Loading...
Parcel Map - 1999June 10, 1999 CITY OF CAMPBELL Community Development Department. Current Planning Mr. George A. Halterman P.O. Box 3456 Arnold, CA 95223 RE: PM 99-01 1489 Harriet Avenue APN: 403-19-106 Dear Property Owner, At an admimstrative hearing on June i, 1999 the Community Development Director conditionally approved the above referenced tentative parcel map to create a three lot subdivision on property located 1489 Harriet Avenue. The approval was granted subject to the attached findings presented at the administrative hearing and is subject to the attached conditions of approval. The presented map indicated that the final parcel map may be phased. This phasing concept reduces the lot size of a non-conforming situation, wherein a residential parcel has two dwelling units which are rented and have not received approval under a conditional use permit process. Prior to recordation of this first phase it will be necessary for you to obtain approval of a conditional use permit for the second living unit on the property. An alternative to the use permit process for the second unit is to modify this secondary unit so that it becomes an accessory building use to the main residence on the property. In the event that you wish to pursue both phases of the map at this time, it would be necessary to remove the residential structures which do not conform due to setbacks / or use of the parcels. I have also enclosed copies of letters from referral agencies which responded to your proposal for your information. The approved tentative parcel map is effective June 11, 1999 and is valid for a 5 yea~md ~vill expire on June 11, 2004. If you should have any questions regarding this decision, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (408) 866-2144. Tim' J. HalL~' Associate Planner enclosures: Conditions of Approval & Tentative Parcel Map CC: Harold Housley, Land Development Engineer Lester Ikegami, Allied Engineering Company 70 North First Street · Campbell, California 95OO8.1423 - TEL 408.866.2140 · F^X 408.866.8381 · TDD 408.866.2790 City of Campbell -- Community Development Department 70 N. First Str~t~ Campbell, CA 95008 MEMORANDUM To: William Seligmann, City Attorney From: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner~ ~ Subject: PM 99-01 1489 Harriet Avenue Date: June 1, 1999 Determination of park impact fee for subdivisions. On June 1, 1999, the Community Development Director considered a tentative parcel map for a three lot subdivision at the intersection of Harriet Avenue and Van Dusen Lane. The subject property is currently developed with two presumed legally constructed dwelling units on a 30,056 square foot parcel. Chapter 20.24 C.M.C. provides for Park Impact Fees and Park Land Dedication Subdivisions. Section 20.24.110(a)(2) describes credits for legally existing units constructed within the proposed subdivision. This language is a little confusing because it refers to units versus lots. Based upon this language though, we have concluded that if the two existing units were legally constructed then a credit of two units at $ 8,242.50 per unit ($16,485) would apply again~ the liability of 3 new lots at $8,242.50 per lot or $24,727.50. At the time of recording the final map a park fee of $ 8,242.50 would be due. Please review this analysis and let me know if you come to the same conclusion. Attachments: Conditions of approval PM 99-01 cc: Bill Helms, Land Development Manager Sharon Fierro, Senior Planner Harold Honsley, Land Development Engineer STAFF REPORT - ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING June 1, 1999 PM 99-01 Halterman, G. Administrative heating to consider the application of George I-Ialterman for approval o~' a parcel map to create a three lot subdivision on property located at 1489 Harriet avenue in a R-l-9 (Single Family Residemial/9,000 square foot lot minimum) Zoning District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Community Development Director take the following action: 1. APPROVE, the subject parcel map for the subject property, subject to attached conditions of approval. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION This project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 Class 1, L (2) and Section 15315 Class 15 (Minor land divisions) of CEQA, therefore, no environmemal action is required. PROJECT DATA Gross Lot Area: Net Lot Area: Proposed Density .99 acres (43,254 square feet) .85 acres (36,886 square feet) 3.03 dwelling units per gross acre General Plan: Zoning: Low Density Residem(less than 4.5 dwelling units per gross acre) R-1-9 (9000 square foot minimum) LOT SIZES Square Feet PARCEL "A" 12,000 PARCEL "B" 12,000 PARCEL "C" 12,866 Surrounding Land Uses Single Family Residemial DISCUSSION Applicant's Proposal: The applicam is requesting approval of a three lot subdivision consisting of three lots along Van Dusen Lane. The property owner intends to phase the recordation of the final map, so that two lots are created initially. Background of Project Area: The subject property is located on the south side of Van Dusen Lane at its intersection with Harriet Avenue. The subject property is currently developed with two older residential structures which are proposed to be removed during the second phase of the Parcel Map. PM 99-01 1489 Harriet Avenue Page 2 Site Conditions: The site contains 9 existing trees. None of the trees have been proposed for removal and the applicant has obtained an arborist report to evaluate the trees and recommends removal of all of the trees except the Coast live oak. In that no development plans have been presented, it is premature to process a tree removal permit. A condition of approval requires the current or future owners to process a tree removal permit at the time of development if protected trees are to be removed. Only two trees on the site are considered protected due to the type and size under the tree preservation ordinance. The subdivision does not indicate any tree removals. ANALYSIS General Plan Designation: The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Low Density Residential (less than 4.5 units per gross acre). The density of the proposed project site is 3 units per gross acre, which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation. Zoning Designation: The zoning designation for the project site is R-l-9 (Single-Family Residential, 9,000 square foot minimum lot size). The proposed net lot areas exceed the minimum lot size for this zoning district as well as width. The retention of the two existing dwelling on the larger parcel creates a non-conforming land use situation for the following reasons: 1) The second unit on the property has not been approved or considered through a conditional use permit process which would review issues of the building placement, parking, deed restrictions. 