HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.1 L101
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS August 12, 1998
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND POOL;
LANDS OF GAFNER; 26990 TAAFFE ROAD; FILE 29-98-ZP-SD.
FROM: Susan Stevenson, Planner
APPROVED BY: Curtis S. Williams, Planning DirecW
-• RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission:
Approve the requested Site Development Permit, subject to the recommended conditions
of approval.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission reviewed the application for a new residence for this site on
July 22, 1998 (minutes attached). Several neighbors at the meeting voiced concerns
regarding view impacts of the new residence from their homes. The Commission
requested that the applicant revise the plans to reduce the overall height of the residence
to a maximum of 23 feet and to ensure that the existing views from neighboring
properties, particularly from the neighbor to the southeast (Thomas), are maintained. The
applicant has responded by reducing the height of the residence and moving the house up
the hill to reduce the impact on the neighboring views.
DISCUSSION
Site Data:
Gross Lot Area: 1.25 acres
Net Lot Area: 1.231 acres
Average Slope: 7.3%
Lot Unit Factor: 1.231
Floor Area and Development Area:
Area Maximum Proposed Existing Increase Left
Development 18,270 12,456 0* +12,456 +5,814
Floor 7,308 6,249 0* +6,249 +1,059
*Existing development is proposed to be removed.
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 2
Staff notes that the proposed floor area has been reduced by approximately 800 square
feet due to the plan changes. A revised worksheet #2 is attached, as is a letter from the
applicant's architect, outlining the modifications from the previous proposal (note that
basement space (514 sq. ft.) is now included in the floor area, as a small portion of the
basement wall would be above grade). The story poles on the site have been adjusted to
reflect the new height limitations.
Modifications
The Planning Commission gave specific direction to the applicants regarding the project,
and the applicants have modified the plans in response to the comments. These changes
include:
1. Reduce the overall height of the residence to no higher than 23 feet.
The applicant has reduced the height of the residence to 23 feet by reducing the
height of the interior attic spaces, lowering the finished floor by one foot, and
reducing the roof pitch from 8:12 to 7:12. The lowest-to-highest height is now 25
feet. Also, the living space over the garage has been eliminated and converted to
attic storage, with a pull-down stair. The height of the garage is now 19'10".
The change in height also reduces the project square footage significantly, as attic
areas over 7 feet in height have been eliminated.
2. Protect the views of adjacent neighbors.
Two neighbors spoke at the last meeting regarding view impacts: Mr. Thomas, at
27033 Dezahara Way, and Mr. Jacquess, at 27053 Taaffe Road. In addition to
lowering the height, the proposed home has been relocated approximately 15 feet
uphill by reducing the three car garage to a two car garage. This change appears
to have restored the view from the Thomas residence. The changes to height and
location also have enhanced potential views from the Jacquess site, although staff
notes that there is not an existing view from that site due to the mature trees which
are located on the Gafner lot and the adjacent site.
Staff has also received a phone call from a representative of the subdivision's
architectural control committee, indicating that they have reviewed the plans and
have determined that the project as revised now complies with the CC&R's.
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 3
Parking
The applicant has revised the parking layout due to the change in the garage, but now
shows the fourth parking space to be located in the setback and in tandem with the third
space. Staff believes that there should be no problem locating a fourth space outside of
the setbacks (such as on the inside of the circle driveway), and has amended condition#1
to require this change prior to acceptance of building plans.
CONCLUSION
The revised plans would limit the maximum height to 23 feet and would relocate the
house to protect existing views. In addition, the square footage of the house would be
reduced substantially. Staff believes that the modifications adequately respond to the
concerns of the Commission at the last meeting.
Staff is available to answer any questions that the Commission or the public may have.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recommended conditions of approval;
fi
2. July 22, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes;
3. Revised Worksheet#2;
4. July 29, 1998 Letter from LGD Architects
5. Development plans.
cc: Barry and Annette Gafner Lori Darling
Tangley @ Westroad, c/o Lyman Davidson Dooley, Inc.
Waybridge Surrey 1640 Powers Ferry Rd. 1-100
England KT130LZ Marietta, GA 30067
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 4
ATTACHMENT 1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND POOL
LANDS OF GAFNER, 26990 TAAFFE ROAD
A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
1. The site plan shall be modified to indicate a fourth parking space outside
" the required setbacks. The changes shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning and Engineering Departments prior to acceptance of plans for
building plan check Any further changes shall be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check. Any further changes or modifications to the approved plans shall
be approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission,
depending upon the scope of the changes.
