The URL can be used to link to this page

.05 U-2007-03 Clifford Chang CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, Agenda Date: June 12, 2007 EXC-2007-08, TM-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 Applicant (s): Clifford Chang Property Location: 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Northeast corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave. Application Summary: 1. USE PERMIT and ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL to construct a 10,582 square foot retail building and one-level parking garage on an existing office site. 2. EXCEPTION to the Heart of the City Specific Plan for a front yard setback. 3. TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide a 9.4 acre site into two parcels, approximately 1 acre and 8.4 acres respectively. 4. TREE REMOV AL PERMIT for tree removal and replanting in conjunction with a proposed 10,582 square foot retail building and one-level parking garage on an existing office site. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of: 1. Use Permit (U-2007-03) and Architectural and Site Approval (ASA-2007-05) to . construct a new retail building and one-level parking garage in accordance with the model resolution. 2. Exception to the Heart of the City (EXC-2007-08) for a front yard setback. 3. Tentative Map (TM-2007-08) to subdivide a 9.4 acre site into two parcels in accordance with the model resolution. 4. Tree Removal Permit (TR-2007-03) to remove 63 trees to accommodate the development of a new retail commercial building and one-level parking garage in accordance with the model resolution. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Specific Plan: Acreage (Net): Proposed Parcell (Retail): Proposed Parcel 2 (Existing Office): Commercialj Office / Residential P (CG, 0, ML, Hotel) Heart of the City (Commercial & Office) 9.4 acres 1 acre 8.4 acres 5,/ Applications: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, EXC-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Page 2 Building SF: Parcell (Proposed Retail Building): Parcel 2 (Proposed Parking Garage): Parcel 2 (Existing Building): 10,582 square feet 26,500 square feet (Approx.) 151,321 square feet (two-story office building) 28 feet (fin wall at 31 feet) 14 feet 594 spaces 573 spaces Proposed Retail Building Height: Proposed Garage Height: Total Parking Proposed: Total Parking Required: Proj ect Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: Heart of the City Specific Plan: Yes Yes No, due to request for front yard setback exception Environmental Assessment: Categorically Exempt per Section 15332, Class 32 of CEQA BACKGROUND: The project site is currently developed with a 151,321 square foot, two-story office complex that is occupied by Verigy, which designs and develops testing systems for the semiconductor industry. The site is located on the northeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue and is surrounded by Interstate 280 to the north; retail commercial, residential and office uses to the south across Stevens Creek Boulevard; a 4-story office complex to the east; and vacant land to the west across N. Tantau Boulevard. The site was originally constructed as a two-story office complex in the early 1990' sand shares a reciprocal ingress/ egress driveway with the adjacent property to the east that is located in the City of Santa Clara and is developed with a 4-story office building. DISCUSSION: Project Description The applicant is proposing to construct a new one-story, 10,582 square foot retail commercial building on the northeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau A venue in front of the existing two-story office complex, and a new one-level, 94 space parking garage at the rear of the site. Development of this project will not affect the existing building on the subject property, but will require the reconfiguration of the existing parking lot to fit the new retail building and parking garage. Site Layout The applicant is requesting approval of the use permit and architectural and site approval to allow the proposed site layout and architectural design of the new structures on the property. The new retail commercial building will be located within existing parking and landscaping areas at the corner of the property and will be developed with a plaza area in the front of the building facing both Stevens Creek 5"~ Applications: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, EXC-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Page 3 Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue to accommodate an outdoor seating area for future prospective retail tenants of the building. The new parking garage will be located within existing parking and landscaping areas at the rear of the office complex site, adjacent to Interstate 280. The site is accessed by two driveways along N. Tantau Avenue and two driveways along Stevens Creek Boulevard, one of which is located on the adjacent property to the east. There is a reciprocal ingress/egress driveway that is shared between the subject property and the adjacent, existing 4-story office building to the east. No changes are proposed to these shared driveway accesses. The reciprocal ingress/egress accesses between these properties will be maintained. Architectural Design The new retail commercial building is proposed to be a one-story, 28-foot high building with a modern design, including extensive spandrel (non-visible) and clear glass around all elevations to enhance the retail commercial function of the building, recessed stucco walls with various reveal lines to create interesting visual articulation on the building, metal canopies, and a 31 foot-high stucco accent fin wall. The proposed one-level parking garage will be constructed of concrete block that will be painted to match the color of the existing office complex building. A concrete block crash wall or cable railing is proposed along the upper level perimeter of the parking garage. The City's Architectural Advisor has reviewed the plans and supports the design of the new structures, but provided the following recommendations on the retail commercial building: · Consider using clear vision glass rather than spandrel glass along the top portion of the glass storefront areas. · Consider using a solid base along the bottom portion of the glass storefront areas rather the spandrel glass. · Add landscaping and quality paving along the rear of the retail building to soften the harsh edge and interface with the existing two-story office building. · Use of this much glazing may not be viable for a significant retail use if merchandise display area is needed along the glass storefront areas. · There will be a substantial loss of mature trees along the corner. The applicant reviewed the Architectural Advisor's comments and modified the landscape plan to include half-diamond landscape planters in the surface parking spaces behind the retail commercial building to soften the edge of the building. However, the applicant still intends to remove the trees along the corner to provide sufficient space to construct the building and for visibility of the retail building. The applicant also intends to retain the use of the spandrel glass, since the applicant's architect believes it is an integral part of the design of the building. 5"3 Applications: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, EXC-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Page 4 Additionally, the applicant's architect clarified that use of extensive storefront glazing is needed to accommodate each of the retail tenants in the building, since it is the applicant's objective to maximize the storefront visibility of each of its tenants facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. Staff is in agreement with the applicant's objective to maximize the storefront glazing along Stevens Creek Boulevard, but does not believe that use of spandrel glass will achieve this objective since it does not provide clear visibility through the glass. For this reason, staff supports the City Architect's recommendation to provide clear vision glass above the proposed clear glass storefront areas and to provide a solid base at the bottom of the building, unless clear vision glass can also be accommodated at the base of the building. Heart of the City Specific Plan Setback Exception The proposed project complies with all of the Heart of the City Specific Plan requirements, except for the proposed front yard setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. The following table indicates the project's compliance with the applicable development requirements of the Heart of the City, except for the front yard setback. Item... Re urre . :Allowed Commercial & Office Develo ment Max. 45 feet; 60 feet if there is a retail com anent Conforms? Use Height Yes Setbacks: Corner parcel (along both street frontages) 9 feet (from Stevens Creek Parkway Landscape Easement) and 35 feet building-from-curb setback Retail: 32 feet 2 inches along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. No, for minor portions of the building to articulate building walls. The majority of the setbacks are 35 feet or greater. Yes. Sides Half the height of the building or 10 feet, whichever is greater Retail: Approx. 310 feet (east) Garage: 10 feet Rear None, if not adjacent to Retail: Approx. 380 feet residential. Garage: 10 feet Yes The Heart of the City Specific Plan requires a minimum 35-foot front yard setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. The applicant proposes an average setback of approximately 46 feet, but a minimum setback of 32 feet 2 inches to create wall articulations and visual interest in the design of the building, while also maximizing the necessary retail square footage for prospective tenants. The proposed retail commercial use will also require an allocation from the retail commercial development allocation pool from the Heart of the City area. The commercial build out of the area allows for 1,476,115 square feet of commercial use in the area. The existing commercial square footage is 1,182,456 square feet, allowing for an additional 293,659 square feet of commercial development potential in the area. The proposed project will require an allocation of 10,582 square feet from the Heart of the 5,tf Applications: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, EXC-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Page 5 City allocation pool that will leave 282,807 square feet of commercial square footage available. Tentative Map The applicant requests approval of a tentative map to subdivide the existing property into two parcels, separating the new retail commercial building from the office complex portion of the site. The two properties will still function as one combined office/ retail commercial complex and will retain the existing reciprocal ingress/ egress driveways and shared parking within the office complex. However, the retail commercial parking proposed within Parcel 1 can accommodate the parking needs for the retail building alone. The tentative map proposes an approximately 1 acre site (Parcell) for the retail commercial building and the remaining 8.4 acres (Parcel 2) for the existing office complex and new parking garage. Tree RemovalfLandscaping Plan The applicant's arborist, Walter Levison, submitted a revised tree survey (See Exhibit B) on June 4, 2007 that recommends removing a total of 63 trees, including 53 trees to accommodate the retail building and parking garage, and an additional 10 trees due to their poor ratings and condition. These trees primarily include the existing evergreen ash trees along the Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue corner behind the back of sidewalk, some of the London Plane trees within the interior parking lot areas to accommodate the new retail building, and some of the Coast Redwood trees along the north (rear) and northwest perimeters of the property to accommodate the new parking garage and that are in poor health. The revised tree survey was submitted in response to the City Arborist's review of the trees that was prepared on May 24, 2007. The City Arborist had identified additional trees that were not included in the initial tree survey and asked that these trees be reviewed by the applicant's arborist and included in the survey. These additional trees have been reviewed by the applicant's arborist and are now included in the revised tree survey. The preliminary landscape plan indicates that the project will accommodate new accent shrubs along the new plaza areas in front of the new retail building facing Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue, and new trees within the surface parking spaces behind the building within half-diamond planter areas. All other trees and landscaping on site are to remain, including the London Plane trees in the interior parking lot of the site that are not affected by the development and many of the Coast Redwoods along the northern and northwest perimeter of the site that can be retained even with the new parking garage. Staff recommends that additional trees and shrubs be planted on site to visual enhance the retail commercial building and adjacent plaza area, and to soften the appearance of 5..-5 Applications: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, EXC-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Page 6 the new parking garage. Staff also recommends that the plaza area in front of the retail building be enhanced. To accomplish these goals, staff recommends the following: · Plant field grown size 'Praxinus Americana' Ash trees, or largest size trees that can be accommodated within the "sawtooth" corners of the retail commercial building facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. These trees will replace the existing ash trees that will need to be removed behind the back of sidewalk along Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave. · Provide a "green screen" around the perimeter of the parking garage that includes planting of trees and shrubs that will screen the garage. Existing redwood trees may suffice as the "green screen" along the rear elevation of the parking garage facing Interstate 280, unless the redwood trees are significantly pruned. If the redwood trees along the rear elevation of the parking garage are significantly pruned and do not provide adequate screening from Interstate 280, additional screening shall be provided. · Widen the plaza area to allow portions of the plaza to extend out to the public right-of-way along N. Tantau Ave. and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The plaza area shall incorporate decorative interlocking pavers as the hardscape area to promote permeability, rather than the proposed broom and salt-finished concrete. Tree Replacements Although a total of 63 trees are identified for removal, the applicant intends to replant 21 trees as replacement trees, including eight flowering accent trees in the half-diamond planters along the rear of the retail commercial building and 13 redwood trees along the front of the new parking garage. The applicant is not able to plant any additional trees on site due to the limitation of available area to accommodate new trees. Given the City's current review and imminent adoption of the protected trees ordinance, staff recommends that the applicant be required to provide an in-lieu fee for the removed trees that cannot be replaced on site. There are 42 trees proposed to be removed that cannot be replaced on site; therefore, staff recommends that an in-lieu fee of $9,240 be required by the applicant based upon the total purchase and installation cost of 42 trees at $220 per tree, unless additional replacement trees can be planted on site, thereby reducing the in-lieu fee accordingly. Staff used a modest purchase and installation cost for replacement trees, due to the large number of trees involved. Sidewalks The project site is surrounded by a 5-foot wide monolithic sidewalk to the west along N. Tantau Avenue and a 35-foot wide landscape parkway to the south along Stevens Creek Blvd. that includes a 5-foot wide sidewalk between the parkway. The landscape parkways on each side of the sidewalk along Stevens Creek Blvd. are improved mature ash trees. 5..." Applications: U-2007-03, ASA-2007-05, EXC-2007-08 & TR-2007-03 10100 N. Tantau Avenue Page 7 Staff has noticed that some of the sidewalks are uplifting on both streets due to the mature growth of the adjacent trees. Staff recommends that the sidewalks along N. Tantau Ave. be repaired or replaced where necessary. However, staff recommends that the sidewalks along Stevens Creek Blvd. be replaced to incorporate the minimum 6-foot wide sidewalk requirement of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Because the frontage of this corner will be significantly modified due to the location of the retail commercial building, staff recommends that the sidewalks be replaced to comply with the frontage renovation requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Parking The proposed project will provide a total of 594 parking spaces on site for the parking needs of the existing two-story office complex and the new retail commercial building. The required number of parking spaces for this site is 572 parking spaces, based upon 151,321 square feet of office space and 10,582 square feet of retail commercial space. Therefore, the proposed project will exceed the required number of parking spaces for the site. The applicant intends to use the surplus parking spaces to accommodate future retail uses that may entail eateries with outdoor seating areas. ENCLOSURES Model Resolutions Exhibit A: Comments from Larry Cannon, Architectural Advisor Exhibit B: Arborist report (revised) prepared by Walter Levison, dated June 4, 2007 Exhibit C: City Arborist report dated May 24, 2007 Plan Set Submitted by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner ~ Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development ~ ~ / G:\ Planning \ PDREPORT\pcllsereports\ lL2007_3.doc ~ 5-1 U-2007-03 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 10,582 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND ONE-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE ON AN EXISTING OFFICE SITE SECTION I: 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; and 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of the Conditional Use Permits Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 3) The proposed development is essentially consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan, except for the exception from front yard setbacks along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for a Use Permit 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. U-2007-03 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12,2007, and are. incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: U-2007-03 Applicant: Clifford Chang Location: 10100 N. Tantau 5-8 Model Resolution Page 2 U-2007-03 June 12, 2007 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits submitted by Chang Architecture titled: "Tantau Retail and Parking Garage" consisting of 14 pages labeled pages C, A1- A4.1, PL-1, PL-2, C1-C4 and a colored rendering of the project, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution. 