASA-2007-0l
set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 24, 2007, and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
1"11
Resolution No.
Page 2
ASA-2007-01
April 24, 2007
SECTION III. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED PROTECT
Approval is based on plan set "Linnet Subdivision, Cupertino, California" stamped
"Received April 16, 2007", consisting of 14 pages labeled AO.O, AO.1, A1.0, A1.1, A2.1,
A2.2, A3.0, A3.1, A4.0, A4.1, AS.O, T1.1, Tl.2 and Page 1 of 1, and four color elevations
labeled E-1 to E-4, except as amended by this resolution.
2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees,
dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant
to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of.
a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications,
reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day
approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail
to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of
Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of April 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Lisa Giefer, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
G: \ Planning \ PO REPORT\ RES \ 2007\ ASA-2007-01 res.doc
/,fJ
TM-2007 -01
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
TENT A TIVE MAP TO CREATE FOUR PARCELS, BETWEEN 4,575 AND 5,247
SQUARE FEET, AT 10630 LINNET LANE
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
for a Tentative Parcel Map, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the
Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held
one or more public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and has satisfied the following requirements:
1) That the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the City of Cupertino
General Plan.
2) That the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent
with the General Plan.
3) That the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development
contemplated under the approved subdivision.
4) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not
likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and
unavoidable injure fish and wildlife or their habitat.
5) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated
there with is not likely to cause serious public health problems.
6) That the design of the subdivision and its associated improvements will not
conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or
use of property within the proposed subdivision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the application for Tentative Parcel Map is hereby approved,
subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2
thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application
No. TM-2007-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of
April 24, 2007, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
I '-/3
Resolution No.
Page 2
TM-2007 -01
April 24, 2007
SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
TM-2007 -01
Frank Ho (Tony Baig)
10630 Linnet Lane
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on the Plan Set labeled, "Property located
at: 10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino, CA 95014" consisting of 1 page labeled Page 1 of I,
stamped "Received April 16, 2007" except as may be amended by the Conditions
contained in this Resolution.
2. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
The applicant shall enter into a reciprocal maintenance agreement with respect to:
a. The private road (formerly Becker Lane), if deemed appropriate by the
Director of Community Development and
b. The new common private road proposed as part of this development.
These agreements shall be recorded in conjunction with recordation of the final map,
and shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney.
3. EASEMENTS
Prior to recordation of Final Map, the applicant shall record appropriate deed
restrictions and covenants running with the land, subject to approval of the City
Attorney, for all parcels that share a common private drive or private roadway with
one or more other parcels. The deed restriction shall provide for
a. Necessary reciprocal ingress and egress pedestrian and vehicular easements
to and from the affected parcels.
b. Parking easement for the guest parking allowed on the common private
driveway
SECTION IV:
DEP ARTMENT
4. OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, street widening and related structures
shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City
Engineer.
CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS
If street lighting is required, street lighting shall be installed and shall be as
approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to
preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and
shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site
is located.
5. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with
I"llf
Resolution No.
Page 3
TM-2007-01
April 24, 2007
Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits
maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/ or Regional Water
Quality Control Board as appropriate.
6. DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
*Pre and Post-development calculations must be provided.
7. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities
Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of
Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of
underground utility devices. Ordinance No. 331 requires all overhead lines to be
underground whether the lines are new or existing. The developer shall submit
detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject
to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer.
8. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of
Cupertino provi~ing for payment of fees, inclu~ing but not limited to checking and
inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding
of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction
permits.
Fees:
a. Grading Permit Fee:
b. Checking and Inspection Fee:
$'6% of OI) Site Improvement Costs or
$ 2,060.00 minimum
$ 5%of Off Site Improvement Costs or
$ 2,194.00 minimum
$ 2,000.00
$ 670.80
c. Development Maintenance Deposit:
d. Storm Drainage Fee:
e. Power Cost:
f. Map Checking Fees:
g. Park Fees:
Bonds (Required):
1. On-Site Improvements Bond: 100% Performance Bond
2. Off-Site Improvements Bond: 100% Performance Bond; 100% Labor/Material Bond
-The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by
the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of
recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or
changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule.
** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights
**
$ 3,348.00
$ 47,250.00
9. EASEMENTS
The applicant must obtain written approval from each utility company (PG&E,
California Water, Cupertino Sanitary District), Santa Clara County Fire and City of
Cupertino to determine the type and location of easements on said parcel map.
I rf 5"
Resolution No.
Page 4
TM -2007-01
April 24, 2007
10. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water
Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil.
11. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP)
REQUIREMENTS
a. Permanent Stormwater Quality BMPs Required
In accordance with chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed
Protection, of the City Code, all development and redevelopment projects shall include
permanent BMPs in order to reduce the water quality impacts of stormwater runoff from
the entire site for the life of the project.
b. Stormwater Management Plan Required
The applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan for this project. The
permanent storm water quality best management practices (BMPs) included in this plan
shall be selected and designed in accordance with chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution
Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the City Code.
c. BMP Agreements
The applicant and the City shall enter into a recorded agreement and covenant running
with the land for perpetual BMP maintenance by the property owners(s). In addition,
the owner(s) and the City shall enter into a recorded easement agreement and covenant
running with the land allowing City access at the site for BMP inspection.
CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF
ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS
(Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code)
I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV.
.. Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices
Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works
City Engineer CA License 22046
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of April 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
I'! It>
.
ARBOR RESOURCES
Professional A rboriclIltllral Consulting & Tree Ca
A TREE INVENTORY AND REVIEW
OF THE PROPOSED FOUR-LOT SUBDIVISION
AND FOUR NEW RESIDENCES AT
10630 LINNET LANE
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
. APPLICANT: Frank Ho
PROPERTY OWNER: Tonv Baia
APN: 316-47-017
Submitted to:
Piu Ghosh
Community Development Department
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Prepared by:
David L. Babby, RCA
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #399
ISA Certified Arborist #WE-4001A
February 22, 2007
Exhibit B
P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 . Email: arborresources@comcast.net
Phone: 650.654.3351 . Fax: 650.240.0777 . Licensed Contractor #796763
, --10,
David 1. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
SECTION
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
5.1
5.2
EXHIBIT
A
B
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE
PAGE
INTRODUCTION ........................ .............. ............... ...... 1
TREE COUNT AND COMPOSITION ..................................1
SUITABILITY FOR TREE PRESERVATION .......................2
REVIEW OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND TREES ..................3
RECOMMENDATIONS........................................... ........ 5
Design Guidelines..... ........................................ ........ ..5
Protection Measures Before and During Construction.. .... ......6
EXHIBITS
TITLE
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
SITE MAP
('';;0
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22,2007
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I have been retained by the City of Cupertino Community Development Department to
review the potential tree impacts associated with a proposal for a four-lot subdivision and
construction of four new homes (one per lot) at 10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino. This report
presents my analysis and recommendations.
Trees inventoried for this report include non-fruit bearing trees that are situated either on
the subject site or have canopies overhanging the site from neighboring properties.
Documents reviewed for this report include the Tentative Map (dated 6/28/06) by Alvarez
& Associates and the architectural drawings (dated 11/15/06) by Studio 61 Architects, Inc.
Please note that the canopy dimensions (or drip line) presented on Sheet AO.! (Plot Plan)
appear arbitrary and do not reflect their actual sizes; I suggest referring to the Tentative
Map for a more accurate depiction.
2.0 TREE COUNT AND COMPOSITION
Twenty-one trees of five various speCIes were inventoried for this report. They are
sequentially numbered as 1 thru 21 and the following table identifies their name, number
and percentage:
Silk Oak 1-3 3 14%
London Plane Tree 4-9, 11 7 33%
Deodar Cedar 10, 18 2 10%
Monterey Pine 12-17, 19 7 33%
Modesto Ash 20,21 2 10%
Total 21 100%
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino Page 1 0/9
City o/Cupertino Community Development Department
,,- .2 I
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
Specific data recorded for each tree is presented in Exhibit A (Tree Inventory Table). The
approximate locations and numbers assigned to each tree are presented in Exhibit B, which
is a copy of the Tentative Map.
Eleven of the inventoried trees are missing from the Tentative Map. They include #1-9, 12
and 17 and their locations, as presented in Exhibit B, are approximate and shall not be
construed as being surveyed.
For identification purposes, I attached round, metallic tags to the trunks of each inventoried
tree located on the subject site. These tags contain engraved numbers that correspond to
tree numbers presented in this report
The trunks of nine trees, #1 thru 9, are situated on the northern neighboring property and
have canopies overhanging the subject site. They have been inventoried as they are
exposed to root damage and/or canopy loss.
Trees that are shown on the Tentative Map but not inv~ntoried for this report include small
citrus and almond trees.
3.0 SUITABILITY FOR TREE PRESERV A TION
Each tree has been assigned either a "high," "moderate" or "low" suitability for
preservation rating as a means to cumulatively measure their physiological health,
structural integrity, location, size and specie type. These ratings and applicable tree
numbers are presented below; note that the "high" category is comprised of one tree (or 5-
percent), the "moderate" category sixteen trees (or 76-percent), and the "low" category
four trees (or 19-percent).
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 2 of9
I-J~
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
Hieh: Applies to tree #10. This tree appears vigorous and in stable condition. It has a
high potential of providing long-term contribution to the site and is considered the most
suitable for retention and protection.
Moderate: Applies to trees #1-9, 11, 12, 14, 17-19 and 21. They appear worthy of
retention; however, their longevity and contribution is less than those of high suitability
and more frequent care is needed during their remaining life span.
Low: Applies to trees #13, 15, 16 and 20. These trees are predisposed to irreparable
health problems and/or structural defects that are expected to worsen regardless of
measures employed.
4.0 REVIEW OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND TREES
Three of the inventoried trees are in direct conflict with the proposed design and include,'
#11, 20 and 21. Based on their species and less than ideal condition, I find the removal of
each complies with City Ordinance.
Tree #11 is a multi-leader London plane tree (sycamore) that appears in only fair
condition. Tree #20 has severely declined and its demise is imminent. Tree #21 appears
in only fair overall condition, and due to being a Modesto ash, is highly prone to limb
failure.
By implementation of the proposed design, trees #13-16 and 19 will be subjected to
premature decline and instability. Trees #13 thru 16 (in addition to #12) represent a row
of fairly tall, Monterey pines that appear in good to fair overall health, but due to improper
and aggressive pruning, have misshapen canopies, poor structural form, and abnormal
branching architecture. Their trunks are situated in very close. proximity to the home
proposed on lot 2 and significant root loss is expected during any trenching and/or
excavation for the foundation (in some instances, soil cuts would occur four feet from a
trunk). Consequently, the trees' decline, instability and/or demise are highly likely. As for
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 3 of9
,... 23
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
canopy loss, I find the branches requiring removal for the new home will be only a minor
impact due to a significant amount having already been removed.
In general, Monterey pines are relatively short-lived (less than 50 years), have a low-
monetary value, and are intolerant of significant root loss. Measures can be taken during
construction to minimize root loss, such as utilizing a pier and above-grade beam design
for the home's foundation. However, given the proximity of the home, I find risk of
decline will remain. In the event efforts are taken to increase their chance of survival and
minimize the impacts to their stability, the setback from the trunks should be increased to
the maximum extent possible, and the sections of home and garage within 20 feet of the
trees' trunks established using a pier and above-grade beam foundation in which the beam
is literally placed on top of existing soil grade (i.e. a no-dig design except for the piers).
Additionally, measures presented in Section 5.0 of this report should also be followed.
Tree #19, another Monterey pine, is also subject to a severe level of root damage by
installation of the proposed roadway. To achieve a possibility for its survival, I
recommend the road and curb are setback by 10 feet from its trunk.
Tree #10 is a deodar cedar in excellent condition. Lower branches will require pruning to
achieve clearance for the new homes on lot 1 and 4; however, provided the work is
performed under the supervision of an individual certified by the International Society of
Arboriculture (ISA), I find the branch loss will be insignificant.
The types, diameters, canopy dimensions and amounts of trees shown on Sheet AO.l differ
from actual site conditions. To offer the opportunity to accurately identify the tree
resources at this site, including those to be removed and retained, I recommend the plan is
revised per item 1, Section 5.1 of this report.
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City a/Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 4 0/9
f -;)tf
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations presented within this section serve as guidelines to achieve adequate
protection of trees being retained. They should be carefully followed and incorporated into
project plans, and are subject to revision upon reviewing any additional or revised plans.
5.1 Design Guidelines
1. The location, canopy dimension, assigned number, species and trunk diameter of all
inventoried trees should be shown on Sheet AO.1 and reflect information presented
within this report.
2. If trees #12-16 and 19 are retained, recommendations presented in Section 4.0 of this
report should be followed.
3. Any walkways or pathways constructed beneath the trees' canopies (including base
materials, edging and forms) should be established entirely on top of existing soil grade
(i.e. a no-dig design).
4. A copy of this report and any additional future reports or letters should be incorporated
into the final set of project plans, titled Sheet T -1, T -2, etc. (Tree Protection
Instructions), and referenced on the Site Plan and future landscape plans.
5. Trenching for utilities and services should be routed outside the canopies of retained
trees. I should be consulted in the event this is not feasible.
6. The drainage design for the project, including downspouts, must not require water
being discharged beneath or towards the canopies of retained trees.
7. Upon availability, the following plans should be reviewed for tree related impacts:
grading and drainage, utility and landscape (both planting and irrigation).
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City o/Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 5 0/9
I,'J5
David 1. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
8. The proposed landscape design should conform to the following guidelines:
a. Turf should be avoided beneath the trees' canopies. As an alternative, I
recommend a four- to five-inch layer of coarse wood chips is used (either
decorative or from a tree company). If plant material is installed, it should be
drought-tolerant and established at least five from their trunks.
b. Irrigation beneath the canopies of trees #10 and 18 can impose adverse impacts
over time and should be avoided. If applied, it should be low-volume, applied
irregularly (such as only once or twice per week), temporary (such as no more than
three to four years), and not strike within five feet of their trunks. Irrigation should
not strike within two to three feet of the trunks of new trees.
c. New trees being installed should be double-staked with rubber tree ties, and all
forms of irrigation shall be of an automatic drip or soaker hose system placed on
the soil surface and not in a sleeve.
d. Trenching for irrigation or lighting should be avoided beneath the canopies. If
necessary, they should not exceed a six-inch depth, and be routed in a radial
direction to the trunks.
e. Stones, mulch and fencing should not be placed against the trunks of existing or
new trees. Plastic ground cover should also be avoided beneath canopies.
f. Tilling beneath canopies should be avoided, including for weed control.
g. Bender board or other edging material proposed beneath the canopies should be
established on top of existing soil grade (such as by using vertical stakes).
5.2 Protection Measures before and during Construction
9. Tree protective fencing shall be installed prior to any demolition, grading, trenching,
surface scraping or heavy equipment arriving to the site. It shall be comprised of six-
foot high chain link mounted on eight-foot tall, two-inch diameter steel posts that are
driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once
established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and be maintained throughout
construction until final inspection. Ple,ase note that the recommended fencing layout
has not, at this time, been delineated on the map in Exhibit B due to foreseeable
changes or modifications to the proposed design. Also, note that fencing should be
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 60f9
,-:)&
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
installed to encompass the entire area beneath tree canopies and established no further
than five feet from a home's foundation and two feet beyond the edge of a proposed
road or driveway.
10. Unless otherwise approved, all development activities must be conducted outside the
fenced areas (even after fencing is removed). These activities include, but are not
limited to, the following: grading, stripping of topsoil, trenching, equipment cleaning,
stockpiling/dumping of materials, and equipment/vehicle operation and parking.
11. Prior to demolition, a root zone buffer should be established beneath the canopies of
trees #1 thru 3, between the existing wall and two feet from the proposed foundation
(about a five-foot wide strip). This should consist of a six-inch layer of coarse wood
chips (V4- to %-inch in size) manually spread on existing grade; it should remain in
place and replenished as necessary throughout development. Full-sheets of one-inch
thick (minimum) plywood could be placed on top of the chips and fastened together to
create a sturdy walking platform. Please note that the root zone buffer is intended for
foot-traffic and wheelbarrow access only"
12. The existing leaf litter (i.e. fallen leaves and needles) within the designated fenced
areas should remain on the ground. The mounds of leaf litter beneath tree #10's
canopy should be spread out to create a more uniform layer (such as five inches deep).
13. Prior to construction, I recommend a four-inch layer of coarse wood chips is also
manually spread within the designated fenced areas. The chips should not be placed
against the trunk and remain throughout construction.
14. Where beneath tree canopies, overcut and trenching should not extend 12 to 24 inches
from the edge of a future foundation or walkway. This specification should also
pertain to trenching for the installation of any drain lines, utilities and services.
15. Prior to excavating within 20 feet from the proposed porch and driveway on lot 2, I
recommend a one-foot wide trench is manually dug with shovels to the required
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City o/Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 70/9
1- :27
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
footing depth. Any roots encountered during the process should be cleanly severed
against the soil cut. Roots with diameters of two inches and greater should be
considered for retention (if feasible); in the event they must be severed, I suggest the
root end is covered with a clear, plastic sandwich bag and tightly secured with a rubber
band or electrical tape.
16. Approved work performed on unpaved soil beneath a canopy shall be manually
performed. Any approved digging or trenching beneath a canopy shall use shovels (or,
where applicable, post-hole diggers). During trenching, all roots of two inches and
greater in diameter shall be retained during the process (and tunneled beneath, if
necessary). Roots smaller than this can be cleanly severed against the tree side of a cut
or trench.
17. Any pier or post-hole dug beneath the trees' canopies shall be perfo.rmed using a post-
hole digger for the first three feet below grade; the remaining depth can be dug using a
manually-operated auger. In the event roots two inches and greater in diameter become
encountered, the hole(s) should be resituated to avoid the root.
18. All existing, unused lines or pipes beneath the canopies of retained trees should be
abandoned and cut off at existing soil grade.
19. Each recommendation that is presented within Section 5.1 of this report and IS
applicable to the actual development of the site shall be followed.
20. Throughout development during the months of May thru October, supplemental water
should be supplied to retained trees. In doing so, I recommend soaker hoses are used
and spread in a manner to evenly distribute water to the root zone beneath the canopies
(but not against their trunks). The rate should be 10 gallons per every inch of trunk
, diameter applied every two to three weeks.
21. The pruning and removal of trees shall be performed under the supervision of an
arborist certified by the ISA and according to ISA Standards (and not performed by
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 80f9
; -1 e,
David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
construction personnel). Any tree stumps being removed beneath or near canopies of
retained trees should be ground below grade rather than pulled up with an excavator.
22. All equipment shall be positioned to avoid the trunks and branches of trees.
23. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited
beneath canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath canopies.
Herbicides should not be used beneath the trees' canopies; where used on site, they
should be labeled for safe use near trees.
Prepared By: fJvxJ <!J
. David L. Babby, ReA
Date: . February 22. 2007
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City o/Cupertino Community Development Department
Page 90/9
/-2C)
David 1. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
EXHIBIT A:
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
1- CD
TREE
NO.
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
TREE NAME
~~
p.,,,,
I "ca
~....
. p.,
2.~
~ 1::
., <<l
Sii::
.~ ~
O~
~ G)
e]
f-<O
c
.~
'i<i
;>~
.... ~
~j
.... --
a.. 2
.... <<l
t8 ~
;>.-0
~ 0
;.::::;:;E
:0:=
E OJ)
. :; :Ii
en '--'
'"
c:I
<<l
ii::
c
o
c:I
~
o
..c
en
o
Z
E
"
u
<<l
'5'
~
c:I
o
-00
G) ....
'i<i "
u p.,
o 8
.....:I a..
Z'
'"
....
o
~
c II
o--~
.......0
,-,;:a, -~
c '"
o G)
O'lfl
r5:~
- 0
~-o
::r::. :::,
~
~
'"
....
o
~
.q Ii,
tih6'
,,0
l:: ~..
- '"
_ "
<<lCQ
.... II
~~
28
~ -
en '--'
:0-
<<l
G)
cO
oJ:::;
::.p 0
.- 0
-0 a..
c__
8'a
-~
~::o
.... 0
" 0
b8
~
~
'"
2 ~
u 0
[.....:I
c II
"::;lr>
..... ~
o '"
o~
.- OJ)
~:Ii
2 II
~:::
.s
.~
.ti 5h
!;::; .-
c '"
o "
uO
--0
U G)
" '"
.= 0
o p.,
o
c ....
_a..
.~
s
;>.
p.,
o
C
<<l
u~
~.s
'i<i-o
.~ e
'" p.,
~en
.E
Q/)
'G)
::r::
-0
"
'i<i
'S
'"
~
Silk Oak
(Grevillea robusta )
Comments:
Silk Oak
(Grevillea robusta )
Comments:
Silk Oak
(Grevillea robusta )
Comments:
London Plane Tree
(Platanus acerifolia )
Comments:
London Plane Tree
(Platanus'acerifolia )
Comments:
London Plane Tree
(Platanus acerifolia )
Comments:
London Plane Tree
(Platanus acerifolia )
Comments:
London Plane Tree
(Platanus acerifolia )
Comments:
London Plane Tree
(Platanus acerifolia )
Comments:
Deodar Cedar
(Cedrus deodara )
Comments: In excellent condition - the best tree on-site.