2) The proposed map does not illustrate the provision of 4 parking space of which two are covered. 3) The proposed map would reduce the lot size for these two existing units from the existing lot size, therefore the use of the second unit RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed parcel map subject to the attached findings and conditions of approval. These conditions require that the applicant receive approval of a conditional use permit for the secondary unit or that it be removed or/modified to meet ordinance requirement, prior to recordation of a Phase 1 map. Prepared by: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Findings for Approval 2. Conditions of Approval 3. Arborist Report FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF FILE NO. PM 98-09 SITE ADDRESS: 1489 Harriet Avenue APPLICANT: George Halterman ADMINMEETING: June 1, 1999 Attachment #1 Findings Approving Parcel Map 99-01--1489 Harriet Ave. The Community Development Director finds as follows with regard to File No. PM 99-01: The development of the proposed project will result in a density of 3 dwelling units per gross acre which is consistent with the General Plan density of less than 4.5 dwelling units per gross acre for the subject property. The lots exceed the minimum requirement for the net lot area and width required for the zoning district in which the property is located. A Condition of Approval requires the approval of a tree removal permit in the event that the development plans call for the removal of the two protected trees on the site. The proposed lot subdivision is consistent with San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan subject to the condition that the applicant address the approval of the secondary living or its modification to comply with approved uses of accessory buildings. The proposed phasing of the final map, subject to the condition that the applicant obtain a conditional use permit or modify or/remove the secondary living unit prior to the recordation of a final map is consistent with the Zoning and the General Plan for the project site. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Community Development Director finds and concludes that: The proposed application is compatible with the General Plan of the City and will aid in the harmonious development of the immediate area. 2. The proposed application is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. Attachment #2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. PM 99-01 SITE ADDRESS: 1489 Harriet Avenue APPLICANT: George Halterman ADMINMEETING: June 1, 1999 The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this application, that he/she is required to meet the following conditions in accordance with the Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California. The lead department with which the applicant will work is identified on each condition where necessary. Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all applicable Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that pertain to this development and are not herein specified: Approved Project: Approval is granted for a 3 lot subdivision located at 1489 Harriet Avenue. The approved map shall substantially comply with the stamped approved map prepared by Allied Engineering Company and dated April 5, 1999. Park In-Lieu Fee: The applicant shall pay a fee in-lieu of park dedication prior to recordation of the final parcel map in the amount of $8,242.50 per lot (credit for 1 existing lot). Park Impact Fee: The applicant is advised that a park impact fee is required in addition to the Park In-Lieu Fee. A fee of $2,747.50 is required upon issuance of certificate of occupancy by the Building Division for a new single family dwelling constructed on the new lot. Parcel Map: Prior to issuance of any building permits for Phase I or Phase II, the applicant shall submit a Parcel Map for each phase for recordation upon approval by the City. The current plan check fee is $1,060 plus $25 per parcel for each parcel map. Preliminary Title Report: Prior to recordation of each Parcel Map, the applicant shall provide a current Preliminary Title Report. Public Service Easement: Prior to recordation of each Parcel Map, the applicant shall grant a maximum 10 foot Public Service Easement on private property contiguous with the public right-of-way along the frontage as determined by the City Engineer. The applicant shall cause all documents to be prepared by a registered civil engineer/surveyor and submitted to the City for review and recordation. Monuments: Prior to recording each Parcel Map, the applicant shall provide security guaranteeing the cost of setting all Monuments shown on the record map, as determined by the City Engineer. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. PM 99-01 SITE ADDRESS: 1489 Harriet Avenue APPLICANT: George Haltemnan ADMINMEETING: June 1, 1999 Page 2 Street Improvements: Prior recordation of each Parcel Map, the applicant shall execute a street improvement agreement and shall cause plans for public Street Improvements to be prepared by a registered civil engineer, pay fees, post security and provide insurance necessary to obtain an encroachment permit for construction of the public improvements, as required by the City Engineer. The plans shall include the following: · Removal of existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk as necessary to construct new ADA compliant sidewalk and driveway approach for each lot. · Construction work as required to obtain clearance from utility companies and local agencies. Encroachment Permit: Prior to the construction of any improvements in the public right- of-way an encroachment permit must be obtained from Caltrans Division IV. Contact Rod Hansen at (408) 446-1798. 