2. "DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval is granted to construct a 10,852 square foot retail commercial building on Parcel 1 of the project site (northeast corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave.) and a 94-space, one-level parking structure on Parcel 2 of the project site. 3. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of 10,582 square feet of retail commercial allocation from the Heart of the City Specific Plan Area allocation. 4. HEART OF THE CITY SETBACK EXCEPTION Approval is granted for a front yard setback exception from the Heart of the City Specific Plan requirements to allow the retail commercial building on Parcel 1 to have a minimum 32 feet 2 inch setback from Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau A venue. 5. PARKING The applicant shall provide a nunImum of 594 parking spaces on site In accordance with the approved site plan. 6. BICYCLE PARKING The applicant shall provide bicycle parking and bike racks for the proposed retail commercial building in accordance with the City's Parking Regulations under Chapter 19.100 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 7. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: a. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 5-q Model Resolution Page 3 U - 2007-03 June 12, 2007 b. Plant field grown size 'Praxinus Americana' ash trees, or the largest size trees that can be accommodated within the 11 sawtooth" corners of the retail commercial building facing Stevens Creek Blvd. c. Provide a 11 green screen" around the perimeter of the parking garage that includes planting of trees and shrubs that will screen the garage. Existing redwood trees may suffice as the 11 green screen" along the rear elevation of the parking garage facing Interstate 280, unless the redwood trees are significantly pruned. If the redwood trees along the rear elevation are significantly pruned and do not provide adequate screening from Interstate 280, additional screening shall be required. 8. PLAZA AREAS The applicant shall provide decorative pavement treatment in the plaza areas around the retail commercial building. The plaza area shall be widened in front of the retail commercial building to allow portions of the plaza to extend out to the public right-of-way along N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The plaza area shall incorporate use of decorative interlocking pavers as the hardscape area, rather than the broom and salt-finished concrete. 9. SIDEWALKS a. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall repair or replace any portions of the sidewalk along N. Tantau Ave. in front of the project site that are in disrepair, as determined by the Director of Public Works. b. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall replace the entire sidewalk along Stevens Creek Blvd. with a minimum 6-foot wide sidewalk, in compliance with the Heart of the City Specific Plan requirements. 10. SIGN PROGRAM A sign program shall be required for the new retail commercial building proposed on Parcell. 11. BUILDING COLORS AND MATERIALS The building colors and materials shall be consistent with the materials board submitted by the applicant. 12. INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction and covenant running with the land, subject to approval of the City Attorney, for all parcels that share common driveways. The deed restriction shall provide for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easement to and from the affected parcels. The easements shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. rs - JD Model Resolution Page 4 U - 2007-03 June 12, 2007 13. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The applicant shall record a maintenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots. 14. RECIPROCAL PARKING The applicant shall record a reciprocal parking easement for the shared parking between Parcell (new retail commercial building site) and Parcel 2 (existing two- story office complex with new parking structure), subject to the approval of the City Attorney prior to issuance of building permits. 15. TREE REMOVAL The applicant is approved to remove a total of 63 trees on site in accordance with the arborist report submitted by Walter Levinson Consulting Arborist, dated January 21, 2007, that include 53 trees that will require removal due to the location of the new structures on site and 10 trees that are in poor or failing health. For any trees to be retained, the applicant shall follow protection measures for the retainment of these trees. 16. TREE PROTECTION 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: a. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. b. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. c. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. d. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. e. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain thern in good health. 17. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in the amount of $100,000 to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 5"-1/ Model Resolution Page 5 U-2007-03 June 12, 2007 18. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee of $9,240 prior to issuance of building permits and upon effective adoption of the protected trees ordinance for the removal of 42 trees on site that cannot be replaced on site, unless additional replacement trees are planted on site in which case the in-lieu fee may be reduced accordingly. The in-lieu fee for each tree removal that cannot be replaced on site shall be $220, based upon the purchase and installation cost of a replacement tree. 19. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the retail building or on the site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 20. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT All new restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to reduce odor impacts from the restaurants to the adjacent community. The odor abatement systems shall be installed prior to final occupancy of the associated restaurant(s). Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 21. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 22. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan. shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur within 250 feet of any residential property. 23. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 5"/~ Model Resolution Page 6 U - 2007-03 June 12, 2007 24. 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. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 25. STREET WIDENING Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 26. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed In accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 27.STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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. 28.FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 29.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. 30.DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre- and post-development calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be installed. ~"/3 Model Resolution Page 7 U-2007-03. June 12, 2007 31.FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City as needed. 32.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. 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. 33.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. Checking & Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,540.00 minimum $ 6% of. Site Improvement Cost or $2,060.00 minimum $ 2,000.00 $ 12,430.31 b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: . d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: h. Street Tree ** NjA NjA By Developer ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100%. of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -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 5'''1 if Model Resolution Page 8 U - 2007 -03 June 12, 2007 event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 34.TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 35.BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. 36.STORMWATER QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT PROTECTS For a project creating or replacing 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, the applicant must fulfill the City's storm water quality requirements, which includes but is not limited to a Storm Water Management Plan/Notice of Intent (NOI), design and implementation of permanent storm water treatment BMPs, BMP operation and maintenance responsibilities, and BMP inspection and reporting. 37.EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 38.TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall install traffic signal improvements at the Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau and ValIeo Parkway /Tantau intersections. The improvements include a new traffic signal controller cabinet, battery backup, and emergency vehicle pre-emption at ValIeo Parkway /Tantau, and emergency vehicle pre- emption at Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau. 39.TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 5,./5 Model Resolution Page 9 U - 2007 -03 June 12, 2007 40.TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designedto the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. 41.REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 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: ABST AIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: . ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Lisa Giefer, Chair Planning Commission 5' '11, ASA-2007-05 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING AN ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 10,582 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND ONE-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE ON AN EXISTING OFFICE SITE SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an Architectural and Site Approval, 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; and 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of the Architectural and Site Review Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code; and 3) The proposed development is essentially consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan, except for the exception from front yard setbacks along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Architectural and Site Approval 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. ASA-2007-05 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 5,./ 7 Model Resolution Page 2 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: ASA-2007-05 Applicant: Clifford Chang Location: 10100 N. Tantau SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits submitted by Chang Architecture titled: "Tantau Retail and Parking Garage" consisting of 14 pages labeled pages C, Al- A4.1, PL-1, PL-2, C1-C4 and a colored rendering of the project, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval is granted to construct a 10,852 square foot retail commercial building on Parcell of the project site (northeast corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave.) and a 94-space, one-level parking structure on Parcel 2 of the project site. 3. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of 10,582 square feet of retail commercial allocation from the Heart of the City Specific Plan Area allocation. 4. HEART OF THE CITY SETBACK EXCEPTION Approval is granted for a front yard setback exception from the Heart of the City Specific Plan requirements to allow the retail commercial building on Parcel 1 to have a minimum 32 feet 2 inch setback from Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. 5. PARKING The applicant shall provide a nummum of 594 parking spaces on site In accordance with the approved site plan. 6. BICYCLE PARKING The applicant shall provide bicycle parking and bike racks for the proposed retail commercial building in accordance with the City's Parking Regulations under Chapter 19.100 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 7. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: 5'IB Model Resolution Page 3 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 a. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. b. Plant field grown size 'Praxinus Americana' ash trees, or the largest size trees that can be accommodated within the "sawtooth" corners of the retail commercial building facing Stevens Creek Blvd. c. Provide a "green screen" around the perimeter of the parking garage that includes planting of trees and shrubs that will screen the garage. Existing redwood trees may suffice as the" green screen" along the rear elevation of the parking garage facing Interstate 280, unless the redwood trees are significantly pruned. If the redwood trees along the rear elevation are significantly pruned and do not provide adequate screening from Interstate 280, additional screening shall be required. 8. PLAZA AREAS The applicant shall provide decorative pavement treatment in the plaza areas around the retail commercial building. The plaza area shall be widened in front of the retail commercial building to allow portions of the plaza to extend out to the public right-of-way along N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The plaza area shall incorporate use of decorative interlocking pavers as the hardscape area, rather than the broom and salt-finished concrete. 9. SIDEWALKS 1. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall repair or replace any portions of the sidewalk along N. Tantau Ave. in front of the project site that are in disrepair, as determined by the Director of Public Works. 2. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall replace the entire sidewalk along Stevens Creek Blvd. with a minimum 6-foot wide sidewalk, in compliance with the Heart of the City Specific Plan requirements. 10. SIGN PROGRAM A sign program shall be required for the new retail commercial building proposed on Parcell. 11. BUILDING COLORS AND MATERIALS The building colors and materials shall be consistent with the materials board submitted by the applicant. 12. INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction and covenant running with the land, subject to approval of the City Attorney, for all parcels that share common driveways. The deed restriction shall provide for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easement to and from the affected parcels. The easements shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. 5'11 Model Resolution Page 4 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 13. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The applicant shall record a maintenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots. 14. RECIPROCAL PARKING The applicant shall record a reciprocal parking easement for the shared parking between Parcell (new retail commercial building site) and Parcel 2 (existing two- story office complex with new parking structure), subject to the approval of the City Attorney prior to issuance of building permits. 15. TREE REMOVAL The applicant is approved to remove a total of 63 trees on site in accordance with the arborist report submitted by Walter Levinson Consulting Arborist, dated January 21, 2007, that include 53 trees that will require removal due to the location of the new structures on site and 10 trees that are in poor or failing health. For any trees to be retained, the applicant shall follow protection measures for the retainment of these trees. 16. TREE PROTECTION 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: 1. For 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. 2. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. 3. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. 4. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. 5. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 17. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in the amount of $100,000 to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 6~o Model Resolution Page 5 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 18. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee of $9,240 prior to issuance of building permits and upon effective adoption of the protected trees ordinance for the removal of 42 trees on site that cannot be replaced on site, unless additional replacement trees are planted on site in which case the in~lieu fee may be reduced accordingly. The in-lieu fee for each tree removal that cannot be replaced on site shall be $220, based upon the purchase and installation cost of a replacement tree. 19. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the retail building or on the site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 20. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT All new restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to reduce odor impacts from the restaurants to the adjacent community. The odor abatement systems shall be installed prior to final occupancy of the associated restaurant(s). Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 21. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 22. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur within 250 feet of any residential property. 23. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 5-:11 Model Resolution Page 6 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 24. 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. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 25. STREET WIDENING Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 26. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed In accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 27.STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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. 28.FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 29.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. 3D. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre- and post-development calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be installed. 5-~d Model Resolution Page 7 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 31.FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City as needed. 32.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. 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. 33.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. Checking & Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,540.00 minimum $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,060.00 minimum $ 2,000.00 $ 12,430.31 b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: h. Street Tree ** NjA NjA By Developer ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -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. 5-28 Model Resolution Page 8 ASA-2007-05 June 12, 2007 34.TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 35.BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. 36.STORMWATER QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT PROTECTS For a project creating or replacing 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, the applicant must fulfill the City's storm water quality requirements, which includes but is not limited to a Storm Water Management Plan/Notice of Intent (NOI), design and implementation of permanent storm water treatment BMPs, BMP operation and maintenance responsibilities, and BMP inspection and reporting. 37.EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 38.TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall install traffic signal improvements at the Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau and Valko Parkway /Tantau intersections. The improvements include a new traffic signal controller cabinet, battery backup, and emergency vehicle pre-emption at Valko Parkway /Tantau, and emergency vehicle pre- emption at Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau. 39.TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 40.TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. 5 .,~tf TM - 2007 -08 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 9.4 ACRE SITE INTO TWO PARCELS, APPROXIMATELY 1 ACRE AND 8.4 ACRES RESPECTIVELY 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 R~solution; 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 is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 5) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated there 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-2007-08 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12,2007, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 5"'Rb Model Resolution Page 2 TM-2007 -08 June 12, 2007 SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TM-2007-08 Applicant/ Owner: Clifford Chang Location: 10100 N. Tantau SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on the Tentative Parcel Map titled: "Tentative Map, Retail and Parking Development, 10100 N. Tantau Avenue, Cuerptino California" consisting of one sheet labeled C-01, prepared by AP Consulting Engineers dated March 10,2007. 2. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS,RESERV ATIONS 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. 4. TREE PROTECTION 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: a. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. b. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. c. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. d. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. e. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 5 ".z7 Model Resolution Page 3 TM - 2007 -08 June 12, 2007 5. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in the amount of $100,000 to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. SECTION. IV: DEP ARTMENT CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS 6. STREET WIDENING Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 7. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 8. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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. 9. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 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 to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be installed. 12. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City as needed. 6';J~ Model Resolution Page 4 TM-2007 -08 June 12, 2007 13. 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. 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. 14. 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. Checking & Inspection Fees: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: h. Street Tree $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,540.00 minimum $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,060.00 minimum $ 2,000.00 $ 12,430.31 b. Grading Permit: ** NjA NjA By Developer ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -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. 5 ';JCJ Model Resolution Page 5 TM-2007-08 June 12,2007 15. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground . such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 16. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. 17. STORMWATER QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT PROTECTS For a project creating or replacing 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, the applicant must fulfill the City's storm water quality requirements, which includes but is not limited to a Storm Water Management Plan/Notice of Intent (NOI), design and implementation of permanent storm water treatment BMPs, BMP operation and maintenance responsibilities, and BMP inspection and reporting. 18. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 19. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall install traffic signal improvements at the Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau and Valko Parkway /Tantau intersections. The improvements include a new traffic signal controller cabinet, battery backup, and emergency vehicle pre-emption at Valko Parkway /Tantau, and emergency vehicle pre- emption at Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau. 20. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 21. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. 5'?f) Model Resolution Page 6 TM-2007 -08 June 12, 2007 22. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtaIn clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 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: ABST AIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki, Director Community Development Department Lisa Giefer, Chair Planning Commission G: IPlanningIPDReport\Res\2007\TM-200 7 -08.doc 5'31 EXC-2007-08 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING AN EXCEPTION TO THE HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK ON A RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD AND N. T ANT A U AVENUE SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: EXC-2007-08 Cliff Chang 10100 N. Tantau SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an exception to the Parking Regulations (Chapter 19.100 of the Cupertino Municipal Code), as described in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to this application: a) That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title; b) That the granting of the exception will not be injurious to property or improvements in the area nor be detrimental to the pubic safety, health and welfare; and c) That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification and the minimum variance to accomplish this purpose; and d) That the proposed exception will not result in significant impacts to neighboring properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the exception to the Heart of the City Specific Plan regulations is hereby approved subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution; 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 EXC-2007-08, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007 and are incorporated by reference herein. 5"- 3 ~ Model Resolution Page 2 EXC-2007-08 June 12, 2007 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits submitted by Chang Architecture titled: "Tantau Retail and Parking Garage" consisting of 14 pages labeled pages C, A1- A4.1, PL-1, PL-2, C1-C4 and a colored rendering of the project, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution. 2. HEART OF THE CITY SETBACK EXCEPTION Approval is granted for a front yard setback exception from the Heart of the City Specific Plan requirements to allow the retail commercial building on Parcel 1 to have a minimum 32 feet 2 inch setback from Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 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, Chair Planning Commission 5'~3 TR-2007-03 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING TREE REMOVALS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED 10,582 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND A ONE- LEVEL PARKING GARAGE ON AN EXISTING OFFICE SITE SECTION 1: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: TR-2007-03 Clifford Chang 10100 N. Tantau SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for the removal of 63 trees in conjunction with the development of a retail commercial building and parking garage; and WHEREAS, the 63 trees are part of an approved landscape plan, subject to Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code, pertaining to Heritage and Specimen Trees; 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 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application for a tree removal 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 TR-2007-03, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007 are incorporated by reference herein. 5"3'-1 Model Resolution Page 2 TR-2007-03 June 12, 2007 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROV AL ACTION The applicant is approved to remove a total of 63 trees on site in accordance with the arborist report submitted by Walter Levinson Consulting Arborist, dated January 21, 2007, that include 53 trees that will require removal due to the location of the new structures on site and 10 trees that are in poor or failing health. For any trees to be retained, the applicant shall follow protection measures for the retainment of these trees. 2. TREE PROTECTION 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: a. For 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. b. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. c. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall.be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. d. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. e. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 3. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in the amount of $100,000 to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 4. 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. 6--35 Model Resolution Page 3 TR-2007 -03 June 12, 2007 5. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee of $9,240 prior to issuance of building permits and upon effective adoption of the protected trees ordinance for the removal of 42 trees on site that cannot be replaced on site, unless additional replacement trees are planted on site that would reduce the in-lieu fee. The in-lieu fee is based upon the purchase and installation cost of $220 per tree removal for each tree that cannot be replaced on site. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 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, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission G: \ Planning \ PDREPORT\RES \2007\ TR-2007-03res.doc 5.. 310 Exhibit A Why spandrel glass when any dropped ceiling is likely to be above this level? I RECESSED - ACCENT un.. RECESSED - I ~fCO W~! PANEl.. (P4}_ _.-.SJ1JCCO~ _ .I~~..-_~!!!- ~ . __'._ -~ r... a P.'!II .... :-; P3 n P,lt ~ p.!I ;:-:; ~ D ; ; . i ~ ; U. ~ ~ ~ ~ -- f" .....,. , .- .-'-.-- - -- ~. .-... This much glazing may not be viable for a significant retail use ~p :t I < NOTE: REFER TO SfiEET L-I FOR PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE ~ NORTH-EAST PROPERTY LINE. ""1 ,-jn5 I JI..IlLD!NC: re. I e'JIL~ll~~ ~ 357,9 . ,__ ~_~~)r,~_ ~~~~~.~~TO SCALL: I 20' STEVENS CREEK BLVD Substantial loss of mature trees at street edges Site Plan and Elevation Comments 10100 NORTH TANTAU Cupertino CANNON DESIGN GROUP May 10,2007 5"'37 I' ~'."4'hf"':lt"'{.:'"~~'1 "" :..':~~, 'Yr,. '-~l '" _ ~,~<...:~ .... '.- I '.';IP r I ';. /0 ,. . r--- :--- Example of a retail building of similar scale and massing San Rafael Note: This is the only significant area available for tenant signage ~~Ie~s n~me is ~~r1 or sign small '1 _"~p _ _ _ .. ... _ UI _ _~ ~.- ~---I --1- L~. - - - - - '. - - - - · .. ... .. '.. i; ., ..J- . '::- - ! Scale of the structure is relatively large, but probably OK if it is devoted to a single, significant tenant The photo above is a structure of similar scale Scale and Massing' Comments 10100 NORTH TANTAU Cupertino CANNON DESIGN GROUP May 10, 2007 5" 3f> Consider vision glass rather than spandrel glass 't Provide alternate approach to facade treatment in the event that tenant will not be able to tolerate this much glazing Not needed if this is being designed for a known and committed tenant t Consider solid base bulkheads rather than spandrel glass "'1/\$1 ~~ ~o ~,(', 'b ~~ Add landscaping, quality paving and pedestrian amenities ~ --..-- . ,... . . ~~ \''''-_ '....._Al._~~:);..,'-__/A,,,_ _ '^~1.._;,/^,___/; EXlSJ1oIQ~A&H"sYCA.UORElRWT05lER~~(REFEJtTO wmNQ~ '\EXStN)~ "-=fV(m~.y~@, ~""'2D' lD~ ~~NYVEN~ Site Plan and Elevation Suggestions 10100 NORTH TANTAU Cupertino Landscaping and pedestrian amenities example from Staples retail store in San Rafael CANNON DE$IGN GROUP May 10, 2007 5'31 ~)~ ~~!t~f,NH~i~~Pr Exhibit B ,\\ ~~~ "'_ "~"" 'r>'''' ,. --, '.'.,,,.-.,,...............,.. ASCA ReQistered Consultina Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 Assessment of 125 trees at 10100-10200 North Tantau Avenue Cupertino, California Prepared at the Request of: Sand Hill Property Company 489 South EI Camino Real San Mateo, CA 94402 Site Visits: Walter Levison 11/8/06 6/4/07 Report: Walter Levison 11/10/06 REV 11/27/06, 1/21/07,6/5/07 1 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5,L/O ~)}J ~~lt~f, N~~;;,i~~R ASCA Registered ConsultinCl Arborist #401 ,\\ ^!tl~;. ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 1. Summary 3 2. Assignment 4 3. Observations and Discussion 5 4. Recommendations 7 5. Tree Location Maps - Partial Scans (Site Plan Version 01/07) 11 6. Photographs 13 7. Consultant's Qualifications 16 8. Bay Area Vendors 17 9. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 18 10. Certification 19 Attached: Tree Data Charts 2 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5"'''' ~)p ~~!~~;'N~~~i~~2 ASCA Reqistered Consultinq Arborist #401 i~ ~~'\. A ~~;,',~,',':':.. ~:.:';:.>.~. ':':..~>, ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 1. Summary a) Tree Survey: A total of one-hundred twenty-five (125) trees were tagged, located on a tree plot sheet, and asses,sed in the attached tree data charts. Only those specimens that were in close proximity to or directly conflicting with the proposed site plan parameters were originally assessed. The City Arborist David Babby requested in a letter dated 5/24/07 that an additional twenty-six (26) trees be assessed. These trees were added into the tree data charts and the report on 6/5/07 as trees #98 through #123. Except for four specimens #98, 99, 100,' and #115, twenty-two (22) of these trees appear to be unaffected or only slightly affected by the revised site plan proposal, assuming grading modifications at the west side of the retail development can be achieved in the final construction set of plans. Trees #1 through #123 and trees A (124) and B (125) were tagged with numbered aluminum race track shaped tree tags at approximately eye level on the main trunk of each tree. b) Removals Dueto Project Conflicts: Of the 125 "subject trees", at least fifty-three (53) specimens will be removed due to site plan conflicts (~rees #1-29,48,81-84,85-87,88-100, 115, and trees A(124) and B(125)) as per the January 2007 site plan revision (see two tree location map scans below in this report). c) Removals Due to Low Condition Ratings & Hazard: I have proposed ten (10) trees for removal based on very poor overall condition ratings (25% or below) or high risk factors forfailure (tree #91). These are trees #50, 51, 52, 55, 60, 71, 80, 91, 103, and 105. Tree #91 will be removed outright due to conflicts with the January 2007 version of the site plan. The City Arborist recommends removing tree #60 and tree #105. The City Arborist also suggests in his letter dated 5/24/07 that we could improve the prognosis of specimens rated in very poor overall condition, assumably via improved irrigation, etc. d) Site Plan Impacts to Coast Redwoods: Redwoods #30 - #46 along the east side of the existing parking lot have scaffold limb growth which extends approximately 6-7 feet west of the trunk edges of the trees. The trees are located approximately 8-feet east of the existing curb line and 5-8 linear feet east of the proposed second story parking structure footprint. Therefore, minimal pruning will be required to clear the proposed structure. Piers will be placed throughout the existing parking lot area, upon which the new floating concrete parking deck will be mounted (personal communication, Chang Architecture, 11/9/06). 