London Plane Tree
(Platanus acerifolia )
Comments:
Site: 10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Depart.
Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA
10f2
February 22, 2007
1-'3/
TREE
NO.
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
.. =
..
c
,~
'"'
:>~
... ~
~3
... --
~.2:!
... '"
c.8 ~
;>."0
~ 0
:.:::::;s
:.0:<=
~ tlll
'S ::Ii
VJ ___
.....
~ .~
c:: '"
o 11.)
UCl
"g]
.= 0
CI go
~.p:
TREE NAME
~c;
0..",
I ";;
~ ...
, 0..
g~
2 ~
11.) '"
~i5:
0.2
..>d 11.)
C::"O
2 'S
f-oO
~
'"
...
o
~
c II
o'$.
".;j 0
:.a u::l
c:: 11.)
01Xl
UII
-='*-
- 0
~o
:::c:___
~
.....
'"
....
o
~
011
.~~
11.)0
..... .
c:: .....
- '"
o;~
... II
~~
28
~ -
VJ ___
::0-
'"
11.)
c::CI
01::;
".;j 0
.- 0
"O~
c::__
8.r;
~
0;::0
... 0
11.) 0
:>0
0___
~
~
'"
'" 11.)
t) ~
~.....:l
:= 11
":::V'l
.....
o '"
oll
.- tlll
~::Ii
E II
~~
-5
.~
,-.,
S
.:E
tlll
'(j)
:::c:
"0
11.)
'"'
.g
'"
~
'"
t:l
'"
i5:
c::
o
t:l
~
o
..c::
VJ
(5
Z
"E
11.)
u
'"
~
<r:
c::
o
"0 ;>.
11.) t:
~ ~
g 8
.....:l~
;>.
0..
o
c::
'"
u~
~~
11.)___
,","0
:= '"
,3 ~
'" 0..
~VJ
Monterey Pine
(Pinus radiata )
Comments:
Monterey Pine
(Pinus radiata )
Comments:
Monterey Pine
(Pinus radiata )
Comments:
Monterey Pine
(Pinus radiata)
Comments:
Monterey Pine
(Pinus radiata )
Comments:
Monterey Pine
(Pinus radiata )
Comments:
Modesto Ash
(Fraxinus v. 'Modesto')
Comments: Tree is dying and contains a significant amount oflarge, dead branches with decay,
Modesto Ash
(Fraxinus v. 'Modesto')
Comments:
Site: 10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Depart.
Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA
20f2
February 22, 2007
1- 3d
10630 LINNET LANE, CUPERTINO
SSMH ;~SDMH
RIM = 9 .60 r RIM = 99.79
INV i~ '30j'" ~ INV = 83.08
I!/ _ II: PARCEL 1 (1)
!j \D I fr. 316-47-018
l ~II Ii I 1. ~ 0 3 sr~~~G~~yE~~?,~UU 9
: II: .. 41 ~~ ~ 7, 5 8 .
: ~l-I oo~-"""':"'_=-=-...=.r=.-;r~84.'"oii?-gl~~~~,:~=-=~=r~
I :1, 'I ,_~" , ,-'"'' J
I 111'""-,, '. ~
I i' I ,:.Lf ;c'''' '~I '\ -",.., f
f."'" ...~; F" J ii'i "''''::2;'-: - \"'n ,,"=......
I 1- 11'1 LOTI (w' \-'" \. x..... -
1 ~W! ~ 1,1i- 4574 SQn (_ ff~ ~\ '''''--'----\tT-:-:TI /7/.0 l!l/
I co ... -0:: II m,,'"'=' )<-"."" _.",~ ,___" ~r' ~.='V~y ~//??'#~~ &
I ~- :l5li;,"'11 '\"\~: >'~'Ir' 47~~TS~FT 0p:'0%;-;;ia I
I ~ .:::E II '-'(' J ". . /EXISTING?1
I iit...... ~ 0< I I ,L-".,,''"''' ,'y." /'GARAGE.%:
~ 0' ~ g I "J~ >'.t:"..2 ",,,,n ."" _V~~ t;; ~16::9~'
UHENT I 101r Vl I~~ co'" _ ."", ___K- I LX; ':"1: U/"1
I ~ 0 ~ -,-;---~---_........- CI-.......,.~ ';,',1::1;10"./ I'
f" Z" l. ~".=_~_C3 1', ,//'1'/,,:.::'/.1 ",
1 0 I 1 N89'45'47'E 82.62' .,-L'-'_LL!~ V:/0'/.~/'~~/" "l
:EE I S! I __~_~~~__~==",,~_-.-.~.-___._'_I.l ,. -Ll~"-----_~///.'/, /J \D
". ~ ."-_ . "OOW~U""''-'-'"'_d*"CLT'''''':~C'~U''' ,,-~- ',", "
I I I. ,Ml!2 C c.. L~_~l::t.L.fi:,-Lc..'-LL:' ,_1- _LL'-'--L~c..L~-:1 -Y'u. II ~ ~fi~(
,,""-" i :-,' .~:!:!-,).. -':"-:.'Ns~~~~,~+.r-t+-<~, ,L"~+t+ N:g:i~~~)'l~ !'.J
I -!- LCYdlJ:.' '-Lr'c..CL' l:<jQ.L~~C;::Lt;!?,,-OQ'L I - - I j'-~.' ''''Y'i:' ifJ
z riB _L~!~~CI...::tL1l! )C@f , ~, ' ~H-H,+jLLL~""L/ 'I II -----:-:" 1'1 "t::
~ ~ 1': '. . ,...,17r:~ ~:7 --.. _.l.d ._- <>-" '-="1 0\
<I . ....I'.. l. _L ..'l..tL.''-~TiNa> ~:f:~z '..b. L:"':"M . .L___l L-~-..Jtr"jo
': ':' ,L ~W:!l"m-Bt,hliDlNti;?Z'-v.: t-H..f-~~. 4. 1"".,;;__'~E~~_' <:
I''':;;; ,l' '17'W~;:74j% &:~~~~: <J.f-.,96" CON~RfrE: 1 ~":."-., ""'-.
-=--- """'. /' .J ~Wg~t~EM6~::}t~'!'. 'S,LAB.. . tJ~~=, '-\ f~
'- .. lr . UL:(.<2('L/...<:':"" '.4/ L, L,' L< <.( LL ~ '~". ~ '" "')
"I_~"\...-.. If IL...:.._.:...~.-~.:...~_.- -~...!-r.f Je"",.-::,:;- -1'..._"" ..,."3:1'~ IJ .
1l1[;~8' . r-~o ) ~":"I Lx.~ '~:J .,.~. j '''~;l
II,r.II 'LOT 2 XM -'<; ~ t. -:---.~:-":"~"., ::JII
II it21 _,;0<5~,n----'" /~--t ~ .b"",.;---4"""----'--k.<->.,. Cllr"""
'-...:i ~ h../?~S;;\fi'--~l'< Wr"----\,. - .."""'" '''~LOT 3 '5,'" t
''Hi. I ~'( $. / y. ~,. \ !:l' (-('h:~~ /~?62 SQn,..,;; ~ ~) ./
ifJ V i,tJ.~~) :t:3 ~I~~(, ~}O r ~ r
[:f'~ . ~ ~-",;:. ~:st \-~ ~']~:~' '_17:1';~IE..'; ~-ff
Ii '~I \ ( '1 \II' u~- '. "'JTt _ t""" 60.16' · ~ J
i~ -~~ -I -~4J40'E I44.02-;-(-.......--....~
SDMH 'I, ''\,_ "'- \,,J ~I aI /
RIM J 00.79 "~"-,,, ,.:::d~-~.y~---"_.,,~~./~
INV '" 90.79 ~ 316-47-018
SFERS REAL EST CORPlJU
EPROPERTY RREEF D
PARC
316-4
SFERS REAL
EPROPERT'
LENGTH
1.37'
1.02'
40.22'
26.70'
, . -~~l ~" ""~""~ -
;~;;',~~~'1~(~, ~
.'\. /:-,,''''.'' .
,'.., ~.:.,:,......"
f;;:'E~,~
..j~",j~;zi~~~
.,.\ \~
.:. ~;"._'~~~:\i'~", ~,~~, ~-~~~-~
Map has been reduced in size and {l'
is not to scale, U
N
/, 3t.!
Page 1 of 4
Piu Ghosh
From: Arbor Resources [arborresources@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 9:12 AM
To: Piu Ghosh
Subject: RE: Linnet Lane
Piu,
I visited the subject site yesterday to review those items specified in your previous email. My comments
regarding implementation of the proposed plans near these trees are as follows:
Tree #12 (29.5-inch pine): This tree is expected to be impacted; however, provided that aggressive
action is taken to employ all measures presented in my report (e.g. supplemental water, mulch and
properly fence), I expect this tree to survive. The loss of canopy will be minimal. Please note that tree
#12's canopy spreads 50 feet across and the dimension shown on Sheet AO.1 should be adjusted
accordingly.
Tree #14 (21.5-inch pine): This tree's canopy will not be adversely impacted. However, the tree will
be at extreme risk of decline and demise due to root damage incurred, even if a pier and above-grade
beam foundation is employed within 20 feet of its trunk.
As for a pier and beam foundation, it can be helpful in maintaining the anchorage roots of a tree,
provided it is a pier and above-grade beam design in which the beam is literally placed on top or above
existing grade with no excavation between the piers. However, smaller roots serving to supply water to
the tree are impacted and die during the process, an event that adversely impacts trees intolerable of root
loss, particularly large mature Monterey pines with a short-life span (such as #tree 14).
Tree #17 (9.5-:inch pine): This tree is expected to survive with minor impacts, provided it is supplied
with supplemental water and properly fenced-off. Please note the canopy dimension shown on Sheet
AO.1 should be reduced in size to show a spread of 20 feet across.
Tree #18. (16-inch cedar): This low-branching deodar cedar will lose the entire southern portion of its
canopy (which is where most of the canopy grows) to achieve clearance for the driveway; this accounts
for an estimated 60- to 70-percent (or more) of the total canopy. Consequently, the tree will be severely
impacted and should be removed as a result of the proposed development.
Tree #19 (19.5-inch pine): Excavation for the future road will require soil cuts at the trunk's base and
4/17/2007
/-85
Page 2 of 4
predispose the tree to almost certain decline and instability. Consequently, the tree would be considered
a loss due to the proposed development.
Regarding its canopy, there is a lO-inch diameter limb that will require removal to achieve roadway
clearance; its accounts for about 20-percent of the total canopy. If the removal of this limb was the only
impact to the tree, it would be insignificant. However, combined with the root damage, it is significant.
Please contact me with any additional questions.
David L. Babby, RCA
Consulting Arborist
650-654-3351
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Piu Ghosh" <PiuG@cupertino.org>
David,
According to your report, Tree # 19 will be severly affected by the development. The driveway is located
about 8 feet from the center of the tree trunk and the street is located about 9 feet from the center of the
tree trunk. Do you still think this will affect the tree? If yes, I will have to change our recommendations.
Please advise.
Additionally, you had mentioned that tree 18's top had been broken and warranted further investigation.
Is this something you would do now? Does is make the tree weak? Can it be saved for a few years now
or does it have to be removed?
Regards,
Piu
-----Original Message-----
From: Arbor Resources (mailto:arborresources@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 11:43 AM
To: Piu Ghosh
Subject: RE: Linnet Lane
Piu,
Certainly, I can provide you a review. I do have the set of plans dated 11/15/06 - if these
are still similar to the proposed design, they should work.
David
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Piu Ghosh" <PiuG@cupertino.org>
Hi David,
4/17/2007
1-3(P
The applicant at Linnet Lane is proposing to keep Tree 14, 17 and 12 on the south side of
the property and trees 18 and 19 on the west side. Will it be possible for you to evaluate if
they did a pier and grade beam for the portions within 20 feet of the tree's trunks, how
much of the these trees will have to be trimmed and if they will survive this trimming/root
impacts.
The house on lot 2 has a second story that is aligned to the south side of the first floor
floor plan. If you do not have plans let me know.... I will send you a copy.
Thanks!
Piu
-----Original Message-----
From: Arbor Resources [mailto:arborresources@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:12 PM
To: Piu Ghosh
Subject: RE: Linnet Lane
Piu,
Those trees would be protected through adherence to recommendations
within my report (Section 5.2). Specifically, they will require pruning
and supplemental watering, and trenching beneath their canopies should be
avoided.
David L. Babby, RCA
Consulting Arborist
650-654-3351
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Piu Ghosh" <PiuG@cupertino.org>
David,
I have another question for you. You have identified 9 trees on the
neighboring property as being moderately affected by the project.
However, you have not made recommendations with regard to these.
Please advise.
Regards,
Piu
-----Original Message-----
From: Arbor Resources [mailto:arborresources@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 10:22 AM
To: Piu Ghosh
Subject: Re: Linnet Lane
Hi Piu,
4/17/2007
Page 3 of 4
,--37
Page 4 of 4
The attached letter presents my recommended replacements.
Please contact me with any questions.
David L. Babby, RCA
Consulting Arborist
650-654-3351
------------- Original message --------------
rom: "Piu Ghosh" <PiuG@cupertino.org>
Hi! David,
Could you suggest adequate replacements for the
rees that are in direct
conflict or those that you think will be impacted by
e construction of the
houses for the project at Linnet Lane?
Piu Ghosh
Assistant Planner
Planning Department
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Ave
Cupertino, CA 95014
4/1 7/2007
/,3<0
.
ARBOR RESOURCES
Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care
April 1 0, 2007
Piu Ghosh
Community Development Department
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
RE: Replacement Trees, 10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino
Dear Ms. Ghosh:
In connection with the proposed development at the above-referenced site, you have asked
that I recommend replacement trees to mitigate those that are in direct conflict with the
design, as well as those that would be severely impacted during construction. Trees
identified within my 2/22/07 report as being in direct conflict include #11, 20 and 21.
Trees anticipated to be severely impacted (i.e. subjected to premature decline and
instability) include #13-16 and 19.
Per City standard, the appraised value (i.e. assigned monetary value) of trees being
removed is used as the basis for identifying replacement values. The appraised values of
trees identified above are as follows and have been calculated using the Guide for Plant
Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the ISA, 2000: tree #11: $5.100; tree #20: $Q; tree
#21: $450; tree #13: $630; tree #14: $1.280; tree #15: $970; tree #16: 970; and tree #19:
$ 1.060.
The size and amounts of trees to install should be roughly equal to the total, appraised
value of trees removed. Replacement tree values and sizes are as follows: $375 for a 24-
inch box; $1.000 for a 36-inch box size tree; $2.125 for a 48-inch box; $2.650 for a 54-
inch box; $3.500 for a 60-inch box size; and $10.000 for a 72-inch box.
P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 . Email: arborresources@comcast.net
Phone: 650.654.3351 . Fax: 650.240.0777 . Licensed Contractor #796763
, -3C}
.
ARBOR RESOURCES
Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care
April 10, 2007
10630 Linnet Lane
page 2 of2
Combined, the trees' appraised value equals $10.460. Based on the replacement trees sizes
and values, this amount is roughly equivalent to five trees of 48-inch box size. To achieve
continuity with trees deemed valuable within the City, I recommend oak trees and deodar
cedars are considered within the new landscape. Additionally, the specific placement of
trees in relation to surrounding homes and driveways, as well as the surrounding
landscape, must be compatible with allowing the new trees to prosper over the long-term.
Should you have any questions or would like additional information, please do not hesitate
to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
~~
David L. Babby, RCA
Consulting Arborist
P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 . Email: arborresources@comcast.net
Phone: 650.654.3351 . Fax: 650.240.0777 . Licensed Contractor #796763
1,4-0
.
CITY OF
CUPEIQ"INO
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
FAX (408) 777-3333
Community Development Department
~taff Use Only
EA File NO.EA-2007-01
Case File No. TM-2007 -01, U-2007 -01,
ASA-2007-01
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Project Title: Frank Ho (Baia Residence)
Project Location: 10630 Linnet Lane
Project Description: The proiect is a request to subdivide one parcel that is 0.52 acres in size
into four residential parcels, ranqinq from 4.575 square feet to 5,247 square feet and a 3.223
square foot parcel for access and quest parkinq.
Environmental Setting:
The proposed proiect is on a developed site with one sinqle family home. The parcel is bounded ..
by an apartment complex to the North, South and East and a park to the West. The parcel. is
close to the 280 freeway. There are several larqe trees on the property. only two 'of which are
specimen trees per the City's Heritaqe and Specimen Tree Ordinance.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Site Area (ac.) - 22.644 sJ. Building Coverage - N/A% Exist. Building - N/A sJ. Proposed Bldg. -
N/A sJ. Zone - P(Comm. Res) G.P. Designation -Commercial/Residential
Assessor's Parcel No. - 316-47-017
If Residential, Units/Gross Acre - 7.69
Unit Type #1
Unit Type #2
T otal# Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price
4 Own 4 2,185 NA
4 Own 4 2,185 NA
4 Own 4 2,185 NA
4 Own 4 2,185 NA
Unit Type #3
Unit Type #4
Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check)
D Monta Vista Design Guidelines
D
S. De Anza Conceptual
D
N. De Anza Conceptual
D
S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual
D
Heart of the City Specific Plan
D
Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & Landscape
If Non-Residential, Building Area - ,N/A sJ. FAR - N/A %
Employees/Shift - N/A Parking Required - N/A Parking Provided - N/A
Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - YES 1RI NO D
I-t.f~
"',;!i: "';'~f'r.i~"":~.'h".,!:;.l.~.<,." ,;,<;.t.,::. .', i<":,;.~,'~&L", ",..}i: 'Co''''' ;i..,>., ,c' " . ,; ; ~:J,~",t><
if INITJAESTua'nSOURCEL:IST1.,\~,..:~:.;:ifSil~"':~{~.. ,,:" "",:,.":.',.,,,;:,q4~r;!~
r, ':; '- '-' ",':",{~~^';::C~(~'~70t'>itir<~.:l:~,',;-::-~-.,il.)'~ ,:;~y\".,--" :_~:':':';-_:'."I_'!"t":~~_;",<_)<!",,q'~ t) '.:.~tJ, ~.' ,- - - -,"-, .-, "t, ,',c'- ", ~
D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued)
A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES 29. Fremont Union High School District
1. Land Use Element 30. Cupertino Union School District
2. Public Safety Element 31. Pacific Gas and Electric
3. Housing Element 32. Santa Clara County Fire Department
4. Transportation Element 33. County Sheriff
5. Environmental Resources 34. CAL TRANS
6. Appendix A- Hillside Development 35. County Transportation Agency
7. Land Use Map 36. Santa Clara Valley Water District
8. Noise Element Amendment 36b Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution
9. City Ridgeline Policy Prevention Program
10. Constraint Maps 36c San Jose Water Company
B. CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS E. OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS
11. Tree Preservation ordinance 778 37. BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant
12. City Aerial Photography Maps Excesses
13. "Cupertino Chronicle" (California History 38. FEMA Flood Maps/SCVWD Flood Maps
Center, 1976) 39. USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County"
14. Geological Report (site specific) 40. County Hazardous Waste Management
15. Parking Ordinance 1277 Plan
16. Zoning Map 41. County Heritage Resources Inventory
17. Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents 42. Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel
18. City Noise Ordinance leak Site
18b City of Cupertino Urban Runoff Pollution 43. CalEPA Hazardous Waste and
Prevention Plan Substances Site
43b National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
C. CITY AGENCIES Site System (NPDES) Municipal Stormwater
19. Community Development Dept. List Discharge Permit Issued to the City' of
20. Public Works Dept. Cupertino by the San Francisco Bay
21. Parks & Recreation Department Regional Water Quality Control Board
22. Cupertino Water Utility 43c Hydromodification Plan
D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES F. OTHER SOURCES
23. County Planning Department 44. Project Plan Set/Application Materials
24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments 45. Field Reconnaissance
25. County Departmental of Environmental Health 46. Experience w/project of similar
26. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District scope/characteristics
27. County Parks and Recreation Department 47. ABAG Projection Series
28. Cupertino Sanitary District
A. Complete all information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES
ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE.
B. Consult the Initial Study Source List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist
information in Categories A through O.
C. You are encouraged to cite other relevant sources; if such sources are used, job in their title(s) in
the "Source" column next to the question to which they relate.
D. If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, you must attach a sheet explaining the
potential impact and suggest mitigation if needed.
E. When explaining any yes response, label your answer clearly (Example "N - 3 Historical") Please
try to respond concisely, and place as many explanatory responses as possible on each paqe.
F. Upon completing the checklist, sign and date the Preparer's Affidavit.
G. Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the City.
