Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 Town Of Los Altos Hills February 25, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING, ADDITIONS TO EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES AND CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, AND PARKING; AND PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD; LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM; (#189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND). FROM: Curtis S. Williams, Planning Diregtj RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: Recommend to the City Council approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in Exhibit"A" (attached), and citing the findings outlined in Exhibit "C"; approval of the site development permit, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in Exhibit"B" (attached); and adoption of the Negative Declaration. BACKGROUND On January 28 and February 11, 1998, the Planning Commission considered this request, and heard testimony from representatives of the applicant and from affected neighbors. On February 11th, the Commission addressed all conditions of approval except for drainage, which remained unresolved. The Commission requested that the conditions be modified for final action at the February 25th meeting. DISCUSSION Attached are revised conditions of approval for the project, as directed by the Commission on February 11th. Exhibit"A" (Attachment 1) comprises the conditions for the conditional use permit and Exhibit "B" (Attachment 2) comprises the conditions for the site development permit. Exhibit"C" (Attachment 3) outlines the proposed findings for approval of the use permit, as modified by the Commission; The revisions are noted in a bold/ctrikethrough format. Drainage The initial staff report identified a drainage problem downstream of the site and the applicant's proposal to address the problem. Condition #20 of the site development permit would require that the channel be widened and rock-lined to protect against erosion, in addition to the applicant obtaining private drainage easements over the channel downstream. Condition #13 of the conditional use permit would require maintenance of the downstream channel. If the proposed improvements to the downstream channel are completed, however, it may not be necessary to include the maintenance condition (for off-site drainage) with the use permit, provided that the easements assign responsibility for maintenance to one or more of the parties involved. The applicant has concerns about the proposed drainage conditions, including the potential costs and the uncertainty of obtaining easements. Since the last Commission meeting, the applicant has initiated contact with downstream neighbors to determine the feasibility of obtaining easements. At the same time, the applicant's engineer has provided Engineering staff with limited information regarding a possible detention basin on the site, intended to detain runoff and release it at a slower rate. The information Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 2 provided at this time, however, is still not complete and staff has a few concerns with the appropriateness of the general concept of a detention basin. A detention basin is used to reduce the peak flow and velocity of water downstream, thereby reducing the potential for erosion. There have been a few detention basins built with other projects in the Town, that have provided staff with firsthand knowledge concerning the maintenance of the basins. Typically, the basins have either a concrete or asphalt lining in the bottom. While this provides for easier cleaning of the basin, it also has a tendency to result in standing water in the basins. The Town sometimes receives calls from residents concerned with mosquito breeding in areas of standing water and the eyesore of an algae covered"pond". Another important issue to consider is the annual maintenance of the detention basin. Since silt tends to settle in the basin, the bottom of the basin must be cleaned periodically in order for it to maintain its required capacity. Since the storm drainage flow into the basin includes runoff from parking lots which may contain gasoline and oils, the material must be disposed of at an approved location. If the detention option is approved, condition #13 of the conditional use permit would need to be revised to include a maintenance program for the detention basin. If a determination concerning the granting of easements by the downstream neighbors has not been reached by the time of the meeting, the Commission may either (1) approve the project with the stated conditions, or (2) ask the applicant if they want to defer the project for another two weeks to complete analysis of the detention basin option. Noise Standards At the Commission's request, staff has included as an attachment the Town Code standards for noise limitations. Also attached is a table of"typical" noise levels for your information. Environmental Review In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff has prepared a Negative Declaration to support the project. The Commission reviewed the Negative Declaration at the last meeting and suggested no changes. Staff is available to respond to questions from the Commission or the public. ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit 2. Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval for Site Development Permit 3. Exhibit C: Findings for Approval for Conditional Use Permit 4. Negative Declaration 5. Draft Minutes of February 11, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting 6. Noise Standards I Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 3 cc: Richard Rudman Congregation Beth Am 26790 Arastradero Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Robert T. Steinberg, FAIA The Steinberg Group 60 Pierce Ave. San Jose, CA 95110 Heinz Erzberger 13457 Thendara Lane Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 4 ATTACHMENT 1 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-GD-ND 1. This conditional use permit allows the use of the subject property as a religious institution and for related religious educational activities and social functions, subject to the following conditions and according to plans approved by the City Council on , 1998. Any further expansion or change of the use shall require an amendment to the conditional use permit. Additionally, the Planning Director may, at any time, schedule a review or revocation hearing before the Planning Commission regarding the use permit, if any condition of approval is not being met or if the facility is being used inconsistent with the approved use or in violation of Town development codes. 2. Not later than one year after final inspection of the multi-purpose building, the applicant shall request and the Planning Commission shall then review the use permit at a noticed public hearing, to determine that the use remains in compliance with the conditions of approval. Subsequent to the initial review, subsequent reviews shall occur every five (5) years thereafter. 3. If permittee abandons the use of said real property-allowed by this permit for a period of one year, then the abandonment shall constitute a revocation of the use herein granted, and this Use Permit shall become null and void. 4. Uses permitted on the site are limited to the following: religious services; religious education (adult and children); life cycle events, including cuch as weddings and bar and bat mitzvahs, etc.; congregational meetings; social gatherings of members of the Congregation and their guests; auxiliary administrative activities, such as administrative office use, classroom supervision, board meetings, etc; meetings of non-profit community groups; and necessary site and building maintenance. Food and alcohol service and music and entertainment are permitted only incidental to the above activities. 5. No commercial activities or retail sales are permitted on the site, other than those incidental to religious and educational activities, such as a religious arts and crafts fair, sale of Jewish holiday foods and items, bake sales, and the sale of wedding and bar/bat mitzvah invitations, for the purpose of raising funds for the Congregation. 6. Social events involving music and/or entertainment and/or catering shall end not later than 10:00 p.m. daily Sunday through Thursday, and not later than 11:30 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, of and not later than 11:00 p.m. on Sundays before a Monday Federal holiday. Clean-up must be completed such that the premises are vacated not more than 30 minutes later. Alcoholic beverages may not be served later than one hour prior to allowable closing event ending times. 7. Social events involving music and/or entertainment and/or catering (not including religious services with food service before or thereafter) which proceed past 6:00 Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 5 p.m. and involve fifty (50) or more persons shall occur not more frequently than twico three times per week and not more than one such social event of that size shall fiet occur simultaneously on the site. 8.. The west-facing doors of the social hall and kitchen shall remain closed during music and/or catering activities, except for loading and unloading. In addition, a phone number shall be provided to immediate neighbors to contact the event supervisor during a social event, in order to respond promptly to concerns regarding excess noise. 9. No outdoor sound amplification of music for social events shall be allowed on the site, = -== - - *::o - -- •-- - - - --- -•- . Noise levels shall be limited to comply with the provisions of Section 5-2.02 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. 