3 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (6S0) 697-0990 sAf~ ~)~ W~!~~f,N~~~i~~~ ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ,~ ~~.~ ...-................."'.,. ""...,. ,,,"'..........._,,, ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 The extent to which pruning might be required to create a "construction corridor" between tree canopies and the east edge of the deck footprint is not known at the time of writing. Also note that the new parking deck will block western sun exposure to the redwoods, possibly reducing photosynthesis and overall vigor. Redwoods #47, #49 - #80, and #101 - #107 (with the exception of redwoods being removed, if any) will require pruning either as 'shearing pruning' or as 'drop crotch pruning' to remove scaffold limbs back to forking lateral branches in order to clear the proposed parking structure footprint. These trees along the north edge of the property have much better scaffold limb extension than do the specimens along the east side of the lot, extending out as much as +1- 15-linear feet southward from the trunk edges or more in some cases. It is assumed that this growth is due to the trees' southern exposure to sunlight. The parking structure will encroach within +1- 5-7 linear feet of the trunk edges of these trees. Therefore, pruning to achieve the required airspace will be very significant, even if a construction corridor space is not accounted for. If a construction corridor of4-5 feet in width is required to allow for steel scaffold erection around the perimeter of the parking structure, then severe shearing pruning of these redwood specimens may need to be performed all the way in to branch attachments along the main trunks. This would reduce the photosynthetic capability of the trees by reducing the "live crown ratios" or percent of living canopy height (currently about 100%) to possibly 60-70% depending on the elevation of the proposed parking deck. The parking structure is expected to block the southern sun exposure currently enjoyed by these trees, possibly reducing their vigor. e) Specimen Trees: Specimen trees as defined by the City of Cupertino include all oaks (Quercus), California buckeyes, big leaf maples, deodar cedars, and blue atlas cedars of certain specified diameters measured at 4.5-feet above grade. As per this definition, there will be zero specimen trees affected or removed under the proposed parking structure and retail development site plan as shown on the tree location map. 2. Assignment The author was originally requested to tag and assess all trees that were adjacent to or within the footprints of the proposed retail and parking structures as per the Chang Architecture site plan dated 6/27/06. All trees were tagged with racetrack shaped aluminum tags numbering "1" through "123" except for two trees A and B which can be considered trees #124 and #125 (see two marked up tree location map sheets scanned into this report). 4 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 6"t{3 ~)~ ~~!~~,r,N!:~;,jg~R ASCA Registered Consultino Arborist #401 ,~ ~~.~ ...._.._..'._, '~_"''''~ 'or ~, ",.. .,.". "'J'", _.......,;. I SA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 The author was further requested to prepare a written arborist report complete with tree data charts (see attached) and protection recommendations as applicable for a site plan submittal to the City of Cupertino planning department. . The report was revised on 1/21/07 to take into account the January 2007 site plan revision which impacts a larger number of trees in the southwest comer of the site than the original 2006 site plan, and again in June 2007 per request of the City Arborist. Twenty-six (26) additional trees were added to the survey at the request of the City Arborist on 6/5/07. 3. Observations and Discussion London Plane Trees London plane trees (Platanus X acerifolia) in both the north and south sections of the site survey appear to be specimens of cultivars that are not resistant to either powdery mildew or sycamore anthracnose. The plane trees being removed as part of the proposed site plan project are easily replaceable due to their fast growth. Note also that the specimens being removed are of quite small trunk diameter when compared to older trees such as the coast redwoods or evergreen ash (see tree charts for details). Only the 'Columbia' plane tree variety should be used in future plantings due to this tree's ability to resist infection by both powdery mildew and anthracnose. Coast redwoods The coast redwoods on the east side of the survey area exhibit much less scaffold limb growth toward the existing parking lot than do those specimens along the north edge of the site facing highway 280. It is not clear why this is so. Use of a Lincoln soil moisture meter in the soil surrounding trees along the east side appears to confirm that the irrigation system is active and providing good soil moisture to the trees. There is a significant 'gradient of decline' noticeable from redwood #41 to redwood #51 where the trees are arranged in a linear gradient from 75% overall condition rating (good) to 15% (very poor) respectively across a distance of only 100-feet. The author postulates that highway 280 air and/or water pollution and/or a heat island effect is causing this decline. Interestingly, the remaining redwood specimens along the north side of the site along highway 280 range in overall condition from good to very poor with no discernable pattern. Most of the trees along this north side exhibit very good scaffold limb extension southward over the existing parking lot and into the proposed project area. This southern exposure receives good sunlight radiation, and will be shaded out due to the presence of the proposed parking deck. The overall effect this shading will have on redwood tree vigor is not known. Coast redwoods are somewhat shade tolerant. 5 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 6 AI t.f ~~ ~~!t~f,N~~~ig~~ ASCA Reaistered Consulting Amorist #401 ,\\. ~~~ ..........,..,.."...,,,,,.-0' "'"'' ....,. "",..;..~,.." ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 I have proposed removal of all redwood specimens with 'very poor' overall condition ratings (25% or less). Removal of these trees would create holes in the existing wall of foliage that screens this north portion of the site from highway 280, creating gaps in the visual (psychological) barrier against the noise and pollution. Note that the existing width of the coast redwood row is not great enough to attenuate noise from traffic (various published Dept. of Transportation sources). Therefore, removal of trees from this row would probably not significantly increase noise entering the site plan area. The significant to severe level of pruning required to clear the site plan area along the southern sides of the redwoods in this row facing highway 280 may negatively affect the trees' health and structure (trees #47, 49-80). Note on irrigation: Irrigation to coast redwoods during summer and fall must be continued in some form, whether it is through use of an irrigation pipe or hose system, water trucks, or a tow-behind water tank with pump/spray apparatus. Evergreen Ash This is a' heavy water user much like coast redwood. The tree is native to Mexico. Branch breakage strength is rated 'medium weak' on a scale from weak to strong (Selectree database, CalPoly website). Limbs overhanging the outdoor eating area may or may not be a concern. The tree is susceptible to foliar anthracnose similar to that affecting Modesto ash in the Bay Area (personal observations), though the specimens at this site appear to be in good health as of the date of writing. I did note that the ash specimens had been improperly pruned such that all inner and lower live wood and foliage was stripped out from the main stems and large scaffolds, effectively "lion tailing" them. This creates a photosynthesis and weight imbalance which is difficult or impossible to correct, permanently disfiguring the trees and lowering their overall condition ratings significantly. Evergreen ash is considered a high root damage species which causes infrastructure cracking and heaving (various sources and personal observation). Therefore, precautions must be taken when building the proposed retaining wall adjacent to these trees. These trees already have significant woody root damage due to repeated mowing of the turf grass adjacent to the trunks which may preclude their retention in the landscape. The extent of root tissue decay is not quantified at this time, though follow-up analysis via use of a Resistograph device could confirm locations and extent of decay or incipient decay in the root systems. 6 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5=-tf 5 ~jb Walter Levison' r CONSULTING ARBORIST A\. 61~ ...-."..........-..,..... "~'..; ,'_A.'. ""BM ""'~Y. ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 Additional tree assessment per City Arborist's item #5 dated 5/24/07: · Item #5a: Impacts to the eight ash trees (newly tagged trees #116 through #123) appear to be less than significant to slightly significant, assuming we can modify grading to achieve at least 8-10 linear feet of separation between tree trunks and the grading limits at the west edge of the proposed retail structure. This limit would be at or just east of the edge of existing lawn which extends eastward from the tree trunks. · Item #5b: One London plane tree specimen (newly tagged tree #115) will be removed due to conflicts with the retail development. · Item #5c: There are no impacts to the seven newly tagged ash trees #108 through #114 expected, unless existing pathways and/or lawn are removed and replaced in this area. · Item #5d: There are no impacts to the seven newly tagged redwoods #101 through #107 expected, unless new utilities are trenched into the subgrade in this area. · Item #5e: Three newly tagged trees #98 through #100 will need to be removed due to parking lot reconfiguration at this location. Trees #98 and #99 are smaller specimens of coast redwood in good overall condition. Tree #100 is a smaller specimen of London plane tree in fair overall condition (see attached tree data charts). 4. Recommendations A. Proiect Arborist: An ASCA registered consulting arborist or (SA certified arborist shall be retained by the property owner to consult on an as-needed basis. This person shall be known as the "project arborist"or "PA". The PA shall be responsible for initial signoff of any tree protection, and may monitor tree maintenance and irrigation as applicable. Construction supervisors may call on the PA to advise on matters such as root pruning, supplemental irrigation systems, construction conflicts, etc. B. Prunina: In as much as possible, all pruning of existing coast redwood specimens shall be conducted in accordance with the ANSI A300 standard for tree care operations - Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Maintenance - Standard Practices (Pruning) 2001 edition. All pruning shall be performed by, or under direct supervision from an ISA-Certified Arborist. Where forks to lateral branches exist, scaffold limbs shall be pruned back to laterals as per ANSI "reduction. ..to decrease....spread" item 5.6.4 on page 6 of the ANSI pruning standards. ** 7 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5~V' ~J}J 1Y~lt~f,NH;:lg~~ ASCA ReQistered ConsultinQ Arborist #401 '\X. ~~.~ "'.... ,,~_. ..,' ,:.,." .. .. . . ....-:<,.......,....."...,..., ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 See vendor list below in this report for Bay Area tree care companies. If possible, "narrow 4-foot wide" scaffolding shall be utilized for the parking deck construction work instead of standard 6-foot wide scaffolding such that pruning of the southern sides of trees #49-#80 is minimized. **Contact the project arborist andlor city arborist if any trees will require shearing pruning all the way back to the branch attachment collars. C. Tree Protection: Chain link panels shall be affixed together with wires and mounted on moveable concrete block footings to form a wall of protection along the south sides of trees #49 through #80 and #101-#107 prior to machinery arrival on site. Signage shall be affixed to this chain link fencing, one sign every 20-linear feet, stating "Tree Protection Fence: Do Not Move or Remove Without Written Approval From Project Arborist". D. Tree Removals: Fifty-three (53) specimens will be removed due to site plan conflicts (trees #1-29, 48, 81-84, 85-87, 88-100, 115, and trees A and B) as per the January 2007 site plan revision (see two tree location map scans in this report). The author recommends that trees #50, 51, 52, 55, 60, 71, 80, 103, and 105 also be removed due to very poor overall condition ratings. Note that tree #91 is recommended to be removed due to high risk of failure (preliminary determination based on visual assessment only) In his letter dated 5/24/07, the City Arborist has suggested that trees #60 and #105 be removed, but that we might attempt to provide improved growing conditions to the other redwoods in very poor overall condition. Ultimately, city staff and commissioners have the final word on whether specimens in very poor condition can be removed or not. E. Irriaation: Maintain all existing irrigation systems at current or better output levels around all ash, redwood, and London plane trees being retained throughout the proposed site plan project period. If the existing irrigation system(s) islare severed or turned off for any reason during the site plan development period, then supplemental irrigation shall be applied at a frequency and volume to be determined by the project arborist (PA). Typical irrigation for heavy water users such as ash or coast redwood is approximately 1 X weekly throughout the year, at a volume approximating 5-gallons per inch of trunk diameter per tree (depending on trunk diameter, species, weather, and other factors). Because the redwoods are in very close proximity to one another, the aCtual rate will probably need to be determined by the PA. Note that this is an appropriate irrigation volume for the ash specimens as well. Supplemental irrigation can be provided using a water truck or tow behind tank/sprayer rig. 8 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 541 ~jb Walter Levison r CONSULTING ARBORIST ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ,~ ~~~ ~_. ..-..... .....'.....' -.. .....,,., ;'~'. ...............-'. ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 F. Fertilization: It mayor may not be beneficial to provide this fertilization to coast redwood specimens along the northeast and north boundaries of the site (adjacent to the proposed parking deck). For the purposes of this report, the author assumed that no subgrade activity would be required for installation of this parking structure other than drilling of the pier holes in the existing asphalt parking lot where minimal root disturbance is expected to occur. Excessive pruning of the redwood specimens mayor may not warrant fertilization of these trees (to be determined by PA). Fertilization should be performed via soil injection prior to commencement of the site plan project. Preferred material is Doggett 32-7-7 Injectofeed slow release tree fertilizer, or Greenbelt 22-14-14. Application shall be at standard arboricultural rates as per ASNI A300 fertilization standard and as per the ISA Best Management Practices - Tree and Shrub Fertilization companion publication to the ANSI A300 fertilization standard. See vendor list below for Bay Area tree care companies. G. Other Tree Maintenance & Protection: Cabling and Bracing: Tree bracing and/or cabling is recommended to be installed in ash tree #84 if this tree is retained (tree #84 is currently proposed to be removed as per 2007 revision of the site plan). This work shall be performed by a qualified tree care company in accordance with the ANSI A300 standard for tree care operations - Support systems a. cabling, bracing, and guying (part 3, 2000). See vendor list below for Bay Area tree care companies. Trunk Buffers: Trunk buffers may be required to be installed around the trunks of ash tree specimens being retained adjacent to the proposed retaining wall work at the southwest corner of the site (ash trees #116 through #123). 9 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 6416 ~)~ 1\'~!t~r,N~~~j~~~ ASCA Reqistered Consultinq Arborist #401 j~ ~~~ ...-"..............,-.>.,.... -: ,......,." ,......'. ... ;,...,......~" ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 H. Site Plan Details: i. Root Barriers (if applicable): Install an herbicide impregnated root barrier such as 'Biobarrier' along the proposed retaining wall edge to prevent intrusion by root growth from the root systems of adjacent trees (ash, etc.) with known high root damage characteristics. ii. Scaffolding: If possible, utilize narrow 4-foot wide scaffolding between the proposed parking deck and the northern boundary redwood specimens #49 through #80 as noted in the pruning recommendation item above. iii. Grading: Grading limits at the west end of the proposed retail development should be altered if possible to allow for a separation of at least 8-10 linear feet between (the trunk edges of ash tree specimens #116 through #123) and grading limits. This will minimize impacts to the trees. 