"Project Plan Set of Legislative Document
"Location map with site clearly marked
(when applicable)
BE SURE YOUR INITIAL STUDY SUBMITTAL
IS COMPLETE - INCOMPLETE MATERIALS
MAY CAUSE PROCESSING DELAY
J - '.f3
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
,-----------~-----"--- -- --------.---- --
! C i
!
i >>- C - 0 C- I
-C cu C C._ C ;
, -cu- cu 0- CUCU- .....i
,
I ISSUES: .~ 0 0 .co.c~f .coo 01
_._ cu I-;;:;!::cuo 1-,- cu o cui
I [and Supporting Information Sources] C ~ Q. 1/)'- 3= C) Q. I/) ~ Q. Z Q.:
Q) C E I/)C ~... I/) C E E'
; '0.2'- Q) C) .- 0 Q) .2'- -I
I D..U) ...J .- :2: 0 ...JU) !
U) C ;
i - !
,
I 1
II. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: I
I
i
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? I
D D D 1RI I
[5,9,24,41,44] i
i
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, D D D 1RI
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
[5,9,11,24,34,41,44]
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or D D 1RI D
quality of the site and its surroundings? [1,17,19,44]
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, D D 1RI D
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the area? [1,19,44]
Items a and b - No Impact
There are no scenic vistas or scenic resources on the project site; therefore, the proposed project will have no
adverse effects on scenic vistas or scenic resources. The proposed project is also not anticipated to degrade the
existing visual character of the site.
Item c and d - Less than Siq~ificant
The subject property currently has one single family home on it. Construction of four new sing.le-family homes on site
wiU alter the existing visual character of the site somewhat. However, since several trees on the property are being
saved the impact wiU be less than sianificant.
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would
the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or D D D 1RI
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? [5,7,39]
; b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a D D D 1RI
I Williamson Act contract? [5,7,23]
! c) Involve other changes in the existing environment D D D 1RI
I which, due to their location or nature, could result in
I conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
I [5,7,39]
i Items a throuqh c - No Impact
I The project site is located within an urbanized area and has no agricultural land or resources; therefore, the proposed
i project wiU not impact agricultural land or resources.
'---._-~_.__._---_.__._-------_._- -------..-----------------..-------- --- ----- -----' ,_._._..~_._------_.-- -----.- .--..., -.. ------ --
I - t../ '-f
------------- --------~._~._- - ~._~._---,
C i
>..... C .... 0 C....
-C cu C C._ C i
-CU.... cu 0 .... CUCU.... .... i
ISSUES: .!l! (.) (.) ~(.)~:;::::;E ~(.)(.) (.)i
.....- cu '-It:~CUO .- .- CU o cui
[and Supporting Information Sources] C ~ Q, eIl'- == tn Q, ell ~ Q, Z Q,j
Q) C C eIlC :;::::;'- ell C C c!
'0.2'- Q) tn .- 0 Q) .2'- -i
Q.U) ..J(i) ::2:(.) ..JU)
C i
- I
III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following determinations. Would
the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 0 lRl i
j
applicable air quality plan? [5,37,42,44] !
i
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 0 lRl I
substantially to an existing or projected air quality i
violation? [5,37,42,44]
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of 0 0 0 lRl
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 precLirsors)?
[4,37,44]
I
i d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 0 lRl I
I concentrations? [4,37,44] i
I
Ie) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 0 0 0 lRl i
i
I i
! number of people? [4,37,44] I
I . I
I Items a throuqh e .- N~ Impa~t
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44]
I b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
I habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in
I local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
I California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
! Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44]
i
o
o
o
o
i c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
I protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
i Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
I vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
I hydrological interruption, or other means? [20,36,44]
I
I d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
i native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
i with established native resident or migratory wildlife
I corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
I sites? [5,10,12,21,26]
o 0
o 0
o lRl
o lRl
o lRl
o lRl
__...__.__._ __.1.. _n _
1-~5
-------- ..-,......------,
C i
>>- C - 0 C- i
I
- C ns C C._ C _1
-ns- ns 0- nsns-
ISSUES: .!!! 0 0 .co.c;E .coo OJ
_._ ns I-tj:~nso 1-,- ns o ns,
[and Supporting Information Sources] c:!:: c. (1)'- 3: OJ c. II):!:: C. z C.I
Q) C E II)C ;"- II) C E EI
c5.~ - Q) OJ .- 0 Q) .~-
D..tn ...Ju; ~o ...Jtn
C i
- i
i
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances I
0 [8] 0 0 I
protecting biological resources, such as a tree i
preservation policy or ordinance? [11,12,41] i
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 0 0 [8]
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan? [5,10,26,27]
Items a throuqh d and f - No Impact
The proposed project is not likely to have any adverse effect on any riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands or
with the movement of sensitive wildlife species or fish since the project site is already developed.
Item e- Less than Siqnificant with Mitiqation Incorporation
The project involves the removal of some non-specimen trees from the site. However, this can be mitigated through
the replacement of these trees. .
V. CUl TURAl RESOURCES -- Would the project: I
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 [8]
significance of a historical resource as defined in
915064.5? [5,13,41]
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 [8]
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
915064.5? [5,13,41]
I c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ,
0 0 0 [8] !
I resource or site or unique geologic feature? [5,13,41]
I d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred 0 0 0 [8]
I outside of formal cemeteries? [1,5] !
I Items a throuqh d - No Impact
! The site is not within a known sensitive archaeological area of the Cit~ and has no historical resources on site.
I VI. GEOLOGY AND SOilS - Would the project: I
i
i i
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
I i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on 0 0 0 [8]
I the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
I Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
I on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
I Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
1
I [2,14,44]
:
I ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [2.5,10,44] 0 0 0 [8] i
I
i iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including 0 0 0 [8]
! liquefaction? [2,5,10,39,44]
1
! iv) Landslides? [2,5.10.39,44] 0 0 0 [8]
i
I b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ___J 0 0 0 [8]
I topsoil? [2.5,10,44] - _.___._n__ ___ .._"__.____n_n_____.____m__.._._n_____n___ . . n__ ____ .._._m____.._ -- --~ ---
____._n___n_____._ __._._.___ "..._..___.._____..____.__.__n_._.___ ___________.___n___._.___.._....__
,-(.1 ("
~-
e
>.- e - 0 e-
- e l'CI e e._ e '01
-l'CI- l'CI 0- l'CIl'CI-
ISSUES: .!:!:! 0 0 ~o~:;:~ ~oo
_._ l'CI 1-l;:~l'CIO I- .- l'CI o l'CI'
[and Supporting Information Sources] e:=o. m'- 3: C) 0. m := 0. z 0.1
Q) e E me :;:... m e E E,
o.~- Q) C) .- 0 Q) .~- -i
0.. en ...J .- :::ii!: 0 ...Jen I
en e
- I
j
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, 0 0 0 [8]
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?
[2,5,10,39]
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 0 0 0 [8]
1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
substantial risks to life or property? [2,5,10]
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the 0 0 0 [8]
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of waste water? [6,9,36,39]
Items a throuqh e - No Impact
I The proiect will be hooked up to the sanitarY sewer system and will not use septic systems. I
i
I VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - !
, I
I Would the project: !
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 [8]
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials? [32,40,42,43,44]
I b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 [8]
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44]
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 0 0 0 [8]
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school? [2,29,30,40,44]
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0 0 0 [8]
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment? [2,42,40,43]
I e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 0 0 0 [8]
! or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
i miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
t project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
! working in the project area? [ ]
I
i f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 0 0 [8]
I would the project result in a safety hazard for people
~residing or working in the project area? [ ] ~----
I g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with I 0 0 I 0 [8]
i an adopted emergency response plan or emergency I
I evacuation plan? [2,32,33,44]
, h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ! -------T
0 0 j 0 [8]
I
._ __ __....__._....__n...._ ---...- -------------.....-- -- -------.-----...--.--. ......_.-.. -- '.-.- - _ i -- ---~._-_..__..._._._- ___n_____
I ,to{ 7
-~--_.~----
I
c !
>,- c - 0 c-
- c ca c C._ C !
-ca- ca 0- caca_ O ~I
ISSUES: .!!:! 0 (,) ~o~;~ ~o(,)
_._ ca 1-lj::!::caO I- .- ca
[and Supporting Information Sources] c ~ c. 1/)'- 3: en c. I/) ~ c. Z E!
(1) C E I/) C ; "- I/) C E
cs.~ - (1) en .- 0 (1) .~- -.
-J(;; :::iiE 0 I
D..tJ) ..JtJ) I
C I
- !
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?[1 ,2,44]
Items a throuoh h - No Impact
The project site is being used as a single family residence. The proposed subdivision is not anticipated to generate
hazardous waste, increase the risk of accidental explosion, release hazardous substances, interfere with emergency
services, increase exposure of people to hazardous waster or increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass or trees.
The project site is not within a two-mile radius of the nearest airport (Moffett Airfield/San Jose Airport) and is not listed
as a contaminated site in the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would
the project:
I a) Violate any water quality standards or waste 0 0 0 [RJ
discharge requirements? [20,36,37]
I
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or 0 0 0 [RJ
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 well$ would drop
to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)? [20,36,42] .
c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed 0 0 0 [RJ
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff? [20,36,42]
d) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 0 0 0 [RJ
[20,36,37]
e) Place housing within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area as 0 0 0 [RJ
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map? [2,38]
f) Place within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area structures 0 0 0 [RJ
which would impede or redirect flood flows? [2,38]
g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 [RJ I
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding !
as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? [2,36,38] I
i
1
h) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [2,36,38] 0 0 0 [RJ !
1
Items a thouoh h - No Impact .
The proposed project is not anticipated to violate any water quality standards or water discharge requirements, I
substantially deplete groundwater supplies, degrade water quality, place housing in a 100-year flood zone, or expose i
people or structures to risks involving flooding, or tsunamis. .
Standard conditions of approval will be applied to the project requiring construction to provide additional storm water
control measures to reduce run-off in accordance with BAASMA guidelines. __________ ___
I-t-f'b
_._-----~_._-~- ,
C !
~... C'" 0 Cc
- C C'CS C C._
-C'CS... C'CS 0 ... C'CSC'CS... 1:>1
ISSUES: .!!! 0 0 .co.c+-~ .coo
... .- C'CS ....li:~C'CSo .... .- C'CS o C'CSi
[and Supporting Information Sources] c:t:c. CI)'- 3: C'l c. CI) :t: C. Z C.!
Q) C E Cl)C +-1- Cl)cE E!
cL2' - Q) C'l .- 0 Q) .2'- -!
a.. en ...J .- :E 0 ...Jen
en c
-
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 ~
[7,12,22,41]
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 0 0 ~
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? [1,7.8,16,17,18,44]
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan 0 0 0 [KJ
or natural community conservation plan? [1,5,6.9.26]
Item a throUQh c - No Impact
The proposed development will not physically divide an established community and will not conflict with any
applicable land use plan. There are no habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans affecting
the project site.
XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels 0 [KJ 0 0
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards bf
other agencies? [8,18,44]
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 0 ~
groundborne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
[8,18,44]
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise 0 0 0 [KJ
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without
the project? [8,18]
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 0 0 ~ 0
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project? [8,18,44]
I
! e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 0 0 0 ~
lor, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
I project expose people residing or working in the project
I area to excessive noise levels? [8,18,44]
I f) For a project within the vicinity of a privat~ airstrip, 0 0 0 [KJ
I would the project expose people residing or working in
I the proj~~t area to excessive noise levels? [8,18] .----
I-t.-fq
I
C I
>>- c - 0 c- I
- c ns c c._ c
-ns- ns 0- nsns_ o ~I
ISSUES: .!!! u u .cu.c;;E .cuu
_._ ns J-;;:::_nso J- .- ns
[and Supporting Information Sources] c ~ Co 1/).-.- C) I/) ~ Co z ~I
Q) C E I/) C 3:;; e- I/) C E
a .2l- Q) C) .- 0 Q) .2l- -I
a..C/) ..J(j) :Eu ..JC/) 1
C i
- i
Item a - Less than Sionificant with Mitioation Incorporation
The proposed project is located close to Interstate 280. An acoustical report done for the development of the property
around the proposed project site dated December 5, 1996 is applicable until 2010 (see Exhibit A). The CNEL level at
the site is in the 59 to 69 CNEL range. This CNEL is conditionally acceptable per the General Plan for low-density
development. According to the General Plan, conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply
systems or air conditioning will normally suffice for the development to be acceptable. According to the acoustical
report, the CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) inside the homes needs to be at 45 CNEL or lower as is
mandated by Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code. The applicant will be required to meet this condition and other
applicable conditions outlined in Exhibit A.
Items b. c. e and f - No Impact
The proposed project will not expose people to groundborne vibration, groundborne noise, or noise levels in excess
of standards of the general plan and noise ordinance. The project is not located within an airport land use plan area
or private airstrip.
Item d - Less Than Sionificant
An increase of temporary ambient noise levels will occur with construction of the project. However, this temporary
ambient noise is considered less than significant. The project will be required to comply with the City's construction
hour requirements per the City's Noise Ordinance.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the I
!
project: I
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, D D D [8] I
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
I
extension of roads or other infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44]
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, D D D [8]
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? [3,16,44]
I
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, D D D [8] I
necessitating the construction of replacement housing I
elsewhere? [3,16,44]
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES I
i
1
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? [19,32,44] D D D [8] i
I
Police protection? [33,44] D D D [8] !
I
i Schools? [29,30,44] D D D [8] I
I
i Parks? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] D D D [8] i
i
! i
Other public facilities? [19,20,44] D D D [8]
I Item a - No Impact I
: I
I The project site is currently located within an urbanized area that is served by municipal services, including fire, I
I police, and public facilities. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to create additional impacts onto the i
I existi~RBublic seryiGe~,--~___~___~___ _____ _________________ ______________ I
/-50
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?
[5,17,19,21,26,27,44]
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment? [5,44]
Items a and b - No Impact
, The proposed proiect will not reauire the construction or expansion of recreational facilities within the area. i
I
I e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
l [2,19,32,33,44]
i
I f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [17,44]
I g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
I supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
I bicycle racks)? [4,34]
;
[ Items a throuah a - No Impact
i The proposed project is not anticipated to create substantial increased traffic, result in a change in air traffic patterns,
I substantially increase hazards due to design features, result in inadequate emergency access and/or parking
I capacity, or conflict with adopted policies/plans on alternative transportation. The applicant is providing the required
! number of parking spaces as required by the City of Cupertino's Parking Ordinance, Chapter 19.100 of the Cupertino
LMuni~pal C~__ _ ..________~____________ ___________________________
ISSUES:
[and Supporting Information Sources]
XIV. RECREATION --
XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC -- 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 (Le., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
[4,20,35,44]
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
[4,20,44] . -
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location
that results in substantial safety risks? [4,?]
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [20,35,44]
r:::
>.- r::: - 0 r:::- i
-r::: l'CI r::: r::: .- r:::
-l'CI- l'CI 0- l'CIl'CI- _i
.!!! u u .cu.c~E .cuu ui
_._ l'CI 1-r.;::~l'CIO I- .- l'CI o l'CI1
r::::!:::: c. CI) .- == en c. CI) :!:::: C. Z c.1
Q) r::: E Cl)r::: ~t.. CI) r::: E EI
c).~ - Q) en .- 0 Q) .~- -I
Il.tI) ...J .- :E u ...JtI)
tI) r::: !
- 1
!
0 0 0 [EI
o
o
o
[EI
o
o
o
[EI
o
o
o
[EI
o
o
o
[EI
o
o
o
[EI
o
o
o
[EI
o
I
[Ell
o
o
o
o
o
[EI
I-51
---------- -----~----------~~ --~.,
C
>,.... C .... 0 C....
- C C'CS C C._ C ;
-C'CS.... C'CS 0.... C'CSC'CS.... .....1
ISSUES: .!!:! C,) C,) 'cC,)'c:;;E 'cC,)C,) C,);
....E;:C'CS ~E;:~C'CS0 ~.- C'CS o C'CS!
[and Supporting Information Sources] C._ c. II) .- ~ C) C. II) ~ c. z C.I
Q) C E II)C :;;... II) C E E,
(5.~ - Q) C) .- 0 Q) .~- -,
ll.tJ) ...J(j) ~C,) ...JtJ) ;
C i
-
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would ,
i
I
the project: !
,
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 0 1RI
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
[5,22,28,36,44]
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 0 1RI
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? [36,22,28,36]
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm 0 0 0 1RI
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? [5,22,28,36,44]
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater 0 0 0 1RI
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? [5,22,28,36,44]
I f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 0 0 0 1RI
I capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs? [?]
I g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 0 0 1RI
I regulations related to solid waste? [?] ,
I -
I Items a throuoh q No Impact
I The project site is served by sanitary sewer service. The applicant, like other users of the system, will be required to
I pay District fees and obtain a permit for construction of the project. A condition of approval will be incorporated that
! will require necessary improvements, if any, to be completed prior to building occupancy. The project will be required
I to comply with all federal, state and local statutes and regulations pertaining related sanitary sewer and solid waste.
1- 5:?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1
(To be completed by City Staff)
c
>.- c - 0 c-
-c ns c c._ c
-ns- ns 0- nsns- -
.!!! U U J:uJ::t:iE J:uU U
ISSUES: -l,i:ns I-ti:~nso I- .- ns o ns
[and Supporting Information Sources] c ._ g. 11>'- ~ OJ C. 11> ~ C. zc.
(1) C E I1>C :;:;1- 11> C E E
o.~- (1) OJ .- 0 (1) .~- -
D..tI) -I(n :!: U ...JtI)
C
-
a) Does the project have the potential to 0 0 0 l&J
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? 0
b) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 0 l&J
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)?
0
c) Does the project have environmental 0 0 0 l&J i
I
effects which will cause substantial adverse I
effects on human beings, either directly or I
!
indirectly? [] f
i
---- - __----.--J
PREP ARER'S AFFIDAVIT
I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding
accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted appropriate source references
when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I
hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause
delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold
harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the consequences of
such delay or discontinuance.
Preparer's Signature
. .. . --.---.;
_~4v-~
PI u L7HVsH-
Print Preparer's Name
{-53
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (To be Completed by City Staff)
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.
0 Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality
0 Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology /Soils
0 Hazards & Hazardous 0 Hydrology / Water 0 Land Use / Planning
Materials Quality
0 Mineral Resources 0 Noise 0 Population / Housing
0 Public Services 0 Recreation 0 T ransportation/Traffic
0 Utilities / Service 0 Mandatory Findings of
Systems Significance
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that:
o
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
IRJ
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have
been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
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)
h e voided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
~LARAT N, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
roposed R ject, nothing further is required.
/
o
o
o
Dat
~/";:'7
Dater '
I'
/-54
." -, :' -:. ,.-
:&.. 'l!il.:a:,~UJat "~X.8 ·
'':fh~J)~O~O~edP~Ojeqt, site is 'loQ~ted. in ,tb.ec1tyofGUpertlnni
ca~:Lforniil. . .' Tha'pr~j.ot:. i.. pr,opocs~" aplll~tmentcomple" k"own "s
Ari,oS\Q'~,'rhaproj.ct, ~iu' 'lson,~.nort:hside,or ' :Interstt\t4ia280
~l\$tof wolfe,Road.', 'l;'hapropc;lsed, ~~oj.c'tconsi.sts of, afQur and
~ewetatQJ:"Y bui14in9 pJ:"();j.ctd~si9n.'$Om.un~ts . of the oomplOX aX'G
Q'V~r,Pilrlcing. .~e" ,char1:~r~ to;r: ..this, investigation 'addresses '. Ail
eV811Ul\~i()1~ otth..o\lJ1ci 1111/411,111 e~~1:'i()r' (~nd;.nterior) ohsi~e ~nd
,~it;lCJ~tlolils.u~gest:e~i;O, rea~ce ,.oun~l~velS..
"Q'illft .oi~rc.8 primi!a'ilY- cont:ributj,n.9 t.o the' existil19' . no:l.8c)
'ellvi~Q~ell'lt;onth. project. 'site.' ~n~lude motor vehic~" traffio on
:t1l~er8tati~Hi9hway280and onWolf~ ROlld, Linnet street. and on si1:a
,v~h~cl.m'lnt.rn.al t.rflffic., Inc.ddition, di~,tantlY, Eo:mestead Roael
andn()ifi~e'fromtheother l,ocalstreets e:ont:r1bute small amount 1$ of
na.tsu:tu', ',existing <~n .i'i::8 sound levels'
Fot p\iT.PQl5eies Of evaluation a<jeiinllil1: st-anda1.'cSs, \:ha CNEL d...e~ipt~r
u..d' in ttleutandards valli utl1:l.zeOto describe. e:lCis't.:i.nq sound
.a levels!n aooordanoewithtypicaldiurnal tra~fio trends and sound
.. levelsta1~istical 'distributions. ~h... dnc:l.stingsound lOV$ls on s.i.te
aJ:'einttu~ range of 59 'to \ti9 CNBL~.~;'~'~f-atthe sasteni1ll0lllC' rr:.tangular lot.
6)
.........0-.,;.- .
. .
. .
~.D'. .1icablt.Reau. ~It:~o~i ~Dd GUidelines. The. ot'iginal authority for
provision of quiet residential ~nvironments lies in the Feaeral
Noise Con1:rol Act' of 1972 which laid ,the qrcund WO~K ~or protection
of, Publi;;~:health and welfare witbreqarcf to acoustics. . Sound
levels. at:tl'.ined under the Noise control Act of .197;; were not
~nte"decito teflectt.ecnnicalor economicteasibility. .'l'he U.S.
