The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.3 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS September 23, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION; LANDS OF BLAIR; 27161 FREMONT ROAD; FILE #115-98-TM-IS/ND-GD. FROM: Suzanne-Davis, Associate Planner SD APPROVED BY: Curtis S. Williams, Planning Director RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1. Review and make comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and proposed Tentative Parcel Map; and 2. Forward the application to the City Council with a recommendation for approval, subject to the conditions in Attachment 1. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The following describes the Town's discretionary actions which are required for approval of the subdivision: 1. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by the City Council. 2. Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program by the City Council. 3. Approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map by the City Council. The Planning Commission's actions relative to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Map are recommendations to the City Council. TENTATIVE MAP REVIEW In order to approve a subdivision, the Planning Commission must determine that the project is consistent with the General Plan, subdivision and zoning regulations, and that none of the findings for denial can be made, as specified in Section 66474 of the State Subdivision Map Act. Staff has prepared findings for approval of the project (see Attachment 2). Comments on the tentative map have been received from the Town geotechnical consultant, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Environmental Design & Protection Committee and Pathways Committee, and are attached for the Commission's review (see Attachments 5-9). Neighboring residents and property owners within 500 feet of the site have been notified of the public hearing. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and draft Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared for the project. The review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment 3) for the proposed two lot subdivision ends October 2, 1998. The Planning Commission may make comments on both the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Tentative Map. The Negative Declaration must be accepted in order to approve the tentative map. In order to recommend approval of the document, the Commission needs to find that there are no significant environmental effects which are not addressed through the proposed mitigation measures. Recommended mitigation measures include drainage improvements, construction regulations relative to the flood plain, protection of existing mature trees, geotechnical review and inspection of any archaeological finds by a qualified individual. If the Commission determines that substantive changes to the Negative Declaration are needed, the document will need to be re-circulated for another 21 day public review period. BACKGROUND The subject property was created in 1903. The Town has no map of record since the creation of-the lot pre-dates the incorporation of the Town. Access is currently from a private driveway off Fremont Road, approximately 55 feet south of the northeast corner of the property. The site is largely undeveloped, although there is a residence, detached garage, barn, and minimal hardscape on the property. A ten foot wide sanitary sewer easement is the only recorded easement on the property. DISCUSSION AND ISSUES Project Location and Setting The project site is located on the west side of Fremont Road south of Arastradero Road and across from Old Trace Lane. Barron Creek crosses under Fremont Road and runs through the property where it enters a culvert at the south property line. Properties to the north and south and across Fremont Road to the east are developed with single family homes. To the rear (west) is Congregation Beth-Am, a religious institution. The access driveway to the existing residence enters the property from Fremont Road, near the northeast corner of the lot. Existing development includes a driveway, residence, detached garage, barn and hardscape. All of the present improvements would be removed in favor of two new residences. There are scattered trees on the site including Walnut, Palm and Liquidambar. Other than two apricot trees to be removed from Parcel B, all of the existing trees are to be saved. Due to the presence of the creek, part of Parcel 1 is within a 100 year flood zone. The site is relatively flat, with an average slope of 6.3%. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 3 Project Description The Tentative Parcel Map proposes to subdivide a 3.07 acre parcel into two lots of 1.77 and 1.16 acres net, for the future development of two single family residences. Existing development (barn, detached garage, two-story residence, and hardscape) will be. demolished. Proposed access to-the rear lot, Parcel 2, is a 25 foot wide "panhandle" from Fremont Road, running along the south property line of the front lot, Parcel 1, to the east (front) property line of Parcel 2. The front lot, Parcel 1, would be accessed directly from Fremont Road in the same location as the existing driveway. The two lots will be connected to the public sanitary sewer. Water service would be provided by Purissima Hills Water District. The project will be required to place all existing power and utility lines located