10. Water Meter(s) and Sewer Cleanout(s): Existing and proposed Water Meter(s) and Sewer Cleanout(s) shall be installed on private property behind the public right-of-way line. 11. Utility Installation Plan: Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall submit a Utility Installation Coordination Plan and Schedule for approval by the City Engineer for installation of street improvements and/or abandonment of all utilities. Streets which have been resurfaced within the previous 5 years will require boring and jacking for all new utility installations. Applicant shall also prepare pavement restoration plans for approval by the City Engineer prior to any utility installation or abandonment. 12. Maintenance Security: Prior to issuance of occupancy approval for the site, all public street improvements required by the street improvement agreement and the encroachment permit must be completed and accepted by the City and the applicant must provide a one- year Maintenance Security in an amount of 25% of the Faithful Performance Bond. 13. Grading and Drainage Plan: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit for each site, the applicant shall conduct hydrology studies based on a 10 year storm frequency, prepare an engineered Grading and Drainage Plan, and pay fees required to obtain necessary grading permits. The plans shall comply with the 1994 edition of the UBC including Chapters 18, 33, and Appendix Chapter 33. Should the development require hauling of soil or other demolition materials on or off site, the applicant shall request and obtain approval of a haul route from the City Engineer. 14. Storm Drain Area Fee: Prior to recordation of each Parcel Map, the applicant 'shall pay the required Storm Drain Area fee which is $ 2,000 per acre. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. PM 99-01 SITE ADDRESS: 1189 Harriet Avenue APPLICANT: George Haltermann ADMINMEETING: June 1, 1999 Page 3 15. 16. 17. 18 19. 20. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Measures: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting requirements and the California Storm Water Best Management Practices handbook prepared by the Storm Water Quality Task Force, Santa Clara Valley Water District and the City of Campbell Municipal Code regarding Storm Water Pollution Prevention. Demolition: Prior to recording of a Parcel Map for Phase II, the applicant shall obtain a Demolition permit to remove existing structures as required by the Community Development Department. Utilities: Prior to recordation of each Parcel Map, the applicant must obtain non- interference letters from the local agencies and utility companies regarding existing facilities. There may be existing improvements on the property that are "live" and will have to remain in service or be appropriately abandoned. The utility companies must also provide clearance letters for the proposed PSE or PUE easements. Tree Removal Permit: The applicant shall prepare a tree retention and replanting plan prepared by a licensed arborist. Any tree removals will require the issuance of a tree removal permit and a tree mitigation plan is required for the replacement of removed trees consistent with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Water Efficient Landscape Standards and the San Tomas Neighborhood Plan. Development plans shall illustrate tree replacements and/or removals. Secondary_ Unit: The applicant shall obtain approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the secondary unit or remove or/modify this building to comply with the use of the building as an accessory structure without living or sleeping quarters. Parking: The applicant shall provide 2 parking spaces for each residential unit on the property, one which must be covered, prior to the recordation of Final Map. ST,-J'E OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District 4 - Division of Design West Office of Santa Clara B' 475 Holger Way San :lose, CA 95134 PHONE: (408) 232-0220 FAX (408) 232-0639 'ATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GRAY DAVIS. Governor August 28, 2000 Mr. Irvin Housley Land Development Engineer City of Campbell 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 04-SC1-85 PM 12.0 Parcel No. 42610 R-x-161.14 Dear Mr. Housley: Subdivision of Mr..I-Ialterman'S~'roperty - Parcel No. 42610 SUBJECT: Per request of Mr. Halterman to the Right of Way Engineering for the review and approval of subdivision of his parcel in the City of Campbell, our Right of Way Engineering Department found no record of any Caltrans' easements on the subject property. Caltrans have no objections to this subdivision. We should bring to your attention that Caltrans has access control along the Pollard Road. This prevents any openings from the properties to the Pollard Road. For your information, we are in the process of relinquishing the local streets (Van Dusen Lane, York Avenue, and Harriet Avenue) to the City of Campbell. If you have any questions, please feel free to call Nita Logan of my staffat (408) 232-0238. Sincerely, HARRY Y. YAHATA Distric~Director By~~) sTEnT I~.~'G District Office Chief Design West, Santa Clara "B" Santa Clara Valley Water District 6 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE, CA 95118-3686 TELEPHONE (408) 265-2600 FACSIMILE (408) 266-0271 www.scvwd.dst.ca.us July 16, 1999 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Mr. Tim Haley Community Development Depmiment City of Campbell 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 .] U L 2 CiTY OF CAMPBELL Dear Mr. Haley: Subject: 1489 Harriet Avenue File PM 99-01 The Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) has reviewed the tentative parcel map for the subject site received on May 3, 1999. The site is located within the Smith Creek watershed and would not be subject to flooding in the event of a 1 percent flood. The proposed 3-lot subdivision is not adjacent to a District facility; therefore, a District permit is not required. If site drainage is to be directed into a District facility, detailed plans should be sent for our review and issuance of a permit prior to the start of construction. In accordance with District Ordinance 90-1, the owner should show any existing well(s) on the plans. The well(s) should be properly registered with the District and either maintained or abandoned in accordance with