Depar1:mel'l'tof Housing and urtiuiDe'lelopmant considerl.J ,65dBA LcIn as
ttJ,e highlast . acc,eptable . . exterior sound level tor :r:es!dQntial.
exter1or$, alt.hough with speoialmit1gation, levels batw8fJm 65~nd
75 . dBA . f.,dn canbl;!. Acoept:ablfl under. oertainc~nd.itions~. ' . Ldnis a
day/night:, weighted 24 hour~ouncl level with n.l.gbtthne nois~ ~ein9
w'e19htcd ]l'l1gher. !nteriorBQ'D standards call for'achievingA 8o\in~
.level not to exoaed45 dall Ldn'. wit.b special emphasis ';1pon a Qu.iet
environme:nt >for loadrooms. Appr:ovalot aJlY project. WJ.th exterior
sounc11evelsil? the 65 to 75 dB)~ LdrI ran98111ust come from the
ReglcmallliUO ldl'o.lnistrator if HUD func1sor app:r:ova1s are involved..
"h~ Ldn ancl CNEL av.r~9in9 systems ~ccC)untfC)r thQ g~~ater annoya11oa
potential of nighttl.me noise by Jsighting nightt1me sound levels
9'~eater tlilm df.l.l'time levels.
Appli<::abl,e state of Califox-hia standa:r:ds arG Title 24 of the State
Uniform. Buil.cUnq code. Thiocoae requires unit interiors attain
sound levels of 45 C~ELor lower with respect to intrusive sound
f~om the ,exterior. CNEL io the commUnity Noise Equivalent Level,
a . 24. houx' t:l.me of day weiqhted flound index in which eve:nin~ and
nighttime noise are weiC)hted to t\ooount for higher annoyanoe of
intrus.ive sound in evening and ni9htt~.me ~erj.ods. ~he State Coda
a1ao X'eq~ires fa calculatll1d .level of 50. STC or higher for party
walls and floox'/ceilincr assoJltbliee relative to airboro/i:l sound and
a 50 IIC l,r higher for floor ceiling assemblies r~lativB to impact
sound.'l'heCity of cl:\pertino also has Gountt level standards which
are consistent with stat~. of california standards.
D:a:O; 05 '9.6. (THU) 06: 4~
CO"W1INlqATlON No: 12 PAOI!:.2
..... '~'
/-50
. ..:'."
'n.u~"
, ' ,
, i'1it~~"s~und'" i~y.i., ,follQwing:deVe19pDient, iliW. 'tbrQugh ~the:y'$at'2.():i.O ,
on tb;"~~iKl..~fproj fi1ct:.si1;4aarf), pr~~i,ot:~~to rem.i!lin ,app~ox,ima~~lY: ,
~1:cu~e~~l~vel,~. ~~~p;t"Et~icttQn.,i~.basedup~n.t;l\e .i~cj;e~$~iil
1:ra~f_;Lc~tol~~,()n Inter~t;ate28J~._~nd ',loca~,,'stre$t.s, ,bu,talfiSO,' w:i~h'
~nC;relis~d\ Phase in,o~f1qui.t:'~r vehiQlfl fleet.,e,speci.ally.regaraing
.diGlSJel'tz~ucks., 'F\ibiresounc.ilevelsonthe :site-wotildbe- i.nthe
;t'~nge,of:',59 't945$CN~:' withthe.1'119~e9tsound .,l..Vel()c;ourri.rll~, along ,
th8(,Intel~.state 280 side:' or "ths'prQpert.Y,l1nd also at'a ).e$se:t
'>itttensi~y.totu"its immediately closes,tto and f, aclnq,'wolfeRoaa.
. .". - . -
. . -.
~e
In.tr~.D.S!No.j.se. ,'Fu~ureexterior ,noise l.vel~ c:>ri .the-propolSed
projep1:dI:it.areprediotedto b,a 69 CHEL on the west. sidf) o:.! the
sit~neax:~st Xnt~rstate280. Hiqhestexterior sOlAn~ levels :(!C'rtne
propOs.edapartment '\.mitsare65 C~~EL at tbe, south ffAce' ofauilding
'l~oand 65 cN~at,uriitstacin9(el\st) an~ adjacc..nt'to hlol~eRoad.
SpeciaJ. nleasur~s are rsoomtnElpded ror t,he south and east taces o,f
bu!ldinqs, Two and Five and for units adjacent toWolfeRoadtacing
east in l~uildin9s ,9 and 10.A:'U other apartment unitexterio~
a>:easare in t.he range of 59 to '62 ,CN~. Less than or' eiqual to 65
CNEL is 9~~n~idered nOrJl!lllly acceptablt\.by the city of ~perttno for
multi-family residential use. (55 to 70' CNEL is consider~d
conditionally acceptable for single family residential and less.)
Apar:tment units situated on the nortnerly portion of the site have
82.Ci:erior ,scund levels ", in the range 'of, 59 ',' to 62 ,CNEL require no
speoiall:lolmd ai:tf'muation. mo~s~os beyond ,those specifJ.cations
indicated, on ,thepl~G, provided the general mitigation measur~B
for all u,nits are followed. " ' '
. . . . .
.,
. .' .
Intruding $ouilcl haS been analyzecl'.forthe parking atructura within
the envelope otfluildbxg$:2;3, 4, !) l\nd 6. it has beel~ tound'that
the,operation ot this parking strlicture,is expectedtooont.ributa
approximately 'cwo decibels' (CNEL)to ,the ambient exterior sound
level i!or'units. taoif.l9 the parking, struoture in 8uildings, 2, 3, 4,
5 and 6. This impact 1s notsigniticant since the interior units
faoingthe ~jarageare aotu~llyshielded from other. ambient SQwid
sourcC!3 t(e.g. e).-t.ernal re:-,adways) by a greater margin than two
decibels.
TO achieve sound infSulationfro1l\ ext:.erlo:t: noifle 80urooS, the
proposed building envelopes of the structures on the site should
provide slouna' insulation to attain an interior Ldn of 45 ctBA tor aJ.l
apart.ment unite.
Rased on lBvaluation of the sitoplans, all extario~ walls and root
designs shQuld provide, ai!loundir~sulation of at least 20 dB, whioh
wpuld be tlUfficientaound. insulation for acoustical proteotion for
all the "nits wi.thin the ,project. 'Glnss s~ctions (inoludln~
sliding doors) ott-he elevatl.ons tac:inq Interstate 280 if! Bl.lilding5
2
I)'ltc.os j 96 (THU)
;""-..'
, .!",:
~:" '~",~'; '~! '~~~~~t:;.:~:::.I.~: ~(":~"~~~~~;;f~J~~;'.~~'
1- 5'1
. T,Jo;'. ~l~cl:, .pi ..;.(e.;g.s'9u~.a.~<i,..;..t~,aaeB) .' 8.~d..' .~.t.' ~f:ay.i.>>.9'~~;~s :'~or..: ...;'.,.
',.lm'i.-~jJ: J;1'l,i3'U.i'~fii~9,~9 and:'J.O' .faclng:.;and .adja9&ll~,..~O ,wol.fe'~oaa,
ahou,l",pliQvid6\l 'Il.'.... miniriU1l\".Cil.Ulc.t,,'in8ti.;LeLti~I'l"" of .....26.. 'd.B,. ...1:,c,:aJ,.loW....a,
.,.r.,;~~~.i?~:~1Il'rc;J.i~,.?7 tOl..~~n,.,~...,..:., . "'" ..., " . . .' . ,.'. .
'~~,ir.!> .:~.>.pf~s~n~s,.s.v.ral.,-91a:'-~ .4~ora~d..~inao!IJ. :'t.yp~~'.and. the'
'. .', ~r.;~\lS~ic:,lll.1" ,f&(:)unCl,in!ilv.la~J.~~.'.~'t .hou;t.d;"'b,~: ~~~ess~(l.:tb:~t..th. 9;La~~..
. ....~~~~~f;.."S,~14:l; .t:~~~*1~t:.~{~"~j.~~:::{~~:tt:~.....
. ',' . 'illsu~at.i;m.;pr.e~cJ.:'i~f!d ~,......'~1.~ss:i9,tso.t~~liili"O~< the tl'pe.B,;..pte~~I1~~~~in '
, tl1e'f?~bleot:~a})l~ ..c~n .hilve. v.nr1.~l. ,/~ound .ins,uIGtii?i'1.c.\u-e'to
" c:lifterenc:efJ in .theassellblyand installation. by manu.faoturers' and
buil.d~rs'~ " .,..... . ..'.. . .' . .. '.' ..... '....... . . . '..
.TYPE.....
. .
, '
.. -0 0'-. -' ,., .
TYPICAL SOmm IN~ULA'1'IQN 'J.OSS'I:BLE' WITH SEvERAL GQ\SS
. .. 'WINOQW '.~D. . DOOR TYPES' .
. _ L. "." ~-~. ....
THICKNESS. (irichefilL SQUND. INSULATION. (dial
. .-" .'
.. .
-~~---.--,.~~.-----~~'
.'.e
.' .'
J.frNri~U1: :
Si~gl~~ Pane
(Platct' GJ.alis)
Doublla Pane
1/S 20 t.o 23
1/4 26 t.o 28
1/:2 31 t.o 32
Glas,s-Spaee-Glass
il4 - 1/2 - 114 29 to 32
3/0 - 7/~(j -3/16 38.
3116 26
"
. G~:;SDQQM:
singl~'"PAne
('J,'empared Glass)
noublePane
('~empered~lass) Gll,lss~Sp~c~-Glass
1/8';" '1/4 '-114
. . .... 3/16:-1/4-3/16
:Lumina T~chnolOgie6, ,1996
1nter';;")Jrlit.NOiml~It is rec:oil\W.tnded that party ,walls between units
provide an airborne sound insulation equal t.o that. requi:red to maet
afJourid:''!'l;'ansmiss10n Class '(STe) , of !SO .'l'befloor/ceiling
assembli.eabetwBen un.itsshould provldoan airbo:t'no. SOUlld
insulat~~on' equal to that'. required ,t.o. ineet an Impaot Insulation
Class rIlC) of 50. The pl1r~}l' walls between the individual \1tlits
sbould }:>8comparable to the wall assembly p.reaented in th$ catalog
'. of S'l'C arid IIC Ratings t.C?r Wall.and Floo.r/Ceiling Ailsembli'ea
(Office of NoiaeControl, 1981)} rated S'rC51.'
2.Gto 29
26 to 29
3.
. '
... .'
.. ,PEO.O'i~6, cr~ll1) O~,;~6.PO~UN[C~Tio~tl~:,t2 . PAOI.4
..... -. " . .... .: .....
,....'.-:.,.-::,..,.,';..-.;...;'-.,'..
..
,:,.-,<
:.... :
i -St6
,8
.(1
~~.;.i.. .
." ,. -'., . -,." .' -. .
"!Ch~.toi19,,'i~, .~~~iCJa~ion aea.Sur...i' ara> recommendeeland may ~".
.eddi~.1.o~~~'.'11le~8~es"~s, 1fJl\~'m on the Jj>>lal1s- ~ .' .-.. . I
r.~r-:~ut~~1.i]gll'.. ~oa.J.lCl.)'i"e,_..11'cjl.~S.~ ..6i.Qt~~n.Of .t~~bui~di"g
"4!iJlfaVS!t1~n.-.ti41?h-". a.o.uth.~ 'or r~s'~em..expos~I8' shoU16-pr.oviae-
_'~' ....~\~4~,n,~~:l.at~oll-.~~._tu J:~llt r:stjlUiredto ,aeet _' .~_.' ,ST~
(Soun~ ,-:'1't~~~JIll."8~(m. q_l~.IfJ)._rat;in9 : o~-' :26,. , .~td;s-gl~z1ra~
r~irtJl!lEtn~.- -.: ~ls() .' appli,eli': 'to,~,t 1ao11\9 'apartment un! ts.-
i~dia'f"ly-:- aclji\c.ntto' Wolf..lt:tild. . -'
.... l'orH-1;bQroslclamtiaiunui~.aras~to 1:286 special measurelJare-
:r:'ecoJa~ended~o reduce eX1:er!or aridinte:cior sound'. '. STe . . .
rati~9'~,-ot:9~~2in9 shoulc1' be-a-miriin\um ot, '26, and window sizes_
. flle~ng 1280 .hoUlcl be'8t:t"ictly min;1.mizeclfor th1$ - end unit~
. . .
X.~iu ,:teco~el1ded. t:hatllignage b:s postaci. ingaragflg and
pulc:.tng .tructures On : si~. to 11.m-it. vehicle speed3to five
ml1e!Vp8): hou~ andtopX'C)h1blt vebicle ielling. .
Ext.erior: doors Ghould be solid oore doors with perimeter
seals. .
- -
All frames and . senls . shoUld be thoroughly. caulked and
We:Atherstr.ipped to preven'tair leaks t.ype' transmission ot
sound.
All, J:,oof/wall junctlons, ,should be thoroughly sealed and
caulk,ad. .' .
Cowncm parti -cions :>>bc:>uld be co;ntin110US and ot" airtiqh't
con~t:ruotionon _each side; _ . im:::lud:i:,ng the ,~pp.l.ic::ationo:f
oa.Ulkin9.and platetape'ilt'ound'the&n'tire p.rimetera~d u~de:r,
thof:loor plate~ All openings at and inaide electrioal boxes
aihoulicl . beaealea,' and the opposing boxes in adjacent units
BepAr!ated by. one stud. space..
... lbchau:st' ductinq at:. kitchens and' b.athrcoms should be fitted
with iflc:~u.tidal i.tbsorben~ lininq$.
- For UI~per storytloors' (not. first. floor) , at the un~orn~at.h of
tub and . showe:t', units,. additional so.u.ndboard of mini'JDWl\
thioklneeo . of - (me half inohshould be in$ted led, as well as
below tilll/l, b~rc\wo~ Qr l!nQla\Ul1 aurfaCes in kitchens,
bathrlJ01nS and entry halls.
Anyv;Lnyl tile should.be cuehion vinyl on the upper level.
Inter.::onnccting duoting batween dwellinc;1 unlts should be
avotdcad whet'e feasible. If intat-oonnecting Quoting is
r~quh'ad, it shou];d be provided with aooust.ioal lining to
minim:l2le '.crosul talk" nffeots.
4
DEC. 0' 19~(rHU)06 :,46
COMMliN.iCATION NCl Ii 2 P".OI, S _
.- ...... c...f ......
,.-..
- .......
/-5L)
,
_. :Al.,1 .w~t."r..\lPP).Yli.lle..Sb~ul'~(~. cl~1npec1bY' ,i.9i~\~,ors' when!iV~r'
'attac::~~(l<'QJ;:''.p,n.t.:r:atili9,<~()~()C)Ci:a~e.oh 8~\.tc!C\1~PEtr . Open. X1iIi,~'
Iaol~t~ri~'shQ'U).c1.'~. ~on~.t.:t.;. cl...pe, . {(Iitb ,'. ten~i l,'e.<'S'tx:ength
...=~~1>20l)O~.9~~~~.~~~~"~D~~~~:;!
.?OB6"{,:2CS81i:",~O.Bt'" "?0~3~"::'20.j,4,: 2036,' ' 203;'" -and '20.fcV'or
'.quival.Jt\t')~~annt.r mOwlt.,'~l)n\ul)bars.' , '
." :-.~.., '. ,,-<.;,.".../. ":,-._';.- '<:' ,c_' ..-: ~.<:. >. ....,.: .' " - -. ..::'>' -;. -,: '.' " "-.' , "'::
~ 'tla~~J':"".looif1.~EJ ',lp 'sti~iy'pipiri~'sh~~l~.b8' .'. designetl ,n~,tr" t.C'i
exo..~~:j~iv. ~ect:per,' ileco~d,:''topr.vent 'pipe .bangin9 or
osoilla1:,ion noise~ '" ",. , ,
. ' .
, '
_ ' All'wat,f)r, SUpplylinei!l' wilJ.. be illJolatedwit.h approved'
:lsola1:~!:'fJ.
.' ."
,_ ,ot:111zeoast' iro~pipe:tor wa~tewat.er piping.
, '
. . ," .
.. Isolate,alJ. water'8uppJ.y jll'lcl,wastewat:er piping ,by" batt or
filledinsU:lationin tbe:itnm~c11ate Gtut;loavi'ty oontaining'th6
'pipe run.. '. " ' .
spfici:fyhlghquality fauc;et5~lhichl1ave larg8t slllqoth inte,rnt\\l
passage~'ays'to minimize, fixture', noise. "
t
IS.. ~Dsn~~JUl
CitY', 'of Cupe_rtino, ,Planning ,DGparblent, telephone cOlNIlunlcation
(september 1996).
. 'the ',Nois~ ,4:;uidebook, U.S. 'DepaJ::tm~nt of Hous~ng and Urban
Deve~opille"nt(HUO) U.S.~OV8rnmant Printing office 1995.
HDO'Ar(ihitea~G, site l'landat;ed September 27, 1996.
LumblC1' Tecll.rlologies, computer Model, for Sound propagati(m trom
',Roadway So.urces, P. o.Sox297, Bri6bane, CA 94005,
(415)6439(:176.
USGS TOpogra,phio survey' da:ta~ (19916).
~la Federal Noise control Ao~ of 1972.
lAC NoiseCclntrol. Manual.
oi ty of cupftrtino, Re'lldent.lal NoiSe Guidal inea .
cali.fornia ~;ta1:e Uniform Building Code, Title 24.
5
DE,O.05,',9~ (THU) 06:47
Cow.<W-HC^,110N No\l;2 JWJP;, 6
.'": ;,-,,' .".;',. -.r
~ ;'::,: ";~::,,<::,,:,,Z:
II~"
~.-,~~.:......:.....
"1..~...n. '
I-leD
I C;'8l[ vnn. PAINTrD
TO MATCH SlW:G
I ~ vERTICAL AND HORIZC'HAL
/ / ~ I SlOIi.G PAINTE,C V.,T'M ~ELL"r'
\ ~OORE PMIT, ElALSAM
8RO....'I. I\M3997-2
-- .-...-. -- -- -- - -
:..::-: ~ - ::;- :.::~~_. - ~
-:
- - -'~-----I- -- ---, - .
-- --- ~-----..- --'-- .... _. ,-~.. - ....- - -- .\..-, ~
- ;=~--~;~.:-~~~~~-1;;~:~~~:~~~~ ~ ~---=_: ;~~_:-:- .-
- ......~,. ----.. -',4- ~,-- - --;---
~T.O.P.
+19'-0"
~
'o'i1NDO\'/, DOOR TPII,:, FACIA
AND BRACi'ET PAI::TED ,'.. TH
KELLY ,..CORE PAlin - FLAX
SEE~ No .~J9g9-3
- - ..-.----.- -- _.- --.- -_.
- ..: -~ -....: '..- -~.." -
-' -- -.....--
- - -- --~, .- -- --...- -- --. - - - -
-_...- ~-_. .-- - ---- -
__ "...... t___ t _ _ . ~ _,. .- ~
--------.- - -----_. - -- --'-~ .--- -----
--' ..... -"" - - -- -~ - -- .~ .'" .-----. ._. -'-- .---
- - -.- - -..-- --- ~.- -.-.- -~'.. - ...--
-. - - -'"-- -- -- ~ -. _. -.- -.....- ......--. - .-.-
. ',._ __ 4 ~_ .._-'- .1.... __ t _. _
~ENTRY T.O.P.
+10'-6"
~T.O.P,
+9'-0-
T.O,P'$
+9'-0.
----. -~ ......---
...J..-. - ._,~ -..-~,----,".
-- --- - -
~ -_ ..,A__
:!t
~HDR. I
+7'-8-
2x2 REDWOOD g,\LLUSTER P.:'II-lTED
Yi1TH KELL'T f.\OJRE PAINT 'L'"
SEED. No. .. ~13999 3
c:::JC] ~ DO
CJDI DO
r-- . l' f . - .,
I .1 I . I
~ . ~ t
!:.l~
\.. WOOD STAIN
GARAGE. DOOR
I . .
DODD
:=JD DO
rg--"r.-,
i J I~
I I ,
:'...~'L~ __-0'
,.. _, I.' ,'_.. ..-
~ """,.."'"
~
VO-=-o. L
..-!,;;,;~
J
~:~~~ I
J
L STUCCO. PAINTED W1TH
"ELL'( MOORE PAINT,
fEP'ICLlFFE. KM3996-2
8 MATERIAL BOARD - LOT 1
LINNET SUBDIVISION N.T,S,
-art'
r' .-A, ~,,-;, '~,' ,,1
__', I
~'
, , - ~ I
A _' I
lc.:: ;/'" .' I
:.. ' I
r-
---~
I
j
,---
':~~. ~ 7 '-:-.": '.::::' '~,. :';:.:. :::::]
.~.:: : I~ .': ~. ::2.:,..: ~ }~]
},-~':~tt':~j
..-.o....D_ io.4au.7.Mti :,::;. ;.:.:.:.:;
I
I
.I
I
l
DRIVEWAY, SEMI-PERVIOUS.