10. Lighting shall be on separate circuits and on timers, such that only security lighting remains on during night hours, unless an event is in progress. In any event, all parking lot lighting shall be turned off by not later than 11:00 p.m., or not later than 30 minutes past the clese end of an event (where permitted later than 11:00 p.m.), except in close proximity to buildings or where necessary for visibility along the driveway. 11. Site activities for which total site attendance is expected to exceed 750 persons shall not occur more frequently than twice per calendar year, unless approved by the City Council after public notice to neighbors. For any site activity for which attendance is expected to exceed 750 persons, the Congregation shall mail notice to all owners of adjacent property at least fourteen days in advance of such event. A parking plan shall be submitted to the Town at least 15 working days in advance of the event, outlining means to accommodate overflow parking (such as parking at nearby office lots,valet parking, or shuttles from off-site, etc.), to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. On-site traffic and parking control shall be provided, at the Congregation's expense, for the duration of any such event,to minimize impacts on Arastradero Road and neighboring properties. 12. Congregation Beth Am shall make all reasonable efforts to minimize impacts to neighboring residents regarding the hours of trash collection, leaf blowers and other gardening maintenance, ai4 catering and clean-up activities, and honking of horns from vehicles at drop-off and pick-up points. 13. Onsite and off-site storm drainage facilities shall be inspected and maintained annually by qualified engineering consultants to Congregation Beth Am, and a report shall be submitted to the Town not later than October 1st of each year describing the findings of the inspection and any remedial measures proposed to assure proper functioning of the drainage system. The report shall include any necessary erosion control measures for the open drainage swale as well as annual cleaning of the system and repairs. All proposed erosion control measures shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to installation. For the purposes of this provision, off-site drainage facilities include the open drainage channel downstream of the project site to Fremont Road. 144 A sign shall be installed and maintained at the exit of the site prohibiting left turns from the site onto Arastradero Road during the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday. Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 6 15. An approved Fire Department key box and appropriate building keys shall be provided to the Fire Department. 16. The roadway through the site shall be marked as a "Fire Lane" per Fire Department specifications, and parking shall be prohibited on either side of the road. Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 7 ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR NEW MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING AND ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-GD-ND A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any modifications to the approved plans requires prior approval of the Planning Director or Planning Commission depending upon the scope of the changes. • 2. Proposed holly oaks shall be replaced with a native evergreen species acceptable to the Planning Director and Environmental Design Committee. Prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building, a fmal landscape screening plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning Commission, with particular emphasis on screening - ' -: `-- • =- -- -= =- = = = _ •_ _ _ _. .•- • ___ .. , -., •-- -. between the new parking areas and the western property boundary, and between the new buildings and the eastern property boundary. All landscaping required for screening purposes or for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building, unless the Planning Director finds that unusual circumstances, such as weather or site conditions, require that planting be delayed. In those instances, a deposit of an amount equal to the cost of landscape materials and installation, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, shall be submitted to the Town. Landscaping shall in any event be installed not later than 6 months after final inspection, or the deposit will be forfeited. 3. A landscape maintenance deposit (or certificate of deposit), equal to the cost of materials and installation for all landscaping required for screening purposes or for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer), but not to exceed $5,000.00, shall be posted prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. An inspection of the landscape to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after installation. The deposit will be released at that time if the plantings remain viable. 4. Materials and colors for the proposed structures shall match the existing buildings on the site. If paint colors are proposed to be changed, colors must be chosen by the applicant and approved by staff in conformance with the Town's adopted color board, and shall exhibit a light reflectivity value of 50 or less. Roofs shall use materials which have a light reflectivity value of 40 or less. All applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the approved color(s) prior to final inspection. 5. Class A or B fire retardant roofing is required for the new construction. 6. Not later than 60 days after issuance of a building permit for the multi-purpose building, the applicant shall submit a revised outdoor lighting plan for review by the Planning Commission at a Site Development Hearing. Lighting at the Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 8 perimeter of the property adjacent to existing residential properties shall be modified to either reduce wattage, reduce the height of light poles, or reduce the number of lights to minimize impacts on those neighbors. All approved lighting must be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. 7. At the time of foundation inspection for the multi-purpose building and prior to final inspection, the location and elevation shall be certified in writing by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor as being in/at the approved location and elevation shown on the approved Site Development plan. At the time of framing inspection for the multi-purpose building, the height of the building shall be similarly certified as being at the height shown on the approved Site Development plan. Prior to paving of the parking lot areas, the location and elevation shall also be certified as being in/at the approved location and elevation shown on the approved Site Development plan. 8. A 6-foot high solid wooden fence shall be constructed along the west property boundary from the rear property line to approximately 50-75 feet from the front property line at Arastradero Road,with an open wood and wire mesh fence or a similar open fence from that point to the front property line, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Gates from Thendara Lane to the site may also be permitted. The fence alignment shall deviate from the property line to the extent needed to maintain a consistent contour elevation at approximately the height of the parking area, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Construction details should include overlapping boards for sound protection, and baseboards or other separation from the ground to assure durability of the fence. A fence permit showing the precise alignment and-construction details must be obtained prior to installation, and the fence must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building. 9. The sound wall outside the kitchen area of the social hall must be constructed according to the details shown on the plan, and a building permit must first be obtained prior to installation. The sound wall shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building. 10. The multi-purpose building shall be soundproofed to minimize noise levels at the perimeter of the site,prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 11. A Class IIb pathway shall be constructed within the right-of-way of Arastradero Road, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department,prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. If necessary to accommodate the pathway, a pathway easement shall be dedicated parallel to the right-of-way sufficient to provide for the pathway. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed surveyor, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department, and the Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including the approved exhibits, 41 shall be signed by the property owner and notarized and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building. Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 9 12. A sign shall be installed at the exit of the site prohibiting left turns from the site onto Arastradero Road during the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday. The design of the sign shall be approved by the Engineering Department and the sign must be installed prior to final inspection of the multi- purpose building. 13. As recommended by William Cotton& Associates in their report dated December 10, 1997, the applicant shall comply with the following: a. The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans (i.e.., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements, and design parameters for foundations and pavement) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. As part of the plan evaluations, the consultant should consider and address whether structural fill beneath the multi-purpose building should be placed at a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. The consultant shall summarize the results of their plan review in a letter to be submitted to the Town,prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building.. b. The project geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed) and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The project geotechnical consultant shall describe the results of inspections and as-built conditions of the project in a letter to be submitted to the Town Engineering Department prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building.. For further details on the above requirements, please reference the letter from William Cotton&Associates dated December 10, 1997. 