1 0 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 6 ;-i./ q ~lb Walter Levison r CONSULTING ARBORIST A~ .t;l~" ASCA ReQistered ConsultinQ Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 o II ~ '" ~ :;0 i ... m :,. CXI g );! Ol ;:; ,. (,., I r= (.J Q I "@ .. vcr. L___ ... ... --<2.. ___ ;,. ! -: ... Z :> AJ .... -I I -I )> Z. --f )> - ..-.. -3 3 '-V ~ "- , 0 ~~ ~N OJ 0 I CDO )>(/) 00 :::::0' fTl'l (/)--r ::'EO )>0 ~z '0 A. / /' ./ I' " ! I "" :'} -""\. @ -1/,/ 8' SIDEWAl,K EASMd]r j{ . PER 589 f..kJ AND 47' 10 '-',. / '.... // \:4' @ PUBLIC SERVICE E..<\SEMi:N r / ;:>E.R 589 M 3 I\:'JO 4- 12 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5'51 ~)~ W~!~~f,N~~~i~~~ ASCA ReQistered Consulting Arborist #401 I~ ~~.~ "'........'........H"..'.. .,...,-,..,.............<...." ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 6. Photographs London plane tree specimens in the northwest portion of the site that are to be removed due to conflicts with the proposed parking structure. Coast redwood row of trees #30-#46 along the northeast portion of the site. Minimal pruning may be required to be performed on these trees to clear the proposed parking structure footprint. 13 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5":5~ .)p ~~!~ri,J:~~i~~R ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 Side view (looking west) of the coast redwoods in the row of trees #47 - #80, showing scaffold limbs extending southward over the existing parking lot that will need to be sheared or drop crotch pruned back to forking laterals to clear the proposed parking structure. '\~ L4.~. .!5::~.;:\~:. (SA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 (Left of Sidewalk): Eastward view of the five evergreen ash specimens #88 -'#92 along Stevens Creek Boulevard. . 14 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5"'53 ~)p ~~!~~~N~~~i~~~ ASCA Registered ConsultinQ Arborist #401 A\ ~~~ A._. ....'.N ';,-... ...\. ,'-' ..".",.....................,. I SA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 Northward view of the southwest corner of the property where a proposed retail structure and outdoor seating area will be located. An example of the trunk buffer and chain link fence Best Management Practice. The tree is wrapped with 10 layers of orange plastic (2-inches thick), then overlain with 2"X4"X8' boards, then either. wrapped again or simply affixed with duct tape on the outside. 1 5 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5' ,,6 tf ~J~ ~~!~~;, N !-~;,ig~m ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 J\\. .^!:l.~~, ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 7. Consultant's Qualifications o ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 o Millbrae Community Preservation Commission (Tree Board) 2001-2006 o ASCA Arboriculture Consulting Academy graduate, class of 2000 o ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 o B.A. Environmental Studies/Soil and Water Resources UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California 1990 o Peace Corps Soil and Water Conservation Extension Agent Chiangmai Province, Thailand 1991-1993 o Associate Consulting Arborist Barrie D. Coate and Associates 4/99-8/99 o Contract City Arborist to the City of Belmont 5/99-present Continued education through attendance of arboriculture lectures and forums sponsored by The American Society of Consulting Arborists, The International Society of Arboriculture (Westem Chapter), and various governmental and non-governmental entities. (My full curriculum vitae is available upon request) 16 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 6 .,55 ~)p ~~!~~,r,N~~~i~~Pr ASCA Reqistered Consultinq Arborist #401 ,\\. ~l\. """,,"''''''''''',. "'..., . '.'. .....-. .""",~ ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 8. Bay Area Vendors Tree Moving Services: Joe Ornaz Trees of California P.O. Box 13189 (408) 264-3663 -trees moved bv hand onlv Covote, CA 95013 Mr. John Service @ Valley Crest 8501 Calaveras Road (925) 862-2485 Sunol, CA 94586 Tree Movers of Mountain View -can transplant, acquire, ship, and install trees (650) 968-6117 -trees moved bv mechanical soade onlv. -trees must normallv be <12"DBH Sources of Replacement Trees: Hecker Pass Specimen Trees Hecker Pass Road (408) 842-2121 Mr. Bill Miller Gilrov, CA 95020 Pacific Nurseries-wholesale only 2099 Hillside Blvd. (650) 755-2330 Colma:, CA 94014 Valley Crest Tree Company 8501 Calaveras Road (925) 862-2485 Sunol, CA 94586 East Bay Nursery 2332 San Pablo Ave. (510) 845-6490 Berkelev, CA 94702 Boething Treeland Farms (Wholesale to the Trade 2923 Alpine Road Only. Huge selection of common and hard to find tree (650) 851-4770 soecies1 Portola Valley, CA 94028 Tree Movers of Mtn View (650) 968-6117 Peninsula Air Spade Contractors Who Perform Tree-Friendly Air Excavation Michael Younq, Urban Tree Manaqement {6501321-0202 Bill Patchett, Treescaoes (Burlinaame) l650\ 574-5354 Matthew Kidd (6501 298-8937 (888) 969-8733 or Arborwell Neil Woolner cell (925) 260- 6655 Ian Geddes Tree Care (see below) Advanced Tree Care {see below1 Tree Maintenance Advanced Tree Care- Rob Weatherill 1650\566-9539 or 839-9539 Arborwell Also contact Neil Woolner Main Office 1 (888) 969- cell {9251 260-6655 8733 Area Custom-- Ron Walker (6501 969-7076 Bill Plateman 650.595.5135 Bob Yamane-- Noonan's Tree Care Redwood Citv 650.367.8818 BiotaTech-Brendan Nelson Cell 14081639-2189 Chris Hall-- West Coast Tree Care South Bay 408.379.1442 Dan Hoskins 650.322.4400 DouQ Anderson South Bav 408.378.2261 GiI Mitchell South Bay (4081 929-3040 Henry Ardalan "City Arborist" Woodside Mobile (650) 222-1771 Ian Geddes Tree Care Saratoaa (408) 374-8233 James Scott Los Gatos 14081 370-2089 Kevin Raftery Palo Alto (650) 428-8733 Lane Kiloatrick 650.941.0240 17 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5"'Sb ~)~ Walter Levison CONSULTING ARBORIST ,\'\ ~~ }... ..._........''"~;, -", . ,.-,-" ..-.. "'..~. '''- ". ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 Mark O'brien - no brush haulina Menlo Park (650 327-0450 Mayne Tree Expert Co. - Richard Huntington & Kevin San Carlos 650.593.4400 Kielty McCarthy Tree Specialties Menlo Park 650 367-7552 Michael Youna- Urban Tree Manaaement Santa Clara 650 321-0202 Nature First - Jeremy Nama & Mimi Scoppettone South Bay 831 562-8233 Randy Harris-Artistry in Trees Mill Valley (Marin County) 415 388-2931 John Stepp Mountain View 650 940-1452 The Care of TreesfTreescapes East Bay 510.638.0781 Torrey Young & David Nelson (The above sources have been known to provide high-quality arboriculture services in the past. They are not guaranteed or endorsed by the author.) 9. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised and evaluated as through free and clean, under responsible ownership and competent management. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinance, statutes, or other government regulations. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. Unless required by law otherwise, the possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any other purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. Unless required by law otherwise, neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the prior expressed conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any initiated designation conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant's/appraiser's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report, being intended for visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys unless expressed otherwise. The reproduction of any information generated by engineers, architects, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of said information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Walter Levison to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information. Unless expressed otherwise: a. information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the conditions of those items at the time of inspection; and b. the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future. 18 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 5 .-57 ~)~ Walter Levison CONSULTING ARBORIST 1\\ ~{~ ...-...".",..'.-...;....,.. ,,,...,,,,.....,,....."'......,, ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 (SA Certified Arborist #WC-3172 Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. Arborist Disclosure Statement: Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or to seek additional advice. Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Tree are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborist cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like any medicine, cannot be guaranteed. . Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist's services such as property boundaries, property ownership, site lines, disputes between neighbors, and other issues. Arborists cannot take such considerations into account unless complete and accurate information is disclosed to the arborist. An arborist should then be expected to reasonably rely upon the completeness and accuracy of the information provided. Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate the trees. 10. Certification I hereby certify that all the statements of fact in this report are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. Signature of Consultant 6/5/07 Attached: Tree Data Charts 19 of 19 Site Address: 10100-10200 N Tantau, Cupertino Walter Levison @ All Rights Reserved Version: 6/5/07 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Phone/Fax (650) 697-0990 ~"'5~. Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "2 "2 u; -= "C :;:- ...~ ... >c~ > "C c_~ l!! oll!",li! c ~ ~-[~ o ... c """Gloot = 0 m~ ,.., E 0 GI ~cP~. Co .c::lOlCU GI Q) = E 511 @c:! E c: e V) ~ 1i~~~ f!E.5O Notes l!! !a..= ... ::> E ~caUJ< 13....!!~ ...e. GI"C1ijo I- .!!8 .,!.!!!.o 1-._ Q) oz~ .c ~U)a:~ 05O::~ 0 O.c OJ o - 0 0 l!! 0 'ijj e. l- I- .5 ::J: London Plane 1 X 7.8 Tree 35/20 60/50 55% Cultivars of the plane tree species at this site are (Platanus X Fair susceptible to powdery mildew and anthracnose. acerifolia) London Plane 2 X 7.8 Tree 35/20 60/50 55% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 3 X 6.2 Tree 25/15 55/45 49% (Platanus X Poor acerifolia) London Plane 20% Tree 4 X 5.1 (Platanus X 20/10 30/20 Very Mainstem broken or topped. acerifolia) Poor London Plane 5 X 5.3 Tree 25/15 55/50 52% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 6 X 6.5 Tree 35/20 60/55 56% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 7 X 6.3 Tree 30/15 55/45 49% Canopy lopsided west (phototropic). Shaded from (Platanus X Poor redwood #8. acerifolia) London Plane 8 X 7.2 Tree 30/20 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) Coast Redwood 80% Limbed up to 6-ft above grade (AG). Good twig density 9 X 11.8 (Sequoia 45/15 80/80 sempervirens) Good and extension. ~ , ~ Page 1 of 15 Site: 10100 -10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "'5l 'C 'jj) it: 'C :e- .. ....~ ... > c~ > 'C c_~ l!! olll!!",lIl c ~ ~.!!!tl o .... C .>0:...... ~~.~~ "" EO" c ti @ci ~.."",.. CL ~=CDQ) .. .. CL._ .. ~ E E c e f/) -:- ~'t).Eae Notes .. ~~Sl< :;:.5- cu"C.....o ......l;: .... :::> E ~~.~~ :lJ2'liic o:S~':" t= j!~8 .c j!.!!!.o c.c (.) f/) m ~v.iO::~ (.) e. 0 o ~ u Q) e. ..... ..... .E ~ Coast Redwood 75% 10 X 11.5 (Sequoia 45/15 75/75 Good Same as #9 sempervirens) Coast Redwood 80% 11 X 13.8 (Sequoia 50/15 80/80 Good Same as #9 sempervirens) Coast Redwood 75% 12 X 12.2 (Sequoia 45/15 75/75 Good Same as #9 sempervirens) London Plane 13 X 5.2 Tree 25/8 30/30 30% Topped/broken apical meristem. Canopy lopsided west. (Platanus X Poor acerifo/ia) London Plane 25% 14 X 6.1 Tree 30/10 25/25 Very Canopy lopsided west. Deformed scaffold~ and apical (Platanus X meristem. acerifo/iaJ Poor London Plane 15 X 6.7 Tree 35/15 60/50 55% (Platanus X Fair acerifo/iaJ London Plane 16 X 5.5 Tree 35/10 45/45 45% Canopy lopsided south. (Platanus X Poor acerifo/iaJ London Plane 17 X 8.5 Tree 40/20 60/55 59% Canopy lopsided south. (Platanus X Fair acerifo/iaJ London Plane 18 X. 7.1 Tree 30/20 60/50 50% Canopy lopsided southwest. (Platanus X Fair acerifo/iaJ tJ\ ~ ~ Page 2 of15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "'C "'C UJ = "'C :;:- ... G> ~.;, '" ,.. c~ ,.. "'C 5-;~ Q) l!! ~1!cn~ c ~ ~-[~ o ~ c .:.::G>~ E~.~~ "*' E 0 G> 5 ~ @)~ 0. ..c- ::I CD CI) G> ... -fi E EEc:E: U) - ~ t).5"if!. Notes l!! !epl;:: ...:5- cu",o.....o .8!8 ~ ::s E .=.!!! g: "" g '" .~~ :!:s~g og~":" I- .8.!!.o .c u Q.c UZCI) g) CI) '";" u e. 0 0 l!! u 'Qj e. l- I- .5 :I: London Plane 19 X 6.3 Tree 30/15 45/45 45% Canopy lopsided southwest. (Platanus X Poor acerifoliaJ London Plane 20 X 7.5 Tree 35/20 50/50 50% (Platanus X Fair acerifoliaJ London Plane 21 X 7.3 Tree 35/20 50/55 55% (Platanus X Fair acerifoliaJ London Plane 22 X 8.0 Tree 35/20 60/55 57% (Platanus X Fair acerifoliaJ London Plane 23 X 7.0 Tree 35/20 49/50 50% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 24 X 9.1 Tree 35/30 55/55 55% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 25 X 9.8 Tree 35/30 50/50 50% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 26 X 8.1 Tree 35/30 55/60 57% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 27 X 9.0 Tree 35/30 55/60 57% (Platanus X Fair acerifoliaJ ~ \ G" - Page 3 of 15 Site: 1 01 00 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist al "C in lI;= "C :2 Gl tlI > c~ > "C ~"'! c_~ l!! oest!cng c ~ ~ .!! .u o ~ C .;x::S"II:t' .. ~ ~ g'~ '* E 0 Gl ~Gl:;:,Gl Q. ;;:::JC>G> Gl Gl Q..- Gl;;E 5 ~ @C! E t:: E C/) -:- _ 1:).5 ';/!. Notes Gl :;.= CP"'C;O ~GlC;::: ~ :::J E ....lQcn< g ...!1:! ~ :B21Uc::> 55&!6 .= .2:18 .z:- .2:So t-._ Gl uz~ C> :cu;rx~ O.z: U - u u Gi 0 0 l!! e. t- t- .5 :I: Coast Redwood 70% 28 X 12.3 (Sequoia 50/15 70/70 Good Moderate live twig density/extension. . sempervirens) Coast Redwood 70% 29 X 12.3 (Sequoia 50/15 70/70 Good Same as #28 sempervirens) Coast Redwood 75% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. 30 13.5 (Sequoia 55/15 75/75 Good Gold flux at branch collar indicates possible sempervirens) Botryosphaeria fungus infection. Coast Redwood 80% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. 31 13.3 (Sequoia 55/15 80/75 Good Possible Botryosphaeria infection (gold flux at branch sempervirens) collars). Coast Redwood 80% 32 15.3 (Sequoia 60/15 80/80 Good Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint sempervirens) Coast Redwood 80% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. 33 16.0 (Sequoia 60/15 75/80 Good Possible Botryosphaeria infection (gold flux at branch sempervirens) collars). Coast Redwood 80% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. 34 12.7 (Sequoia 5015 80/80 Good Possible Botryosphaeria infection (gold flux at branch sempervirens) collars). Coast Redwood 80% 35 16.0 (Sequoia 60/15 80/80 Good Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint sempervirens) Coast Redwood 80% 36 13.6 (Sequoia . 60/15 80/80 Good Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint sempervirens) Coast Redwood 80% 37 13.9 (Sequoia 55/15 80/80 Good Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint sempervirens) Coast Redwood 75% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. 38 13.7 (Sequoia 55/15 75/75 Good Possible Botryosphaeria infection (gold flux at branch sempervirens) collars). Note that apical meristem is deflected off vertical. ~ 0..... ~ Page 4 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist al al en ~ "'tl :c- ... > c ~ > "'tl ..."'! 5-;~CD l!! oiSe(l)~ c ~ ~-[~ o ... C .>o:G>...,. l! ~ g'~ "*' E 0 G> 5 ~ @c! Q. .c::>C1G> G> G>;;E EE~e II) - ~ 1:>'5 c.t Notes G> !cuC;::: ...!!.. ~-g1i~ t= ~!8 ... ::> E ~cacn< a ....~~ :l!2'l;io ~~o 1-._ G> .c 08D:e. O.c UZII) CI :I:D)O::~ 0 r=. ~ 0 'Qj e. I- .5 :I: Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. Coast Redwood Limited scaffold limb extension (due to drought? Pollution 39 13.6 (Sequoia 55/15 75/75 75% from highway 280?). There seems to be a gradient of Good increasing tree decline as one moves closer to highway sempervirens) 101, indicating that air pollution may be having a significant negative effect on the health of the redwoods. Coast Redwood 70% 40 13.7 (Sequoia 55/15 70/70 Good Same as #39, plus some foliar dieback. sempervirens) Coast Redwood 75% Foliar dieback. Trees north of here are lower and lower in 41 14.2 (Sequoia 55/15 75/75 Good terms of their overall condition ratings, apparently due. to sempervirens) air pollution. Coast Redwood 70% Foliar dieback. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage 42 14.2 (Sequoia 55/15 70/70 sempervirens) Good structure footprint Coast Redwood 70% Foliar die back. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage 43 13.9 (Sequoia 55/15 70/70 sempervirens) Good structure footprint Coast Redwood 69% Foliar dieback. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage 44 13.9 (Sequoia 55/15 69/69 sempervirens) Fair structure footprint Coast Redwood 69% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. 45 13.9 (Sequoia 55/15 69/69 Fair Possible Botryosphaeria infection (gold flux at branch sempervirens) collars). Foliar dieback. Coast Redwood Gold flux indicates possible Botryosphaeria infection. 46 11.1 (Sequoia 45/15 60/60 60% Canopy conflicts with proposed parking structure. Tree is Fair growing in shade of surrounding larger specimens sempervirens) (stunted growth). Coast Redwood 50% Poor twig density and extension. Canopy extends well 47 32.0 (Sequoia 70/35 50/50 Fair over existing parking lot, and conflicts with proposed sempervirens) parking structure. London Plane 48 X 7.7 Tree 45/30 60/55 58% Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint (Platanus X Fair acerifio/ia) ~ ~ ~ Page 5 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist ~ ~ .