PAVERS - CAlSTONE RIVER
ROCK. COLOR BROWN BEIGE
CHARCOAL
CULTURE STONE
RIVlERA-CSV-J68117
STUCCO. PAINTED WITH
KElL Y l.lOORE PAINT.
FERNClIFFE. KMJ996-2
SIDING PAINTED WITH KELLY
MOORE PAINT, BALSAM
BROWN. KM3997-2
V.'NDOW, DOOR TRIM, fACIA
AND BRACKET PAINTED WITH
KELL Y MOORE PAINT - FLAX
SEED, No. KM3999-3
MONIER UFETILE. STYLE
SAXONY SLATE. CAlIFORNI A
MISSION BLEND - PRODUCT
No. lFACS6464
E-.i
---
\
{;'-
~T.O.P.
+19'-0"
WINDOW. DOOR TPII,t. F ^CI' - -
"NO 8P,CfFT Pi,ltTfD MTH
I'ELL Y MOOD[ PAIN'" - AGED
OU i:'. I '4j..15-3
~ENmY T.O.P.
+10'-6" L
~
~
~HOR. I
+ 7'-8"
2x2 PEDWOOD BALLUSTER PAINTED
'M TH YELL Y MOOPf PAINT - AGED
OU',i[. n~3415-J
CULTURE STOiK
EAPTH8LEND CSV-2084
't'JF.F.
0'_0. L
~~~~;" I
i1.P TiCAL AtlD HORIZOtlTAL
SIDlt.G ;>,,,tll(O ~/1TH ~ ELL Y
IAOOPt'" p" n, P.ETP(J
LI34'';-3
~~"...., I
~------ --
-1
T.O,P'$
+9'-0.
[~'-l
n~'
['~
L- ..' ..]
r' -]
l'i
~-,-_]r-
lL~~
_____ STUCCO. PAINTED ~1 TH
/' vn L Y MOOPf PAlin. MOSSY
,. LOG "M':W 3-2
I
d
\
LWOOD STAirl
GAP AGE DOOR
CD MATERIAL BOARD - LOT 2
2 LINNET SUBDIVISION NT,S,
I . .-- / "", II
t. "I ~ ~II 'I~
, I " I
II ' I / I ~
MONIER L1FETlLE. STYLE
SAXONY SLATE. CALIFORNIA
CHARCOAL BRO~N BLEND
- PRODUCT No. lFACSI132
\
~
'.-i-
....,.....:. .::.... '::::.~
:-:':':-i
:-:.:.:~
':::'<:l
:'..T,U'Di:~:l
:::::.::~
,. .... J
. . . . .. ...... . :. :::::.~
p, .a...a.. ",~7.....i :::; ';:-:.:.:.:;
'MNDOW. DOOR TRIM, FACIA
AND BRACKET PAINTED WITH
KELL Y MOORE PAINT - AGED
ou~, KM3415-3
SIDING PAINTED WITH KELLY
MOORE PAINT. RETRO
AVOCADO, KM3414-3
STUCCO, PAINTED WITH
KELL Y MOORE PAINT, MOSSY
LOG, KM3413-2
DRI~WAY. SEMI-PERVIOUS,
PA~RS - CALSTONE RI~R
ROCK, COLOR BROWN BEIGE
CHARCOAL
E-2
~T.O.P.
+19'-0'
,..~
~"
WINDOW, DOOR TRIM, FACtA
AND BRACKET PAINTED 'MTH
KELLY :"tOORE PAil'll -
BAREFOOT BEACH, KM39S2-3
~ENlRY T.O.P.
+10'-6"
~
Y+9'=O"
,.l,.HDR. I
~
2x2 REDWOOD BALLUSTER PAINTED
\'~TH KELLY MOORE PAINT -
BAREFOOT BEACH, KM3982-J
CUL TURE STONE
MOJAVF -C5V-20Q4.2
~
Vil'="O.- L
~ ~~~;" .1
r GABLE VENT. PAINTED ~ VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL SIDING
TO MATCH SIDING. \. PAINTED \\HH KELLY MOORE PAINT,
HAPPY CAMPER. KM3981-2
... - -
"
~.
,'"
- y
,. "'-..""
~
..
,..
.,.
'";
r
"'"
"II!!! "
.." -
l!f
,.
.. '.
....
'i
'l!!1r
.." ;:
"I,?
.-
....~ y
".
..'~,:"~"-
I,,;
~ ~li~HCCK~LE:I~b~RE
PAINT, WESTERN
WEAR, I(M3980-2
.r.:J-:. l"'~'
. .'" .J.-,
-~.,..
'l._.~ ,'-='
~_rr:.
Ii
I
I
l WOOD STAIN
GARAGE DOOR
o MATERIAL BOARD - LOT 3
3 LINNET SUBDIVISION N.T.S.
MONIER L1FETILE, STYLE
SAXONY SLATE,
APALACHIAN
BLEND-l F ACSOJJO
\
~'
~
~"'.~"'..r.'~"'."~'itfJ.' ".
l !~J13'i1_. _H~
~r~
r _ .:.... ..
:::*fj'~?CI?~~!
'F"~'c'fIi.,;:~""l""1
: I,:::':':.h;'. :,j;:.::: >t:"::,: ,':::::::4
.~., ,.:t,:,:.:.:l" ".,.,. ~....... "1
>s2ri/1rLJ~7~
......... .. .......... .......1
..... ,. . '.. .'. . .....
........... .......-... .......
:.:~:-:.>:-:.:-..:.:.:.:.:...:.:-:.:.:...:.:-:.:~:::::::::::::::::~
'.----.P.~7.M1....__.... ..
CULTURE STONE
MOJAVE-CSV-20042
DRIVEWAY, SEt.lI-PERVlOUS,
PAVERS - CALSTONE RIVER
ROCK, COLOR BROWN BEIGE
CHARCOAL
STUCCO, PAINTED WITH
KELLY MOORE PAINT.
WESTERN WEAR, KM3980-2
UNDOW, DOOR TRIM, FACIA
AND BRACKET PAINTED UTH
KELL Y MOORE PAINT -
BAREFOOT BEACH, KM3982-3
SiDING PAINTED WITH KEllY
MOORE PAINT, HAPPY
CAMPER. KM3981-2
E-~
',IOI,IEP ,lfr- -, <;r,'1 r
S,A.(C', Sl_.k_,
CHc.Po ,',ClOD 1f :'CS '80::
rI. T.O.P.
V+i'9"=0.
',:'1,00'.\, :JOCo -PII,:, r ...::1 A.
,..'1(; BRAn _I "'All. ILe y, rH
,t__ ',iJOP:. OAll.l
T'M-I'. -'s -', rs, ,M30;?1- ~
~ENTRY T,O,P.
+10'-0. L
~ T.O.P.
+9'-0.
~ HDR. I
+7'-8.
,,- WCCi, 0.-'1:1, F[I ~,TH
r "" f,'{lOP- PI,I'IT,
r C A, I' ','-)09.'- ::
V.aOD STpl~ - -__
~APA.r.'" DOCO ~F.F,
0'-0. L
~:~~~ I
,.-
tI
; /
E."Ii::;_ ,-;:D ";O;:>''::OTAL S:XiC
P411TC ','r- I':,~_ MC:)P[: P"-I'IT.
P JPOL[ oL"T. -'.:'::;<')9.3- 2
"-Ir.ro, "AIIH-O WiTH
,':' ~ ':oopr P"".-.
r _C -, r ',!jGS_' :?
CD MATERIAL BOARD - LOT 4
LINNET SUBDIVISION N.T.S,
,----
I
I
I
I
MONIER L1FETILE, STYLE
SAXONY SLA TE,
CHERRYWOOD-1FACS7002
,
~.
*-
........-- .. ~ - - - -,.. .----- .~ """" oIi ... .....~. _ - _ 'l"'-.....
....-...-,.. .................---,.-----....- --...~-----,-. -........... ---.... -
-. ....---. "'~__ l.. ~_~. _ .--
....~ -~--'-~--:- ---~.;-----
~ ,.. .,. ...- _..--- .. -'.. -,- -.-' .-.'Jf"".
- .,.....---.... ..............-,~ ~--......-.-~"' ~--...
''"";' --'T' ----r--"'r..--.....,..--,
. , ,
::U_-JP:. STOllt. 9vC'E'f~
_''.1'::5"70''1:: -:5 1-20:'3
~." prOW080 8AI ''''r? o;.,t1i..O
:..,-, I' :LL' '.'OOPE PA'r -
1I,,"IIIA'S EES 1".'jOE'~ 2
[:J
~~r..ldt 4L1
:~B ,'<. i"i:LJ--ilJ
~\'1f:r~ M,~"~
. - w.......J_..:.-1
Ut j !l~ :
'MNDOW, DOOR TRIM, FACIA
AND BRACKET PAINTED WITH
KELL Y MOORE PAINT -
TIANNA'S EYES KM3094-2
SIDING PAINTED 'MTH KELLY
MOORE PAINT, PURPLEY
PUFf, K1.l3093-2
STUCCO, PAINTED WITH
KELLY MOORE PAINT, KECIA.
KM3093-2
CUl TURE STONE, BUCKEYE
UMESTON E -CSV- 2023
DRIVEWAY. SEMI-PERVIOUS.
PAVERS - CAlSTONE RIVER
ROCK, COLOR BROVIN BEIGE
CHARCOAL
"'~(~~?tI1:.::"~:!
,1'... .(.....-- ..."..~.. ',' ... 'j' . ",'I
.(..,. .. ..-~.. .. -.
t.... ... ...... ... ... ...
t"S~~T~'.i
"'~1':~.M1.:.:':~:.::.;,.
E.-if
~D~~ [p~@u~@uD@~
,. PRO\IIDE PullUC FIllE H"l1lRANT(S) "T LOCATION(S) TO BE DETER"INED JOINlI.Y 8Y
THE FIRE DEPARllIENT AND THE CAUFORN" w"TER w"TER COlIPANY. mAX.
HYDRANT SPACING SHALL BE 500 FEET. WITH .. "'NOW" SINGLE HYDRANT FLOW or
1500 GPlI ..T 20 PSI, RESIDUAL. IF ARE" FIRE H"l1lRANTS ElOST, REFLECT THEIR
LOCATION ON THE Ow. DR..WlNGS INCLUDED WITH THE IIUIl.llING PENT SU8llITTAL.
REOUIRED FEES TO BE PAlO ASAP TO PREIot:NT ENQNEERINC DELAYS.
2. PRlV.. TE ON SITE flRE HYDRANT(S) REOUlRED: PRO\IIDE ONE PRIVATE ON-SITE FIRE
H"l1lRANT(S) INSTALLED PER NFP.. STD. 12', ..T LOCATION(S) TO BE DETERlI"ED 8Y
THE FIRE DEPARllIENT. "AX. H"l1lRANT SPACWC SHALL BE 500 FEET. WITH .. llIN.
ACCEPT_E FLOW or 1500 GPlI AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL PRESSURE.
3. ON-SITE PRIV"TE FIRE SERVIC( .....NS AND/OR H"l1lRANTS: ..STALL"TION or
PRIVATE flRE SERVIC( ......S NIlJ/OR FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL CONFORlI TO
N"TIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCI"TION (NFP") STNIlJARD 12', AND FIRE
DEPARTlIENT STNIlJARD DETAILS NIlJ SPECIFICATION W-2. IF THE SUPPLY PIPI<G IS
"COlIIlINED" (SPRINKLER SYSTE" at HYDRANTS), .. U.L. _D '-WAY FOC
SHALL BE PROVIDED. A SEPAR..TE INSTALLAllON PERlIIT fllOlI THE I1RE
DEPARTlIENT IS REOUIRED.
.. TIlI1NC or REOUlRED WATER SUPPLY INSTALL..TlONS: INSTALL..llONS or REQUIRED
FIllE SERVIC((S) AND flRE HYDRANT(S) SHAlL BE TESTED AND ACCEPTED 8Y THE
FIllE DEPARTlIENT, PRIOR TO THE START or FR....NG OR DEUIot:RY or BULK
COlI8USTl8LE ....TERlALS. IIUIUlING PERlIIT ISSUANCE "AY BE WITHHELD UNTIL
REOUIRED INSTALLATIONS ARE COlIPI.ETED. TESTED, AND ACCEPTED.
5. FIRE APPAR" TUS (ENGINE) ACCESS ROADS REOUlRED: PRO\IIDE ACCESS ROADW" YS
WITH A P..Iot:D ALL WE"THER SURF"CE, .. _...... UN08STRUCTED WIDTH or 20
FEET. Iot:R1lCAL CLEARANCE or 13 FEET 6 _s. INSTALLATIONS SHAlL CONFORlI
WITH FIRE DEPARTlIENT STANDARD DET....S NIlJ SPECIflCATlON SHEET ..-.. UFC
902.2.2
6. FIRE Dl.PARTlIENT (ENQNE) ROADW"Y TURN-AROuND IS NOT REQUIRED DUE TO THE
F..CT TH..T THE PRlV"TE ROAD ONLY :0""-0" fllOlI .._ PUBLIC ROAD.
7. FIRE LANE ..ARK"C REQUIRED: PROlllDE ..ARICINC FOR ALL ROADWAYS WITHIN THE
PRO..(CT. ..ARKINC SHALL BE PER FIRE DEPARTlIENT SPECIflCATIONS. ..STALL..TlONS
SHALL ALSO CONFORlI TO LOCAl. CO\'ERNlIENT STANDARDS AND flRE DEPARllIENT
STANDARD DET....S AND SPECIflCATlONS "-6
8. PARK..C ALONG ROADW.' YS: THE REOUlRED WIDTH or flRE ACCESS ROADW" YS
SHALL NOT BE 08STRuCTED IN ANY "ANNER NIlJ, PARKING SHALL NOT 8E ALLOWED
ALONG ROADW"Y LESS THAN 28 rEET IN WIDTH. P_ ....Y BE PERlIITTED ALONG
ONESIDE or ROADWAYS 28-JlI FEET IN WIDTH. ROAD WAY WIDTHS SHALL BE
lIE"SURED CUR8 FACE TO CURB FACE, WITH PARKING SP"CE 8ASED ON AN 8 FEET
WIDTH.
9. ll..ING or REOUIRED ROADW"Y "STALL"TIONS: REOUlRED "CCESS ROADS, UP
THROUGH FIRST LIFT or ASPHAl. T, SHALL BE "STALLED NIlJ "CCEPTED 8Y THE FIRE
DEPARTlIENT PRIOR TO THE START or COlI8LISTl8LE CONSTRuCTION. DURING
CONSTRuCTION, ElIERGENCY "CCESS ROADS SHALL BE II...NT"'NED CLEAR AND
UNllPEDEO. NOTE TH.. T BUILDING PERIlIT ISSUANCE II" Y BE .~LD UNTIL
"ST ALLA TlONS ARE COIlPLETED. TEIlPORARY "CCESS RO"DS IIA Y BE APPROIot:O ON
A C"SE BY CASE BASIS.
10. PRE,,'SES "DENTlFICATION: APPRO\ot:D NUIlBERS OR ADDRESSES SHALL BE PLACED
ON ALL NEW AND ElOSTlNG BUlLDINCS IN SUCH .. POSITION "5 TO BE PLAINLY
IIIS1BLE AND LEGIBLE FROIl THE STREET OR ROAD FRONTING THE PROPERTY.
NUIl8ERS SHALL CONTR"ST WITH THEIR 8..CKGROUND.
[LOOOOO~u @Q1)[ID[Q)OWO@O@OO
@M~~~uD~@~ @&[sD[?@~~D&
RECEIVED
APR 1 6 Z007
BY:
~[}{]~~uDOO[Q)~~
[p~@~~@u [Q)&U&
ARCHITECTURAL
BUILDING TABULATIONS:
AO.O TITLE SHEET, LOCATION MAP, PROJECT DATA.
SHEET INDEX.
AO.1 SITE PLAN
A1.0 LOT 1 - ELEVATIONS
AU LOT 1 - 1ST, 2ND fLR.. Roar PLAN, AND
SECTIONS
A2.1 LOT 2 - ELEVATIONS
A2.2 LOT 2 - 1ST, 2NO fLOOR PLAN. ROOf
PLAN, AND S[CTlONS.
AJ.O LOT J - ELEVATIONS
AJ.l LOT J - 1ST, 2ND fLOOR PLAN, ROOF
PLAN. AND SECTIONS.
A4.0 LOT 4 - ELEVATIONS
A4.1 LOT 4 - 1ST. 2ND fLOOR PLAN, ROOF
PLAN, AND SECTIONS.
A50 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
Tl.1 TREE PROTECTION INSTRUCTION
Tl.2 TREE PROTECTION INSTRUCTION
8UlLDWG OCCUPANCY
OCCUPANCY SEPAR..TION
CONSTRUCTION TYPE
NO. or UN1TS
1ST FeR. UIIING
1ST GARAGE
2ND FLR. UIIING
TOTAL UIIING
TOTAL AREA
PATIO ARE"
LOT Sl2E
8LDC 1
913 SF
'32 SF
840 SF
1,7S3 SF
VIIS SF
287 SF
',575 SF
NO. or STORIES PER BLOC.
ZONING
TOTAL LOT ARE"
ROAD AREA
NET LOT AREA
TOTAL BULDWG AREA PROPOSAl.
f'.A.R.
TOTAL P..TlO
TOTAL 2'" ROOF OIot:R HANG
LOT COIot:RACE
(BASED ON TOTAL 8U1LD1<GS FOOTPRINT)
PARKING
ON SITE PARKING
CUEST PARKING PROlllDE
[p~@~~@lJ [Q)D~~@u@~W
WD@D~DUW [}YjJ&[P
OWNER:
TONY BAIG
411 N. LEIGH AVE.
CAMPBELL, CA 95008
PHONE: (408) 90J-B4J1
fAX. (408) J69-8297
:\f~1't!tl )2 ~~(t ~
t ~
r I ..
;'
l.*o;""Jif<J~~
~ .. ... P<#ri ~
:.4t4
ARCHITECT:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS
18725 LOREE AVE.
CUPERTINO. CA 95014
PHONE: (408) 892-5020
FAX: (408) 996-218J
"',::.,~\..~
f"~~?l<<:
CIVIL ENGINEER:
1
t
,:;
APN NO:
J16-47-017
ZONNING:
(PO)
GENERAL PLAN:
EXISTING USE: SINGLE f AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL
PROPOSEO USE: fiVE DETACHED SINGLE f AMIL Y RESIOENTIAL
8LDC 2
897 SF
'32 SF
lI56 SF
1,7S3 SF
2,111S SF
378 SF
5.247 SF
R-3/1J-1
OCCUPANCY SEPARAllON
V-N
FIIot: BULIlINGS
BLOC 3
;;nr;
438 SF
873 SF
'.n8 SF
2.189 SF
--
J94 SF
..ass SF
2 STORY
PO
(0.S2 ACRES)
. 44.91X
. 1,371 SF
. 41X
8
i
~ ! ~~~'t''''''f
r; >..~~/"'.'''''''~
"
",n"'..~,"
~*~~ ~j
~
!
;;
,. 4lII__, f.. ~."".lIl...
d, I
Project
Linnet Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 linnet Ln
Cupertino, CA 95014
ApplicanVOwner:
TONY BAIG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph' 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCgiobal.net
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA, S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Emaii: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
Plan Check Comment 3.14.07
__ _______ - _n__ ~
NO ReviSion Date
Drawn By:
Date:
ile:
Tssue:
'0630 LOINET LN. I roale:
CUPERTINO. CA 9:10" I 1115.2006
Sheet Title
TITLE SHEET, LOCATION MAP,
PROJECT DATA, SHEET INDEX
Sheet No
mlmo@
I
LEGEND
I' I
~
I...... ...... ...1
:l&
o
LANDSCAPE - CREEN AREA
SE"-PER'olOU5. PAVERS - CALSTQNE
RIVER ROCK, COlOR _ BEIGE
OtARCOAL
CONCRETE PAWOG
TREE TO BE REIIOVEO
TREE TO REII_ ANO PROTECTEO
NOTE:
1. TREE 11-10. 112. fl4. T17. TII. TI' SHIll BE REMAIN AND
PROTECTED lUlING CONSTRUCnON PER TREE PROTEcnON
lNS1RUCllON PAGE n.1 AND 11.2
2, PROPOSE TO REIIO\IE TREE T11, TlJ, T!5, Tl6, T20. T21 AND AU.
(E) F'RUT TREE ON SITE
L
r"-,,-"-"_. NO",/,"9'17'26"r 146.,93' 14693' p. L
..,-............ ....... f " .
'66.39'.. . .... '~r.' "-'--"--. r. ..-..-.._.._
I, 80.54'
:/ "I. i ! '" LOT 3 4 855 sr
o c, '/ SITE: , 185 sr
I, . BUILDING 2,
I 4 ,;1 ,/
.~ PAno I TR>l
47 .... I
LOT 4
SITE: 4,745 sr
BUILDING 2.185 sr
X 1ST FLR.