14. The site drainage associated with the proposed development must be designed as surface flow wherever possible to avoid concentration of the runoff. The proposed drainage shall be designed to maintain the existing flow patterns. A final grading and drainage plan shall be required to be submitted and approved by the Town Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Final drainage and grading shall be inspected by the Engineering Department and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. A letter shall be submitted from the project engineer stating that the drainage improvements were installed as shown on the approved plans and in accordance with their recommendations prior to final inspection. 15. Any, and all, changes to the approved grading and drainage plan shall be submitted as revisions from the project engineer and shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take place during the grading 4' moratorium between November 1 and April 1 except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line. 16. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 10 17. An erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building. The contractor and the property owner shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control. The first 100 feet of the driveway shall be rocked during construction and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected from erosion. All areas on the site that have the native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. 18. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance _of plans for building plan check The grading/construction plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on Arastradero Road and surrounding roadways; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; parking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 19. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 20. The property owner shall obtain private drainage easements from the property owners at 27201 and 27241 Fremont Road and 26744 Arastradero Road and shall submit copies of the recorded documents prior to submittal of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building. Additionally, the property owner shall improve the downstream channel between the site and Fremont Road and the on- site drainage channels in proximity to the proposed headwall to accommodate expected 100-year flow levels and to protect against erosion, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. Improvements to the drainage channels shall be completed prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. 21. A Certificate of Compliance is required to be issued by the Town for this property. The property owner shall submit legal description and plat exhibits prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor for the boundary of the property in addition to the title history for the property prior to the Town's incorporation in January 1946. The Town shall prepare the Certificate of Compliance. The required exhibits and title history shall be submitted and approved by the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check C. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 22. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background and be a minimum of 4 inches in height. Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 11 23. The roadway through the site shall have a minimum width of twenty (20) feet. Vertical clearance shall be a minimum of thirteen feet six inches. Both dimensions shall be maintained. The driveway shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (40,000 pounds) and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. 24. A private on-site fire hydrant shall be provided at a location to be determined by the Fire Department. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 250 feet and the minimum flow hydrant shall be 1000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. (Note: The Fire Department has indicated that the hydrant is to be located near the east driveway alongside the multi-purpose building). The hydrant must be installed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department prior to framing construction. Bulk construction materials may not be delivered to the construction site until installation is completed as stated above. 25. When open gates shall not obstruct any portion of the required access roadway or driveway width. If gates are provided, all locks shall be Fire Department approved, and installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications G-1. 26. The roadway through the site shall be marked as a "Fire Lane" per Fire Department specifications. Upon completion of construction, a final inspection shall be set with the Planning Department and Engineering Department at least two weeks prior to final building inspection approval. CONDITION NUMBERS 8, 9, 11, 13a, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20 AND 21 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. (NOTE: THE PLANNING DIRECTOR MAY ALLOW THE ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE TO PROCEED SUBJECT ONLY TO CONDITION NUMBERS 13, 17, 18, AND 20 BEING SATISFIED). • . . . . .. . . . _ . . . , . . . . _ . . _. • . _ . . . ! • ' . • • • • . I . . • . _ . _ . . ! . . . . . . . . .' . . . , . . . . • • . . . . . •. . . . . . . . . • • . . ' . •. . . . r-eeeipts:• NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until February 25, 1999). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. I Planning Commission: February 25, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 12 ATTACHMENT 3 EXHIBIT "C" FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RENEWAL LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-GD-ND 1. The proposed use or facility is properly located in relation to the community as a whole, land uses, and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; The church has been located on this site for 40. years. Access is to a major through roadway connecting the Town to Palo Alto and to Highway 280, and does not conflict with neighboring residents. The proposed multi-purpose buildings are situated over 120 feet from property lines to retain the openness existing with current neighbors. The church serves community members in Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, and Palo Alto, so it is conveniently located in proximity to all three cities. 2. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and such other features as may be required by this chapter or will be needed to assure that the proposed use will be reasonably compatible with land uses normally permitted in the surrounding area; The site is over 9 acres in size, and can accommodate the proposed use, buildings, and required parking and remain compatible with residential uses in the surrounding area. In particular, setbacks are proposed far in excess of the minimum required, and measures are proposed to minimize lighting and noise impacts to neighbors. Most of the existing parking spaces which encroach into setbacks will be relocated to conform with setback requirements. 3. The site for the proposed use will be served by streets and highways of adequate width and pavement to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use; The site has access directly to Arastradero Road. A traffic study has been prepared by the applicant and indicates that the project and use will not have a significant impact on the road or nearby intersections. The study recommended, however, that left turns from the site to Arastradero be prohibited at weekday peak hours, which is included as a condition of the use permit and Negative Declaration. 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the abutting property or the permitted use thereof. The project includes several mitigation measures to assure that abutting property is not adversely impacted. These include construction of a sound wall and limitations on noise and hours of operation; revised lighting to minimize visibility to neighbors; traffic control requirements; and on-site and off-site drainage improvements. The new buildings will provide setbacks from adjacent properties well in excess of minimum setback requirements. Most of the existing parking spaces which encroach into setbacks will be relocated to conform with setback requirements. • f}-TI1\C rf w\"1 r TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT SPONSOR: Congregation Beth Am Steve Bauman,President 26790 Arastradero Road Los Altos Hills,CA 94022 LOCATION OF PROJECT: 26790 Arastradero Road Los Altos Hills,CA APN#175-32-001 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New multi-purpose building, administration and dassrooms,hardscape and parking. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND CITY POLICY, AN INITIAL STUDY WAS CONDUCTED TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE FOLLOWING PROJECT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. ON THE BASIS OF THE INITIAL STUDY IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT: _ THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS NOT REQUIRED. X ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE MITIGATION MEASURES DESCRIBED IN THE INITIAL STUDY HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS NOT REQUIRED. NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT AND ALL SUPPORT MATERIAL ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE OFFICE LISIEU ABOVE. THIS NEGATIVE DECLARATION MAY BECOME FINAL UNLESS WRITTEN COMMENTS ARE RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE LIS i"EU ABOVE BY JANUARY 28, 1998. IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL THE APPROPRIATENESS OR ADEQUACY OF THIS DOCUMENT, ADDRESS YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS TO THE TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, AS REFERENCED ABOVE, AND STATE THE FINDING THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT t,H ECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND: 1. IDENTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL EriECT(S), WHY THEY WOULD OCCUR, AND WHY THEY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT. EXPLAIN THE BASIS FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND SUBMIT ANY SUPPORTING DATA;AND 2. SUGGEST ANY MITIGATION MEASURES WHICH YOU WOULD BELIEVE WOULD REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE htikECT TO AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL Curtis S.Williams,Planning Director Da e TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Congregation Beth Am, Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 1 INITIAL STUDY CONGREGATION BETH AM Los Altos Hills, CA 26790 Arastradero Road (File#189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND) PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes the construction of a new 7,050 square foot multi-purpose building (classrooms, kitchen and restrooms), 2,112 square feet of administrative offices, 2,112 square feet of classrooms (11,274 square feet total of new buildings), 12,330 square feet of patio/walkways, and 45,700 square feet of new parking (138 new standard spaces and 4 handicap spaces) on the existing Congregation Beth Am site. The proposed additions are intended to alleviate existing classroom overcrowding and would not have a significant impact on membership. According to information provided by the applicant, the membership growth at Congregation Beth Am has been approximately one percent per year for the past ten years. PROJECT LOCATION The project is located at 26790 Arastradero Road (APN#175-32-001) in the Town of Los Altos Hills. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The subject property is approximately 9 acres in size and is presently developed with a 16,716 square foot sanctuary, 6,736 square feet of administrative offices, 6,736 square feet of classrooms, and associated parking and other hardscape. The slope of the site is relatively flat (less than 10%) and the site contains numerous trees (mostly of pine and eucalyptus species). Surrounding uses to the west, east and south are single-family residential. Several `research park' office buildings are located to the north, across Arastradero Road, in the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. Access to the site is from Arastradero Road, the only local access to the project site. Arastradero/Deer Creek and Arastradero/Fremont are the two closest major intersections (both un-signalized). Both intersections presently operate satisfactorily at Level of Service 'C' or better during the weekday P.M. peak hour and other times, with very little traffic delay as indicated by the applicant's traffic consultant. POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS An Initial Study is a preliminary analysis prepared by the lead agency to determine whether an EIR ors Negative Declaration must be prepared and to identify the significant effects to be analyzed in an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15365). The Initial Study for the proposed Congregation Beth Am will serve to focus on effects determined to be potentially significant. In • Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 2 accordance with CEQA Guidelines, the following checklist has been prepared that identifies any environmental effects. The following two sections evaluate impacts of the proposed project. The environmental checklist, approved by the Town and consistent with CEQA Guidelines, was used to focus this study on physical, social, and economic factors that may be further impacted by the proposed project. The checklist indicates whether there would be a `potentially significant impact', `potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated', 'less than significant', or 'no impact' for each specified potential impact. The second section will respond and analyze-in detail those impacts identified in the checklist. A brief explanation is required for all answers except 'no impact' answers that are.adequately supported. A 'no impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. Referenced information sources utilized for this analysis include the following: 1) Los Altos Kills Zoning Code/General Plan; 2) Site visit; 3) Traffic study prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk, dated December 4, 1997; 4) Noise mitigation letter from Charles M. Salter Associates, dated August 21, 1997; 5) Geotechnical investigation prepared by Lowney Associates, dated September 22, 1997; 6) Responses from Los Altos Hills staff/committees; 7) Santa Clara County Central Fire District; 8) Not applicable to project site; 9) Drainage study prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk, dated December 4, 1997. Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL,CHECKLIST TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Project Title: Congregation Beth Am(File#189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND) 2. Lead Agency Name: Town of Los Altos Hills 3. Contact person and phone number: Mr. Curtis Williams,Planning Director (650) 941-7222 4. Project location: 26790 Arastradero Road 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Congregation Beth Am, Steve Bauman, President, 26790 Arastradero Road, Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 6. General plan designation: Religious Institution 7. Zoning: R-A(Residential-Agricultural) 8. Description of project: construction of new multi-purpose building, administrative offices and classrooms, and associated hardscape and parking. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Low-density residential to the west, south and east. Several `research park' office buildings to the north, across Arastradero Road in the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. 10. Other public agencies whose approval may be required: None. I Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: ❑ Land Use and Planning 0 Transportation/Circulation ❑x Public Services ❑ Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities and Service Systems ❑x . Geologic Problems 0 Energy and Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics ❑x Water 0 Hazards NI Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality 0 Noise . 0 Recreation 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find thatalthough the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project.A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on an earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but is must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. \1.& 1 ) 98 Signature Date S . 1l�a. sI Pla.,hIY;IIN 4t,r Printed Name and Title Congregation Beth Am • Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant L LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or ❑ 0 0 x❑ zoning?(1) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction 0 ❑ 0 0 over the project?(8) _ c) Be incompatible with existing land uses in the ❑ ❑ p ❑ vicinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from ❑ ❑ 0 p incompatible land uses)?(2) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community(including a low income ❑ ❑ ❑ px or minority community)?(8) IL POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: - a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?(1) ❑ 0 0 ❑x b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly(e.g.,through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major 0 ❑ ❑ 0infrastructure)?(1) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 0 0 0 El housing?(8) III GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b) Seismic ground shaking? 0 ❑2 0 0 c) Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? 0 0 d) Seiche,tsunami, or volcanic hazard?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Landslides or mudflows?(5) 0 ❑ ❑ 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 6 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading,or fill? 0 0 0 0 g) Subsidence of land?(5) 0 0 ❑ 0 h) Expansive soils? ❑ 0 ❑ 0 i) Unique geologic or physical features?(5) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, ❑ o ❑ ❑ or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related ❑ ❑ ❑ hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, ❑ ❑ ❑ dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ❑ - ❑ p ❑ water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ❑ ❑ ❑ p of water movements?(8) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of 0 0 CI 0 groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? 0 0 ❑x 0 h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ❑ 0 El 0 i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public 0 0 0 0 water supplies? Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 7 V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than SIgnificant Mitigation Significant a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to jiiipt Incorporated Impact No Impact an existing or projected air quality violation? 0 0 0 b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?(2) 0 0 0 0 c) Alter air movements, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? 0 0 0 d) Create objectionable odors? 0 ❑ 0 VL TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicular trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? ' ❑ D ❑ ❑ c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby ❑ ❑ ❑ uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? ❑ ❑ CI ❑ e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ❑ ❑ f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, ❑ ❑ ❑ bicycle racks)?