2. Subsequent to final framing, a landscape screening and erosion control
plan shall be reviewed at a Site Development Hearing. Particular attention
shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to break up the view of
the new residence from surrounding properties and streets and maintaining
privacy between neighbors. The 3 large Mayten trees are suggested to be
boxed during construction and replanted. All landscaping required for
screening purposes or for erosion control (as determined by the City
Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection, 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 six 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, shall be posted prior to final inspection. 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. Prior to beginning any grading or construction operations, all significant
trees in the vicinity of construction shall be fenced at the dripline. The
. i.
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 5
fencing shall be of material and structure to clearly delineate the dripline.
Town staff must inspect the fencing and the trees to be fenced prior to
commencement of grading or construction. The fencing must remain in
place throughout the course of construction. No storage of equipment,
vehicles or debris shall be allowed within the driplines of these trees. The
applicant shall submit a letter from the arborist commenting on the impact
of the development as shown on the approved plans and listing
construction techniques to be used for the development. Any grading or
work to be done within the dripline of a heritage oak must be supervised
by a certified arborist and a report shall be submitted prior to final
indicating the health of the heritage oaks and that any repair work on the
trees has been completed.
5. Paint colors shall 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. White trim area should be
minimized, particularly on large surfaces such as doors, columns, railings,
and trellises. A color sample shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check. All applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the
approved color(s)prior to final inspection.
6. Skylights shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted light. No
lighting may be placed within skylight wells.
7. Fire retardant roofing is required for the new construction.
8. Outdoor lighting locations and specifications shall be submitted for
Planning Department approval prior to acceptance of plans for building
plan check. Locations should be kept to a minimum with 1 light per exit
and 2 allowed at the entry and garage. Any additional outdoor lighting
shall be reviewed with the landscape plan. Lighting fixtures shall
generally be downlights. Exceptions may be permitted in limited
locations (entry, garage, etc.) or where the fixtures would not be visible
from off site. Flood lights shall be directed away from neighbors. Any
security lighting shall be limited in number and directed away from clear
view of neighbors, and shielding with shrouds or louvers is suggested.
Lighting shall be low wattage, shall'not encroach or reflect on adjacent
properties, and the source of lighting should not be directly visible from
off site. No lighting may be placed within the setbacks except for 2
driveway or entry lights, except where determined to be necessary for
safety.
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 6
9. Standard swimming pool conditions:
a. Lights shall be designed so that the source is not visible from off-
site.
b. Drainage outfall structures shall be constructed and located to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
c. Fencing or a locking pool cover is recommended for safety.
d. Equipment shall be enclosed on all four sides for noise mitigation
and screening.
10. As recommended by Cotton, Shires & Associates in their report dated
March 27, 1998, the applicant shall comply with the following:
a. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all
geotechnical aspects of the of the development plans (i.e. Site
preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design
parameters for foundations, swimming pool and driveway) to ensure
that his recommendations have been properly incorporated.
The results of the plan review should be summarized by the
geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted tot he Town Engineer
for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
b. The 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 prior to placement of steel and concrete. The
consultant shall verify that new fill materials are properly keyed and
benched into competent earth materials.
The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project
shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and
submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final (as built)
project approval.
For further details on the above requirements, please refer to the letter
from Cotton, Shires & Associates dated March 27, 1998.
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 7
B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
11. The drainage outlets shall be relocated 30 feet to the west, to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Department, prior to acceptance of plans
for building plan check. 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 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 except to allow for the
construction of the'driveway access.
12. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed
underground.
13. 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. 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 hand 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.
14. 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
Taaffe Road and surrounding roadways; storage of construction materials;
placement of sanitary facilities; parking for construction vehicles; and
parking for construction personnel. In particular, the plan should address
how construction personnel vehicles, will be parked so as to leave the
roadway clear. 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.
15. 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
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 8
roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check.
16. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed and to be roughened
where the pathway intersects, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
prior to final inspection.
17. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary
sewer prior to final inspection. A copy of a permit from the City of Los
Altos shall be required to be submitted to the Town prior to submittal of
plans for building plan check.
18. 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 submitted for
approval by the 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.
19. Prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check, the applicant shall
pay a pathway fee to the Town, based on the length of the lot along the
east property line (179.5 feet) ($7.00 per linear foot).
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
20. The driveway shall be a minimum of 14 feet wide, shall have a vertical
clearance of 13 feet six inches, shall be designed and maintained to
support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (40,000 pounds) and shall
have an all weather surface. Minimum circulating turning radius shall be
36 feet outside and 23 feet inside.
21. The property address shall be placed on the property so that it is clearly
visible and legible from Fernhill Drive. The address numbers shall be a
minimum of four inches high and shall contrast with the background color.
22. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall install a fire sprinklering
system to assure that adequate flow is available to the residence. The
design of the fire sprinklering system shall be reviewed and approved by
the fire department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check.
Planning Commission
Lands of Gafner
August 12, 1998
Page 9
Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with
the Planning and Engineering Departments two weeks prior to final building inspection
approval.
CONDITION NUMBERS 1, 5, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18,. 19 AND 22 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.
•
Properties residing within the Los Altos School District boundaries must pay School
District fees before receiving their building permit from Los Altos Hills. The
applicant must take a copy of Worksheet#2 to both the elementary and high school
district offices, pay the appropriate fees and provide the Town with a copy of their
receipts.
NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until
July 22, 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.
Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT
July 22, 1998
Page 6
ommissioner Gottlieb questioned the location of the cabana as it is blocking a beautiful
vi . It also is a visual impact from Concepcion Road and from the neighboring proAy.
She\It if the bedrooms and garage were switched, it would reduce the amount of
pavem- .. and retaining walls. She also felt the house should step down as itf:will overlook
the Wen p 5.erty. Commissioner Schreiner agreed. She was concerned,with the skylights
as they give\wo story appearance. She was also concerned with the'impact on the Wen
property, suggestng moving the house closer to Concepcion. ,Commissioner Jinkerson
also agreed that th house should step down.
P l
Mr. Helm responded tha theY can remove the skylighxs;if it is a problem on the east side.
They can also move the cabala but would prefer not to move the garage as it provides easy
access to the back. The amount` pavement beyond the garage could be reduced up to 10
feet. The overall profile is 26 feet a d they can screen the foundation.
MOTION SECONDED AND PASS,ED: ' otion by Commissioner Gottlieb and seconded
by Commissioner Schreiner to ayprove the Sp: Development Permit for a new residence,
cabana and pool, Lands of Myrtliy and Srinath, w. the following additions/changes to the
conditions of approval; re/ , ce the roof elevation at t"- .l�ghest point by at least 2 feet; step
down or lower the houssyin combination with backfill to imize exposure to Concepcion
Road; relocate the pool house to the opposite side of the poo '; educe the paved area in the
garage backup; a delete the skylights.
AYES: ;'Vice-Chair Jinkerson, Commissioners Gottlieb & Schrein r��\
NOES: None
ABSE/N': Chairman Cheng & Commissioner Aurelio ~�
Tapproval is subject to a 21 day appeal period.
3.4 LANDS OF GAFNER, 26990 Taaffe Road (67-98-ZP-SD-GD); A request
for a Site Development Permit for a new 7,038 square foot, 27 foot high
(partial two story) residence and pool.
The Planning Director introduced this item by referring to a statement in the staff report
and the misinformation regarding the approval of a two story residence on lot 27. Lot 27
was subsequently re-subdivided and was originally part of the lots which were allowed two
story residences per the CC&R's. Commissioner Schreiner disclosed she had viewed the
property from the Thomas residence.
OPENED PUBLIC HEARING
• i
Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT
July 22, 1998
Page 7
Barry Gafner, applicant, provided the history of the design process, working with staff to
insure a project that was within Town codes. He has met with six of the eight abutting
neighbors (Thomas, George, Talbott, Reed, Rome, Pbwell). The Powells were concerned
with the south elevation privacy with the guest suite above the garage. They have agreed
with the Powells to remove the two windows and the,guest suite over the garage. They are
still working with the Thomas' regarding their view'line. They need to get the roof line
down to about 17 feet to address his view concerns. The existing roof line is between 16 to
17 feet. He continued by discussing changes to the plan which reduced the height,
however, there is still view impacts. The fifth parking space will be removed. Mr. Gafner
was aware of the CC&R's noting the house is only a single story.
Laurie Darling, project architect, discussed the height of the house. She was available for
questions.
Marvin Shibuya, 26898 Dezahara Way, had provided staff with a copy of the CC&R's for
the subdivision. The CC&R's indicate approval by the architectural committee prior to
Town approval. He felt this applicant was premature. Commissioner Jinkerson clarified
the Commission's position regarding the involvement with CC&R's. He realized this was
a delicate issue but they do not enforce CC&R's.