District standards. Property owners or their representative should call Mr. David Zozaya at (408) 265-2607, extension 2650, for information regarding well permits and the registering or abandonment of ~ny wells. Sincerely, Sue A. Tippets, P.E. Supervising Engineer Community Projects Review Unit C~ recycled paper June 10, 1999 CITY OF CAMPBELL Community Development Department · Current Planning Mr. George A. Halterman P.O. Box 3456 Arnold, CA 95223 RE: PM 99-01 1489 Harriet Avenue APN: 403-19-106 Dear Property. Owner, At an administrative heating on June I, 1999 the Community Development Director conditionally approved the above referenced tentative parcel map to create a three lot subdivision on property located 1489 Harriet Avenue. The approval was granted subject to the attached findings presented at the administrative hearing and is subject to the attached conditions of approval. The presented map indicated that the final parcel map may be phased. This phasing concept reduces the lot size of a non-conforming situation, wherein a residential parcel has two dwelling units which are rented and have not received approval under a conditional use permit process. Prior to recordation of this first phase it will be necessary, for you to obtain approval of a conditional use permit for the second living unit on the property. An alternative to the use permit process for the second unit is to modify this secondary unit so that it becomes an accessory, building use to the main residence on the property. In the event that you wish to pursue both phases of the map at this time, it would be necessary to remove the residential structures which do not conform due to setbacks / or use of the parcels. I have also enclosed copies of letters from referral agencies which responded to your proposal for your information. The approved tentative parcel map is effective June 11, 1999 and is valid for a 5 year,end ~ expire on June 1 I, 2004. If you should have any questions regarding this decisibn, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (408) 866-2144. Associate Planner enclosures: Conditions of Approval & Tentative Parcel Map CC' Harold Housley, Land Development Engineer Lester Ikegami, Allied Engineering Company 70 North First Street · Campbell, California 95008.1423 - ~- 408.866.2140 · vax 408.866.8381 · TDO 408.866.2790 City of Campbell -- Community Development Department 70 N. First Street, Campbell, CA 95008 MEMORANDUM To: William Seligmann, City Attorney From: Tim J. Haley, Associate Planner~ ~ Subject: PM 99-01 1489 Harriet Avenue Date: June 1, 1999 Determination of park impact fee for subdivisions. On June 1, 1999, the Community Development Director considered a tentative parcel map for a three lot subdivision at the intersection of Harriet Avenue and Van Dusen Lane. The subject property is currently developed with two presumed legally constructed dwelling units on a 30,056 square foot parcel. Chapter 20.24 C.M.C. provides for Park Impact Fees and Park Land Dedication Subdivisions. Section 20.24.110(a)(2) describes credits for legally existing units constructed within the proposed subdivision. This language is a little confusing because it refers to units versus lots. Based upon this language though, we have concluded that if the two existing units were legally constructed then a credit of two units at $ 8,242.50 per unit ($16,485) would apply against the liability of 3 new lots at $8,242.50 per lot or $24,727.50. At the time of recording the final map a park fee of $ 8,242.50 would be due. Please review this analysis and let me know if you come to the same conclusion. Attachments: Conditions of approval PM 99-01 cc: Bill Helms, Land Development Manager Sharon Fierro, Senior Planner Harold Housley, Land Development Engineer Pacific Gas and Electric Company 111 Almaden Boulevard P.O. Box 15005 San Jose. CA 95115-0005 May 17, 1999 Mr. Tim J. Haley City of Campbell Community Development Dept. 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 Re: Parcel Map Review, 1489 Harriet Avenue, APN 403-19-106, PG&E File No.50003323 I 9 1999 CITY OF Cfi/tt{~'~ - · ~' :t:.LL Dear Mr. Haley: Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject parcel map. PG&E has no objections to the recording of the parcel map. PG&E owns and operates a variety of gas and electric facilities which (may be/are) located within the proposed project boundaries. Project proponents should coordinate with PG&E early in the development of their project plans to promote the safe and reliable maintenance and operation of existing utility facilities. Any proposed development plans should provide for unrestricted utility access and prevent interference with PG&E easements. Activities which may impact our facilities include, but are not limited to, permanent/temporary changes in grade over or under our facilities, construction of structures within or adjacent to PG&E's easements, and planting of certain types of vegetation over, under, or adjacent to our facilities. The installation of new gas and electric facilities and/or the relocation of existing PG&E facilities will be performed in accordance with common law or Rules and Tariffs as authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission. Please contact me at (408)282-7546 if you have any questions regarding our comments. Sincerely; ! ,.._/'.~,/. ,, Nicholas C. Arellano Lead Land Technician Land Rights Offices - San Jose WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY SERVING RESIDENTS OF CITY OF CAMPBELL TOWN OF LOS GATOS CITY OF MONTE SERENO CITY OF SARATOGA UNINCORPORATED AREA May 14,1999 :';'~": 1 7 1999 CITY OF CAIVt?