~.VE 2:: F~.
'11 847 sr.
\"
o
...
;,.
...
a-
(I)
"'-5'-0" HIGH
(REDWOOD FENCE
I GUEST
I PARkll'lG
I . .
I
GARAGE .~. _ _ _ .Ano PRO\1~PIER ON
472 sr . 14' .... GRADE EAM
.1 8'.21' FOUND ON ON
r - - - - , . I. ANY P T OF
I II I GUEST . BUILDI WHICH
I I ?' , IPARKING IS LESS THAN
I I re,. I 20'-0" ROM
cul~ I TREE 14
'~"M I.
;; ~.~. I
'(1)'1' I Cu.
~.~ "'. J--- ::; -~ J'
~, ^ I '. . .' REMOVE .
.. c. I 8 .21 I 20.... I
. I 'GUEST w I T16,
I r-- IPARKING ~ ~~:"":J
: 1ST FLR. : . 1 tn r II
If-i 913 SF I -Ai' C ~
Il._....... .
6' -0" HIGH REDWOOD FENCE .[:] - 2ND FLR. I
~n. 840 SF ~. - '"
'-...'. /' "> ,,- 6 -0 HIGH
" ", J~_;'_ I ....- OWOOO fENCE
PRO\1DE RED CURB MARKING, .~ ".~=!---,0
CURB TOP AND SIDE SHALL BE '. . I .' ~
~AINTED REp, AND THE WORDS, I ~\ ~ , . 0' .
FIRE LANE SHALL BE . ' T-m ~
~~~ONH~~ 1 (
SIDE OF ALL RED CURBS ANT A I ! I ". :. . \
MAXIMUM INTERVAL OF 50 . < · T17' I " <
FEET. LETTERS SHALL BE TREE . ~ IMONTEREY
INCHES (3") IN HEIGH WITH A LPlNE . ,
MINIMUM i-INCH STROKE. . .. J--- -i- ,;
,
.. . -.. PRO\1*PAVER
DRIVE Y ON GRADE
~, TO MIN IZE IMPACT
o-J'---.-... ,,_... N01"4'38"E ,.,' TO R T OF TREE
STORM DRAiN T17 )
II--€) r
@-\!. 272.76' - - - - - -Smrr7,j~- - - - - ue - - ---:....J
~,~\ ~
G-- "'''''-... SANiTARY SEWER .....".~/'J
SOO"24"S3"W 167.61'
-
1
f
.Ano
.. ....
.
tw-
...
'(1)
I
1ST FLR.
909 SF ,'.,
2ND FLR.
L...-,
PAno
141 sr.
-.f-' .~ ,
-.J - --
0..
9',i1'8'
-WJ
'9 xl
~
U
-t
Y-
ix>
.q-
<Xi
10
GARAGE
4.32 sr
-../
}-<
fi
~?
>I
(
I
iD
...
<Xi
:!!
r-"'II"-....-.,
~.J:-~
....T10
DEODAR
CEDAR
o
.S. 0~.14...'l
.........:il..-
6~.4'"
6'-0" HIGH REDWOOD FENCE ~-
...
~
\
\0
"~
PRO\1DE RED CURB MARKING,
CURB TOP AND SIDE SHALL BE
PAINTED RED, AND THE WORDS
"FIRE LANE" SHALL BE
STENOLED ON THE TOP AND
SIDE OF ALL RED CURBS ANT A
MAXIMUM INTERVAL OF 50
FEET. LETTERS SHALL BE TREE
INCHES (3") IN HEIGH WITH A
MINIMUM i-INCH STROKE.
'"
(I)
VI
e
~/'"'"
I PRO\1DE CONC. \ PRO\1DE rtRE HYDRANT, SEE
L-DRIVEWAY ON GRADE ~CI\1L IMPROVEMENT PLAN -
TO MINIMIZE IMPACT PLAN AND PROFILE LINNET
TO ROOT OF TREE COURT
o PLOT PLAN T19 tE:::::"
l'~lO'-{)' N \t:7
';.""'_'-f.._~\".'-
Project:
Linnet Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
1 0630 Unnel Ln.
Cupertino. CA95014
ApplicanVOwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N LeighA\I13
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Conlact: Tony Baig
Ernaii: Baig2@SBCglobal.nel
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS. Inc
12480 Salaloga A\I13
Saratoga. CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Ernail, FRANKlHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE ALAMEDA S#360
San Jose. CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Ernail: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
Plan Check Comment 3.14.D7
.-~--
NO Revision Date
Drawn By: I Date:
ile:
Issue-
ate:
11.15.2006
Sheet Title,
PLOT PLAN
Sheel No.:
&@o 1]
:J
I
+1~~;'
fH'lWTfoa.P..
+1Cl'."
~__'M~
~
--, .,,:;,
----'l,A
~
--, ......
~
o 2' 4' S' II'
e!) LOT 1 - NORTH (REAR) ELEVATION ~
3/16'=1'-{l'
~
~
~
~
--, .T':;'
----'l,A
~
l~,
o 2' <t' 6' 15'
o LOT 1 - EAST (RIGHT) ELEVATION ~1iIIIII"""
3/16'=1'-0'
~.
~
'~r r
"""'-----
Y<=G"O-
+~.I
L
~
V+'19"'=O.
h7 VERTICAL CEDAR
TRIM AT CORNER
HORIZONTAL WOOD
SIDING
~ENlRY T.O.P.
+10'-6"
~
~
AHDR. I
~
2x2 REDWOOD
BALLUSTER
CUl TURE STONE
~~
~
. GIlAQ( I
~
r---___-,_____
I I ----:1
! ~OT4 j~OT3 I:
, ;-'- II
! (:! 1) ___ I :
f-u---~ I n-u -rl
:S'::i'~'i
! ,I I : I LOT 2 I:
i LOT 1 1:1 i ! I I !
, 1'1 I,
L____1LJJ1_____--LJ
KEY SITE PLAN
Ne
~@~ 1]
~D~OO~~ @M[ID[IDDWD@D@~
DDIDD
DDDD
A
LOT 1 - SOUTH (FRONT) ELEVATION
o :l' 4'
~ ..;' T'
MONIER L1F"ETllE. STYlE SAXONY SLATE. CAliFORNIA MISSION BLEND - lFACSS<464
HORIZONTAL CEDAR WOOD SIDING - UPPER WALLS PAINTED WITH KELLY MOORE P"'NT
BALSAM BROWN, K1.l3997-2
vERTICAL SIDING AT WAll UNDER GABLE END, PAINTED TO MATOi HORIZONTAl SIDING
STUCCO - lO~R WAllS PAINTED 'MTH KELLY MOORE PAINT, FERNCUFTE. KMJ996- 2
'MNDOW, DOOR TRIM. r AClA AND BRACKET PAINTED 'MTH KEU Y MOORE PAINT - FLAX
SEED, KM3999- 3
CULTURE STONE IJENEER. RIVlERA-Csv-368117
DRIVE WAY SEUI-PER\o'1OUS, PAVERS - CALSTONE RIVER ROCK, COlOR BROWN BEIG(
CHARCOAl
1/4'=1'-0'
T.O,P_$!
+9'-0.
@......................................1J.....................1:1
. ... .. I
..... ..... .... .~
.... ...... ..... 0.... .... . . ..... .......... ......r. ..... .DI . D.. ~..I
.. . . ... c'
.: . ..~ j
.i
I
P..__.P.~II3.
Project:
Unnet Town Pk>mes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
Cupertino, CA 95014
ApplicanVOwner:
TONYBAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobal.net
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHllECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892~5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE ALAMEDA. S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOLCOM
_ Plan Check Comment 3.14.07
NO. Revision Date
:.,
I
~
Drawn By:
Date:
lie:
Tssue:
Date:
11.15~2006
Sheet TItle:
LOT 1 - ElEVATIONS
Sheet No.:
& 1] o@
:J
I
~
~'"-;..
~
~
.~..r
~
~
+~, I
STAll
BATHRW.
SA lHRW.
'OYER
CD LOT 1 - SECTION EE Ne I.J~~
3/16'=1'-0"
,---------T---------i
SLOPE I SLOPE
5: 12 I 5: 12
r--------...,
I I
I I
I I
I I
I SLOPE SLOPE I
'--- ~I
I 5: 12 5: 12 I
I I
I I
I
r------L----
I
I
w t
[L N
g ~
(/] "'
I
w t
[L N
g -:-:
(/] "'
-,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
CD LOT1-ROOFPLAN Ne~
3/16'=1'-0"
L
----------,
I
I
I
I
I
w ~
[L N
g -:-:
(/] "'
I
L__-,
t ~ :
"' I
-------t
~ N I
-,
lii I
I
-'
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r------'
I
i
I
I
I
I
______1-___
SLOPE
SLOPE
5: 12
5: 12
5: 12
I
I
I
5: 12 I
---- ~
SLOPE
SLOPE
PaR'"
.~.~~.,
.0l1lh'.!.O'...
+Ia'-
~
~
+:':':.. r
~
~
+~.I
'I
il
1- - ---,- ---- ---:1
!~T4 IlBOT3 I:
, ;" II
! ,.. ! 1) I :
~n___~ i n-u-u-n
:g,I::il~li
! II I : I LOT 2 I:
i LOTI II i ! I I !
: I'" I I,
Ln__1LiJln___iJ
KEY SITE PLAN
Ne
o LOT1-SECTIONDD Ne t.J_~.
3/16'=1'.0'
r----------I----------l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
25H.
"""
~
"
"
iII~
,~
DRDI~
t:J~
~
ill
."
:;
~l~
.. .
l
2 - 5H.
....
I
I
I
I
__.J
,
"
2 - 9l.
""'"
2'-0.
32'-0'
D
A1.1
o LOT 1 - SECOND FLOOR 7:LAN Ne \..f~~'
6"-9-
7'-1'.
GARAGE
~
~
2 - 5H.
....
c::JD EJ t] or )~
DIN ~
gg ~I I ~ ; "
iII~
iII~IIIO
[GJ
iII~111 0 RDOM
2-SM.
""'"
14'-1'
1)'-6"
~
A1.1
~ 0 2' 4' " S'
o LOT 1 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN NV ~-::::
FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTE:
CD
CD
Q)
INSTANT WATER HEATER, ~OUNT ON WALL WTH tollN.
6'0" CLR. FROM FINISH FLOOR
STACK WASHER AND DRYER
FURNACE IN ATTIC
@...........................ij............:-l
.... .... .. .I!
Giur':
'..4lIl__.'-~lP.
~
PrDject:
Unnet Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
CupertinD. CA 95014
ApplicanVOwner:
TONY BAJG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave
Campbell. CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.6297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCgIDbal.net
Nchitect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHQ@YAHoo.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE ALAMEOA. S#360
San Jose. CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
Plan Check Comment 3.14.07
Revision Date
Date:
Sheet Trtle:
LOT 1 - 1ST AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN
LOT 1 - ROOF PLAN
Sheet No.:
&1]01]
~
I
~
't'.lr-O'" .
+IN'IJn't.o.I""
.Ie'-I'"
~
~
f':=... r
~-
~
.~~.I
o 2' ..' 6' s'
o LOT 2 - SOUTH (REAR) ELEVATION ~
3/16"~1'-(]"
.~:':~o"
+"""".r:
.let-I"
~
~
+:'::.. r
~
~
+~.I
-',",""
~
o 2' 4' 6' II'
eD LOT 2 - WEST (RIGHT) ELEVATION ~
3/16"~1'-(]"
.~:':~o"
'EMtlrf1.~
.to'-6"
~
~
+:'::.. r
~
~
+~. I
~
~
o 7' ..' 6' 8'
CE) LOT 2 - EAST (LEFT) ELEVATION ~
L
~T.O.P.
+19'-0"
,ENTRY T.O.P.
.10'-5.
~
~
AHOR. ,-
-v:;r:r
~
~
. GRADE I
~
= ..... .....:-l
@......................1].........1
0'. .'. n ...... ..D lD1
. .. "0.
P.__.p.~"".
II
Project:
Unn.t Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
Cupertino, CA 95014
AppIicanVOwne<:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Comact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobal.net
KEY SITE PLAN
N~
ArcMect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
[1@u ~
[1D~~~u ~M[ID[g)DWD~D@~
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA, S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Emai!: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
Plan Check Comment ~07
Revision Date
Date:
Tssue:
Date:
11.15.2006
Sheet Tille:
LOT 2. ElEVATIONS
Sheet No.:
o or .f 6' 8'
'..r- I
o LOT 2 - NORTH (FRONT) ELEVATION
1/4'~1'-(]"
. MONIER LlFETllE. STYLE SAXONY SLATE. CALIFORNIA CHARCO.4L BROWN BLEND - PROOUCT No. 1FAC$1132
HORIZONTAl CEDAR WOOD SIDING - UPPER WALLS PAINTED 'MTH KELLY MOORE PAINT. RETRQ AVOCADO.
KM3-41<4-3
CEDAR WOOO SHINGlE AT UNDERSIDE Of" GABLE END PAINTED TO lrAATOi HORIZONTAl SIDING
STUCCO - LOWER WAllS. PAINTED 'MTH KELLY MOORE PAINT, MOSSY lOG. KMJ41J-2
WINDOW. DOOR TRIM, FACIA AND BRACKET PAINTED WITH KEllY MOORE PAINT - AGED OlIVE. KlrAJ4'5-J
CULTURE VENEER STONE EARTHBlEND CSV-2084
DRIVEWAY, SElrA,-PERVlOUS, PAVERS - CAlSTONE RIVER ROCK, COlOR BRO'lttN BEIGE CHARCOAL
&/?2o@
:J
I
':i:~
IjlOOOT T....
+ICI'-r
~
--,r;r:r-
+:-::.. r
~
~
Ijl~.r
W.l.
a.OSEl
BEDRlI.
..
BE"'"
BEDRlI.
BE"'"
~
~
ICIlCH[N
.....ACE
o 2' .' " 8'
~....-""
CD LOT 2 - SECTION EE 3116" 1'-0'
I
;--:~t
I a. '"
o -
I -.J ..
I (f) "'
: ~~'"
I g ~
I (f) "'
L
-,
I
,-----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
: SLOPE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SLOPE
SLOPE
5:12
5: 12
5:12
. ~:~r
fE":" l.~
., .r
AT,""~
~
.~..r
~
~
Ijl~.r
,
-J
1-- ---'------1]
! ~4 lffiOT3 I :
, ~-,,, I I
! (:! '1) I:
~___u~ I n-u-u-rl
:~'::i'0Ii
! ,I!: I LOT 2 I:
i LOTI Iii ! I I !
: I:: il JJ
L____lUuJ:L_____
KEY SITE PLAN
OJ
a.
o
...J
V1
I
I
I
I
I
L___~_
5: 12
I
I
I
_ __ _ __,_ -L________
o 2' 4' 6' iii'
o LOT 2 - SECTION DO ~_-....
3/16" ~ 1 '-0'
3:f~""
2'-0.
15'-0'
18'-7"
I ,
..
:~ I " BEDR" I >----1L--, "
I~
SEDRM I
~~~ I
~~ I
I
I
I
~H
..'
I
BJ'
I
-I'
~p
~ I
SEDRM. if! I
, I
~ I
I
I
I
,-SIt ~
"""
,-------------
~
;,
,__---.J
: ~ I 0
I ill';;
I
i
I
I ~IO
I ill';;
L
-,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
________-1._
SLOPE
5: 12
I
j
I
I
I
L_____
3'-,
'h- h~
: ... [] ~ 00
~2
~W
~I I ~:IO
"I
5'-6"
ala.
,~ c;>
N ";::;
f,-l1"
'''-1"
.36'-0'
CD LOT2-ROOFPLAN Ne ~~.
3/16"~I'-O' ,
o
$r C:,
CD LOT 2 - SECOND FLOOR PLAN 'NI:{7 t.rl~ii-\.J'
3/16" -1 '-0'
o LOT 2 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN Ne t.rl~~.
FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTE: 3116"=1'-0'
L
CD
ill
Q)
INSTANT WATER HEATER, MOUNT ON WALL Yt'ITH MIN
6'O~ CLR. FROM F"lNISH FLOOR
STACK WASHER AND DRYER
FURNACE IN ATTIC
Ne
"
@..............................1]........................10
... ........ ... .. . ....~
)0... ........T.... ...t
.. .'0.
,._'-.f.~~,
I
Project:
Unnel Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Applicant/Owner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.6297
Contact: Tony Ba;g
EmaH: Baig2@SBCglobal.net
Architect:
STUDiO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saraloga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHoo.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA, S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOLCOM
~
3.14.07
Date
Date:
Tssue:
Date:
11.15.2006
Sheet TIlle:
LOT 2 - 1 ST AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN
LOT 2 - ROOF PLAN
Sheet No.:
&/t2 0 1]
~
I
~....
l'l,;:r
+IT-W
+Dl1WT,!'o.,.
....-
~-
~
.~..r
~
~
.~.I
o LOT 3 - EAST (REAR) ELEVATION ~.
3116'~1'-Q'
'~lf.ir
~
+[M""'.o.".
+Ill'~"
~
~
+:';':... r
~
.~~ I
o 2' 4' 6' e'
CD LOT 3 - SOUTH (RIGHT) ELEVATION ~
3116'~1'-Q'
o 2' 4' 6' s'
o LOT3-NORTH (LEFT) ELEVATION ~
3/16'~1'-o"
L
ljlT.O.P.
+19'-0.
~
V+17'=--'O.
~[NTR,( T.O.P.
+10'-6'"
~
V+9'~O.
AHOR. I
~
STUCCO
fiNISH
~
~o~---L
ljl:,;~.1
r-------T----
:&1 '~---~
! LOT4 i LOT 3 I :
, ;,",- II
! (:! '1) I:
~-----~ i n-------rl
:~I::i'0Ii
! ,I I : I LOT 2 I:
i LOT 1 'j i ! I , !
: I:: il lJ
L..__lUulL_____
KEY SITE PLAN
Ne
[s@u ~
[sD~~~u ~(1O[ID[Q)DWD~D@~
4.8 CORBEL.
SEEtI':1
~
1
5.
'.7 ~RTlCAl CEOAR
TRIM AT CORNER
HORIZONTAl WOOD
SIDING
o
I
~
CULTURE
STONE VENEER 0 2" 4' 6' 8'
~ I
o L~~:,:.:~~~ ::~~: ~~:~A~:~~~N BLENO-lFACS03JO 1/4"~1'-~
HORIZONTAl CEDAR WOOD SIDING - UPPER WALLS. PAINTED WITH KEllY MOORE PAINT, HAPPY CAMPER,
K1I43961-2
VERTlVAl WOOD SIDING AT WALL UNDER GABLE END ROOF. PAINTED TO MATCH HORIZONTAL SIDING
STUCCO - lOWER WAllS. PAINTED WITH KELLY tr.40ORE PAINT, WESTERN WEAR, K1o(3980-2
WINDOW, DOOR TRlt.4. FAaA AND BRACKET PAINTED 'MTH KELLY MOORE PAINT - BAREFOOT BEACH,
Kt.43982-3
CULTURE STONE VENEER - l,40JAVE-CSV-200~2
DRIVEWAY, SHill-PERVIOUS. PAVERS - CALSTONE RI\'ER ROCK. COlOR BRO'MII BEIGE CHARCOAL
@i\...1].............;l
...... ... .... .... .... II
/p. U.... ....D loj
. . "- "
,.""--.,.~~.,
I
Project:
Unnet Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnel Ln.
Cupertino, CA 95014
ApplicanVQwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobaJ.net
Architect:
SruDIO 81 ARCHITECTS. Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 998.2163
Email: FRANKLHCl@YAHOO.COM
STRUCruRE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA. S#380
San Jose. CA 95126
T: (408) 821.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
_ Plan Check Comment 3.14.07
NO. Revision Date
Drawn By:
Date:
Tssue:
Date:
11.15.2008
Sheet Hie:
LOT 3 - ELEVATIONS
Sheet No.:
&<J3o@
:J
I
'::':r
':~1a"
..-
HALLWAY
'EN"""T.o.~.
.,O'-r
~
~
'~r r
GUEST
...
~
~
",~.r
CD LOT 3 - SECTION EE N~ t.-' S' 12' 16'
1/8"=1'-0"
3&'-'"
7'-1"
SH._
~ I,
.. .
SH."""
2 - Stt. JCMO
Ot~r 1:1
l~
BEDR~ .
~l'
.. .
nBo
1",,,_, '-SH.
l__ ___'~_c______
~
l!
H'-7"
J'-lf
5'-\1"
LJ'-!l"
o LOT 3 - SECOND FLOOR PLAN N~ ~'
3/16"=1'.0'
L
'" ~;t:..
~
_ .~~;.OJ'.
~
~-f
'~rrC-'
~
~
"':o:~. r
:"
!
,
"
HAU
.AT
SA THRW.
"-
BE""".
...-
SATHRU.
0REA2E
.AT
CD LOT 3 - SECTION DD N~ t.-.
1/8'=1'-0"
SO'-S"
15'-0"
14'-2"
7'-2"
2 - SH.