(1) g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ VILBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,insects,animals, and birds)?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ p b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage trees)? ❑ ❑ xi ❑ . c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest,coastal habitat, etc.)?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ p d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)?(2) ❑ 0 0 e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?(8) 0 0 0 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 8 VIII ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Leas than Significant Mitigation Significant a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plan? Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact (8) 0 0 0 0 b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ❑ 0 0 ❑ . c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State?(1) - ❑ 0 0 0 IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances(including,but not limited to,oil,pesticides,chemicals,or radiation)?(8) 0 0 0 b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?(8) i ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 d) Exposure of people to existing sources. of potential health hazards?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ XL PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ El ❑ c) Schools?(8) 0 0 0 0 d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 0 0 0 0 e) Other government services?(6) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 1 . Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 9 XILUTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Potentially " Would thenew l result in a need osaro for systems Significant P P Potentially Unless Leas than or supplies, or substantial alterations to the significant Mitigation Significant following: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a) Power or natural gas? 0 0 ❑ 0 b) Communication systems? CI 0 ❑ 0 c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ❑ ❑ El ❑ systems? O 0 0 0 d) Sewer or septic tanks? O 0 0 ❑ e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g) Local or regional water supplies? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: i a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ c) Create light or glare? 0 0 ❑ 0 XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? 0 0 ❑ ❑ b) Disturb archaeological resources? 0 0 0 0 c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural 0 0 0 0 values? d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within 0 0 0 0 the potential impact area?(8) XV.RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 0 0 (6) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0 0 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation SIgnificant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVL MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or, endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pre-history? ❑ ❑ NJ ❑ b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ❑ ❑ D 0 c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) ❑ 0 a ❑ d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? ❑ 0 CI 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 11 Checklist Responses and Environmental Analysis The following section provides responses to those questions in the previous section. Each subsection is annotated with the number, name and letter corresponding to the checklist form. Sources used to complete the Initial Study include the Town's Zoning Code and General Plan, written comments from staff/committees, and technical information provided by the applicant. Please note that as stated in the previous sections, questionsresponded to with a 'no impact' which are adequately supported (numbers appear in parentheses following the questions, indicating the source utilized for analysis) do not require further explanation. Therefore, only those questions marked other than 'no impact' are discussed below. The roman numbers correspond to those utilized in the checklist. L Land Use and Planning (c) Land Use Incompatibilities The proposed project represents a continuation of existing uses on-site (weekly religious services, administrative offices, school attendance, and community social functions). Surrounding land uses to the east, west and south include low-density single-family residential uses, with `research park' offices to the north across Arastradero Road. The; new buildings proposed on-site would not result in an incompatibility with adjacent lands as the uses on-site are proposed to remain the same and would not foster a dramatic increase in congregation membership. According to the applicant, the new buildings would essentially be relieving overcrowding conditions currently experienced on-site. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Some nearby residents have complained of noise levels related to events that are catered. Please refer to the Noise section for a discussion of this potential impact. III. Geologic Problems (a, b, c, f, h) Information for this section was derived from a geotechnical investigation report prepared by Lowney Associates (dated September 22, 1997), consultants to the applicant. Fault Rupture The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no active faults are believed to exist within the project site. Fault rupture is not anticipated. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant..No mitigationiis required Seismic Ground Shaking Strong ground shaking can be expected at the site during moderate to severe earthquakes in the general region. This is common to virtually all developments in the San Francisco Bay Area. Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 12 Current understanding of earthquake activity indicates that the site will likely be subject to at least one moderate to severe earthquake within 50 years following construction. During such an earthquake the danger of fault offset at the site is slight, but strong shaking of the site is likely to occur. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: IIIc. A geotechnical consultant shall be retained by the applicant to review the final construction plans and specifications. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall submit a letter indicating that the design and specifications are adequate (indicating any recommendations,, as necessary), to the Town's geotechnical consultant for approval prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. Seismic Ground Failure—Liquefaction Soil liquefaction results from loss of strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded, fine-graded sands. The sands encountered in on-site borings were well graded, dense to very dense and contained a significant amount of fine-grained material. For these reasons, the potential for liquefaction is low during seismic shaking. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Erosion, Changes in Topography or Unstable Soils Due to the fact that the site is relatively flat, erosion is anticipated to be minimal during the construction phase. In addition, the Town Engineering Department's standards conditions of approval (i.e., no grading during the rainy season) would further reduce any potential for erosion or unstable soils. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Expansive Soils Test boring performed by the applicant's geotechnical consultant found that in the area of the proposed multi-use center and classrooms, soils encountered were generally hard silty and sandy clay with varying sand and gravel content to depths ranging from 6 to 10.5 feet. A Plasticity Index (PI) test performed on this surficial soil resulted in a PI of 29, indicating moderate expansion potential. For future structures to be built in this area, this is considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Mitigation measure Ilia. above would apply. Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 13 IV. Water (a, b, c, d, f, g, h, i) Information for this section was derived from a drainage report prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk (dated December 4, 1997), consultants to the applicant. Absorption Rates/Drainage The proposed project would increase the amount of impervious area on the site from 63,600 square feet to 132,900 square feet. The increase in impervious area will cause the peak flow rate at Fremont Road to increase by about 6 percent. The calculated change in flow depth at Fremont Road is less than 0.05 feet during the 10-year event. The Engineering Department, in their review of the applicant's drainage study, has indicated that additional analyses will be required to assess the potential impact of the proposed drainage system. This is a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: IVa. The applicant shall prepare and submit a,revised drainage study, which includes analysis of the natural drainage channel (from outlet of 30" cmp to inlet of pipes under Fremont Road) comparing existing flow with proposed flow to determine if any additional erosion control measures are required. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. IVb. The applicant shall provide proof to the Town of their legal right to use the drainage swale, OR acquire such right prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. Flooding The site is located in FEMA Zone 2, which has a mean annual precipitation of 17 inches per year. The existing storm drain culverts at Fremont Road do not have adequate flow capacity for the design 10-year flow. With the proposed development, the flow rate to these culverts will increase by about 6 percent. The resulting increase in depth;of flow is less than 0.05 feet. The potential increase in the duration of ponding on Fremont road is less than 4 minutes during the 10-year event. The changes to the depth and duration of ponding are not significant. With the proposed project, there will be at least two feet freeboard to the existing finished floor of the buildings downstream of the site. The extension of the 30-inch diameter storm drain culvert to the site will reduce the potential for clogging at the culvert opening with the existing conditions. This will benefit downstream landowners by reducing the overland flows that would occur when the culvert opening clogs. This impact is considered to be less than significant.,No mitigation is required Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 14 Groundwater Free groundwater was encountered during drilling at a depth of 18.5 feet. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall and other factors not in evidence at the time measurements were made. Due to the relatively small scope of site improvements proposed, impacts related to groundwater quantity and quality are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required V. Air Quality (a, c, d) Proposed site improvements are not anticipated to result in an increase in the congregation membership, which in turn would increase automobile trips to/from the site and air quality impacts associated with cars. Due to the relatively small scale of development proposed, any changes in local climate or creation of objectionable odors is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, this impact is anticipated to be less than significant. • VL Transportation/Circulation (a, b, c, d, e) The following information is provided based on a traffic report prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk (dated December 4, 1997), consultants to the applicant. Vehicular Trips The study performed by BKF evaluated traffic impacts at two adjacent intersections (Arastradero Road/Fremont Road and Arastradero Road/Deer Creek Road). Both intersections presently operate satisfactorily at Level of Service "C" or better, with very little traffic delay. Calculations and analysis performed by BKF indicate that Level of Service levels would not change with addition of the proposed project. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. Safety Hazards from Design Features Because the existing driveway to the site is located at the middle of a short block of Arastradero Road, between Fremont Road and Deer Creek Road, it is difficult for motorists to turn left onto westbound Arastradero Road during weekday PM peak hours. The weekday PM peak hour volume on westbound Arastradero is approximately 837 vehicles per hour and the average gap between vehicles is only about 4.3 seconds. Based on Table 10-2 of the "Highway Capacity Manual", the minimum gap that would be found acceptable for motorists to make a left turn should be 6.5 seconds. Motorists could encounter severe delays to turn out of the site during the PM peak hour. This is considered a potentially significant impact. • The following mitigation measures are recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: 1 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 15 Via. The applicant shall post a sign at the exit to Arastradero Road indicating that 'No Left Turn' is permitted between the hours of 4-6 PM on weekdays. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to final inspection. Internal Circulation and Parking City of Palo Alto Parking Regulations were utilized due to the fact that the Town has no regulations for non-residential uses. Palo Alto's parking standard for a religious institution is one on-site parking space for each four seats or four persons. The maximum seating number at the existing sanctuary is approximately 450. The number of students who are going to attend educational programs will be approximately 300. Assuming it is possible to have 750 people in the Temple at the same time, a minimum of 188 parking stalls must be provided. The proposed parking supply of 199 paved and approximately 30 unpaved parking spaces is sufficient to meet peak demands. Existing one way circulation for on-site access will remain with some modification at the main entrance. Proper signage shall be installed at the main entrance to minimize confusion for drivers. No striping and signage will be provided for unpaved parking. These impacts are anticipated to be less than significant No mitigation is required VII. Biological Resources (b) There are no designated heritage trees on the project site. Although several trees are proposed for removal in order to accommodate construction, none of these would qualify as a Town Heritage Tree (typically oak species). In addition, the applicant is proposing replacement plantings for those trees proposed for removal. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant No mitigation is required VIII. Energy (b) Although the proposed project will utilize nonrenewable resources during the construction phase of development, due to the relatively small scale involved, it is not anticipated that these resources would be used in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required X. Noise (a, b) Increases in Existing Noise Levels Future noise levels are not anticipated to increase over existing noise levels. However, nearby residents have complained in the past about noise generated by use of the assembly hall kitchen (from catering services delivering and loading from vans parked adjacent to the kitchen door). Due to$hese existing issues, this impact is considered potentially significant. Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 17 Maintenance of Public Facilities Due to the nature of the proposed improvements, and the fact that future use of the site will remain unchanged from existing uses, impacts related to maintenance of roadways provided by the Town of Los Altos Hills are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required XII. Utilities and Service Systems (a, b, c, d, e,f, g) Due to the relatively small level of development proposed, impacts to utilities and services are anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation is required XIII. Aesthetics (a, b, c) Aesthetics The proposed buildings will be required to conform to Town standards regarding height and color of building materials. As the local ridgeline acts as a backdrop to the project site and due to extensive existing and proposed landscape screening, impacts related to aesthetics are anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Light and Glare The majority of the Town of Los Altos Hills has no street lighting, therefore any nighttime lighting provided for the parking lots is likely to be noticeable, even from off-site. This could affect nearby residences and be noticeable to cars travelling along Arastradero Road. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The applicant proposes to remove existing lighting standards from the parking area and replace them with poles and fixtures better directed away from residential properties. The following mitigation measures are recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: MTh. Outdoor lighting shall be directed away from residential properties and adjacent roadways to the greatest extent feasible. All outdoor lighting locations and specifications shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. XIV. Cultural Resources (a, b, c) No data has been provided by the applicant indicating the presence/absence of archaeological resources on the project site. This is considered a potentially significant impact. I The following mitigation measure is recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 18 XIVa. Should archaeological artifacts or remains be discovered during construction of the project, work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find. Project personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources. Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on forms DPR 422 (archaeological sites) and/or DPR 523 (historic resources). If human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. XV. Recreation (b) Arastradero Road is a primary route through Town and a connector to the City of Palo..Alto. Nearby Fremont Road provides access to Town Hall and two schools. Existing pathway use in the vicinity of the site is high (due mostly to lunchtime joggers/walkers from Palo Alto and from the two Los Altos FElls schools) and would be expected to continue at current levels with the proposed development. Due to the extensive Town pathway system, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required The Town's Pathways Committee has reviewed the proposed project and has the following recommendation: XVa. Construct II-B path along Arastradero Road. -If necessary, acquire additional pathway easement adjacent to road right-of-way. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. 'a-H-14ehn mi- 5- Minutes Minutes of a Regular Meeting DRAFT Town of Los Altos Hills PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, February 11, 1998, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road cc: Cassettes (3) #3-98 1. ROLL C: L AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commiss $n meeting was called to ord- ' at 7:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Chairman Gottlieb, o I s•;ssioners Schreiner, Cheng,Aurelio &Jinkerson Staff: Curtis Williams, 'lanni : Director; Sheryl Proft, Assistant Engineer; Suzanne Davis, Ph = ; Lani Lonber_-r, Planning Secretary CONSENSUS: To ia ace an emergency item on the :enda regarding re-organization of the Planning Co ' sion CONSE US: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner, secondee .y Commissioner Jinkerson, and pass y consensus recommending Commission Cheng as Vice -• . 2. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR-None 3., PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM, 26790 Arastradero Road (189-97- ZP-SD-CUP-ND); Proposed Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit for the construction of a 7,050 square foot multi-purpose building, additions of 4,225 square feet of classroom and administrative buildings, and 142 new parking spaces, to an existing religious facility; and Proposed Negative Declaration(continued from January 28, 1998). Disclosure: Commissioner Aurelio has read the previous staff report and has listened to the tape of the previous meeting. The Planning Director introduced this item stating 'on January 28th the Commission considered this. request, and heard testimony from representatives of the applicant and from affected neighbors. Staff has worked very extensively with the applicant and the neighbors regarding Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT February 11, 1998 Page 2 issues previously discussed. One major item which remains is the drainage issue. The applicants are still evaluating the staff's proposed condition regarding improvements to the downstream channel between the site and Fremont Road and the on-site drainage channels in proximity to the proposed headwall to accommodate expected 100-year flow levels and to protect against erosion, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. He suggested finalizing all other issues, and returning to the February 25th meeting to review the conditions of approval and to review the drainage plan. Also, a letter from John and Katie Buzbee Harding was provided. He further discussed the changes to the conditions of approval as recommended at the previous meeting noting a requested change to #7 by Mr. Erzberger removing "6:00 p.m." and to #9 delete "except for religious services or ceremonies" and adding "for social events": after the word "music." Regarding #12, it was suggested adding wording to minimize the honking of horns. Mr. Erzberger had stated to the Planning Director that he would not object to the addition of gates in the fence (Site Development condition#8), working with the neighbors regarding location. Also, the statement in the conditions of approval regarding the payment of school fees does not apply to this application and shall be deleted. He further clarified, after a discussion with the City Attorney, regarding congregation membership, that while the Town may regulate the use of the site with a variety of standards, conditions of approval may not limit the membership of the congregation, in this case, since membership alone does not relate to impacts of the site. Commissioner Schreiner discussed Use Permit condition#11, suggesting adding wording stating that once the 200 parking spaces have been used, there should be no parking on adjacent streets, suggesting the use of a shuttle. Commissioner Cheng suggested valet parking for large events. The Planning Director suggested for larger events, the applicant shall provide a plan indicating how they will handle overflow parking which can include valet parking, off site shuttle service, or parking at the office building across the street. This will help keep cars off the neighboring streets. Commissioner Jinkerson felt it would be harder to enforce appropriate parking with a gate in the fence which will attract neighborhood parking. He suggested changes to the Use Permit condition #4, deleting "such as" replacing it with "including". Also, to delete the word "etc." Condition#10, to include half hour past the end of an event rather than having the parking lights turned off by not later than 11:00 p.m. or past the close of an event, for safety. Commissioner Schreiner would like the lighting plan reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission as she felt this was one of the most critical issues on this site. The Planning Director clarified all the items which will be reviewed prior to accepting plans for building plan check. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Richard Block, Rabbi, Congregation Beth Am, addressed conditions #4 (would prefer not using the word "traditional"), 6, 7 (leave in 6:00 p.m.), 9, 11, and 12 (keep "make all reasonable efforts Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT February 11, 1998 - Page 3 to"). He felt parking on neighborhood streets during large events have never been a concern. He has no opinion regarding a gate in the fence and any potential parking problems. Katie Buzbee Harding, 27201 Fremont Road, discussed her letter dated. February 6th regarding drainage, concerns with lighting shining into her bedroom and bathroom, and the possibility of replacing the eucalyptus trees with some pine trees. Bob Blair, new owner at 27161 Fremont Road, did not receive a notice, but aked that the visual impact and screening be mitigated. Otherwise he had no problem with the project. Steve Choong, 13481 Thendara Lane, requested no outdoor sound amplification in the evening (conditions #6 and 9) for social events. Art Jones, 13481 Thendara Lane, stated a concern with the lighting as it should be facing in toward the parking area and should not impact the neighbors. Also, currently the lights go off at 1:00 a.m. This should be corrected now. He did not feel the fence should stop 75 feet from the end of the property line. It should be carried to the end of the property. He experiences his area being used as a short cut, trampling his oleanders. The fence extension could be chain link. He would like to,see events end at 11:00 p.m. to provide people and caterers time to leave. Parking and the flow of traffic will impact him with the proposed loop. He asked if they could come in one side and exit another. He has had only one experience in.15 years regarding street parking. He had no opinion regarding a proposed gate. Heinz Erzberger, 13457 Thendara Lane, discussed the following: conditions #6.(closing of activities at 11:00 p.m.); #7 (removal of 6:00 p.m. and extending the events to three per week); parking; the request for a gate close to the garden shed area with a lock, if needed; and a concern with new parking lot and the possible impact of the new circulation of traffic. He would like to review the circulation of traffic in one year. He stated the current Beth Am leadership was very sensitive to the neighbors and their problems. He hoped this would remain if the leadership changes. He further discussed the accumulative effect of the different types of noises with several events taking place on the site. He agreed with the suggestion to extend the fence beyond the 75 feet from the end of the property line with perhaps a chain link fence. Commissioner Jinkerson felt a gate would propose a problem with foot traffic, and who would keep the key if the gate is locked. Francis Liu, 27241 Fremont Road, discussed drainage issues as they related to her property which is on the corner of Fremont Road and Arastradero Road. They get everyone's water. She provided sketches of the impact on her property after Monday's storm. The assistant engineer stated she and the City Engineer had visited this site Tuesday. They have been reviewing the swale from the Beth Am property and from the neighboring property. Beth Am is reviewing the drainage swale although they want to review their options at this time. The Planning Director stated there were two options under consideration: (1) improving the drainage Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT February 11, 1998 - Page 4 swale which would require easements from the various neighbors; or (2) construct a detention basin on their property to hold the water back and release it at a slower rate. Robert Block reviewed the previous comments noting the following: no objection to a gate and lock; agreed with the change to condition #7; preferred #6 as drafted; and #9, rare occasion for outdoor music sound amplification on the patio area. The area of concern is the far side of the property which would require some amplification and music (outdoor sanctuary) and should not affect neighbors. He continued requesting the wording in #12 (make all reasonable efforts to minimize impacts...)remain. He clarified that no one lives on the site. Alex Vayntrub, 27067 Horseshoe Lane, voiced support of the project stating a good neighbor relationship should be encouraged by communication. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING The Planning Director suggested a discussion and consensus on the conditions needing modification, returning February 25th with the conditions in their final form along with the drainage issues to review. Currently it is not known what effect a detention basin would have on parking spaces or construction. Discussion and changes to the conditions of approval ensued. Conditions of approval, Use Permit: #4; new #4, remove "etc." and replace "such as" with "including"; #6, add, " not later than 11:30 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, of and not later than 11:00 p.m. on Sundays before a Monday Federal holiday". Also, delete "allowable closing" adding "event ending"; #7, adding (not including religious services with food service "before or "thereafter)...which proceed past 6:00 p.m. and ...more frequently than twice three times per week ...; #9, add "for social events" and deleting - -- = o - •: =- - • = ' "'-•- ; #10, add, "not later than 30 minutes past the clese end of an event"...; #11, add, "a parking plan shall be submitted to the Town at least 15 working days in advance of the event, outlining means to accommodate overflow parking (such as parking at nearby office lots, valet parking, or shuttles from off-site, etc.) to the satisfaction of the Planning Director"; #12, and add "and honking of horns from vehicles at drop-off and pick-up points". Conditions of approval, Site Development Permit: #2, add, a final landscape screening plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning Commission, with particular,emphasis on screening -- -b '-o - - _ --- _ - .