~ELL FL~,NNI[,~ DEeT, Tim J. Haley Community Development Department City of Campbell 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 Tentative Parcel Map (PM99-01) 1489 Harriet Avenue APN 403-19-106 Dear Tim: The proposed development will have little impact on the district's facilities in the area. Approval for the development will be in the form of sewer connection permits from this office. Cost of the permit is estimated at $1,200 per lot. If you should have any questions, please call me at (408) 378-2407. Very truly yours, Robert R. Reid District Manager and Engineer B~~ager 100 East Sunnyoaks Avenue, Campbell, California 95008-6608 Tel: (408) 378-2407 Fax: (408) 364-1821 May 7, 1999 CITY OF CAMPBELL Community Development Department · Current Planning NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Community Development Director of the City of Campbell has set the hour of 4:00 p.m., on Tuesday, June 1, 1998, for an Administrative Public Hearing in the Planning Conference Room, on the second floor of Campbell City Hall, 70 North First Street, as the time and place to consider the following application: The application of Mr. George Halterman for a Tentative Parcel Map (PM 99-01) to create three parcels from a single lot on property located at 1489 Harriet Avenue in an R-l-9 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. This project is Categorically Exempt, under the California Environmental Quality Act. Interested persons may attend this hearing and comment upon the project which is the subject of the hearing. Please be advised that if you challenge in court the nature of any project reviewed at a public hearing, you could be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, or which were raised in written correspondence received prior to the hearing. Any written comments for this hearing regarding the parcel map should be sent to the Community Development Department at 70 North First Street, Campbell, CA 95008, prior to the hearing, or be brought to the hearing. Questions may be addressed to Tim Haley, of the Planning Department, at (408) 866-2140. The building and hearing room are wheelchair accessible. Decisions of the Community Development Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission. Appeals must be submitted to the Community Development Department in writing within 10 calendar days of an action by the Community Development Director. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, listening assistive devices are available for all meetings held in the Council Chambers. If you require accommodation, please contact the Community Development Department at (408) 866-2140, at least one week in advance of the meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION' CITY OF CAMPBELL STEVE PIASECKI SECRETARY PLEASE NOTE: When calling about this Notice, please refer to File No. PM 99-01 Address: 1489 Harriet Avenue 70 North First Street . Campbell, California 95OO8.1423 . TEL 408.866.2140 · F^X 408.866.8381 · TDD 408.866.2790 Deborah Ellis, ASCA Conl. lti#g Arborlst & Horticulturist ARBORIST REPORT 1489 Harriet Avenue, Campbell, California ~epared ~ Mr. George Halterman for the Halterman / Bravo Trust PO Box 3456 Arnold, CA 95223 Prepomd bit: Deborah Elfls, MS. Consulting Arbodst & Horflcultudst American Society of Consulting Arborists. Registered Consulting Arborist #305 International Society of Arboriculture, Western Chapter Certified Arborist #457 American College of Forensic Examiners # 14370 ©Copyright Deborah Bits, 1999. This report may not be reproduced in wt3ole or in part without the ex4:xessed written or verbal consent of Debcx~h Eilis, May 4, 1999 Table of Contents Summary 1 lnkoduction I Scope of services ! Limits of Scope and Investigation: 2 Background 2 Investigation Methods 2 Observations 3 Site or Fietd Conditions 3 Description of the Subject Trees 3 Recommendaflom 7 Monetary Appraisal Calculation for oak #9 (8) Site Map 9 1489 Harriet Ave. Arborist Report for Halterman/Bravo Trust. D. Etlis, 5t4/99 Deborah Ellis, ASCA CoflsulJJif ArlleJJJt & HedlculturlL_ SUMMARY Please refer to the Existing Site Map on the last page of this report for the location of the numbered trees mentioned herein. There are 9 existing trees on site, plus several large shrubs or shrubby trees that are too small fo qualify as "trees". Three of the existing trees qualify as "Protected Treesw. These trees are: · #1 Cedrus at~antica 'Giauca', Atlas cedar · #4 Acacia melonoxylon, black acacia · #9 Quercus agrifolia, coast live oak The remaining trees are either: · too small to qualify as protected trees · are fruit or Eucalyptus trees {thus they are "Exempt") Most of the trees on this site are in very poor condition and should probably be removed. There is one tree of any practical value on this site; coast live oak #9. This tree is in excellent condition and should be saved if possible. A value for the pt'otected trees has been requested. It is my opinion that the value for trees #1 and ~ above is negative. These two trees are in such poor condition that they should be removed, and their removal will be a cost although this will atso benefit the site. The value of oak tree ~9 is calculated at $10,000.00 {see page 8 for calculation worksheet). INTRODUCTION Scope of services My assianment is to provide and inventory of the trees on site and a description of their condition. The intended qudience of this report is Mr. George Halterman, the City of Campbell Planning Department and the architects and contractors for the project. The purpose of this report is to preserve the existing trees that are in good condition, are of a recommended species for this area, have a reasonable life expectancy and wilt benefit the future use of the site. How to use ~ls Report: For a quick synopsis of the main message of the report, read the Sur~marv, Recommendations, and Conclusions sections. For more background information and detail, read the entire report. 1 As ~ City of Campbell Tree Protection Regulations, section 21.56.050. 489 Harriet Ave. Arborist Report fc~' Halt~nan/Bravo Trust. D. Ellis, 5/4/99 Deborah Ellis, ASCA ConsuiiJng lrborist & Hortlcultu~|Gt Limits O,,,,f Scope and Investigation: 1. The existing trees on site were inspected on April 23, 1999 and their condition as stated in this report reflects that date. 2. Tree inspections were brief, by ground and without root collar excavations or other probing or boring done upon trees, 3. Tree locations were provided by AJlJed Engineering Company and are shown on the partiat copy of the Tentative Parcel Map (dated April 1999, last page of this repo~). Locations are assumed to be accurate but should be verified in the field. 