,..,
~
0D
" D
I I
III 0 li[J E
D'N :: m
I I
, ,
2 - SH.
-
II
III
FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTE:
CD INSTA,NT WATER HEATER, t.4OUNT ON WALL 'MTH MIN.
6'0. ClR. FROM fiNISH FLOOR
CV STACK WASHER AND DRYER
Q) FURNACE IN A Tne
l~~-SH'
. ,:",:
AJ.!
o LOT 3 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN N~ tJi....~.
3/16"=1'.0'
: ~IN
I ~ ji
L
-----
I
I & I N
I uf ;;
+--------
SlOPE
I
I
I
I
I
...L T - -,
5:12
5:12
I
I
I
I SlOPE
I-
I 5:12 I 5:12 I
L________J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ _ _ _ ~'~ J_ ~:~ _ _ _ J
SLOPE
SLOPE
CD LOT 3 - ROOF PLAN N~ t.-.
118'=1'-0"
III
~
--l
r------i--
! ------~
! ~OT4 11)ffiOT3 1 :
1 ~-,,, I 1
: (,'! 1f I:
~-----~ i ~-----Tj
i[2I::11011
, II 1 : I lOT 2 I:
i LOT 1 I:: II 1 1
: I!!:I I:
L____lLJ_Ji___uJJ
KEY SITE PLAN
N~
cmi]":
II
';._.f.~lP.
Project:
Unnet Town Homes
4 Untts Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
Cupertino, CA 95014
ApplicanVQwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N.leighAve.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobal.net
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 8925020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKlHO@YAHoo.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA. S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F:(408)261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
Plan Check Commen! 3.14.07
NO. Revision Date
Drawn By: I Date:
ile:
Tssue:
Date:
11.15.2006
SIleetTrtle:
lOT 3 . 1 ST AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN
LOT 3 . ROOF PLAN
Sheet No.:
&~o 1]
:J
I
~
~
~
~
~
~
CD LOT 4 - EAST (REAR) ELEVATION ~
~
~
~
err
~
'\ .
~
~..l ~ f
CD LOT 4 - SOUTH (RIGHT) ELEVATION ~
~
~
~
~
~
...~i"
o LOT4-NORTH (LEFT) ELEVATION ~
L
.~:~o-
.IJI"'.~
.111-'"
.'.u.
.~-r
.~.. r
~
~
.~. r
SlUCCO
nNISH
[s@u ~
r---_
I ---,--------11
' I : I
'MOT4 i LOT 3 I:
i ...-t"..' 1 I
, I,' l I:
1-, ~ -----+1
-----
I ,
i~P i~li
, II: 1 LOT 2 I:
i LOTI I:I! 1 !
, I' I I,
L___JLLJL____jJ
KEY SITE PLAN
Ne
[sD~OO~u ~M[ID[])DWD~D@~
~~
~~
Wo ...
S-.- 1l[N[[ll
..7 1l[R"IICAl. CEOM
... .., COIIN[Il
_ZQl,.... 11000
-
o LOT 4 - WEST (FRONT) ELEVATION ~
. IION[R UFEtU. snu: ~ Sl.Att. _'FACS7002 1/4 -1-{J'
HClI'ZON'.... aOAll IlOOll _ - .-R -..s. P....t[l) _n< IC[LU UClOR[ P....,. ...-J:Y PIn.
OIIJOII3- 2
1l[RtlCO SONG .., wALL UIClt:R [Ill '" GA8U ROOF. P....tED to ....tCH _ZQl,.... SONG
S1UCCO - L_R -..s. P....ttD _n< IC[U,Y UClOR[ P....T. IC[Wo IQlJOII3-2
_ DDOII_ FN;lA _ _, P....t[l) _n< IC[UY IlOOII[ P....T - _'5 [Y[S
_-2
WoTUll[ STM 1l[N[[lI. 1UQC[Y[ Ull[STClN[-CSY-2D23
IlAr\l[WAY. _-P[RWOUS, P"_ - CALS-.- !hER IKlOC. OOl.DR _ Kill[ CH-.
':':.~'.:.:.....':':'.:..'.'.":.'.;::::laiii;i
I,.. .." ' ",., ,
I'....,>:A><..'.,"""'>>"
, "~ ' ' ' ' , ' ,
.:.:..::::::::::::W ,:':< If:
'::~Aoiili,;i';~~ili>:
Project:
linnet Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
Cupertino, CA95014
ApplicanVOwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369,6263
Fax: 406.369.6297
Contact Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobalnet
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc
12460 Saratoga Ave,
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 692,5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE ALAMEDA. S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
Plan Check Comment 3.14,07
NO. Revision Date
Drawn By: I Date:
ile:
ssue:
afe:
1115,2006
Sheet Title'
LOT 4 - ELEVATIONS
Sheet No
&@Jo@
~
I
L
'~':~a" . ~.:,~O"
91. THRM. HAlLWAY STAIR B1 " """'". III STAIR II ..-. II II BE"""'.
+""'" ..or: +"1' T.~
+ICI'-a" +1 -0-
~ ~
...-tI' +1'-0" /
+~r r '~r r (.;
II:I:IJII[OJI liJJJIII:UJI KlTOIEN . 'AW. I! ~I ........ II a.. II BEDR".
DDDD
~ DDDD ~
.-r .-r
~ ~
-,'-.. -1'-4-
CD LOT 4 - SECTION EE 1/8'~1'.o-
o LOT 4 - SECTION DO 1/8"=1'.0-
44'-7"
21'-7"
7-2"
l.}'-lO'
12'-\"
"
III
2 - SH. lO!W)
A~ JOJO
o
.111[8
I ~ tit GUEST
RO""
110
DD
[88
-----f~----
... lOTI
2-SH.~
~I I ~~
Ell
o
~
;,
00
8D
SEDRM.
!iO
I
I
I
~j
~~2 ~~
I
I
1
I
J
,
.~
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L_________
~Qr
2-SH.JOJO
5'-7"
22'-""
12'-6"
"I ~III r ~
~
,
"
i
---------~
2 - SH. 3040
t)'-T
13'-10'
A~
1111
.
E
~
o LOT 4 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN N~ \.-i~~'
3116"=1'.0-
r-----J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I
L____________~
SlOPE
SlOP'
5:12
5;12
CD LOT 4 - ROOF PLAN
1/8'=1'.0-
2'-0'
FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTE:
,
,.,
CD
ill
Q)
INSTANT WATER HEATER, MOUNT ON WALL WITH MIN.
6'0. CLR. FR()t.4 FINISH FlOOR
STACK WASHER AND DRYER
FURNACE IN ATTIC
t
~
~
r---_
I ---r-----__~
i ~OT4 +mi LOT 3 I :
, ~--, II
! (i! 1f I:
~-----~ i n-------rl
:@GI::il~li
! II I : I LOT 2 I:
i LOT 1 Iii ! I I !
: I:: il JJ
L____lUuli_____
KEY SITE PLAN
N~
@...................................1].......................1:1
.... . ...... . .......1
.' II
(DuT'j
'.,,"__f._..u1~, '.
I
Project:
Unnet Town Homes
4 Un~s Town Homes
10630 Unnet 1..11.
CUpertino, CA 95014
Applicant/Owner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.6263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobal.nel
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, loc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE ALAMEDA, S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F:(408)261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOL.COM
PlanCheckCommenl 3.14.07
NO. Revision Date
Drawn By: I Dale:
lie:
Issue:
Date:
11.15.2006
SheelTitle:
LOT 4 - 1ST AND 2ND FLOOR PUIN
LOT 4 - ROOF PUIN
Sheel No.:
&~D 1]
~
I
2'-4-
2"
9"
o GABLE END CORBEL 1 1/2" ~ 1'.0"
ROOFJr<<; 8(101), SlI ~ PlAH
CD FACIAL END RAFTER 1 1/2" ~ 1'-0"
L
EXTERIOR FINISH.
SEE EL.EVA.TlON
2116 CEDAR TRIM
AT TOP Of
WlNOOW
'MNOOW FRAME
2.4 CEDAR
IJERTlCM. TRIM
2r4 a:OAR 'MKlO 1RIU
:;
2-2J:S1ll
,-,
GYP. BO, TYP.
U.N.O.
r
6x6 CEDAR
CORBEL
.I~
~
CD WOOD TRIM AND CORBEL AT WINDOW
11(1' "" 1'..()"
2.a (to..
WOOO
1 r-o" [
..I I
I '-IILJ
CD BRACKET DETAIL T
11/2" = 1'-0'
o FACIAL END RAFTER 1 1/2" ~ 1'-0'
@....................1]...........:'
....... ...... .. ....1 I
..... ..... ... ...... ... . ..... 11
(Ii 0' >:,.
Project:
Unnet Town Homes
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln.
Cupertino, CA 95014
ApplicanVOwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobal.net
Architect:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE ALAMEDA S#360
San Jose, CA 95126
T: (408) 621.0114
F: (408)261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOLCOM
3.14.07
Date
Date:
Tssue:
ITate:
11.15.2006
Sheet Title'
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
Sheet No.:
&@o@
:J
I
.
ARBOR RESOURCES
David L Bahby. Regimrld ConndJing Arborist
February 12, ]007
PrcJ~!Ujon(JJ Arbor;c.dttlraJ Consulting &: Tree C!Jre
TABLE OF CONTENTS
~
I!!!&
~
A TREE INVENTORY A!'ll>REVIEW
OF THE PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE AT
10114 CRESCENT COURT (LOT 1)
CUPERTINO, CAUFORNIA
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Z.O
TREE COUNT AND COMPOSITION ..................................1
3.0
SU.,lTABILITY FOR TREE PRESERVATION ....................... Z
APPLICANT: KellY Gordon DeveloDment CorDoratlon
APN: 326-17-009 & 326-17-030
4.0
REVIEW OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND TREES
5.0
5.1
5.Z
RECOMMENDATIONS
Design Guidelines
Protection Measures Before and During Construction. . . . .... 6
Submitted to:
Piu Ghosh
Community Development Department
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
EXlDBITS
EXHIBIT
TITLE
A
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
Prepared by:
B
SITE MAP
David L. Bobby, RCA
ASCA Regi.steredConsubing Aroorist #399
!SA Certified Aroorist #WE-JOOJA
Febru.a:ry 22, 2007
P_O. Box ~~29~. ,CSan MltHO. Cal1fornia 9.U02 . Email: a.rhorre.OllrCei(t.~C<.lmCll.;!l.nel
Phone: 6'O.6~-I,3:J~1 Fax: 6.50.140.0177 . Lictnse,j C<llllnC~r 1t,96763
D.7uJ 1. B.,bby. Ri:gj~t.lrd COll~1I1tjllj. .-tr~Ul
.'-~brll:m' 21. 2(;O~ David L BaMy, RegisteredConsulling Amons! Febn;ary 22.2007
!!!f!!: Arr1icJ.l0 tree #10. Thb\ tr.;lC aprcan; \'igol'OU" and in ~ts.hk cond.ition. It ha.~ a.
high J~ltial nf pnwidillg $oflg.tc:nn CIWltrlbutiotl tlllh~ ;:;ito: and j!; CllllSicler.:d the Ilk);;t
!\ultabk l~ll' rt:kntion l.loo prot.:dion
canopy loss, I flJ\d the branches requiring removal for the new home will be only a minor
impact due to a significant amount having already been removed.
~: Applic,," tn h~l." #1-'~ 11. 11. tJ. 17-19 and 21. ~y appeal" \\"t~1hy of
~IC1lliQn; ho\\ever, t.heir longe...il~ and ":ontri~ulK.'I1 ilS l~:s than lho\;~ ,-,f high liwtabilil:v
and mono frequent care is n~~dcd during their r~m."inins lit~ sp~n
In general, Monterey pines are relatively short-lived (les:s than SO years), have a low-
monetary value, and are intolerant of significant root loss. Measures can be taken during
construction to minimize root loss, such as utilizing a pie... and above-grade beam design
for the home's foundation Howeve..., given the proximity of the home, I fmd risk of
decline will remain. In the event efforts are taken to increase their chance of sUl'"\,ival and
minimize the impacts to their stability, the setback from tht: trunks should be increased to
the maximum e_xtent possihle, and the sections of home and garage within 20 fed of the
trees' trnnks established using a pie... and above-grade beam foundation in which the beam
is literally placed on top of existing soil grade (i.e. a no-dig design except for the piers).
Additionally, measures presented in Section 5.0 of this report should also be followed
~: Appli~s t~1 tl'{....'1I #13., l~ J6 und 20. 11le:i... lr~c.; :.LIlt (JR'-\Ii.sp<J;i.i:J h' irr("pal"abl~
he-alth probJetus and/or stnlctl1rnl d~fe(1s that are exp~ct~J to \\'or~"'f1 regardl?s:!- Of
UlCiUollres elllployelt.
4.0 REVIEW OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND TREES
Thret> of tlli: il1\'enlorittd tr<:~s otre in dired l:oollid with W propi..'\ictl design :1I1t1 indlllk
#11.211 and 21. H3~cd I'll their !tp.:ci.::!- and 1.:...'1 than id~l conditi.1n. I find th.:- remnval nf
cu'h cOfOlllj;.':> with City ()nJiflanc~.
Tree #19, another ~'Ionte...ey pine, is also subject to a severe levd of root damage hy
installation of the pl'"oposed roadway. To achieve a possibility for its survival. 1
recotwnend the road and curb are setback by 10 feet from its tntnk.
Tn'(~ #11 i:o; it multi-leada- lllJxlon plan.: trel: (:!)'<.:am....r<::) 11ml :lppear.,; in ....nly fai.r
nmdili<..>n_ l'I't'c #2U has !I~\,t:'I'"dy dl:'<:liu;:J ami its lkmis... is illunin;:nl. Tn~ #21 "pJXars
in only fair OVl:ulJ ~olldi1i()n. and ~ kl lleing ,] M\1otk~to 3....h. is hjghl~' llrnne 11' limb
f.-uhu,:
Tree #10 is a deodar cedar in excellent condition. Lower h...anches will require pnming to
achieve clearance for the new homes on lot 1 and 4: hon'ever, provided the work is
pe..-fornw.:d under the supervision of an individual certified by the International Society of
Arboriculture (IS A), I find the branch loss will be insignificant.
By impkmenl;lliou of the pI'OptJS<d dl:sign, .n'es #13-16 and 19 \\-ill hI: subj~..:kJ 10
pr'::lTI3.turc .;kdin~ and inid'ahility. ...~ #1.1 .hnl 1(, l:in adctitiillltll #121 r.::pr.:~..:::nl a rom'
I)" fairl) w1J. Mont.::r.:y pill':~ thm: appeal" 111 g<)l)d to rair \)\",,:T.ll1I IIclIlth. hut dw lCl irnpn1llCr
,UJlf iJ.bgrc:'Ss:i\-< prumug, ha\'< mi~ilJXJI ~'lll1opi.a;, pOi..'f <;lrUdUtil! C\.Inn. auJ ...bnomIal
br~hing archikl"1ur~. Their lrunk.s are $i.tLlat~d in v~ry ,-'!I'lli.;!' pro>.imjt~-- to lb~ home
prop.Js<.'d 00 lot 2 ;uld s.ignitica.nt ro..lS h.'lSl. i<; expo:,,"t<:'d durint!, :U1Y u-endling IUltt'"(lr
':Xl':l\'illKm for th..: rmmiliUinn (in some: in>;wIk..~, soil ..:ub;. \\Huld 1)o.:....la four fed [rom :1
The types, diam~ters. l-anopy dimensions and amounts of trees ShO\ltll on Sheet :\0.1 differ
from actual sile conditions. To offer the opportunity to accurately identify the tree
resources at this sit~, including those to ~ remo....ed and retained, I recommend tbe plan is
revised per item I, Section 5. I of this report.
cntnk). Con!l.>X(lIL'Tltly. the lr~c~' decline, in.-rtahility and,',lr l:i.:lTliF'':: Itr.: hig"l~' lil.:~ly. A1'; f()r
lti63fJUlrr/t'! /...on.:, C!.1'i:riinc;
l~il)' .;(C.,..,,-trtlllll ('nmml.r.i-t;!-. r~~'6!'~""..t fI:/p<Jr1m~'"t
i'ilg,' j ,~...-"
/0630 Li"'~t Lontl. Cupo-(in()
City ofOlperrinQ Commllllity Dtl1-.tilopmmJ Dllpanllltlnl
L
David L Babby, Rlgisterrd Consullin:~ Arborist
F~bTJIary 21. 2007
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I bave been retained by the City of Cupertino Community Development Department to
review the potential tree impacts associated with a proposal for a four-lot subdivision and
~()nstruction of four new homes (one per lot) at 10630 Linnet Lane, Cupertino. This report
p...esents my analysis and recommendations.
T...ees inventoried fo... this report include non-fruit bearing trees that are situated either 00
the subject site or ha....e canopies overhanging the site from neighboring properties.
Documenls re\;ewed for this report include the Tentative Map (dated 6128/06) by Alvarez
& Associates and the architectural drawings (dated 11/15/06) by Studio 61 Architects, Inc.
Please note that the canopy dimensions (or dnpline) presented on Sheet AO.l (Plot Plan)
appear arbitrary and do not reflect their aetual sizes; I suggest referring to the Tentati....e
Map for a more accurate depiction
Z.O TREE COUNT AND COMPOSITION
Twetd)'-one trees of five various species were inventoried for this report. They are
sequentially numbered as I thru 21 and the following table identifies thei... name, number
and pe...centag~:
London Plane Tree
4-9.11
33%
Deodar Cedar
10.18
10%
Monterey Pine
12-17.19
33%
Modesto Ash
ZO.21
10%
Total
100%
21
10630 Li'FIet l..ruw, CIl~rti"O
City of Cupertino Community D~lopment Department
Page I 0/9
David L Bobby, Registered Consulting Arborist
February 22, 2007
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The rel,;ommendations p...esented within this section serve as guidelines to achieve adequate
protection of trees being retained. They should be carefully followed and incorporated into
projt;:ct plans, and ar.: subject to revision upon reviewing any additional or revised plans.
5.1 Desi~n Guidelines
I The location, canopy dimension, a.~signed number, species and trunk diameter of all
inventoried trees should be shown on Sheet :\0.1 and reflect information presented
within this report
lftrees #12.16 and 19 are retained, recommendations presented in Section 4.0 of this
report should be followed.
3. Any walkways or pathways constructed beneath the trees' canopies (including ba.<;e
materials, edging and forms) should be established enlirely on top of existing soil grade
(i.e. a no.dig design).
4. A copy of this report and any additional futu...e reports or letters should be incorporated
into the fmal set of project plans. titled Sheet T-I, T.2, etc. (Tree Protection
Instructions), and referenced on the Site Plan and future landscape plans
Trenching for utilities and services should be routed oul..ide the canopies of retained
trees 1 should be consulted in the event this is not feasible
6 The drainage design for th~ project, including downspouts. must not require water
being discharged beneath 01'" towards the canopies of retained trees.
7 Upon a\'ailability. the following plans should be reviewed for tree related impacts:
grading and drainage, utility and landscape (both planting and inigalion).
10630 LmJltlll.ano!. Cllpt,.tmo
(~I/Y oICllput//1oCrmum<nity D/rwlo~n1 Dtlpartmeffl
Page j of9
DavidL Babby, Regi$teredCotwulingArbori$t
February 22, 1007
Specific data re~orded for each lree is presented in Exhibit A (Tree Inventory Table). 1be
approximate locations and numben. assigned (0 each tree are presented in Exhibit B, which
is a copy of the: Tentative Map.
Eleven of the inventoried trees are missing from the Tentative Map. They include #1-9,12
an. 17 and their locations, a,.. presented in Exhibit B, are approximate and shall nol be
construed as being surveyed.
For identification purposes, I attached ...ound, metallic tags to the trunks of each inventoried
tree located on the subject site. These tags contain engraved numbers that correspond to
tree numbers presented in this report
The trunks of nine trees, #- I thru 9, arc situated on the northern neighboring property and
have canopies overhanging the subject site. They have been inventoried as they are
exposed to root damage and/or canopy loss.
Trees that are shown on the Tentative Map but not inventoried fOr this report include small
citrus and almond trees.
3.0 SUITABILITY FOR TREE PRESERVATION
Each tree has been assigned either a "high," "moderate" or "low" suitability for
preservation rating as a means to (''1.lmulatively measure their physiological health,
structural integrity, location, size and specie type. These ratings and applicable tree
numbers are presented below: note that the '"high" category is comprised of one tree (or 5-
percent), the ''moderate'' category sixteen trees (or 76--percent), and the "low" category
four trees (or 19-percent)
10630 Limel Lane, CupertinQ
City ofCrtpertino CQ,"nnmity DeVt!fopmom! Lkpar/1m:rlJ
Pogd of9
.~:!~.~..~~~.~l!..~~,~~!!.~~~0~.~~.~0.'s.~~.~(lf~~~.
._...._......_......__f!.~.~~!1.~_.;.~~..;~?