Mike Thomas, 27033 Dezahara Way, bordering on approximately 130 feet of the Gafner
property. His view is a very narrow corridor across their property. He provided the
Commission with photographs of their view from the upper patio area. They do have other
filtered views although they have enjoyed the current;view for many years. He understood
that the CC&R's cannot be enforced by the Commission. However, there are many
neighbors who depend on the CC&R's. The Gafners knew about the CC&R's. The
proposal is for a one story structure with a height of a two story. It should not have been a
surprise to the Gafners that some neighbors would be upset with this project. He discussed
a 1989 judgment (copy of legal document submitted) noting the CC&R's can be enforced
legally. When you are looking off to the horizon, every foot counts. Perhaps a large house
is not appropriate on this site. Further discussion ensued regarding the language in the
CC&R's. Mr. Thomas felt this should be a single story home.
Gary Jaquess 27053 Taaffe Road, stated he objected to the project. Building a second story
on that lot will further impair the southerly views from his house. Currently, they are
highly obscured by trees on the Gafner and neighboring properties which may be an
infraction of the CC&R's. While there is a chance of regaining views by removing trees, a
house would be a permanent obstruction. This view degradation could reduce the value of
his property. He provided the Commission with a letter of his concerns.
Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT
July 22, 1998
Page 8
Glen Reed, 26855 Dezahara Way, discussed the many changes over the last 25 years.
There are problems with the height of trees. He felt this was a nice house. He disagreed
with the CC&R's. He asked what is the difference between a 25 foot house or a 50 foot
tree.
Mike Powell, 27011 Dezahara Way, his property abuts the south side of the Gafner
property. He felt as long as there were no windows on the second floor on the south side of
the property, now or in the future, his primary objection has been eliminated.
Mr. Gafner commented their intention was not to flaunt the CC&R's. He used the Town
guidelines for a single story (maximum 27 feet) but they have reduced it to 24 feet at the
high point. He asked Mr. Thomas what would be the desirable height.
Mr. Thomas responded he did not know what the perimeters are for a single story home but
they are not 27 feet. He felt it was more of what a prudent person would consider to be a
two story versus a one story building. It is not a design question but a height question.
Ideally, a single story would be one he could look over.
Mr. Gafner further discussed the fire department requirements for a 14 foot wide driveway
with a 37 foot radius as it pushes the house down the hill. If there is a way to do some sort
of variance relative to this turning radius or to move it into the setback slightly as they need
12 feet to move the 21 foot roof area out of Mr. Thomas' view corridor with the 17 foot
part of the roof not blocking his view.
Diane Barrager, Pathways Committee, requested the pathway over the driveway _be
roughened.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING
The Planning Director discussed the height of a single story not being 27 feet. Although
the Commission does not have to impose the CC&R's, they can use similar language.
Commissioner Jinkerson discussed the fire department requirements (14 foot driveways).
He felt the height should be no more than 23 feet anywhere. Commissioner Schreiner
quoted from the "Site Development Policy Statement." She did not feel the 27 foot height
meet the intent of a one story structure. This structure is a physical block. She would like
to see a redesign to reduce the height to a maximum of 23 feet (as measured by the Town),
with a lower height in some areas. This is a big house. Commissioner Gottlieb clarified
that on the view side, the structure should be reduced to 20 to 21 feet. Commissioner
Jinkerson, in summary, noted that due to the location, the ridgeline, and environment, the
house should be no more than 23 feet in height. Due to the view corridor, the house should
be less than 23 feet in height. The house should not obstruct existing views.
Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT
July 22, 1998
Page 9
MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and
seconded by Commissioner Gottlieb to continue the application for a Site Development
Permit for a new residence and pool, Lands of Gafner, for redesign, to address the height,
visibility, impact on neighbors, and the driveway design.
AYES: Vice-Chair Jinkerson, Commissioners Gottlieb & Schreiner
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chairman Cheng & Commissioner Aurelio.
This item will be re-noticed for a public hearing.
Brief break at 10:25 p.m.
3.5 LANDS OF LAMBERT, 24700 Olive Tree Court (79-96-ZP-SD- • -
VAR); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new 4,66 % quare
foot residence with attached 500 square foot carport, and, 'ances to
\xceed allowable height (42 feet proposed) and floor area. 'd to encroach
Is required side yard setback. '`
Staff had nothing fur.b-r to add to the report.
Jai
OPENED PUBLIC HEAR ?