4. I have not seen any plans, details or spedficafions for this pro~ect except for the above parcel map. 5. The measures noted within this report are designed to assist in the protection and preservation of the trees mentioned in this report, should they remain; and to help in their short and long term health and longevity. This is not however, a guarantee that any of these frees may not suddenly or eventually decline, fail, or die, for whatever reason. Because a significant portion of the roots are far beyond the d~ipline of the tree, even frees that are well protected during consffuction often decline, fail or die. Because there may be hidden defects within the root system, trunk or branches of frees, it is possible that trees with no obvious detects can be subject to failure without warning. It is impossible to guarantee the safety of any free. Background Mr, Hatterman contacted me in early April 1999 regarding this project, He asked me lo prepare the Arborist Report for the site, which he plans to subdivide. He is currently involved in the subdivision permit process with the City of Campbell. He does not yet have any plans to build on the property. Investigation Methods Trees were examined for structural condition (stabiJify) and general heatth (vigor) by visual assessment from the ground. Tree characteristics such as form, weight distribution, foliage color and density, wounds and indicators of decay were noted. Surrounding site conditions were aJso observed. Evaluation procedures were taken from: · Guicle...fc)r Plant..ADDraisal, 8th edition, 1992, authored by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers (CTLA) and published by the International Society of Arboricutture {ISA}. · Species Ctass/ficaf/on and Group Assiclnmenf published by the Western Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture · Tree Hazard Evaluation Form taken from [vaiuatk)n of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas, Matheny & Clark, International Society of Arboriculture, 1991. The above three references serve as industry professional standards for tree and landscape evaluations. 1489 Harriet Ave. Arborist Report for Halterman/Sravo Trust. D. Ellis, 5/4/99 Observations ite or Field co,n, ditions There are currently two small, one-story single-family residences on the property. These are rental units, and thus the property (including the vegetation) has not been well maintained. Long ago this property was probably part of a larger orchard, os was most of the land in this area. There are several remnant orchard trees on the site. The site is predominantly level. The soil here is very good - o clay loam that is not compacted in most areas. The trees on this site do not seem to receive any irrigation. Their sun exposure varies from full to partial, depending upon proximity to other trees and to buildings. Most of the trees on this site ore in poor condition because they hove been pruned very severely and very poody in the past. Tree # 1, which is a tall tree near overhead electrical wires, has been "side trimmed" by PG&E for wire clearance, as they are required to do by law. Other trees on the property have been topped in the past, with little training of regrowth afterwards. Description of the S,,u. biect denotes 'Protected tree" Nails regarding trunk diameter measurements: It was not possible to measure the trunks of certain trees at 4.0 or 4.5 feet above ground level, because the tTUnks had diverged to branches below those heights. Instead, I measured at the height recommended in the Guide for Plant ADgroisal. For example t measured trees #5 and 6 at 12 inches because their trunks were between 4 and 8 inches in diameter at this height. For almond #7 I measured the trunk diameter at 14 inches because there was no trunk above this height. Cordyline austrolis is not realty a tree or a palm; it is o large shrubby succulent plant in the Agave family. I have included it because it is listed as a palm on the plans. Tree # Trunk diameter Species Common name Action 4.0fl. 4.$fl. '1 30.1" 30.3" Cedrus c~lantica · Glauca' blue Arias cedar Remove 2 11.7' 9.5" Prunus ilicifoiio hollyteaf cher~ Debatable 3 37" 38" Euca/yptus sp. Eucalyptus Remove 3 489 Hah'let Ave. Arborist Repod for Hafferman/Bravo T~ust. D. Ellis, 5/4/99 Deborah Ellis, ASCA Consulting Arborlit & Horticulturist Tree # Trunk diameter 4.0fl. 4.Sfl. 17" 19.2" 6, 4.5, 3.5 @ 12" 6.6, 5.9" at 12" 7 13"@14" 8 6, 4, 4 and 4" at 4.0 ff 26.7 26.7" Species Common name Acacia melanoxyfo, black acacia Prunus amygdalus Juglans hindsii Prunus amygclalus Cordyline australis almond N. Calif. black walnut almond cordyline Quercus agrifo//a coast live oak Action R~move Remove Debatable Debatable May satvage Save A detailed description of the three 'Protected Trees" on this site is provided below. If additional information on the other trees is required, you may contact me. Height and canopy measurements are approximate and are meant for comparison purposes only. Trunk diameter (DBH) was measured at 4.0 and 4.5 feet above ground level. (The City of Campbell requests the height of 4.0 feet to determine protected tree status, and the 4.5-foot height is used for monetary valuation purposes, also required by the City. The trees were rated as per the guidelines of the industry standard appraisal text, Guide for PJqrlt Appraisal [8th edition, International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), t992. Species, condition and location ratings are used to obtain the tree ratings provided in this repod. The species r~flln~ is obtained from the regionally specific publication, Species Classification gnd C;~OUD Assianment, (Western Chapter ISA, 1992). The condition r~flln~ is obtained by assessing both health and structural characteristics. For example (70/80=60 means that health/vigor is rated at 70, structure is rated at 80 and the average of these is 60. The location rating is the average of site, location and contribution ratings, also from the Guide. Tree ratings: 20 - unacceptable, 40 - poor, 60 = fair, 80 - good, 100 =, excellent. The specific calculations used to arrive at tree rating are not included in this repod. They are available from my field worksheets, if necessary. Tree ratings are given for the existing tree in its existing condition at the time of evaluation. 