8. TI1C Pfopo!Jl::d landwapc ~sign should \,-'OllfomI1o the following guideliu>:!'l:
a. 'furf sbov)J be ;1\'I...-idt:J benealh lhCl 1re~!i' i,;auopi~ll. .-'u; 1m altnrnlli\lC!.
re;:onm~nd a tour- to tin.itlch hlyer ,)1" com'S~ wood chips is used (~ithtr
d,;:.;orali\'c or f..-om II I~<: .:ompany). If pl:IDl m:lh:rial is imlalkd, it sh(mlJ. be
droughL.tt)l~ranl and (.'sL""li~d ill. t..:asl1i\'\: from lhcir Irul1k~.
h. Irrigati,1I1 ....Cllcalh t1K: call(lpi.:~ "f tr~~s #10 and IR ..:an inl'l'OSC ad\.'CTSc imp'J.ct<l
,W.;lr time and "hould h~ 9.v;licL:d. If arJl~i;.:d. " ~hould lie low-volume, appl1cd
irn::gularly (&u.;:11 a~ only once or t\\'ice per wtek.), temporary (such as 0') lUl.)re titan
thrc..: to timr Y'::Ars),. and n,)t strik.: within five t;:ct .,ftheir tnmlu.. Irrigation $,hould
llI.>l ::lrih wilhin 1'-\'0 In lhr~<: r~el l,lrdtc trunks Ofll~w lre.:s
hew tn:..:s h.:ing in.~tilU~d should tk: dOllht;:.~IaJ...ed wilh rubber Ir..~ ties, aut! nU
fl1nm \)f inigatiofl sha.1I b~ i1f 31'1 a.utumatic drip i1r soaker hose system placed 011
the l>oil surface and not in a slee"e.
d. Trenching t~r irrigation or lighting shoold bo: avoided bcOl:a.th ~ CM(lpio:s. It"
n.;c.:ssary. they should llot .:xc.;cd a six.inclt dqrth. and be root.;d in a radial
din:diolllO [hi: trul1k.s.
e. Sto..'I1es, mukh and felldng sbOtltd not ~ pla~ against the trunks i..lfaxisting QT
n~"" I......<:~, Phs-Ii.: ground c<.\vt:r ~b..,uhl ~tlSI) be ilvoided beneatll canl-.pi.:s
Tilling bC:ILC!llb <':i1nopies should be a\'oilkd, inchuljng for wt:aI ('onlrt.ll.
g. Rcnd.ct' hoard <~f "t1~r ..:edging O13.I.::rial pmlloscd 1~'I'lCa.lh the C3.lklpk:s !<hould ~
cs;l:lh1i~h.::d on tnp "f c'\i~tillg ~\)il g~ (.mcl1 1" by using \".::rtical ;!takc.<t).
5.2 PnJtect~m 'fea.,uT~ bero~ ..lid dun_:: COlL"ltractlOft
9. Tree protcctiv.:: tcn,;ing sh:lU L~ instalkd prior t.o any do:mohtioll. grading. tr~nchjng.
surface scraping or h.::n\~' oquipll~nt arriving to th~ !oik. It shall Ix compris.::d of six.
foot high chain link mowlted on eight.foot lal1, twO-indl diam~t.:r lo1eel posts that are
driv~n 24 in.:bes into tbe g1\'lIud and spa.:ed n..\ more than 10 re~t apart. ()n....e
rst:lbli~~1, tb..: ret'k.'mg mw;i n:m:lin undi<;lllr~d and tk: IlL-unlainitO throughout
L:('lI'-;lnk:UUn Ulllit fmal inspc:dion_ Plt'.1IM" nolt' lhallh.: re~l.-imnl~nlkd fl:nl.:ing layout
has not, :it rllis tim,", 11'::';:11 dclin.::n1cd 11Il th;,;; mar ill Kxhihil R du..::: 10 t(lf..:::s.::.:ahl.:
change:s.: <\r mnditic:ltinni\ ro the pmpo_~ di:~ign. AI"", n(}l~ lh;ti fencing slHlIIld he
}O<i;lOL,,-o1~-:t [..an... '_-!,~"r.f1<;
'_~lry.' .:.fC~,.Ii~-,;,i/~" (':.M,;""mti [)T',~i,~::m"'1t nZpcJH1t~'tl
----~._---
;-',.uo<J/<;-
~....O....Ej.
. . , ., ... . . .. ,. .. ...
..-.. ..... ..-. .... ...
.. '...:::. ..:::. . .... ...T : toO.-1
. ..., .,. ...,.... .... ... ~
. .... , ' . . . .. , . .. .. .
.. ............ . . .... . . .
. ......... ." . ... ..
.... ...... ... .. ...
.... ....... .
. - . . . . . . . . . , . '" . . . . .
",,]
...........'....,......
,;"",,0,;0_ f,~I.......
Project:
Unnet Town H""",,,,-
4 Units Town Homes
10630 Unnet Ln
Cupertino, CA95014
ApplicanVQwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERI1ECH
411 N. LeighAw.
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: 408.369.8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony 8aig
Email: 8aig2@SBCglobal.net
Architect:
STUDIO 81 ARCHITEClS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave.
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892.5020
F: (408) 996.2163
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA. S#3BO
San Jose. CA 95126
T: (408) 821.0114
F: (408)261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOLCOM
Plan Check Comment 314.07
NO Revision Date
Drawn By:
Date:
ile:
fssue:
ITate:
1115.2006
Sheet Tille:
TREE PROTECTiON INSTRUCTION
Sheet No.:
Vl] 01]
~
I
I?~."I"I._tJ:~"_/(;.':$.is.~~~.~_-!_~;~"~~".1f.1r.f!orut
F.~~,~~J..P,__;~~
~j,~I.~ ,!!(J~.~r_,R:.~ti~r.i.~~:;~~~I.l1!".8._-1t_~()/'J_j_t
F.mrtl;l1Y22. 2007
installed 10 cmcompass th( entire ~a beneath tree canopies and established 00 further
than fIVe f~el from a home's foundation and two fect beyond t~ edge of.. proposed
footing ~pth. Any roots encountered during the process should ~ cleanly se\'.:red
against tho: soil '..:\It, Roots with di<Utle1en of two ioch.:s and greater !;hoold bel
coo~idercd for retcntitID (if fcuible);. in the eVI.-'T11 (hey must be !ll!vtn.>d, I suggi..'St the
((kll end is covcred with a dear. pla.<rtic sand\,,'ich hag and tightly secured with a rubber
b:lll.d or eledn\:al tape.
mad or dri VO:W3Y
10. Cules... ()lhcrwi.~ apprm;ed, all dcvlollopment activitii."S must be conducted ouL~idc the
tcnced areas (ev~l1 aft.:r t~'f)cing is remo'Vcd). lbcsc 3Clh.itics include, but at.: not
limited 10. the following: grading, litripping ofi()psoi~ trenching, equipment cleaning.
sto.:kpilingfdllmping of mat~ri:lls, and equipmC}llt!vehicle O~tat10tl and parking.
16. Appro,...~d wl~k perfonn",d on unpaved soil be~ath a canopy shall b", manually
[X'ffonned. Any appro,,';xi digging or trencbing bCrlenth a canopy sltallusc shovels (or,
when: appli.;able, post. hole diggen). During tnmching. all roots of two inch~:'! and
gr~aler in diameter !';hall be retained during the process (and tunneled beneath. if
n.x:.essar}). Root'l SI1\ullcr th:utlhis can be cwanly sO:\'ef"OO ugaiost th.;: lree side of a cut
orlrend.L
I J. Prior to demolition. a root lone butler 8hould be ~~1ablish~d b\:neath the canopies of
tree,; .# t thm 3, between tbe existing wall and hl.'o fe.:t from the propo~ed f<'Unda.tion
(ahout :l fjye-foot wide strip). This should cOMist of a !iix-inch layer of coarse wo.'Xi
l,.':hips (1,':". to ~.-ioch in size) mauually spr~ad on c!xisting grade; it shotdd remain ill
pl./ICe and n:pk'lishcd a~ ncce.j;sary throughout dcvdopm~l1t. Full.!j.hccts of onc.indl
thick (minimum) pl~'\\'lk>d ~ould N: plu.:;..:d on lOp ofth..: chips WId fast..:ned together to
crellte a sturdy walking platfomt. PI~nse nm.: dUll th.: root zone butl~r is intended for
foot-traffic and wheelharrow ilCt,.'CSS only
17. :-\.ny pier l'r po~t-hol.., dug beneath the: tn:(s' callopi~8 shall be JX.--rfon~d u:>illg a post.
hol.z digg.:r for the finot three fed below grade~ the remaining depth can h<: dug using a
manually.op.:rated ullg~r. [n th~ <=verll roots two inc~ and greater in diameter becom~
encounkn::d, the hnlc(s) Iihould be rcsilu.au::d to II\'Oid the root.
L2. 'Illl;: existing leaf litter (i.e, tallen lcav,,;:s and necdks) within the designated fenced
ar<:3S shQuld remain on th~ grQund. 'Dle lOOunds of leaf litter beneath lreo: #10'5
l,.':unopy should be spuad .......11 to crca.le a ml~e uni!()mllayer(stlch as five in.:hes deep).
18. A.1I exi-'ting. unu.s.:.--d lin~ Of" pipes ~ne;dh tho: canopi..:s of rdain~d tree~ shlmld ~
ahandoo",d and eu! off at exil;;1ing soil !,lTade
U. I'rim to coostruction, l recommend a four.inch layer of coarse wood chips is ab;o
manually spr~ad within th~ dc!$ignated !imced areas. 1be chips should not be placoo
against the tronk and ret1loUn throughout Cc..'Iustrtlctioll.
19. F.ach foX\)mmcncl.atioll th:lt ilO pr~~nkd within Sect.ion 5.1 of this r~port and is
applicable to the a..1ua! developm':llt of~ site' shall b< followed.
14. Wha-e beneath tL-ee canopies. OVc!fCut and trend-ring sbOf.lld 110t ex1end 12 to 24 inches
fr~m, the odg.: of a futur~ foundation or walkway_ 1l1i!'; specification should also
pertain to trenching for the instaUutioll of .my drain lines, utilities and sen..il,.':~
20. Throughout deydopmenl dunllg llle months of Mil)' thru Oc.1ooor. supplem..:ntal wat.::r
should bt. supplied to retained tre~s. 111 doing so. I n::cQllunend soaker hoses are used
and ~rcad in a manner to eye-nly distribute wat~r to the ro..,t lOO~ heneath the- cM\'Ipies
(but oot 3.gains! th.:ir trunks), Tho: rate should be 10 gallons per ever)" inch (If trunk
diameter applied otvery two t,) thre.:- \~".:-eks.
15. Prior to excavating within 20 feet from tb4: pNpm;cd porch and drjv.;way on tot l, I
r.:c\-.nlmcnd ... one.foot wid.: tr.:nch is. manually dug with ~h\l\-'ds tll the requir~d
21. lh~ pruning and removal of tree~ shall h.;: p.::rfomled lUld\:r the ~upervisioll of all
arbo>rist cc:rtiJied by the ISA and according to lSA Standard'! (4ud llt')t pert'onned by
106;"0 l.imo!; Lon.., CwpertinrJ
t:'ity O1fCN{Hrlioc' Comrmonily l)tel'iflopmnit Di!purlm~llt
Paso! 70ft;
l06J(Jl.j'lT1o~tlA~ Cuperonu
City 4Cup.:rtin.~ COIP!m1mit}, Di'\.,;,ll)pmmt D...partmmt
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
i ~ , lllll I
n ~
~ L 1; J
! ~J :ii
II ,. :;
5~ <'! ,.10 "~
4~ ~ ~" "" .' ,!;. ,-''-
oF.';" .::;,
'i
;
:~
1m' [;"c:~~'::;"'m) Lm".m". L.I'1"J,,..L,,.,J~,,,..,J, L "L,I
,,' I '" I v, I
.~-,~;:~~~\~,~~,,,, 1'1'
,I
"""..1
, I
SIN'fHX:~_L_,~
"""'M'tlIIf/r:ClrytlllCiotp.._c-.o.~~DwNtf.
~l>yo...'idL~b:r.~
F~U..'Ot/~
S;"'.fO(l3~~_l_.':....-rn'"
"'~""':~ro1lc.._t'm.>C"","'..ow....,~,o..w.~
p..,.-",'.c...Nd,.I3.,,"t".Ir:::.r.
L
Pag.:I:'t19
!
i!
.[)r.h'ld 1~ lfdJhy.TKgutUM Conwitbt; .trl:lO.rin
_____ ___~_... Fo'bnItry 12. !OO!
Ct'lflStnDion peuomdj. Any tree snunps being ralloved t~neath or near caI"MJlXes of
retained tre:s should be grolUld below grade rather than pullc<l up with an e.wavator,
22. All ~pUlcnt titwll he prn:ilimted to li.voidlh~ lrunks and branchc..~ ()ftr~.
23. The dispc6aJ of harmful products (such as: chemicaJs, oil and gasoline) is pmhibited
beneath canopies 0[ an)'wh~ m $ite that: allows drainage beneath canopi~.
Herbici<b should not be used bel~th tre trees' cmcpies; where used on site, they
should be labeled for safe use near trees.
Prepared By:
I
VV-'>V ~
Duvid L. Bubby, RC.A
Date: f~~_n~_~.9_{).7
jo5j.iiiJiiiiiI.a;;;.cup;iiiii()._.......
Cty qfCuptrtino Co!nmuIri.l}' lXwlq:JMtIY ~pnn/rf('/Il
................~.9.of9
u;rp,d L e"cby ~SIS;<'f<iJ Ci.'nm!!ifl~ .-i',!>CfIJt
ft6ru..ry1.'.lW";
EXHIBIT B:
SITE MAP
$SI<tl '? 0 ;.S:I<'I
;m.. .'.l~,.. ", . li:l-'l" ~'.;:l
u....- ,,~~:)fl-l'-""'~ j~'.. 1l:I.(Ill
! : . ~~ ! ~. FARCt'.. 1 'D
f ! ~..~ : :", 31$-"7-<:16
, ~, . '."." 1 2 ~n:~:; RI:AL ;;,S. T COR;>J:';
~ :::: .. 3 G'I?~P~Y >;1)f to
" I ': '. 4:.'. 7, 8 9
~ . :1, :''r.~n'''''' IMl.Mr ,.-.._' .. ..
'-1.":t\-._,.~._---_.'"'-V'.,-..c~-..---yl.
~il'''-.''~~,;~j '-~i.,:: ~ .,.. "
'~ "'. cin ~: 10 ..f
:~ ~:;;:!'8,t~~~1
. ,:,,:,:'~';'ii ~f,(R~ ~~:<~~
; rPRn>>t:FT'
~$?J~,;/~~E;j
_u_._.JL~__:.,_~.~~._J&L--"- I
... In",-,.,- ;.;lIi"~~'~~'€ 1~.,O;:; ;c-'
DtH'id,_ &/;6y, n_gi.vttrtd COIl$lJlti.ng ~n'.~~__._~_____._._...__..____.
EXHIBfI' A:
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
.iQi;5oTJ;;~t..iAM:Tiqw~m;.-._._._.m..__.-.~-.--._--
City l~rcllp..'r:i"dCvmJrj1Uli(l.' [).'Y<!/QP,....nJ r:~purf1l":1f!
10630 LINNET LANE, CUPERTINO
, ~I,
<4: _1
,.... '1'
l.':~ ~ 8
'U''';: -:1, 5
!p .'"f'"
~~,t. -, ; "7
u....mf..lt>f: ,:'
~ . ''''';4 "t
1 \ ~
! ~r:i~;;
'-'i~.~~-~t~~ :~-..
S;E~S Rt:;,;. \:S7 t;,RP<..'U
ri'p.CPERT'I' i{,,::E:. n
<,
Map has been reduced in $ize and
IS not to scale.
Ftbnwry 11, }(jOi
U
N
@..................1]...~~
............... . ....~.i I
........ ..... ... .... ... .... .... ~.
iOn <. 'OJ
... ., .0'.
',.4lIlI__.',~~.
II
.1
Project:
Unnet TO'Nfl Homes
4 Un~s Town Homes
10630 Unnet In.
Cupertino, CA 9501 4
ApplicanVOwner:
TONY BAlG
AMERITECH
411 N. Leigh Ave.
Campbell, CA95008
Ph: 408,369,8263
Fax: 408.369.8297
Contact: Tony Baig
Email: Baig2@SBCglobaLnet
Architact:
STUDIO 61 ARCHITECTS, Inc.
12480 Saratoga Ave,
Saratoga, CA 95070
T: (408) 892,5020
F: (408) 996,2183
Email: FRANKLHO@YAHOO.COM
STRUCTURE ENGINEER:
DB ENGINEERING
2021 THE AlAMEDA S#360
San Jose, CA95126
T: (408)821.0114
F: (408) 261.1503
Email: MRSTRUNG@AOLCOM
_ Plan Check Comment 3.14.07
NO. Revision Date
Drawn By: I Date:
ile:
Tssue:
Date:
11.15.2006
Sheet Trtle:
TREE PROTECTION INSTRUCTION
Sheet No.:
ul] D~
:J
TOTAL AREA = 22.644 SO.FT
BENCH~ARK:
ASSUMED IlllTUM AT IDIUMENT AT TIE
INTERSECTJIIl l:F LDIIET LANE AND
SIETLANIl PLACE.
ELEVATIlJl . IllO.OO'
RECEIVED
APR 1 l) ZOO?
BY:
SCALE: 1 INCH" 30 FEET
SSMH
TENTATIVE MAP RIM = 9 .60j
INV = Q .30 ,.
SU80MSlQN NAME: HIDDEN GLEN ~~.
CLmENT PROPERTY OWNER: .
TONY BAIG it
<l11N.LEIGHAVENlE ~
CAMPBELL",""" II ~ I~ r. PARCEL 1 a>
~ I 316-47-018
::::.':'" ~ r--I : SFERS REAL EST CORPUU
::::="'. u.."" : C\Jl' j EPROPERTY RREEF D
ALVAREZ&ASSOClATES,INC. I I
~NORnl~:'-;~ I I I
OATEJOS<. S89. 45' 4 7'" 168.48' ...... ..
I 1 ir- - -- --- --- - - -- - ---............T-......--=~.................~......-~=(
. --------84.il0'------- 84.48'
DA~DA"ARU.'" : I ,,_.. x.....
'","EC"" ..... . "..,'", , l ,'I
"'6.... OSE 01 """""'''', "","""_ , ,I ~)(llIO.lS XlGOJa
PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY: RESIDENTIAl X9l8JLj J:9a
EXlSTlNG ZONING OF PROPERTY: Rl J...JI1j LOT 1 ..
PFlOP06ED ZONING OF PROPERTY: R1 ..,... I
SOORCE 01 WATER "-",,,-y, SAN.>OSEWATEROOMPAAY I I ix> tl 5497 SQ.FT
PROPOSEDN....EROI ,m,. , I ~w ~ ~ I
LEGEND I co (::: ~ I J -X!OO-O<l )QJI>.a X\OO.1!
- - - - PRtFERTY LIt€ I r...: 0 I ~
CENTERLIt€ co' w:::IE I
-----EASEMENT LIt€ I ~ _ ~ Ct: I I
o MANG...E LID I ~ 0 I!" f? I
(!) fl1JND ST ANIlARD STREET HIJNUMENT' :ri 0 ;! (f) I.
I;" 5
I ~ z
INDICATES DRIPLIt€ IF TREE I ~
I
I
,
: PARCEL 1 a>
I 316-47-018
I SFERS REAL EST CORPUU
: EPRDPE~~
I $412."
,
I
,
BASIS OF BEARING: ~
TIE BEARING l>>l TIE CENTERLINE l:F iI
LDIIET LANE. N"17'32'''', AS SAID ;
CENTERLINE IS SlIl\JN l>>l THAT MAP fILED
flit RECIRD IN J[JJ( :569 l:F MAPS AT
PAGES 41 , 42 . CIIUNTY l:F SANTA
CLARA, STA TEl:F CALJI'lRNJA. "'AS USED
AS TIE BASIS l:F IlEARINGS flit THIS MAP.
SSMH
RIM = 100.36
INV = 93.36
I 60.16'
LENGTH I I -- - ...
1.37'
1.02'
40.22'
26.70'
CURVE TABLE
CURVE RADIUS DEL T A
Cl 3.00' 26.08'02'
C2 3.00' 19.26'23'
C3 17.00' 135.34'23'
C4 17.00' 90.00'00'
3r6-47-018
SFERS REAL EST CORPUU
EPROPERTY RREEF D
I
i i i OlaIOr __~
L~..:.,D~:r:m=l i"'~"",,:;;,'~
- ---"l
I
I
I
I
I
i "<,.J
. ','
I ",
I
I
" I
%11
!'~:~~~~i
'"
OJ
<IlZ
LLiUJ
f->
s:;<C!'-
,-,~N
oOu:i
00=:01
~~()~
..,""' .Il'>
~;:~~
[t:a:::of"-.
<.O.....N
~W
n
~ ~
<(w..---
ZO
0<(1.0
w---l(J)
I-
<(1-<(
uwu
oz _
---lzO
>----lz
1-01-
0::::1")0::::
w(Qw
0..00..
0..---::)
0:::: U
0..
1 OF 1