~ '*" .. .. ~ '"0 .. ~ c:- ~-aii .....-= ..;t:: '" .QUI 0 0-1.) I- "5l UI > '"0 o ... '" EO" .. .;:; E ... ::> E ~..!!.o ~ ~ = ...ob ..v:.!!';' 2 ~ @ci I-.!l! III < 0.<: I.) .E 20.0 x 5.9 '" ... o-;~ CD EEC:S g ~ .~~ C,,) CI) '"0 to ~ .. .<: l5.. .., l!! UI :;:1_.'" ~ CI) -:- .;:;::> 01" <ii ~ OI~ ~E ftit5~c.t ~:o~g .J:: ep2cao >cCG- .~ ::I:Q)~~ 08Q:e, ::I: e. Notes Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 60/15 I 60/60 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 15/7 I 15/15 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 55/20 I 15/15 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 50/12 I 25/25 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 40/10 I 50/50 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 70/20 I 45/40 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 70/15 I 15/15 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 70/20 I 30/30 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 60/10 I 60/60 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 75/35 I 80/80 sempervirens) Coast Redwood (Sequoia I 75/20 I 40/30 sempervirens) Page 6 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 x 20.5 x 17.9 11.7 22.5 x 19.0 21.4. 10.2 est. 24" 19.4 60% Fair 15% Very Poor 15% Very Poor 25% Very Poor 50% Fair 43% Poor 15% Very Poor 30% Poor 60% Fair 80% Good 35% Poor Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. Moderate twig density and extension. VP twig density/extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint VP twig density/extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint Moderate twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint Poor twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint VP twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint Poor twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint Moderate twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint Good twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint S-trunk form. Poor twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "C . CD -g III ~ "C :c > c- > "C ...It'! m 'It: g..!!! tl o ... c """CD.. c_ ~ ~ecn~ c _ CD E 0 CD 5~@~ gCD~CD a. .e=m4U ~~.~~ ! ~e adS e e c e rn - 2! ;:.~ ...1:)1:0 I- .2l!S ... ::> e .=.!!/ 1-< ~ ....!!! ~ 1i ;l1l" ~"C 'tQ ~ Notes .2l.!2.o .c 2...0 050::0 o ~ C.c oz~ en :J:li.i0::~ 0 0 'CD o ~ l- I- ... .E :J: S!- Coast Redwood 5% 60 X 14.3 (Sequoia 65/5 5/5 Very Very poor twig density and extension. sempervirens) Poor Coast Redwood 57% 61 20.0 (Sequoia 75/25 55/60 Moderate twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts sempervirens) Fair with proposed garage structure footprint Coast Redwood 50% 62 10.9 (Sequoia 60/10 50/50 Tree is stunted in shade of surrounding specimens. sempervirens) Fair Moderate twig density and extension. Coast Redwood 75% 63 28.5 (Sequoia 75/35 75/75 Good twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with sempervirens) Good proposed garage structure footprint Coast Redwood 75% 64 est. 22 (Sequoia 75/35 75/75 Good twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with sempervirens) Good proposed garage structure footprint Coast Redwood 70% 65 21.9 (Sequoia 70/30 70/70 Good twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts with sempervirens) Good proposed garage structure footprint Coast Redwood 65% Moderate to good twig extension and density. Canopy 66 22.0 (Sequoia 70/35 70/65 conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. sempervirens) Fair Assume apical meristem has broken off. Coast Redwood 60% 67 12.2 (Sequoia 65/20 60/60 Moderate twig density and extension. Canopy conflicts sempervirens) Fair with proposed garage structure footprint Coast Redwood 55% Apical meristem deflected. Moderate twig density and 68 20.7 (Sequoia 70/20 60/50 extension. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage sempervirens) Fair structure fOQtprint Coast Redwood 40% 69 7.8 (Sequoia 35/10 40/40 Stunted in shade of tree #70. Moderate twig density and sempervirens) Poor extension. Coast Redwood 60% 70 34.5 . (Sequoia 80/35 60/60 Moderate to good twig density and extension. Canopy sempervirens) Fair conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint \J\ ~ 0\ Page 7 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist -g ~U) ~ -g:c >c- > "'C...u1 C Co) CD oi:SiID U C _ _ o.!! -n 0 0 i -'I::.!!.qo ~ 0 -; ~ Q) is. ~ & = ~.2 afit. ~ ~ ~ii: ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~~ ~ ~.i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,g ~ ~ ~ i ~ Notes I- GI'1;ilS GI.!!.o I-.!!!GI ozu~ i3, ~...~ooo~o .o_u .0 ~ o"fi (,) U) ._ ~(f) "';'" (,) - ~ :=......E :! S!.- Coast Redwood 20% Poor twig density and extension with epicormic shoots 71 X 27,0 (Sequoia 75/30 20/20 Very arising. Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure sempervirens) Poor footprint Coast Redwood 3001 P tw' d 't d t 'C fl' t 'th 72 16.3 (Se uoia 75/20 30/30 10 oor Ig ensl y an ex enslon" anopy con IC s WI q, ) Poor proposed garage structure footprint sempervlrens Coast Redwood 7001 Mdt t d tw' d 't d t ' C 73 16.7 (Se uoia 70/25 70/70 10 0 ~ra e .0 goo Ig ensl y an ex enSlon, , anopy q, ) Good conflicts With proposed garage structure footprint sempervlrens Coast Redwood 7001 Mdt t d tw' d 't d t ' C 74 19.7 (Se uoia 75/25 70/70 10 0 ~ra e ,0 goo Ig ensl y an ex enSlon, , anopy q, ) Good conflicts With proposed garage structure footprint sempervlrens Coast Redwood 4001 P t d t t 'd 't d t ' C 75 9.7 (Se uoia 65/10 40/40 10 oor, 0 m~ era e wig ensl y an ex enslon. , anopy q, ) Poor conflicts With proposed garage structure footprint sempervlrens Coast Redwood 68% Moderate to good twig density and extension, Moderate 76 17.6 (Sequoia 80/20 70/60 F ,0 scaffold limb extension, Canopy conflicts with proposed sempervirens) air garage structure footprint Canopy conflicts with proposed garage structure footprint. C t R d d Extends southward farther than any other redwood 77 28.5 oa(~e ~o:oo 85/35 80/80 80% sp~c!men in this row (~bout 12-linear feet over th,e q, ) Good eXisting asphalt), Pruning to clear proposed parking sempervlrens ' , structure may have negative Impact on health/structure of the tree. Drop crotch type pruninq may be beneficial. 20 5/ Coast Redwood 75% Good twig density and extension, Extends far out over 78 8 '0 (Sequoia 70/30 75/75 G ~ existing asphalt parking lot. Canopy conflicts with . sempervirens) 00 proposed garage structure footprint Coast Redwood 60% 79 6.7 (Sequoia 35/12 60/60 F ,0 Stunted in shade of surrounding specimens, , ) air sempervlrens Coast Redwood 25% P t' d 't d t 'c fl' t 'th 80 X 22.3 (Se uoia 80/25 25/25 Ve oor wig ensl y an ex enslon., anopy con IC s WI q, ) P ry proposed garage structure footprint sempeNJrens oor U\ ~ ~ Page 8 of 15 Site: 10100 -10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "C 'i c;;- =: "i :c CD ...u1 > c~ > "C c_~ l!! olll!!",g c ~ "*' ~-[~ o ... c ...."''''" c. ~ ~ g'~ E 0 CD ~~@~ ~CDbCD .c=mcu CD '" = E E c: e VJ ~ ::: 1) .5 ;j!. Notes !Q)C;: ';:I~ Cb"C;:;O l!! ... ::s E 1= .!! III <( IS ....!!! ~ g!21Go >cco..- I- 1l!S 1l.!!.o J:: 08D::!:i OJ:: oZb,l m :E:U)a:~ u u 'a; 0 0 l!! e. l- I- .E I London Plane 25% 81 X X 6.0 Tree 80/25 25/25 Very Poor twig density and extension. (Platanus X acerifolia) Poor London Plane 82 X 8.1 Tree 45/20 60/60 60% Canopy lopsided east (phototropic). (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) South side of root crown has a girdling root along 1/3 of the circumference. Tree has been heavily limbed up or "lion tailed", removing most inner and lower live stems. 83 X 19.8 Evergreen ash 55/30 60/40 50% Tree irrigated indirectly from sprinklers at nearby turf. (Fraxinus uhdei) Fair Root system would be severed during development of the retail area. The retainable root plate radius is within the Hayes threshold minimum of 5-feet radius, and would not maintain adequate structural stability. Roots are invading the surrounding turf lawn. Roots damaged on grade from repeated mowing. Same conditions as tree #83 above. Tree has codominant mainstem crotch with included bark (embedded bark: a structural defect) at 14-ft above grade. Tree if retained would require cable installation by a qualified tree care 84 X 23.4 Evergreen ash 60/45 60/35 47% company. (Fraxinus uhdei) Poor Hayes minimum root plate radius is 5'-9" to maintain structural stability assuming <33% of buttress roots are severed. Given location of retail footprint, it is likely that root system will be severed at +/- 3-4 linear ft out from trunk or less. Tree is to be removed as per 2007 site plan revision. London Plane 85 X 9.6 Tree 45/25 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) 0"\ \ 0' ~ Page 9 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "'5l "'5l Ii> 4:: "'C :c ...~ .. > <::~ > "'C c_~ l!! ~e",~ <:: - ~ ~ ts o .. <:: ~.s" e ~ lr~ - e 0 Gl ~~'ge CL .c::JaG) Gl f! ~ce Gl:5E <:: QI @ci (I) - ~tL5~ Notes l!! ~.~ 1Il c( :;:>~ CD "C.. 0 .!~8 .. ::s E e".!!:;lg z: ""2"liio ~g~"': I- ~.!!..o Cz: 8z~ CI ~i'i)O:~ o e. 0 0 'cu 0 0 l!! e. l- I- .5 :I: London Plane 86 X 9.8 Tree 45/25 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 87 X 14.4 Tree 50/30 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) Two codominant mainstems at 7-ft above grade. Mounded on soil berni. Roots damaged on grade from repeated lawn mowing. Trunk leans south due to phototropic tendancy toward sunlight. Tree has been Evergreen ash 50% Iiontailed to remove inner and lower stems, permanently 88 X 22.5 . (Fraxinus uhdei) 50/40 60/50 Fair downgrading the health and structure of the tree. Outdoor seating area construction may destabilize the tree u.nless at least 6-7 linear feet of root zone can be retained as a "no dig" zone north of the trunk edge. Tree is to be removed as per 2007 site plan revision. Same as tree #88 above, except no codominant mainstem system. This tree has girdling roots on the south side of the root crown that encompass Evergreen ash 45% approximately 25% of the trunk circumference which is 89 X 17.6 (Fraxinus uhdei) 50/40 60/40 Poor within acceptable limits as per Hayes. Outdoor seating area construction may destabilize the tree unless at least 7.5 linear feet of root zone can be retained as a "no dig" zone north of the trunk edge. Tree is to be removed as per 2007 site plan revision. '" ~ <$:) Page 10 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "C 'il Ii) 4:: '1:l :c Gl ...~ <II > c- > "C I::_.g l!! oae!Cfti c _ "" ~ .!! 1S o ... c ~.s""" . Q. ~ ~ g'~ CD E 0 CD c CD @C) ~ ~~ ~ en - :S :0 C) Gl CD Q..- l!! 'S ~ ;:.e. _ u.5~ ~-g~~ Notes l!! "'CD!;: ~.~ g:< .!!s ~ <II.S! ~ .c :!2'l;io I- .!~o C.c uZJ; C) :J:u;tX~ 08ll::e. 0 {!. ~ u 'Qi 0 I- .5 ::J: - Same as tree #88, except codominant mainstems fork at 10-feet above grade. Tension roots (buttress roots on north side of trunk base) are moderately damaged by repeated mowing. The actual degree to which these roots 90 X 18.4 . Evergreen ash 50/40 60/45 50% may be compromised is not known at the time of writing, (Fraxinus uhdei) Fair as this initial assessment was only a visual survey of the site. Tree is to be removed as per January 2007 revision of the site plan due to close proximity of building footprint to trunk edqe. Same as tree #88, except no codominant mainstems. Girdling roots on south side of root crown extend across approximately 50% of the trunk circumference: past the threshold for "high risk" designation as per Hayes. Evergreen ash 37% Tension roots on north side of trunk are severely 91 X X 16.3 (Fraxinus uhdei) 50/40 50/30 Poor damaged by repeated mowing and may be compromised (not confirmed at the time of writing). Tree is to be removed as per January 2007 revision of the site plan due to close proximity of building footprint to trunk edqe. All same as tree #88, except multiple codominant mainstems and girdling root on east side of root crown. Tension roots appear to be severely compromised due to Evergreen ash 43% repeated lawn mower damage north of the trunk base. 92 X 18.7 50/40 50/40 (Fraxinus uhdei) Poor Outdoor seating area construction may destabilize the tree unless at least 7.5 linear feet of root zone can be retained as a "no dig" zone north of the trunk edge. Tree is to be removed as per 2007 site plan revision. London Plane 93 X 10.3 Tree 40/30 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) U"'\ ~ ~ Page 11 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "'5l "'Cl Cii" ~ "'Cl ::c 41 '" >c- > "'Cl ...~ c:_~ I!! olSecn~ c _ ~.!!!ts o ... c ~s~ 4 ~ ~ g'~ "*' E 0 41 ~G1::::GI Co .c::JClCD GI c GI @Cl E I:: e U) - 41 Co._ G1fiE .,,5- 1ij~~~ ~1!~~ Notes I!! "'41"" ... = E 2~",< ~ "'.~~ I- ~!8 ll..!!.o I- ._ GI .c :!u;~~ 08Cl::e. O.c oZU) 0) 0 o ~ u 'ijj S. l- I- ... .5 :z:: London Plane 94 X 8.5 Tree 40/25 60/55 58% Two codominant mainstems at 9-ft above grade. (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 95 X 6.4 Tree 30/20 55/55 55% Poor growth/taper compared to surrounding specimens of (Platanus X Fair the same species. acerifolia) London Plane 96 X 9.0 Tree 35/25 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) London Plane 97 X 9.3 Tree 40/30 60/60 60% (Platanus X Fair acerifolia) Coast redwood 70% 98 X 14.9 (Sequoia 40/12 70/70 Good Moderate live twig density and extension sempervirens) Coast redwood 80% 99 X 14.8 (Sequoia 45/15 80/80 Good Good live twig density and extension. sempervirens) London plane Moderate live twig density and extension. Two tree 57% 100 X 9.7 (Platanus X 40/18 60/55 Fair cod om in ant main stems fork at 15-feet above grade in a acerifolia) wide crotch. Powdery mildew fungus infection. Coast redwood 37% 101 35 (Sequoia 65/25 35/40 Poor Poor live twig density and extension. sempervirens) Coast redwood 35% 102 16 (Sequoia 70/15 37/32 Poor Poor live twig density and extension. sempervirens) \)"') \ ~ ~ Page 12 of 15 Site: 10100 -10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist al "0 u; ~ "0 :c cu ~~ '" > c- > "0 c:_~ .. all!!...&! c _ "" ~.!!! fS o ... c a e ~ g>~ E 0 cu ~ Gl @~ ~cu'l:OI> Etl.~; cu cu c..._ 01>5 E E I:: E rn - Notes l!! ...cu"" ..~...< ."E CD"C~O 11:[8 .. ::J E S "'.~ ~ ~.5~g > I:: ca..... I- ~~o 1-._ cu .s::. 08D::e O.s::. uZrn CI rn '";" 0 ~ ~ u 'ijj e. I- .5 :t: Coast redwood 20% Stunted in shade of surrounding larger specimens. Poor 103 X 11 (Sequoia 45/8 20/20 Very radial trunk growth and poor scaffold limb extension. sempervirens) Poor Author recommends removal, but city arborist may require retention of all trees in very poor overall condition. Coast redwood 50% 104 28 (Sequoia 70/15 50/50 Fair Poor to moderate live twig density and extension. sempervirens) Coast redwood 5% Very poor twig density and extension. Tree is almost 105 X 14 (Sequoia 70/5 5/5 Very sempervirens) Poor dead. Remove per city arborist recommendation. Coast redwood 57% 106 23 (Sequoia 70/20 55/60 Fair Moderate live twig density and extension. sempervirens) Coast redwood 59% 107 25 (Sequoia 70/25 55/60 Fair Moderate live twig density and extension. sempervirens) 108 20.8 Evergreen ash 50/25 50/40 45% Limbed up on south side. Roots damaged on grade. Bark (Fraxinus uhde/) Poor inclusion crotch at 9-feet above grade. 109 24.4 Evergreen ash 50/30 50/40 40% Same as #108, but bark inclusion crotch at 6-feet. (Fraxinus uhde/) Poor Canopy lopsided south. 110 15.3 Evergreen ash 50/30 50/40 40% Canopy lopsided south. Tree limbed up. Bark inclusion (Fraxinus uhdel) Poor crotch at 9-feet above grade. Evergreen ash 37% Roots damaged on grade. Canopy lopsided south. One 111 21.9 (Fraxinus uhdel) 50/30 40/35 Poor splitout noted at 7-feet above grade. Tree limbed up. Trunk leans south. Evergreen ash 43% Multiple codominant mainstems @8-feet above grade. 112 20.3 (Fraxinus uhde/) 50/30 45/40 Poor Roots damaged on grade. Canopy lopsided south. Limbed up. Evergreen ash 37% Trunk leans south. Girdling roots on south side and NE 113 15.3 (Fraxinus uhdel) 50/30 40/35 Poor section. Canopy lopsided south. Roots damaged on grade. Minor twig dieback noted throughout canopy. ~ , ~ - Page 13 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist al al Iii' == "t:J :c ....n ... > c~ > "t:J c_~ l!! o(ll!!...~ c ~ ~.!!! ts o ... c QJ...,j ~~ ~~ "*' E 0 QJ ~ a; @)ci ~QJ,=QJ Co .c :s 0) QJ QJ ~ ~e QJ;;E E c: e In ~ ~U:S~ Notes QJ ~.~ Xl..( ;>~ CIJ"'C;iO .= ~~8 .... :s E ~ ....~~ mS&!g OS~~ .!.!!.o .c C.c <.Jz~ 0) :1:(1) "";' <.J e. 0 o ~ (J "jjj e. l- I- E ::I: 114 19.8 Evergreen ash 50/35 50/40 45% Roots damaged on grade. Sidewalk berm tree. Girdling (Fraxihus uhdel) Poor root on SW section. Limbed up. London plane Twig dieback throughout canopy. Poor to moderate live tree 40% 115 X 9.3 (Platanus X 35/25 40/40 Poor twig density and extension. Powdery mildew fungus acerifolia) infection. Canopy lopsided east. Limbed up. Multiple codominant 116 19.6 Evergreen ash 50/30 40/35 35% mainstems. May need to remove tree if cannot alter (Fraxinus uhdel) Poor grading plan to allow +/- 8-10 radial feet of root zone protection east of trunk. 117 18.0 Evergreen ash 50/20 45/40 43% Canopy lopsided east. Limbed up. Multiple codominant (Fraxinus uhdel) Poor mainstems. 118 19.0 Evergreen ash 50/45 50/40 43% Limbed up. Canopy lopsided west. Two codominant (Fraxinus uhdel) Poor mainstems at 8-feet above grade. May need to remove tree if cannot alter grading plan to 119 18.9 Evergreen ash 50/30 50/40 46% allow +/- 8-10 radial feet of root zone protection east of (Fraxinus uhdel) Poor trunk. Two codominant mainstems fork at 7-feet above qrade. Canopy lopsided west. Limbed up. May need to remove tree if cannot alter grading plan to 120 18.0 Evergreen ash 50/40 50/40 45% allow +/- 8-10 radial feet of root zone protection east of (Fraxinus uhdeJ) Poor trunk. Multiple codominant main stems at 8-feet above grade. Canopy lopsided west. Limbed up. May need to remove tree if cannot alter grading plan to Evergreen ash 40% allow +/- 8-10 radial feet of root zone protection east of 121 19.6 50/45 50/40 trunk. Two codominant mainstems fork in a wide crotch at (Fraxinus uhdel) Poor 7-feet above grade. Girdling roots noted around entire circumference of root crown. Evergreen ash 45% Girdling roots east and north sides of root crown. Limbed 122 20.0 (Fraxinus uhdel) 50/35 50/43 Poor up. Two codominant mainstems fork in a wide crotch at 8- feet above grade. t-"\ , 13 Page 14 of 15 Site: 10100 -10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA Tree Data Charts Revised 6/5/07 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist "'i "'i u; 4:: "i z >c- > "C ...