4 '714 · (,4.081 725-1357 Voice & Fax 489 Harriet Ave. Arborist Report for Hatterman/Bravo Trust. D. Ellis, 5/4/99 Deborah Ellis, ASCA Censultlng Ar#orist & Horticulturist *Tree no.: 1. Botanical narne: Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca'. Common name: blue Atlas cedar. Loc~n: lot 2, east side of existing house. Trunk diameter at 4,0 & 4.5 It.: 30.1, 30.3 Jrt. Size (height x canopy spreadl: ~45 x 27 ft. Tree Ranking: Spec/es: 90, Condlffon: (v~gor 80+ structure 50/2)= ~, Locaffon: (site 40, con~bution 80, placement 20/3)=47. Ranking (average of 3 factors) = 67. Monetmy value: negative, Hazard rating: moderate. Action: remove. Reason for action: Planted too close to overhead electric wires and required pruning for w~e clearance has deformed tree. Mulfil~e attachment of large scaffold branches on east side of tree due to removal of many branches on this site, which has oJlowecl remaining branches to grow to large diameters. Planting this tree here was a mistake to begin with, and if the property is developed this is the right time to correct the mistake. I say this with some authority, having done line clearance pruning research for PG&E for the last four years. The eventual removal af this tree, if done after the property is developed and landscaped, will be much more disruptive and costly. Trem no.: 4. Botanical name: Acacia melanoxy/on. Common name: btock acacia, location: Jot # 1, west side of house. Trunk diameter at 4.0 & 4.5 It.: 17.0, 19,2 in, Size (height x canopy srxeod): ~20 x 2O ft. Tree Ranidn~ Spec/es: ~, Cond//fon: (vigor 60+ structure 2O/2)= 40, Location: (site 40, contribution 60, placement ~0/3)=50. Ranking {average of 3 factors) = 40. Monetary value: negative. Hazard rating: Iow/moderate. Action.' Remove. Reason for action: poor structural condition. General Nates on l~ee: This tree looks nice from the outside, but when you look inside at the branch structure you will see that it has been foppecP in the past, similarly to many 2 TooDina is the practice of cutting back large diameter branches of a mature tree to buds, stubs or lateral branches not Jarge enough to assume the terminal rote. Reputable orborists no longer recommend topping because it is a particularly destructive pruning practice, it is stressful to mature trees and may result in reduced vigor, decline and even death of trees. In addition, branches that reg~ow from topping cuts ore weakly attached to the tree and are in danger of splitting out. 5 489 Harriet Ave. Arbodsf Report for Hal~erman/B~avo Trust. D. Df[s, 5/4/99 Deborah Ellis, A$CA Consulting Arborlet & ltortlcaltgris~ other trees on this site. Some of these old topping cuts have died back and have lett long, decayed stubs. This wifl not be a good flee to keep in a new development, Tree no.: 9', Botanical name: Quercus agdfolia. Common name: coast live oak. Location: lot # 1, east of house closest to Van Dusen Lane. Trunk dlamefer at 4.0 & 4.5 fl.: 26.7 in. Size (height x canopy s~ead): ~35 x 35 ft. Tree Ranking: Sla~ec/es: 90, Conc~on: Ivigor 9o+ structure 90/2)= ~ Locaffon: (site 40, contrii~tion 100, placement 40/3}=60. Ranking [averoge of 3 factors) = 80. Monetary value: $10,000.00. Hazard rating: Iow/moderate. Action: save. Reason for action: good sDecies in good condition. Genmal Notes on flee: The above-average condition of this coast live oak is due to minimal pruning in the past. IPnJning does not necessarily improve flees, as you can well see on this site). Although there is pavement up to the flunk of the tree on three sides, it seems to have adapted fairly well, The pavement has been in place for a long time, t estimate longer than 20 years. In a way, the pavement is probably better for the tree than the usual treatment of native California oaks in residential landscapes, which is frequent irrigation of the root zone. There are only a few very minor defects in the tree. On the south side of the root collar, a buttress root presses against and is beginning to grow over the pavement. Therefore pavement here should be cut away carefully from the flee so the roots and flunk are not injured. Do not fry to rip the pavement out. There is also a small (1.5-inch diameter) surface root that grows over this buttress root. This small root should be severed carefully on either side of the buttress root to stop its expansion over the buttress root. if this roof is allowed to grow, it may restrict growth and conductance of the buttress root. Again, do not tn/to rip the small root out. There are a few branches with stub cuts over the house roof. This is not the recommended way to make a cut (refer back to the topping definition), but these branches are relatively small in diameter and do not pose a problem, c=~,-~,~-,,~n. ~A .q,~07(3-.1714 · (408'~ 725-1357 Voice & Fax 6 1489 Harriet Ave. Arborist Repod for Hatterman/Bravo Trust. D. Ellis, 5/4j99 Deborah Ellis, AS(M Consulting Arberilt & flortlelilt#rlst RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Design the site layout so that the ddpline area of oak #9 will be disturbed as little as possible (after removal of the existing structure and pavement, of course). This means no grading, trenching or constnJCtion within the dripline. If this is not possible, then preserve as much of the dripline area as possible. The closer you place improvements to this tree, the more damage you will do, There are not many coast live oaks in good condition left in residential areas - most of them have been overpruned and otherwise abused. Please contact me for additional advice if any improvements must take place within the dripline. 2. Written Tree ~olecflon $1a~illcallons should be developed for this oak. I can do this along with the development of construction plans, when this activity is about to occur. Remember the cardinal rule - preserve as much of the dripline area as possible. 3. The h'eatment of thi~ Itee ~ con~rucllon will be as important as its protection during construction. Landscaping within the dripline area should preferably be the tree's natural leaf litter mulch and no other plantings or in'igation. Again if this is not possible, please contact me for additional advice. Educating ttm future owner's on the care of native California oaks will be of paramount importance - if this is not done all tree protection efforts may be in vain. 4. Overi~'unlng of native oaks is commonplace in our area. These oaks should be pruned as little as possible, despite what you commonly see. Please contact me for advice regarding any pruning. I hope that this information will be helpful to you, Thank you for the opportunity to provide service. Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Deborah Ellis, MS, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist W,C,LS.A. Certified Arbortst #457, ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist#305, ACFE #14370 ...... ,,.,-~n -~-~.~a . /4nm 725-1357 Voice & Fax - t48~) Harriet Ave. Arborist Report for..,terman/Bravo Trust, D. Ellis, 5t4t99 Trunk Formula Method Form For Northern California, 1992 Established by the International Society of Arboriculture. 1992 Trees LESS Than 30" Diameter Appraised Value = Basic Value X Condition X Location Basic Value = Replacement Cost + (Basic Price X [TAa - TAr] X Species) Species: Ouercus a~rifotie Tree #: 9 ____ DBH: 257 Replacement Cost: =$1805 Cost of largest commonly available transplantable tree, as installed at an average location, (as established for Northern California, by t~e Western Chapter), If the appraised tree is in a Ioca~on which will make installa~on of a replacement especially difficult or expensive, you should increase this line to account for the costs above the average, Group: 3 2. Replacment tree Basic (per square inch) Price: $37.00 per sq. inch (from Table 1 t-1992) Determine difference in trunk areas If dA = 30 inches or less, determine TAa a TAa = (Q785d2) b. Replacement tree TAr (refer to table 11-tg92) c, Subtract TAr from TAa (3A -3B) 4, Multiply Basic Price by area differences 518.48'1sq inches t4,60 sq. inches 503.881sq. inches $37.00 Iper sq, in X (2) 503881sqin (3C~ $. Adjust step 4 by Species rating 90% 6. Basic Value = $1,805 + L$16,77g.36 l ( line 1 ) (tine 5) 7. Adjust line 6 by Condition = 9O% Adjust for Location: Location = ( Site + Contribution 40% + 100% Adjust Line 7 by Location + Placement) 1 3 = + 40% 80% l/ 3= Appraised Value = Round Line 8 to nearest 100.00 10. For Partial Loss: of loss X line 9 - value of loss: 11. Removal/Reconstruction Cost, if appropriate Prepared for: Address: Date: Failure Date: Prepared by Deborah Ellis, ASCA, Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist P.O. BOX 3714, Saratoga Ca 95070. 408.725-1357 :[ $18,643.73] $18,584.36 L $16,725.92 ] [ 60% I $10,035,55 1 I sl0,o0o, oo ! L i S-03-1999 I:~7PM FROM ENV. ANALYSIS 408 321 r~ S A N T A C L A R A Valley Transportation Authority May 3,1999 Cfl;y of Campbell Community Development Department - Current Planning 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008 Attention: Tim J_ Haley, Associate Planner Subject: PM 99-01 / Halterman at 1489 Harriet Avenue Dear Mr. Haley: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) have reviewed the project referenced above for ~he tentative parcel map for the subdivision of a parcel at 1489 Harriet Avenue into three single-£amily lots. We have the following comments. Currently, VTA operates no bus service on Harriett Avenue or Van Dusen Lane adjacent to the project site. However, ~crvice is provided within 122 mile of the project site on Sm~ Tomas Acquino Road and Pollard Road by Lines 38 and 60. To provide visitors and residents of the proposed project with convenient and safe access to the transit services in the area, VTA staff recommend that the City condition the developer to provide the following improvements az part of the project: · A continuous sidewalk along the project frontage on Van Dusen Lane. · Wheelchair curb ramps at all driveways and intersections within and adjacent to the project site. We appreciate the opportunity to review this project, ff you have any questions, please call Lauren Bobadilla of my staff at (408) 32 J[-5776. Roy Molsecd Senior Environmental Analyst RM:LGB:kh 3331 North First Street · San Jose, CA 9Sl34-1906 · Adm{nistralion 400,321.5555 · £ustome~ Service CITY oF CAMPBELL Community Development Department · Current Planning April 29, 1999 Referral Agencies RE: Tentative Parcel Map (PM 99-01) 1489 Harriet Avenue APN: 403-19-106 Dear Referral Agency: The Community Development Department has received the above referenced application for the subdivision of the project site into three (3) single family lots. Please forward any comments to the Community Development Department by May 17~ 1999. Should you have any questions regarding this referral, please do not hesitate to contact me at the Community Development Department at (408) 866-2140. Sincerely, Associate Planner enclosure: Tentative Parcel Map Distribution: Town of Los Gatos, Planning Dept. Caltrans Department of Transportation Health Department United States Post Office Santa Clara Valley Water District Campbell Union School District Cambrian Elementary School District Moreland School District PG&E Pac Bell TCI San Jose Water Company Valley Transportation Authority West Valley Sanitation District of Santa Clara County 70 North First Street · Campbell, California 95008.1423 . TEL 408.866.2140 · F^X 408.866.8381 . TDD 408.866.2790 CITY OF CAMPBELL Community Development Department. Current Planning March 25, 1999 M r. George Halterman P. O. Box 3616 Amold, CA 95223 Re: PM 99-01 (Application Completeness) 1489 Harriet Avenue Dear Mr. Halterman: The Community Development Department has reviewed your application for a tentative parcel map to create three parcels on the referenced property. Based upon a review of the submitted information your application has been determined to be incomplete. The following information needs to be submitted to complete your request: 1) Submittal of scaled floor plans of the retained residence. 2) An inventory and assessment of trees on the site. 3) Photographs of the existing residence, site and neighboring properties should be provided 4) Illustrate buildings on adjacent parcels.(A copy of an aedal graph has been enclosed) 5) Two copies of a preliminary title report. 6) Description of the phasing of the final map. OthenNise, a condition of the tentative map approval would be to removed or modify the existing structures to comply with setback and use regulations. A red lined copy of the submitted map has been forwarded to your engineer. If you should have any questions regarding the requested information or if you would like to discuss these items, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (408) 866-2144. Tim J.~a~ Associate Planner Harold Housley, Land Development Engineer Sharon Fierro, Senior Planner Lester Ikegami, Allied Engineering Company (with enclosure) 70 North First Street · Campbell, California 95008.1423 . TEL 408.866.2140 ' F^X 408.866.8381 - TDD 408.866.2790