Steven Pahl, 160 W. Santa Clara;4 an Jose, applljcants representative, referred to his May 8,
1998 letter to the Planning Directzdetailing7their position. There are only two variances
being requested; height and setback. *did not believe a variance for the floor area was
necessary. The existing structure is highthan the proposed new structure. He referred to
the rendering provided in the packet.' Also'povided''was a petition signed by 46 residents
in support of the project. In,;order to acl i ve a' more harmonious design, they are
requesting a variance to the,>%current existing o vn imposed setback requirements and
height requirements. This/structure will slightly stitch beyond the footprint of the old
structure and will occupy"areas within the property setback not previously occupied by the
previous structure. In/mitigation to these additional ``foot 'nt" encroachments, the height
of the home beinwproposed moves from a four story, six lev house with a fourteen foot
pony wall to a Vo story, "prairie style" structure. This will be a Woden house with 8 foot
eaves. Heted that City Council has reviewed this project5e, providing some
clarification. to Mr. Lambert. The Council suggested a variance and th- are here for that
reason./ '1 . Lambert is extremely opposed to variances but believes tti. roject meets
Tow, codes. He suggested, if the Commission cannot grant the request se N orth in his
let r, to direct them back to the City Council to continue where they left off in ebruary,
97, when they suggested to bring this back with a variance request. \
RECEIVED
JUL 2 91998
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
26379 Fremont Road•Los Altos Hills,California 94022•(415)941-7222•FAX(415)941-3160
WORKSHEET #2
EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA
• TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION•
PROPERTY OWNERS NAME /5/ ey
PROPERTY ADDRESS .02z0,47/0
CALCULATED BYy DALE
10#2/ Jot.) - r--//9" 7. 26 •q
1. DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
Existing Proposed Total
(Additions or Deletions)
A. House and Garage (from Part 2.A.) (pa 1/9 •
B. Decking
C. Driveway and Parking •
(Measured 100'along centerline) j a /c g
D. Patios and Walkways /-21 (v
E. Tennis Court
F. Pool and Decking
G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B)
•
H. Any other coverage
TOTALS //t `s/(P
(o�I
Maximum Development Area Allowed-MDA (from Worksheet#1) l�jo2.7
l
2. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
Existing Proposed Total
(Additions or Deletions)
A. - House and Garage
a. 1st Floor
b. 2nd Floor --
c. Attic anasement 'j /4l
d. Garage 72-0
B. Accessory Buildings
a. 1st Floor ._
b. 2nd Floor _.-.
c. Attic and Basement
TOTALS I (902 V 9 Ca2171Gj
gs/6.
Maximum Floor Area Allowed-MFA(from Worksheet#1) -73dg
"TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY DALE
Revised 2/26/96
A -
G
LGD ARCHITECTS U 3 199$
TuS,52 'akamilr�F;LES
Marietta,Georgia 30064
July 29, 1998
•
Ms. Susan Stevenson
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills,CA 94022
Re:26990 Taaffe Road •
Dear Susan; •
You should be receiving an Air Borne Express package today containing 10 sets of revised drawings. The changes were made
following the hearing and further discussions with the neighbors. They include the following:
. • The garage has been reduced from three bays to two bays,,which allowed the house to slide 15'feet up the hill.
This,in combination with changes outlined below,brought the ridge line of the family room down enough to
return most of the Thomas'view through that corridor. •
• The finished floor of the main house is now at 208.5(from 209.5): The differential between the lower levels and
the main house has been increase 3"to 24". •
• The ceiling height has been reduced to 9' except in the entry,living room and dining room and those rooms with
vaults and trays. This dropped the wall/roof rafter connection by 1': .
•• The depth of the crawl space has been reduced from 3.'to. he minimum 1'-6".
• ::• The roof pitch has been reduced for 8/12 to 7/12 removingtthose areas up in the attic with head heights over 7':'
• The guest suite in the garage has been removed. Thereduced size of the garage eliminated the ability to:include a
permanent stair to its attic storage. A pull-down stair is proposed.
The outcome of thesechanges brought:
• • The height of the,main portion of the house to 23'measured from the floor of the crawl space. The heights of
the othersections range from 21'-3"(kitchen measured from floor of crawl space),20'-l0"(master bedroom
measured from floor of crawl space),:19'-10"(garage measured from FG of 208),and-17'-2"(family room
measured from ceiling of basement). -
• A revision to the area calculation. Without attic head height and a reduced garage,the overall area has been
greatly reduced from 7038 sf.to 5735 sf (excluding.the basement). Worksheet#2 included with the drawings
" shows the floor area inclusive of the basement.at 6249 sf.
In anticipation of the August 12 hearing,the story poles will bereset prior to Aug 1'.
•
In writing this letter,I noticed anerror on the A4 sheet. I have labeled the height of the master bedroom at 16'-I 0"when the
measured height is 20'-10". This shows up twice,the left side of elevation 5/A4 and the right side of elevation 1/A4. I would
greatly appreciate it if you would mark out the 16' and replace it with 20'. Thank-you.
Please call with any question and comments. I look forward to moving forward! •
Sincere
Lori Darling,AIA
Phone:(770)850-8494 Fax:(770)850-8993 Iddi@abraxis.com
•