__ .. _ _._•-: ' - _: .. , -. -- -. between the new parking areas and the western property boundary, (adding) and between the new buildings and the eastern property boundary; #6, review by Planning Commission - - -• - `- - o=---- - --- •-:; #8, add, "50"to 75 feet...with an open wood and wire mesh fence or a similar open fence from that point to the front property line, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Gates from Thendara Lane to the site may also be permitted; and deleting requirement to pay school district fees. Findings for approval: add to #4, that most of the existing parking spaces which encroach into setbacks will be relocated to conform with setback requirements. fir PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner, seconded by Commissioner Jinkerson, and passed by consensus to continue the proposed Conditional Use Permit and Site Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT February 11, 1998 Page 5 Development Permit for the construction of a 7,050 square foot multipurpose building, additions of 4,225 square feet of classroom and administrative buildings, and 142 new parking spaces, to an existing religious facility; and Proposed Negative Declaration, Lands of Beth Am,to February 25th, directing staff to return with changes to the conditions as previously noted, and with a proposed resolution to drainage issue for review. AYES: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Cheng, Aurelio, Schreiner&Jinkerson NOES: None Brief break at 8:50 p.m. _ 3.2 LANDS OF CHAN, 12125 Oak Park Court (lot 8a) (251-97-ZP-SD-GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new residence and poo.. Ms Da ' introduced this item by discussing the constraints affectin. the house location. Chairman . ottlieb voiced concern regarding two driveways within 20 -et from each other and three homes • spearing to line up. OPENED PUBL . HEARING Norm Burdick, P. O. Box 517, Los Altos, project • chitect, voiced no objections to the conditions of approval. .e stated that the house cp ld be adjusted some and noted that the driveway would be adjacen to the driveway on 1 {7. It was noted that the lots have limited building area due to easements. Les Earnest, Pathway Committee, n►ted retention basin in the lower portion of the property and a drainage ditch going across the 3► oot pathway easement where they are planning to build a bike path. He would like to make s e ere is enough for a bike path built to California State standards room (minimum 12 feet)/ Fred Fallah, 12374 Priscilla ane, would not w•. t the house shifted too far back as it would impact his property. He / er questioned conditio •20 as it relates to his property. CLOSED PUBLIC HEZING Commissioner Ch ng had noproblems with the project as sub ,*tted and she would agree with g moving the use back. Commissioner Schreiner would li. - the house moved back approximate) 20 feet to provide an area for landscaping between the o houses which would also move ome of the driveway out of the setback. Chairman Gottlieb w• Id like the applicants to work ith staff to move the house back so the house is off-set from the two houses under cons tion which would also reduce the pavement in the setback. She would like the house move at least 10 feet. Commissioners Aurelio agreed with the comments. Commissioner Ji erson discussed the exterior lighting requesting a reduction of two lights as noted in the staff § 5-2.01 LOS ALTOS HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE § 5-2.02 • or vehicle which is not designed to carry persons, including but not limited to any model airplane, boat, car or rocket. (i) "Sound-producing device" shall mean a mechanical or electronic device, a primary purpose of which is the creation of sound or the amplification of sound to higher levels, including, without limitation, public address systems, music amplifiers, horns, sirens, whistles, bells, and explosives. (§ 1, Ord. 181 , as amended by §§ 1 , 2 and 3, Ord. 249) Sec. 5-2.02. Standards. The below -prescribed standards are established to be applicable to the classifications indicated when measured as follows: (a) Use a standard noise level meter as prescribed by ANSI-SI.4. All measurements will be taken with the meter switched to the weighting ........' network labeled "C" and to the F (Fast) sub-network. (b) When the source is on private property, measurements shall be made at any location on. or beyond the property boundary. (c) When the source is on public property, measurements shall be made fifty (50') feet from the source or -= = at the private property; line, whichever is closer. = - Maximum Decibels Noise Sources Day/.Night Aircraft* 60/50 Animals 50/40 Farm tractor 82/40 Implements of husbandry 65/40 • Machines, tools or appliances 50/40 Motor vehicles 82/70 Motor vehicle repairing, rebuilding, modernizing and testing. 82/40 Persons 50/40 Powered model vehicle 60/40 Sound-producing devices 50/40 *1,000 feet from affected property For the purposes of enforcing the provisions of this chapter, "daytime" shall be the period from 7:00 a.m. to sunset, _ inclusive, and "nighttime" shall be the period from sunset to 6:59 a.m., inclusive, Pacific Standard Time or Daylight Saving Time, as then in effect, of the next succeeding day. (§§ 2 and 4, Ord. 181, as amended by § 4, Ord. 249; § 1, Ord. 254, eff. August 31, 1979) IT Ali , u:nom ,_1R_Rdl Wagstaff and Assoime Initial Study Checkm City of El Cerrito . T h&a Day School Project February 14, 1996 Pae 6 Table 7 TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS MEASURED IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND INDUSTRY \\ A WeigNe At a Given Distance Sound Level Subjective . From Nds Source in Decibels Nds Environments Impression . \ 14 •-, \ Civil Defense Siren (100) 120 _ 14: / Jk7ae# A00) 120 Pain Threshold - d / 110 Rock Music Concert ,r VeryLoud Pile Driver (50') 100 ..,- Ambulance eRn (0) ';i: \ 90 Boiler Ro m :;:" Freight Cars (50) Printing Press Plant Pneumatic Drill (50) 80 In Kitchen With Garbage Disposal Rnnin . / Freeway (0) \ 70 Moderately Vacuum Cleaner (0) 60 Data Processing Center •> \ Department Store \/ Light Traffic (00) 50 Private Business Office f% }. Large Tadorer (2 0) , / 2 40 Quiet . \ \ 2» SoftWhisper 7) 30 Quiet Bedroom _ 20 Recording Studio '\ / 10 , Threshold of Hearin «§ q -y, 1V. 0 . % ' / ' _ ƒ SOURCE Wagstaff and Associates; Rngwort & Rodkin, In. \/ } - %, � - \ � y \ t :Z '_ '}> • RECEIVED FEB 1 9 1998 Beth Am TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26790 Arastradero Road Los Altos Hills,Ca. 94022 Attn: Ric Rudman Dear Mr.Rudman Reviewing your letter of Feb 17, '98 regarding the drainage problem from your two ditches into our drainage pipe and beyond,we still have a problem with your two options. The first option is not acceptable because the detention pond will not adequately protect us from mud buildup and refuse flowing down to our drainage pipe and clogging our screen. Whether the ditch down stream from us is fixed or not,the problem is with the ditches running through your property. You have two options to solve this problem which are: 1) Run 30"pipe and tie it to our pipe or 2) Widen, dredge and concrete the ditch to control the amount of mud buildup and debris that enters our property. We will be happy to meet with you to answer any questions that you might have. We have worked tirelessly in an effort to get this problem solved for many years and still believe it is feasible. Sincerely yours, 2��✓ w�. 1G � FAQ l�V L�4 John and Katie Buzbee Hardin 27201 Fremont Rd., Los Altos Hills, California 94022 (650)948-3051 o/c Ms. Sheryl Proft Los Altos I-ills Town Hall g I RICHARD A BLOCK CONGREGATION 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD (650) 493-4661 RA881 BETH AM LOS ALTOS HILLS, CA 94022 FAX(650) 494-8248 KENNETH I. CARR Katie A. Buzbee February 17, 1998 ' ' 27201 W. Fremont Rd. SIDNEYAKSELRAD Los Altos Hills, CA 94022-1023 ,EMERRus BY PERSONAL DELIVERY KAY GREENWALD Dear Katie, CANTOR DAVID UNTERMAN As you are aware,Congregation Beth Am is planning on modernizing its facilities. During the review CANTOR EME>rnn with the City of Los Altos Hills questions have been raised about the adequacy of the existing . drainage system. In an effort to improve the drainage in our area we are considering two options. RABBI LAURA NOVAK WINER The first involves constructing a detention'pond that would be located on Beth Am's property. The DIREQOROFEDUCATION purpose of this pond would be to detain drainage water during periods of significant rainfall and usA ANGER release it at a slower rate. The second option is to improve the existing drainage channel,a portion PROGRAM COORDINATOR of which is on your property. Both options will require a considerable expense on the part of Beth Am and should improve the current drainage. MARCYL SEIDSCHER DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION The feasibility of this second option depends on our ability to obtain a drainage easement from you and our two other neighbors. Given the expense to Beth Am and the anticipated benefits to you,we would request that you grant us this drainage easement on a no cost basis. If we obtain your preliminary consent, and that of the other two neighbors, it will allow us to assess the costs and benefits of the two options with the City Engineer and reach agreement on the best drainage solution. If the decision is to improve the channel on your property(the second option) we will have our engineer draw the easement and submit it to you for approval and execution. We hope that you will consent to grant us this easement. We would very much appreciate a prompt reply by your returning the copy of this letter indicating your approval. A stamped, self-addressed envelope is included for this purpose. It would be most helpful iif you could mail this to us by this Saturday, February 21. We will keep you posted of our progress. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 855-2690 (work number)or Sheryl Proft of the Town of Los Altos Hills at 941-7222. Either or both of us will be glad to meet with you to discuss this further. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, • Ric Rudman, Chair Facilities Steering Committee cc: Town of Los Altos Hills Attn. Sheryl Proft I am willing to grant Congregation Beth Am the drainage easement. Please send me the document for my review. Dated Owner(s)