~ E:_r,g e olSl!cn~ c _ ~.!!!tl o ... c .x: .!! "'Ct ~ I! ~ g'~ '*" E 0 a> ~a>'CCIl 0. :5 ::> Cl a> a> a> 0..- a>:5 E c a> @Ie) E c E en .-,.. _'tS.5~ Notes l!! ... GJ.C;::: ~.~ III < ';>!:. GI "0.. 0 ll!S ... ::> E ~ "'"!!!~ :Jl2~g og~<w; I- ll.!l!.o ..c C..c oz~ Cl ::t:li) ";" o S?- o ~ ~ u Oil So I- .5 ::t: Two codominant mainstems fork in a bark inclusion type 123 20.9 Evergreen ash 50/30 50/40 47% crotch at 8-feet above grade. Roots girdling on east side. (Fraxinus uhde/) Poor Canopy lopsided west. Do not grade past the proposed retainino wall location at +/-10-feet east from trunk. A X 19.0 Evergreen ash 50/30 50/40 45% Codominant mainstems fork at 10-feet above grade. (124) (Fraxinus uhdei) Poor Limbed up. Canopy lopsided east. B X 16.9 Evergreen ash SO/3D 50/40 45% Codominant mainstems at 8-feet above grade. Limbed (125) (Fraxinus uhdei) Poor up. Canopy lopsided east. . "'" , ~ U) Page 15 of 15 Site: 10100 - 10200 N Tantau Ave, Cupertino, CA .~..."'.... .;!'.,. . . ..... ARBOR RESOURCES Exhibit C Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree May 24, 2007 Aki Honda Community Development Department City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 RE: 10100-10200 North TantauAvenue, Cupertino Dear Ms. Honda: I have reviewed the following documents in connection with the proposed development at the above-referenced site: [1] the architectural, civil, and landscape drawings mailed to me on 5/14/07, and [2] the arborist report, dated 1/21/07, by Mr. Walter Levison (the project arborist on record for this application). I visited the site on 5/17/07 and this letter presents my comments. 1. The tree protection measures specified within Section 4.0 of Mr. Levison's report should be adopted as conditions of approval for this project. 2. Mr. Levison's report provides an evaluation of 99 trees located within or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed retail building and parking garage. The trees are sequentially numbered as 1-97, A and B, and none are defined as "specimen trees." 3. Of these trees, 49 are identified for removal to accommodate development; they include #1-29, 48, 81-97, A and B. Of these, six are redwoods (#9-12, 28 and 29), seven evergreen ash (#83, 84 and 88-92), and the remainder London planes. Based on their species, size, and/or condition, I find the loss of each would be insignificant. Note that the project plans do not identify the removal of #28 and 29; if the project arborist reaffirms they are in conflict, they should, accordingly, be shown on Sheets PL-1 and C-04. P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 . Email: arborresources@co1Tlcast.net Phone: 650.654.3351 . Fax: 650.240.0777 . Licensed Contractor #796763 6,11f ARBOR RESOURCES Professional Arboricultllral Consulting & Tree Care May 24, 2007 10100-10200 North Tantau Avenue page 2 of3 4. There are seven additional trees recommended by Mr. Levison for removal; they include #50-52, 55, 60, 71 and 80. Each is a redwood located long the northeast property line. Tree #60 is nearly dead, while the others appear in significant decline but not seemingly beyond recovery; if desired, measures could possibly be employed to promote their vigor. 5. There are 26 additional trees located within proximity of the proposed development and are subject to root loss or entire removal. They are as follows: a. Eight evergreen ash along the northwest and west sides of the proposed building and patios. b. One London plane within the planter island immediately north of the building. c. Seven evergreen ash along the south side ofthe building. d. Seven redwoods beyond or west of tree #81 (immediately east of the garage ramp). The one with the dead top should be specified for removal. e. Two redwoods and one London plane immediately south of tree #21 (these trees will seemingly require removal to accommodate the parking lot reconfiguration. 6. Each of the 26 additional trees should be evaluated and documented by the project arborist. I also recommend the impacts are assessed, and any protection measures or design modifications to achieve the survival of retained trees is mentioned. 7. All trees (the original 99 plus the additional 26) and their associated numbers should be shown on Sheets PI-I, PI-2 and C-04. I also recommend the disposition of each tree is shown. P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 . Phone: 650.654.3351 . Fax: 650.240.0777 Email: arborresources@;comcast.net . Licensed Contractor #796763 ~ --15 ARBOR RESOURCES Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care May 24, 2007 10100-10200 North Tantau Avenue page 3 of3 8. At a minimum, Section 4.0 and the "Tree Data Charts" of Mr. Levison's final report should be copied onto a plan sheet, titled Sheets T -1, T -2, etc. (Tree Protection Instructions) and referenced on all site-related plans of the architectural, civil and landscape drawings. 9. The "Tree Protection Detail" should be omitted from Sheet C-04. All tree protection measures, including fencing, must conform to Section 4.0 of Mr. Levison's report. 10. I recommend the irrigation design is reviewed for tree-related impacts prior to being installed. Any necessary modifications recommended to minimize tree impacts should be implemented. Should you have any questions or would like additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, {~ <t David L. Babby, RCA Consulting Arborist P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 . Phone: 650.654.3351 . Fax: 650.240.0777 Email: arborresoLlrces(~;comcast.net . Licensed Contractor #796763 6,1/P I ( ---r'--- - --f:'- ,I' i"':'" .,;. , i -:. ...,........:a1.o.~.~~________~ J i?l ~ ! I ',",- --~..,;..c. I >$' C t(i . \ 'I I, I I t~, \: <t I ,:,.'; o' f !~j " ~ ) , 1$-1 1:-' """'" I \, ....::...... l: - ,.-~ ~,J ,~ P' H [ h ~ If i;! I ,I' r ' ;\ llll:ll~ I 0 i jlli-~l .'::- I' 1,IN:!',l '1,1 · i' \ Jt11 \ '~ ~- .,~ ~ Ii, i I' ',., ~ ~I-. T I \ == . L '._)~ , 'r ! I : ,I' II: I ::, , I:' 11 ; ;:~. It I ' ., I ~ :; ~::.=::: ~ : h", .. ,.--~J ~ .-- "L'r- i \ ,-_1 tr _ [ I . ,,1 ff~.r? ", 1 'I ~ 1! I = :', ::0::::-': ~ F""-:; i '~,li l r.; IB,/ ~~ ~!i.-: I '/'f/l11I1 ; '/ -' ~/' ,; ,~~ \ l~:' II ' / 1/ J I ~, ,\ . :II' . ....... I .4,0- J ~j ,- l'~ I I' ... ~- P L' -,.' '. . t j .. ~ i " o III " ~. 'oJ I ~! ,'~ 11 '; ,t . '-' ': ~ ,. r~ 'J' i.. ,!I~>>'_ .. ~;}');I ~ ~ I ;j '--:'r- f -~~' , \! ';, I 1\ },j · · .I~' ' I :'.1' . .\~ '~:. I ~ h",t~~ ..... I'~ I ;,f" "'1 ~~ /:\1"::; !i ~I 1 l' ill 1~, . I( l' ~~,.;..,' ~l--: ""-=, ~,,~~ ';' I" ~ "\W. '~ ~l ~"I I , ;t : it ~'1 I '. , ";. ~\ / - /~! .~, I 1 \1 I. l Ii .~~. ;, '- : .,f} ~ ~t - 'z .. -. ~ ~ I U I', - I ,I I .:.:...~ i I ~ l7", -=r_~ r-- I 1!=~ \ L~I~' K~~ .Ii~ """""i'...., _.1 _ I ,t ~ ! i I I \ \ = C._ l~~ , 1 I .1~ ,0 ,...... lCO I~ I ! I I 1'1 I ] " t , f '-~'1 . i I I ~ ~ > f' i,li (1) J .- r .' i > - ... (1) c: I.- o .0 :..;"''" j :cf- (," " [ m m I 1'1 II I~; 1 I 7 ., I , _ <' ~ \1 1)\ ,:' "\ 4JlfT7)C1: \\, ~ ' 1 .~." t "t ~ ~ 't. ""," ~ ,) · 1 ~Il l~.. I' ! I ' ____ ,..___:L I ~ r-; ---.----. F~ , I 5-71 ~-'l <1t> .l..- ~ @ ~ ^ < " '" NOTE: REFER TO SHEET L -1 FOR PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE @ NORTH-EAST PROPERTY LINE. /' t?EB -lL (JT" cs::::s (JT" (JT" u:s (JT" I- I- EXISTING LAWN TO REMAIN I- EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK I- I- o ~..f2. ij\~ ~Q O~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ :J <{ ~ Z <{ ~ --==- {:( PROPOSED NEW PLAZA. WALK & H.C. RAMP EX. BRICK & CONC. ENTRY PLAZA EX. 13" DIA. SYCAMORE /'f -i- I ~ / b -, I \ ~r' I .). / y '\ \ I o ~1 { BLVD o ~--" o B~ ff=bMJ ~.. < o Z~~ OJ' & (X) I :------..- ~ CHANG ARCIDTECTURE II I I I I I , I 125i65T -I BUIW!NG TO I -L~~ I Li]i TI ~~~LJ ----.t j5.59' CD 3595' - - - @ ~ \' I o. j ~ ~ ~~ I I I I I I EXISTING 18"-24" OIA. EVERGREEN I ASH TREES TO REMAIN I \ , EXISTiNG PlTTOSPORUM, RHAPHIOLEPIS & IVY TO REMAIN I ' ~ 0::: o Z PROPOSED SALT-FINISH OR BROOM- FINISH CONC. ENTRY PLAZA. OUTDOOR PATIOS, AND WALKS WI SCORING > PATTERN & INTEGRAL COLOR EXISTING EVERGREEN ASH TREES (TYP.) ~~~~M~~EL I I I I I I I I PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL SHRUB ~ Bl,JFFEA (I.E. INOlA HAWTHORNE, AFRICAN IRIS, NEW ZEALAND FLAX. ( PURPLE FOUNTAIN GRASS. DAYLILY. _ _ LOROPaALUM LILY-{)F-THE-NILE. ETC.) \ FLOWERING GROUND COVER -+ __ (LE. LAVENDeR LANTANA. SCAEVOLA 'MAUVE CLUSTERS'. OR STAR JASMINE) ., o~ FOCAL POINT ACCENT SHRUBS <LE. BLUE HIBISCUS. TREE MALLOW. NEW ~LAND TEA. ETC.) OBNAMENTAL SHRUB BUFFER J.. j\ f><J j\ l\. ~ A " /' "./ " ./ I. ./ '-. ' "- '-- -- .........- --/ ........---- .......... --- ........ ).~_.-'" ..........------ _/ "----' EXISTING NUMBERED ASH & SYCAMORE TREES TO BE REMOVED (REFER TO EXISTING LAWN . EXISTING PITTOSPORUM EXISTING 18"-24" DIA. EVERGREEN ARBORISl'S REPORT PREPARED BY PROJECT ARBORIST. WALTER LEVISON) TO REMAIN RHAPHKlLEPIS & IVY ASH TREES TO REMAIN @ ro,,""N SCALE: 1"=20' STEVEN S CREEK '-.i ~-A ,---~ LJ. <r4 \ I b t I ~I i ' II I {:( ~- ---- - tf5= SL Y'$ / lit l.ALDERBAUGH r=I ASSOCIATES Landscape Archileclu'elPlaming 102 Persian Drive, Suite 202 Sunnyvale. CallIornia 94089-1517 (406) 745-7380 ~ ~ 05.23.07 CITY PLAN CHECK RESPONSE 05.15.07 CITY PLAN CHECK RESPONSE 10100 N. Tantau Parking Structure + Retail Building Cupertino, CA Drawing Titlej PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN A40135 02.22.07 AS NOTED ~ Job # Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet PL-2 TANTAU RETAIL + PARKING GARAGE Design Submittal March 15th, 2007 April 18th, 2007 May 17th, 2007 INDEX C COVER ARCHITECTURAL A1 SITE PLAN A2 RETAIL FLOOR PLAN A2.1 RETAIL ROOF PLAN A3 GARAGE FLOOR PLANS A4 RETAIL ELEVATIONS A4.1 GARAGE ELEVATIONS LANDSCAPE PL-1 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN PL-2 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN CIVIL C1 C2 C3 C4 TENTATIVE MAP PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN TREE REMOVAL PLAN :lj LOCATION MAP CHANG ARCHITECTURE N. Tantau Retail Building + Parking Structure Cupertino, CA Drawing Title - COVER Job # M0135 Date: 5/17 07 Scale: AS NOTED Drawn By: Sheet: c , ." I !.....: ~ _~(E) ~ SIDEWALK .~~ i (E) ///t~ ~ I LANDSCAPE ~~i .... "',. 2 137'-11%" FUTURE 20 CAR DECK EXPANSION t j "1 I I I I I I I \----------' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I PARKING DECK PLAN (SEE FLOOR PlAN FOR STALL DIMENSIONS) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ,,'0 ~ /'0 ~ " /J ,t~ ,l",&- , f!J"" (~. ~~: / q,'4Y \ ,S"4:~,,,-'~ \ ~~~~:;~: ~~ ,;;.li:~l'< ,,; ,J .. ,:}~'J \ . pI, ,,~"'I #.$1 \ "if' /,\ '0'" ' ~~~ ~' ",&/ f ~! ., i!r!! ~~ !&.<>-':- tr. to. ~~':$" ~~ ' . , @>-.. CJo C i3:'i ~; ~ ~~ m ~; ~ u"- ~ W W e 0:: (.) @.......,. en -CJo iU Z ~.., W ~'" (ij <'" ~<O "'~ lilffi ~ ",'" REQUIRED PARKING NORTH TANTALJ \ ',--- (E) SIDEWALK EXIST, OFFICE BUILDING AREA; REO. OFFICE PARKING' PROPOSED RETAIL AREA: REO, RETAIL PARKING: REO. TOTAL PARKING: 151.321 SF ' ...-......-..-.-.. ''''339"'''<<--- 530 STALLS (3. 5 STAllS /1000) (6 STALLS/1000) 45'-9" MIN. SETBACK 32'-2" MAX. SETBACK 59'-5" Ave. SETBACK 91'-7"/2 1 0.582 SF SITE PLAN 1 A1 64 STALLS 594 STALLS SCALE: 1 "=4 PROPOSED PARKING GRAPHIC SCALE ON-GRADE SPACES; NEW DECK SPACES PROPOSED TOTAL PARKING: 'h..-.J 'I' ':' ~ T ~ 500 STALLS 94 STALLS 594 STALLS ( IN FEET ) 1 inch :=: 40 fl z ~~ ~- ;;!~ u~ ~~ e~~ RETAIL PARCEL AREA: RETAIL AREA: FAR: 53.655 SF (1.23 ACRES) 10.667 SF 2C% CHANG ARCHITECTURE N. Tantau Retail Building + Parking Structure Cupertino, CA Drawing Title SITE PLAN Job# Date: Scale: Drawn By: ~ A40135 5/17/07 AS NOTED At /-0ROFILED S~CO / -~ALL (P2) i s~ I I I o I I I , o I 00 i I' 00 I' r<') ,... I c" HIGH PARADET -----rr:- 25' =cJ""" '-OW PARAPET -----rr:- 2"2' =cJ""" ROOF ~f9'.:::o 156 CllapIn UIle -- CdIfomIG 94Ol0 Tel: 6SO..I4U41S FGIC 6SO..\40.H41 _ _,~octuro.com GRADE EL. O~ GJ CROSS ~~~~~~'~'-0" 13'-8" ~ 13'-8" 0" 2'.1.4 " --h-- I ,~ I' ~ rj r L . f 11'-4" JII. 11'-4" fl.; 11'-4" ~~ 11'-4" m 11'-4" f ' II 2'+4" 2'+4" ! I 2'-4" 2't4" . I ! PARAPET/~QUIP, I I I I I Ii: ; : SCREEN ASOVE I I I I I : I ~ - -t- - -H - - + - - -'- - -+ - - - - - - t- - - +- - - - - - -* - - i-J - I I I I I I I , I i I- I I I I I, I I II I r I L . I STEEL STEEL ~ ' I I :: I I / COLUMN I COLUMN \ I I I : I / I I I \, I I I >k- --'I< N -----l~--~--El-,' --T--r IjI --1--------"------ --~ I W 11'-4" : I I: I I I : I r I 11'-4" l f~ N , I I I ." I ' I ~I' 2'-2" I. I "" 2'-2" '" I I, I I I I I ! ~l -I : I I ill I I I I- I _+__~--_+_-- 1__-+_____-+___1," 1 J I I I I r- r ~1;r;~J r} N 2'-2" I, I I I I :r! 2'-2" i I ~SKYLlGHT ::; ABOVE: ! - - - - - '" -'I< 1.1 - - ~ - -~li-f\--------~--7.-'.,lt - -II -II roo ~ 1 J 11 -4 I !, I \ I I II L 11 -4 '~ N 'j l' I 111\ I,ll . . 00 2'-2".... i I I \ / I' I I '..t 2'-2" " ,I I I III \ / 1'1 I ,I ::! :: ! L III \I 1,1 I :: I I I I 1\ I i I , " I I I \ I ' I , f2\----l--- - -- - -- - - _ ~ r- I _ _ _ _ -----LI L ~\" -4+-- _ _ _ _ _ ---t c;' ~I ' {=- 11' 4" I , I I I ,,, -{. . N B I": ! I I I I I \ I I I 11 -4 ' N 0: .. ... I ~______.::; I , "I 2'-2" I ,--------1--------- ----" '_" :::1 11'-4" 9'-6" I I 9'-6" I 11'-4" '7f2 2 0-+------------ 'I I I {1 I :io -J.J<-L------..J L_____...J I, rl I I 'IIL---.----!IIL--------!!t.{: l' 8 '---'--1----' '----------':1 -2" ! ~I I I I I I ~----------~--~-----------------~-~ '-- LOW CANOPY ABOVE c--HIGH CANOPY ABOVE 'I ~ -...... -'I< 1r, I '" , 00 I '" N. Tantau Retail Building + Parking Structure Cupertino, CA Drawing Tille RETAIL FLOOR PLAN + SECTION 1 A2. RETAIL FLOOR PLAN Job # Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet: M013S 5/17/07 AS NOTED SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 10,582 GSF A2 13'-8" Co I i<) ~I ~I ~I I 0-t---- ~I ~ G 13'-8" q ,------,1,------, ! I -+1 ~I (EL. +25') ~I 1 Hlc---- _ _ i_SCREEN H~ - - - - - - - - - --- - - - I (EL. +25') SCREElN I - ---t--- - - -'- - - IEL t') I '" 1 I , I I I ---+---~---L _ ... . _ . _1___f"CEl_.____ I I ' ~H~[ ~ I SCR~EN VAC I (EL. 1+25') 1 SKYLIGHT 1 SC EEN -- T - -if-------~-l- - - ---t--- - ~t25') I i I : II I I I' I L' :1 I: 1 I . 11r- STOREFRONTI I 1 PARAPET __ - - - _~ /1 (EL ~",," I' I~ .~-~-- I' 1 I 1 I i I I r-;-- UPPER - - --r -I-PARAPE-T- - -- (EL. +25') 13'-8" GW~ PARAFlET ~ (EL. +22') G UPpJR PARApET (EL. 1+25') Co I i<) o I '0 L LOWER PARAPET (EL. +22') 13'-8" __~ 13'-8" f Q 13'-8" 13'-8" E.5 F.5 13'-8" 13'-8" UPPER I PARAPET L (EL. +25') L__\___--1 ~I~WALL __.J / \, (ElL. +31')___/ \~ CANOPY BELOW LOWER -----, l PARAPET : - (EL. +22') I I I I /--- CANOPY I / ABOVE i (El. + 28') _______-.J I L__________________ 13'-8" e ,------,1 ~ I ----'!< -:- ----'!< CHANG ARCHITECTURE 156 Chopfl L...e llur1~game CdifonJlo 94010 Tel: 65Il.340.9415 Fox: 650.340.9641 WeIr www.changcrdTitecture.com N. Tantau Retail Building + Parking Structure Cupertino, CA Drawing Title - -- RET AIL ROOF PLAN Job# Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet: A40135 5/17 /07 AS NOTED A2.1 56'-3" 1 '" 1 I { '" RAMP UP f8'-5" l 313'-SX. 297' -5" 33 CARS @ 8'-5" ~~J [: t r\ / \ /' [J L~.I \ \ \\ '\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \\ \'6. \~ \~-i-, -S-~ \ ;.;. ("1, \ '?.p, \~6" \ U' , @ \ 0>\ \ ~\ \\ \ \ , \ \ \\ \ \ \ ;;x\'\ \ do. /:' STAIR #2 LJ [] Nt I I ! I ~l '-- COLUMN BELOW 25'-6" 4'-10" 238' 5' 17' 133 CARS @ 8'-6Il 28 CARS @ 8'-6" 1 :2 CARS r '@ 8'-6" ell [J Ie I I l~: rJl I I [Ii I I Ie I I [J I l77/lJ I !) 1 ~~ I 2' 25'-6" I rt~ r ~ro~ STAIR #1 ~ " 27'-6" 27'-6" 280' -5''ii. C2\ GARAGE DECK PLAN \gJ 94 CARS SCALE: 1/16"~1'-O" '0>, -, i I +- I i ~I I 27'-6" 27'-6" 27' -6" 27'-6" ~ '1 i L ON-GilADE CURB ----T---- L DECK ABOVE 1 A3 PARKING BELOW GARAGE DECK '8 SCALE: 1/15"~1'-O" '8 \\ \ \ \ \ \\ -'\ -' , \ ~ \~u'. ~\'o-. \:0"., @\ \'? (9,,\ ,'$-. \,,\\ \ u, \\ \ \ \\ \ , \ \ \ V 27'-6" 27'-6" 27'-6" 27'-6" Tel: 6SL.I4O.i41S fox: eso.340.8841 WtIl:www.cIIGrIQan:IIRedure._ N. Tantau Retail Building + Parking Structure Cupertino, CA Drawing Title GARAGE PLANS Job # Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet: A40135 5/17/07 AS NOTED A3 ACCENT FIN WALL I BEYOND 0 CD cp (P2) -l , I I i ~ PROFILED I I STUCCO WfLL (P2) DIAGONAL METAL BRACE WITH STEEL CONNECTIONS I I ~ ~PET , Y-fC i2'~'T i<l ~F_ TEL 19' -0" + GRADE EL. 0' -0. I .-- RECESSED I STUCCO WALL , (P1) i =j I I ~:;'1 ALUM. MULLION L(P4) y I I I o I N N ~ EAST EL~:~?~,_o" I I" 1 ~ I I I I r- RECESSED I I STUCCO WALL ,-PROFILED' I (P2) STUCCO ~P2) I 1 l' :~~;l , L. ALUM. ElAND VISION GLASS SUN-S~ADE (P4) i '---- (CLEAR) (P4) MTL. CANOPY -- (P4) 0) ; II CANOPY BEYOND --; I CANOPY (P4) ~ I ~ ! , RECESSED -. ' PARAtEr ." I I ST.UCCO WA~L I PABA~ ~ 22'-0 .'1 ' I (p) +--PEL22'-0 t') TR I i<l ROOF IIj _ _~OO,~-+- ~C 19'-0" EL. 19-0 I , o I N N GRADE + EL. 0'-0" GRADE EL."""(i - 0" ,IT 0 I N N ,~ I 0) CD G G G 1_- RECESSED STUCCO WALL (P1) , PROFILED ---, STUCCO WALL I (P2) I I '" j ,~ i :~~t,J l' I I I~",'\'~", ",j",,<,',:l;?\l}.'!<.., _~"v I I 1._ ~u. .._"..,. ds I f WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" I STUCCO I WALL I (P1)~ @ "~~ I I I 1 I I I ~~Wf._,,~1lI1 .- -----rr lIIBlI1I ~ ,;'it~ I L~*lR,::P~F~~<&'@ .,,!!' .,,'~',.--.---i},' ~'" . 'I 'Ii:< ~.. .,', ";~~ ':." ,;;,_.". .. .."" '.".; .. "";,1,"" ", .. ^.,.":,, I I jr (0 i} ~ NORTH ~~~~~:.~~~" PROFILED rO\ STUCCO ACCENT V FIN WALL (P2) --, : \ ' ~'~ ~ ,METAL ri REVEALS ~r' ~ ~ , LI GHT LOWER I (P4) CANbPY I (P4) --.J G) SOUTH ~E~~;'~?~" I SPANDREL '--- GLASS (P3) rE\ ~ MEDALLION! Y / LIGHT METAL / SCONCE I CANOPY / I DIAGONAL I (P4) / I METAL BRA ,E / I (P4) w &t :@ ,\ '.~' "'I \_~~~ COLOR KEY (P1) MUSTARD (P2) TERRA COTTA (P3) GREEN/GREY (P4) BLACK (P5) WHITE ii:;I~!' af$1 f 0 I ,-- RECESSED I STUCCO WALL, I i (P2) I RECESSED --, I -1- - - -r-- - ---5JUCCQ...'NALL - L-- ~ lL~i~T(:'~ (Pll i · I ~ II' ~~A~ EL. 28'.::0"1" , I RQQL....b.. ---+a19'~ , . , I O' Ii Co N' '~~ ,,]'~~ o I ~I I I .I ELO~~~ , GlAZl~G MATERiAl KEY _ VISION GLASS I DESCRIPlIlON CLEAR, DUAL PANE 0) I , ACCENT FIN WALL G BEYOND : r-(P2) jill. -~."-~ .- ~ I SPANDREL GLASS #1 CLEAR, SINGLE-GLAZED, 1/4" WITH OPACIFIER, R-19 INSUL. ~ METAL PANEL 1/4" PANEL, R-19 INSUL. GARAGE ONLY CHANG ARCHITECTURE DIAGONAL METAL BRACE WITH STEEL CONNECTIONS (P3) (P4) N. Tantau Retail Building + Parking Structure Cupertino, CA Drawing Title RETAIL ELEVATIONS Job# Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet: M0135 5/17/07 AS NOTED A4 ---"1 I I \ \------- \ \ \ \ \ ~ \ I;Xl$TING FlI;OWOOD TREES \ TREE NUMBERING CORRESPONDS TO : ~ BI;REMOVED PER ARBORIST'S\ THE AFlBOFlIST'S REPORT PREPARED, I b \ REPORT (TYP.) \ BY PROJECT ARBORIST. WALTER LEVISON. /-..; "'-. \ ' EXISTING FlEDWOO,D TREES \ J \ TO REMAIN (TYP'>J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~V4.5 ,,~4...:P....4J4.t.....4.0.......~...-VV3BV ~~.......~a.gj.3l.~ ;:--" , - 4;) oJ "" ..J .....~. ".- - \ \ \ \ \ \ TII: _MIS fax: <<lO.J40.M41 _ _.""~ccm 1C..= ~ c.lIIomIa t40I 0 II LALDERBAUGH ASSOCIATES Landscape ArchileclureIPlanning 102 Persian Drive. Suite 202 Sunnyvale. Calirornia94089-t517 (408) 745-7380 \ . o > -.J CD ~ W w 0::: o (f) z w > W I- (f) I I I I I -} I I r I ~,/~ NOTE: REFER TO SHEET PL -2 FOR PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR NEW RETAIL BUILDING. (QJ 05.15.07 CITY PLAN CHECK RESPONSE 10100 N. Tantau Parking Structure + Retail Building Cupertino, CA Drawing Title - ~(,I ..~ " g. .. PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN NORTH TANTAU Job# Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet A40135 ~07 AS NOTED - JWL (t SO^" ,.~<o' PL-1 fXl$TING 18"-24" OIA ,EVERGREEN I ASH TREES TO REMAIN ( \ ExISTING PITTOSPORUM RHAPHIOLEPlS ,& IVY TO REMAIN ~-'l <1t> {1- @l {1- ^ < " " NOTE: REFER TO SHEET L -1 FOR PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE @ NORTH-EAST PROPERTY LINE. t; tl ~ '7,,-0 c:s:=s: !)-" !)-" [:s=s !)-" I- t EXISTING LAWN TO REMAIN .:l I / + \ \~ / ( I \ ,,/- / )/ " ," ~ PRQP()Seo SALT-FINISH OR BROOM- ,,/ '" ~ FINl$.H 0, ONe EN, TRY PLAZA., OUTDOOR~ / " ^ /' , PAtIOS. ANO WALKS WI SCORING ~ ~..l\ '/ ?\TTERN llNTEGRAL COLOR I "- /""- ra /" \ ',/ "!~ "/ EXISTING EVERGREEN 82)1( / " . / '\ Q (\ / "_ / ASH TREES (TYP) "/ "~/\" / / " ~" / -v /" \</ y ~~ V94 12"-18" SMOOTH TRQWEL /" /" / ~/ " OONC. BANOS (TYP,) '>' X /1n" / " / "/ / 'Z~/" / PRQPPSEO ORNAMENTAL SHRUB > " )< 'j >( / ~ >" : 61.iFFER (~E,INDIA HAWTHORt'!E. / ,,/ " / ~.A 'x ~ AFPllCAN IRIS, NEW ZEALAND FLAX. ( /. ?<.. ~" ,~. / ' PURPLE FOUNTAIN GRAss. DAYLILY. d 85 / ' / , / ~ V", "_ / _ LOROPETALUM. LlLy-oF-THE-NILE. ETC.), 'JL' '/: '/ ^~. ^ \ '/' /" / " / - ,,/ y' ,,/ " ./ / I -....\ ,Jt{l6 /" /" /, /", C I " " / p:J 'J FLOWERING GROUND COVER ,.). / (I.E. LAVENO{;R LANTANA. SCAEVOLA 'MAUVE CLUSTERS'. OR STAR JASMINE) 'v '\ \ o " . I IC SIDfi#lLK -; FOC",l P9tNT .-.ccENT SHRlJSS / (l,e. BLuE HiBISCUS. TREE MALLOW. rf;W ~ND TEA, ETC.) '~' NAMENTAL SHRUB BUFFER )\ ^ f'v1 ^ " '\. /'\ " V"J I. ,/" ^ '" '-./ '....... _.-/ "- ':>11.\ ~/ ,__ '- ___ ......__ ......... - . -- --- - - "----- '''-- CXISTlNG NUMBERED A$H& SYCAMQRE if!E.E$ TO BEI'l!;MOveo (Rj;FeR TO EXISTING LAWN 'EXISTING PtTTOSPORUM, EXISTING 18"-24" CIA EVERGREel ARBORISTSRl:PORT PREPARED BY PROJECT ARBORIST. WALTER LEVISON) TO REMAIN RHAPHlOLEPIS & IVY ,ASH TREES TO REMAIN a TO ,.... ," SCALE: 1"=20' STEVENS CREEK BLVD EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK ~ '" I- / 7 ,< I- ~ \S'~~ G' O~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ G' o ~ <( ~ Z <( ~ - I. {1- I ~ n::: o z PROPOSED NEW PLAZA. WALK & H.C. RAMP / EX. BRICK & CONC. ENTRY PLAZA /^ /( "'> / /"', ,/ / // '> v/ / "v~/ -\ EX. 13" Of A SYCAMORE ~ u co - - - @ " V~ " o OJ V{1- uJTmTI - - - rLU, ~ g AD roF::b ----- --- .~- \~~o W\I CL~ ~s 4<SL x~ \ < ,,"~ CHANG ARCIDTECTURE Y5.9:S' ,35.:J9' j I I I ti I --- '--- 1 ::sl65 ~ BUll' ["1"(- "" I . ,L~'''" I'-J1 BUILDiNG TIE J ~ 61.19 --, -.--..-. -.,.-----.--. I ~ I ~ V I 1 I I I I I t--~: 44-~ /_..J, , I b ~t I rill I H==- - v~ ~w ~ ~ LAlDER8AUGH ASSOCIATES Landscape ArchilecturelPlanning 102 Persian Drive. Suite 202 Sunnyvale, California 94069-1517 (408) 745-7380 05.15.07 CITY PLAN CHECK RESPONSE 10100 N. Tantau Parking Structure + Retail Building Cupertino, CA Drawing Title Job # Date: Scale: Drawn By: Sheet PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN A40135 ~7 AS NOTED ~ PL-2 '" 0 '" '" 0- S E VI 0 0 ~~4)(~ ~~t:,g~ > - ~~~*g> OO~~.. Q: .~~a. :<( '" I I <> ~::I..........O ~~~~.g ~ .! O~O'O'c: ~::>:g:g&. -1%1................0 ~ I- Z W ~ CLW 0::) .....J WZ u Q >~ :j '<:( W < vi ~o < ~ ::)U ~ u lLJ~< ~~ :> z~~ ~ f= ~<I- ~ '<:( 0::: I- e::: ~ I-- <( 'W u :z: CL Z a.. VI lLJ ::)~ I-- ogu ~ Z..- VI <(0 :::> ..- ~ .....J z ~ <( Ii:: I- W I.L/ Z 0::: ~ 0 0; ! 0; ~ '0 <; ill u 0 ~ VI ~ .. '0 0 .. c: 0 0; "> .. Q: .; ~ SHEET C-01 OF 4 SHEETS JOBI: 06-053 Tentative Map RETAIL & PARKING DEVELOPMENT JOJOO N. TANTAU A VENUE Cuperfino~ California r r $125 STE\OIS Gflf:Ek "~'v1) AA'EA:16.354SQ.H HE1Gl11,SO' LOCATION MAP ..T& VICNTY MAP 1tT& ABBfEVIA 11ONS: SUi:;;VEy()r~: U::C;f:~!D: ----,-,-_.,-_._---~~- AD BW CB DO os DWY (E) EG DI EWAE EP IT FM Fl Fil FS GII GR HP INV JT JP LO LF (N) PSDE PSSE PUE RIll so SDCO 55 SSCO TW TYP W WI! AREA ORAIN BOTTOII OF WAll. ELEVATION CATCH BASIN DECK DRAIN ROOF DOWN SPOUT DRIVEWAY EXISTING EXISTING GRADE ELECTRICAl IIETER EMERGENCY VEHIClE ACCESS EASEMENT EDGE OF PAVEMENT FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION FIRE HYDRANT flOW UNE ELEVATION FORCE MAlN UNE FINISH SURFACE ELEVATION GAS METER GRATE ELEVATION HIGH POINT INVERT ELEVATION JOINT TRENCH JOINT POlE lANDSCAPE DRAlN UNEAR FEET NEW PRIVATE STORII ORAIN EASEMENT PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PUBUC UTIUTY EASEMENT Rill ELEVATION STORII ORAIN UNE STORII ORAIN Cl.EANOUT SANITARY SEWER SANITARY SEWER Cl.EANOUT TOP or WAll. ELEVATION TYPICAL OOIIEsnC WATER UNE WATER METER AC APN QDBfP ASPHAI. T I..SSESSOR P;',RCEl, NUMBER B.ACK FLOW rR[VE.NTQR 80LLt~R[) BUt:...DING SET8ACK i.-iNE CATCH BA.5!t\ CEN :[RUNE CONCRETE. CjNCRE1E PAQ DR!vEWt.,'( f:i.J~C1RI(.A.l. 80X hEC1"RICftL CABINET cu:cn~ICAL VAULT F ACE OF CURB FIRE DEPARTM[Nl CONNE:cr,ON nRE HYDRA.N r GAS METEr.;: GAS VAl.V[ MANHOLE MGWTORINC '\"JELL SLDG BS:" CB CONC co ill (8 EO €V Fe FOC M'H L...) GM IN ~~ PROPOSED PARCEL f!) MW PI' PLTIl POST iND!CATOR VALVf PLANTER POW[R POl.E PROPERTY LlN[ SQliARf. FEET STREET UGH; STREET LIGHT BOX SiCRM DRAIN MANHOLE: SANITARY SEiIY'ER CLlANOUT SANITARY SEViER MANHOLE 7ElEPHONE TRANSFORh-tER TRAffiC S!GNI\.L BOX METER WATE.R VALVE. YARD UGH f DENOTES ENCROACHMENTS CORRESP01\iDS TO SCHtDULE 8 ro---, PP ~ Pl SQ. ff $C $C. @ SOWH @ ssco @ SShlH TEL TRANS TSO vr ~ WM [><JWV Q: Yl @ Q) -- A-. ---- .-- -- -' 60 IAI~UP/ GRAPHIC SCALE w ~(f) 5: SITE PLAN SCALE: 1 "=60' NOTES: OWNER: SAND Hill PROPERTY COIIPANY, CONTACT: JOHN TZE 489 S. EL CAMINO REAL, SAN MATEO, CA PHONE: (650) ,3<<-ISoo FAX: (650) i<<-tl652 AP CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CONTACT: TONY PONTERIO 1200 HOWARD AVE, SUITE 202, BURUNGAME, CA PHONE: (650) 347-4-448 FAX: (650) 347-44-49 GENERAL NOTES - ~RY'EYOR OIISER\lOD NO OlSCERNllllE EWlENCE OF EARlH NO..,NG WORK. BUIlDING CONSlRUCnON OR BUilDING AOOnlONS iMTHIN RECENT MOHmS OBSER\S) NO DISCERNIBLE E\IIOENCE OF RECENT STREET OR SIDEWAlK CONSTRUC11QII OR REPAiR_ OBSER\€ll NO 0lsca<N1tlLE E'<1llENCE OF SllE IlElNG USED AS A SOlJO WASTE DUMP. SUMP OR SANfTARY lAHDFllL mE EXISTENCE AND LOCA 110N or- All Ul1UllES. PIPES. POlES. NtD/a< STRUCTURES SHOiM'l ON THIS S1JRIO l\ERE OIITAlNm BY OBSER\EO E'f1DENCE ONlY. THE paNT OF ENTRY ON $.4JD UnUTlES CANNOT BE DETERMINED A1...L FlE1D WEASUREWENTS IiIA TCHED RECORD OItIEHSlOOS WITHIN THE PRECISION REOUIREllENTS OF ALTA/ACSM SPEClFlCAnONS UNLESS OlHER'MSE SHO\\N. APPUCANT /CIVlL ENGINEER: APN: EXISTING lAND USE: PROPOSED lAND USE: STORM ORAIN: WATER: SANITARY SEWER: TELEPHONE: GAS a: ELECTRIC: GARBAGE: SITE AREA: 316-19-033, 061 P (CG, 0, ML. HOTEL) P (CG, 0, ML. HOTEL) CITY OF CUPERTINO CAUFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO. CUPERTIHO SANITARY DlSTRlCT ATI:T PGa:E LOS ALTOS GARBAGE CO. 410,200:1: SF !Nl'Ol1..e.s CO[::&[i-~it~O!NiO~~~ YU SCHIEKm!l..fr:. :0 ~.t"iL [J)~$<<:;~trY1Vi~ nTlE ITEMS PER SCHEDULE "8" CF "THE POUCY Of nllE INSURANCE PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN nTLE COIlPANY, UNDER ORDER NO. NC$-l254S6-SC. OAIDl 1BO "AT1ERS THAT AffECT PARCfL ONE: (J)MtNINUW DISTANCE OF 60' BETVlEEN ADJACENT BUILDINGS PER K994 OR 1580 (AffECTS FEE PARCEl. NOTHING TO PLOT) CID SlOEWAlJ( EASEIlENT PER LJ17 OR 1782 (PLOTlEO) <Zl ELEClRlCAL AND COIolllUNICAnONS EASEIlENT PER L357 OR 17B9 (PLOTlEO) WATTERS mAT AfFECT PARCEl TWO: @ RruNQUISHMENT OF ABUTTER'S RIGHTS PER 5889 OR 328 (PlOllED) @ PUE PER 8069 OR 642 (PlOTlEO) @ EASEIlENTS PER 589 .. 3-4 (PlOTlEO) ti8'l UCENSE AGREEWENT FOR IHSTAllAn~ AND WAlNlENANCE OF ~ICA1lONS FAcunES PER K295 OR 1171 (PLOTTED) Gj) CAR POOl/VAN POOl AGREEIIENT PER DOC. NO. 97J0564 OR (AFFECTS FEE PARCEl. NOT PlOTTABLE) (20) MINIMUM DISTANCE Of 60' BETWEEN ADJACENT BUIlDINGS PER K994 OR 1580 ~C1S FEE PARCEL. NOTHING TO PlOT) REAL PROPERTY IN lHE QTY OF CUPERTINO. COUNTY OF SANTA ClAR.... STATE OF CAUFORN'A. DESCRIBED AS FOlLOWS: PARCfL l'Mk PARCEl 1, AS SH~ ~ THAT CERTAIN PARCEl YAP v.HICH WAS AlED IN 'THE Of'FlCE OF THE RECORER Of SANTA Q..ARA COUNTY. STAlE OF CAl..IFORNIA ON .lJlY 2'. 1988 IN BOOK 589 OF "APS, PAGES J ANI) 4. THE PROPERTY HEREON ~BED IS lliE SAME AS THE PERllNENT PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN lIfE POUCY OF nTLE INSURANCE PREPARED BY RRST AMERICAN TIllE CQWPANY UNDER ORDER NO. NCS-125456-SC, DATE 180 APN: 316-1S1-033. 061 SI-EET H)E)(: C-Ol TENTATIVE MAP C-02 NEW PARCEL GRADING I: DRAINAGE PlAN C-03 NEW PARKlNG STRUCTURE GRADING I: ORAINAGE PlAN C-D4 TREE REMOVAL PlAN 1 or 1 ALTA/ACSII lAND ffiLE SURVEY SITE AfEAS: -ALL STORM WATER SHALL BE COLLECTED ON SITE AND DIRECTED INTO THE EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. NEW CONNECTIONS Will BE MAOE WHEN NECESSARY. -SEWAGE WILL BE DISPOSED OF BY CONNECTING TO CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT SYSTEM. NEW CONNECTIONS WILL BE MADE WHEN NECESSARY. -WATER SHALL BE SUPPUED FROM THE CITY MAINS. NEW CONNECTIONS WILL BE MADE WHEN NECESSARY. -EXISTING UTIUTIES SHALL BE RELOCATED PER THE CITY OF CUPERTINO. -All CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH CITY OF CUPERTINO BEST MANAGEIIENT PRACTICES TO PROHIBIT POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING STORM WATER SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION AND IIAINTENANCE. -ALL CONSTRUCTION SHAll BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH CITY OF CUPERTINO STANOARDS iWl18 OF_ mE WESTERN lINE Of PARCEL ONE. NOO"2S'16.W, AS SHO'tIIN ON mAT CERTAIN MAP FlLED fOR RECORO IN lIfE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF lHE COUNTY Of SANTA ClARA. STATE CF CAUFORNIA ON .lJL Y 21, 1988 IN BOOK 589 OF MAPS. PAGES 3-4, WAS TAKEN AS THE BASIS Of BEARINGS fOR lHlS MAP. PROPOSED PARCEL = REMAINING PARCEL TWO = 43,160:1: SF 367,040:1: SF By graphic plotting only, thla property Is In Zone(s) ~Of the Rood Insurance Rate WGp, Community Panel No. 05=01~960 and is not In 0 = f1~ H~ffec":: :;.te of telephone coil dotlld 02-10-2006 to the Notional Flood tn...ranee Program (800--838-6620) we ho.... leomed thl8 community does currenUy porticlpote In the pl"09J"0f'l. No fWd 8Uf'WI)"fng waa ~fonned to det.-mlne thl. zone and on elevation certificate may be needed to verify thi8 determination Of" oppty for 0 'o'Or\ance from the federal Em.-vency Wmogem-.t Ag<<lcy. ER CONC RAMP PARCEL ONE PER 589 M 3 & 4 10100 & 10200 NORTH TANTAU AVE AREA: 104,409 SQ. FT. HEIGHT: 32.7' TYPE III-N 61 , , , , , ) V "V <- / " @ , // 'v/~ OVERHANG ----'y./ PARCEL 410,200 9.4169 TWO SQ. FT. ACRES '.4 Q: CONCRETE Q: Q: Q: '.4 T '.4 T '.4 T '.4 T '4PLTR PLTR '.4 T CONC WALK 86.33 '.4 T . .5 T '.4 T CONC '9T~ ~ ~ ~18 8.,; ~.. z _SIGNa~ 1~807 jI I .cu:< L~I 1.;T~ I I - - - ..::.T...E.C TEL. BX b~ ~ CP~ - _TEL "1M --_.~ ~ ~ 0 -_.~---'-- TSB ~( 1.7 T - - _ (E) S PLTR 1.4T---- TSB 1.5 T 105.60 ~ CONC DWY TEL BX ~ w z 1_ (f) s NEW PARCEL PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: 1"=20' o 20 40 I I ___~ GRAPHIC SCALE 589"59'57"E 159:50~- I I ~100 lolls - Icl SIGN I I ~1. 0" 81~ - ~i~ ~ I I i . .5 . .6 co r<) <.0 CO . .5 . .8 4.bf4.t ~ ~,#!1 S[ R=50.00 L=20.58 ~34'39" RAMP ~~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ :5 E V) 0 . 0 " ~c;"::i')(,~ :z...~~. ~ oa '-'- .s -<-<~~g> 00....... Q: .......Q. ~~.!..!.g o~"''''.$! :r::zI<)I<)~ o :; O''O'~ ~~~~&. --D:l................O r ;i T ~ co ..0 I:'- 0) ~ I- Z Zw <(~ ....10.. a.. 0 ....,jW l.aJ w::> ~>Z ~ <(WW ...... Z 0> en - <<( ~ ~ c:,,::> () ~ a z< .. ~ -~o VI ~Z <( a (k:<(Z rs ., <:(~~ ~ "- 0.. a::: 0 <( .W Za.. ~ o :::> ~ ~ZOUI.oJ ~ <:( ~ Iii a 0 ::l I ~ <(=..... ~ 0::: <:( ~ ~I- W ci:: (k: I.oJ ~ o ~~v WCl ~z W<( Vl <(I") W W ~~ Um 500 a:: 10 Wa:: Vlw ull. ::::i CD ~ a. D JP ~ ... I ~ I .. I .! ~ " .. o ~ V) ~ Tl .. 1; 0 R=40.00 L=46.37 6=66025' 21 .. .. c: .!! .!! > . Q: o :z SHEET C-02 OF 4 SHEETS JOBI: 06-038 FOUND IRON PIPE SOT17'36"W 2.35' FROM RECORD __~,:",.~T~~10T '1.2T -1.0 T '1.0 T -1.0 T '1.0 T-.~.9T :Q SOO J:1 cf ~ ." # ~ ~ ~ ~& ~", ~~ c:Y~ ~ ~~ . ~!<Y I'L 'b~ ~!V ~. q, ~ PARCEL ON PER 589 M 10100 & 10200 AREA: 104,409 HEIGHT: 32.7' TYPE III-N APN: 316-19-061 HAZEL LESTER , , " ~ PL"IR 'V" // , > ~ " / @) '- 'v/---- OVERHANG -----, . .4 :(x CONCRETE :Q :Q :Q . ." '.4 T . .4 T . .4 T . "PLTR PLTR ~ 101 CONC WALK w Z --.J 1- (f) 5 PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: 1 "=20' o 20 40 I I I GRAPHIC SCAlE <"l <=I <"l ~ :5 E 1Il 0 '0 " ~;;::/')(,~ Z't~~. ~ 0) '-' '- .E ~<~~g' QO't't. 1I:....'t'tlt ~::Er!..r!... o~'t't.2 :x:2:........; o :J '0' '0' c: ~~:2:28. -CD,-,-O QII Z ~1- ~z W w~ <'=>Q.. ~ 0 1.&.1 ~ -I::> ~Wz 0::: > 1.&.1 OW> . 0<(<( ~ o ....u ~ Z,,,-, (.) ~......<( ..0 "'" ZI--Q ~ -Zz -< <.=> ~ <( I-- :..: Z e::: I-- a:: ~ a < .1.&.1 fi ~ Q.. z a.. lI) a:: ::>~ <.=> oou ~ Zo ..... >- or- lI) a:: <0 ~ ~ or- ..... "'" -I 2 Z_ ~ -< ~1- -JW We::: a:: Cl.. (.) -I -I Ii: L..I ~ o Ii I Ii I ;; Q ~ ~ II . ;; Q OJ c: .2 .!! :- . II: .; z SHEET C-03 OF 4 SHEETS JOB': 06-053 ",I' 154.17 FOUND IRON PIPE APN: 316-19-031 S07'7.J<;"W 2.35. .,-if .";7, ~~~~~~D.:~~~~'-:i.1T"I:Z' FR~.~C~ "1.4T. 01.4'. 11__00... ~ a.-~"4I.06. ........ r.-a.n 6-er~If.,. NOTE: 42 TREES TO BE REMOVED SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR TREE PLANTING w z -' 1_ Ul 5 o 40 80 I I I TREE REMOVAL PLAN SCALE: 1"=40' GRAPHIC SCALE TREE PROTECTION NOTES: 1. PROTECT EXISTING VEGETATION, INCLUDING OVERHANGING BRANCHES AND ROOTS FROIl COMPACTION AND DAMAGE DURING MATERIALS STAGING AND CONSTRUCTION. TRENCHING ADJACENT TO AND WlTHtN TREE DRIPUNES TO BE OONE BY HAND TO AVOID ROOT DAMAGE. IF ROOTS LARGER THAN ONE (1) INCH DlAIlETER ARE ENCOUNTERED, ALERT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. DA"AGE TO ANY ExiSTING PLANTS OR PlANTS TO RElIAIN ARE TO BE REPLACED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CONTRACTOR. PROTECT TltEES WITH FOUR (4) FOOT PLASTIC MESH FENCING AS SHOWN ON PLAN. 6. EXCAVATION SHALl BE OONE BY HAND IN AREAS WHERE TWO (2) INCH AND LARGER ROOTS OCCUR, AND IN AREAS WITHIN THE DRIPUlIE OF EXISITNG tREES TO REMAIN. 7. ROOTS TWO (2) INCHES AND LARGER IN DIA"ETER, EXCEPT DIRECTLY IN THE PATH OF PIPE OR CONDUIT, SHALl BE TUNNELED UNDER AND SHALL BE HEAVILY WRAPPED WITH BURlAP TO PREVENT SCARRING AND EXCESSIVE DRYlHG. PROTECTIVE rENClNO 2. DO NOT PARK VEHICLES OR STORE ..ATERIALS OR EQUIP..ENT WITHIN THE DRIPUNES OF EXISTING TREES TO RE..AlN. 3. WHERE IT IS NECESSARY TO EXCAVATE ADJACENT TO EXISTING TREES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALl USE CARE TO AVOID INJURY TO TREES AND TREE ROOTS. 4. NO TREE ROOTS GREATER THAN ONE (1) INCH IN DWlETER "AY BE CUT DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF DEIoIOUTION WORK, INSTALLATION OF UTlUTlES OR CONSTRUCTION OF FOOTINGS. 5. WHEN TREE ROOTS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING EXCAVATION, THEY SHALl BE CAREFULLY UNCOVERED AND THE ADJACENT MATERIAL REMOVED WITHOUT ROOT DAMAGE, AFTER WHICH THE EXCAVATION SHALl BE IIiI1llEDlATELY BACKRLLfD. 8. WHERE A DITCHING ..ACHINE IS RUN CLOSE TO TREES HAVING ROOTS SIIAlLER THAN TWO (2) INCHES IN DlA"ETER, THE ROOTS SHALl BE HAND TRI....ED AT THE WALL OF THE TRENCH. 9. WHERE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO AVOID CUmNG ROOTS GREATER THAN ONE (1) INCH IN DWlETER, THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE SHALl BE NDTlRED, AND THE WORK SHALL BE OONE ONLY BY A QUAURED ARBORIST. ROOTS OF TREES SHALl BE CUT USING CLEAN, SHARP PRUNING TOOLS. ROOTS SHALL NOT BE BROKEN OR TORN LEAVING RAGGED ENDS. 10. CLOSE TRENCHES ADJACENT TO TREES WITHIN 24 HOURS. IF THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE, KEEP SIDE OF TRENCH ADJACENT TO THE TREE SHADED WITH BURlAP OR CANVAS. 11. CONTINUAL PUDDUNG OR RUNNING OF WATER IN THE VICINITY OF THE TREE SHALL BE AVOIDED. TREE PROTECTION DETAIL .ImES: 1. PROTECTIVE rElIClIIG SHALL BE BRtGHT 0_ POLYPROPYLENE FENCING. 2. NOTHING INSIDE THE DR/PUNE AREA SHALl BE RAKED, CUT, STORED, OR OTHERWISE DISTURBED. NOT TO SCALE ~ C ~ ~ :5 E 1Il 0 " ~~:i'><'~ Z....~~. ~ ~ '-'- S "'C"(~~~ lil':~~X. ~~,.'.,.'.& O~"""".2 :Z:z"l"l~ 8 ~ O'Sl ~;:):g:gQ. -a:t,-,-o ;i I- Z w ::E a.. 0 Z ...J w ~ w::> ....J > Z (,) Q W~ ::l 0<( iii' ....J <(~ ~ ,-,::>U ~ ::>Z<( ~O 0-.....0 ~ ~ ~ZZ -< 0::: <( - :loc: l.t.J <(..... t: t::: a:: a.. .w ~ Z 0.. (I) l.t.J OO~ ~ l.t.J Z 0 ~ a:: <(,.... tl I- 0 ::l ...J,.... ~ <( ~ ~ I- W ~ 0::: ~ ~ 0 .! ! ~ I 0 0 0 ~ " 0 1Il :! .! ~ .. c 0 ~ . II< ci z SHrET C-04 OF 4 SHEETS JOBM: 06-053