on the property underground, and to install drainage improvements. The following table includes an analysis of each lot and its corresponding Lot Unit Factor (LUF), Maximum Development Area (MDA) and Maximum Floor Area (MFA) as required by-Sections 10-1.502 and 10-1.503 of the Town of Los Altos Hills Zoning Ordinance. The net lot area of Parcel 2 has been reduced by exclusion of the access panhandle. Parcel it . Net Acres Ave Shope LUF . MDA 1VIFA 1 1.77 7.0% 1.77 26,550 10,620 2 1.16 5.5% 1.16 17,400 6,960 entire property- 3.07 6.3% 3.07 46,050 18,420 Source: Giuliani&Kull,Inc. Staff has identified the following issues which are important to the evaluation of this subdivision. The Planning Commission should discuss each issue and provide direction for the applicant and staff, including amending the recommended conditions of approval as necessary. Access The driveways to the two lots would be over existing access points. There is a paved driveway to the existing residence that would be used for access to Parcel 1. The driveway entry from Fremont Road would remain the same, but would change on-site as noted on the conceptual development plan. The location is also marked on the site with wood stakes. A second point of access near the south property line is the location of the panhandle and driveway to Parcel 2. This access is used for maintenance and is not presently paved. There are gates off Fremont Road and at the creek crossing, and the location of the proposed driveway has been staked. The City Attorney recommends having a panhandle access instead of an access easement which is what the applicant has proposed. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 4 The two driveways would be sufficient distance to one another, and would not adversely impact any neighbors in the proposed locations. The adjacent neighbor to the south has a tennis court closest to the common property line with the panhandle of Parcel 2 so there is good separation between the house on that property and the driveway location. Also, there is a culvert and crossing that will be maintained rather than creating a new crossing. The existing paved driveway does not cross the creek. Placing the panhandle along the north property line would impact the building site for Parcel 1, and would result in up to three driveways in close proximity to one another (the driveway to the adjacent Lands of Buzbee runs along the common property line on the north side). _ Lot Design The tentative map shows a 160 foot diameter building circle on each lot. The center of the building sites have been staked so that the Commission can located them on-site. The two building sites would have good separation from one another which would allow for landscaping to be done between the two new residences. The Parcel 1 building site includes a small portion of the creek, but is otherwise unencumbered. No significant trees would be impacted by the development on this site. A large Black Walnut tree just outside the building circle could easily be maintained. The conceptual development plan shows a new residence, pool and guest house on Parcel 1. Trees along Fremont Road provide good screening from the road,including the proposed guest house site. The building site for Parcel 2 would be more exposed. There is not as much vegetation along the rear half of the south property line, and the neighbor's house (Dang) is fairly exposed on that side. There are more trees and vegetation along the north property line, and more distance between the building site and the property line. The conceptual development plan shows a residence, guest house and pool that would not conflict with any significant trees or crowd the setbacks. To the rear of the site is Congregation Beth- Am where construction is underway. Landscaping will be done on that site as well as on Parcel 2 to provide a better buffer between the two lands uses. The two building sites appear reasonable and would allow adequate area for development of the two new residences and outdoor areas. Flood Plain The proposed subdivision is under review by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). The presence of a flood plain over part of the building area of Parcel 1 would prohibit a basement in that area, and would require the finished floor elevation to be at least one foot above the 1% flood elevation if any portion of the house encroaches into the flood plain. The flood plain does not encompass any of proposed Parcel 2. Plans for the new home on Parcel 1 will be reviewed by SCVWD at the time of site development permit application. Staff has spoken to the Community Projects review Unit at SCVWD and expects to have written comments prior to the Commission meeting. SCVWD recommends that any structures be a minimum of 50 feet from the top of the creek banks. Also, a permit will need to be issued for any drainage outfalls or grading in the vicinity of the creek. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 5 Drainage The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and has recommended conditions included in Attachment 1. Drainage improvements would be done as part of the subdivision improvements. These would include either installation of an additional pipe under Fremont Road, or replacement of the existing pipe with a larger one. This work is necessary to ensure that storm water is contained within the creek. In addition, a drainage swale will be required to be constructed along the northerly property line to accommodate site drainage in 100 year storm conditions. The applicant objects to the requirement to upgrade the creek crossing under Fremont Road and his representatives will address this concern at the meeting. At time of site development for the two lots, site specific drainage plans will be reviewed by the Engineering Department. Easements Staff recommends that the applicant grant storm drain and conservation easements over Barron Creek, to include areas within 25 feet of the tops of the banks. Any planting within the conservation easement would be required to be non-invasive native riparian species and no fencing would be allowed to cross the easement. Condition #8 has been included to require this easement. Public utility and sanitary sewer easements will be required to accommodate utility lines and sewer connections. The exact location of these easements would be determined when the final map and improvement plans are submitted and would be recorded with the final map, as would the conservation and storm drain easements. Utilities Sanitary sewer service will be provided for the two lots. Purissima Hills Water District and PG&E have reviewed the proposed subdivision and have stated that utility service can be provided. Cable service will also be provided to the lots. Geotechnical Review The Town geotechnical consultant, Cotton, Shires & Associates, has reviewed the geotechnical report and plans for the proposed subdivision and has visited the property (see Attachment 5). The subdivision improvement plans will be reviewed by the Town Geologist prior to final approval. Site development plans and supplemental geotechnical reports for the individual lots will also be reviewed by the Town Geologist prior to applications being forwarded to the Planning Commission. - Fire Department Review The Santa Clara County Fire Department has reviewed the proposed subdivision and has specified criteria which will be evaluated with the individual lot development (see Attachment 6). The driveways serving the two new residences will be required to be at least 14 feet wide, with a vertical clearance of 13' feet, and an all weather surface that Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 6 can support the load of fire apparatus (40,000 pounds). The addresses for the two lots will be required to be installed where they are clearly visible from Fremont Road at time of site development. Also, an emergency vehicle turnaround will be required on Parcel 2 since the length of the driveway will exceed 150 feet. A fire hydrant or residential sprinkler system will be needed for the home on Parcel 2 for the same reason. Fire sprinklers may also be required for the home on-Parcel 1 dependent on its size, and the flow capacity of the closest hydrant. The Fire Department has also requested that the access driveways be installed prior to commencement of construction, and that an acceptable means of access be provided if the lots-are fenced and gated, as approved by the Fire Department. These-recommendations have been included as conditions of approval. Committee Review The Pathway Committee has recommended that a type IIB path be installed along Fremont Road and that the path be separated from the edge of pavement by at least five feet (see Attachment 7). Condition #18 requires the pathway to be installed within the public right-of-way at the time of subdivision improvements. The path can be meandered around trees if necessary. Driveways that cross the path will be required to be roughened or treated with a non-slip coating. _ The Environmental Design & Protection Committee would like the large Black Walnut tree to be saved, and recommends keeping any improvements out of the dripline of the tree. The Committee also recommends that the creek be re-vegetated (see Attachment 8). Conditions have been included requiring the Black Walnut tree to be saved, and a landscape plan to be submitted and approved during the final map process. CONCLUSIONS The Commission must determine whether the proposed subdivision is in compliance with the General Plan, and whether the lots would allow development to occur which meets the provisions of the Zoning and Site Development Ordinances and the Design Guidelines. Upon direction from the Commission, staff will modify conditions as needed, and proceed to City Council for action, or return to the Commission if any significant redesign is requested. Staff is available to answer any questions that the Planning Commission or public may have. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 7 ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Findings for subdivision approval 3. Initial Study &Mitigated Negative Declaration 4. Slope Density Calculations and worksheet#2 (seven pages) 5. Report from Cotton, Shires & Associates, dated July 16, 1998 (three pages) - 6. Comments from Santa Clara County Fire Department dated June 19, 1998 (two pages) 7. Pathways, Parks & Recreation Committee recommendation dated June 23, 1998 (one page) 8. Environmental Design & Protection Committee evaluation, received June 29, 1998 (one page) 9. Letter from Santa Clara Valley Water District, dated July 1, 1997 (one page) 10. Tentative map, slope analysis and conceptual development plans (three sheets) cc: Robert& Cheryl Blair 917 Rock Canyon Circle San Jose, CA 95127 Mark Helton Giuliani &Kull, Inc. 4880 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 205 San Jose, CA 9129 Stan Gamble Trafalgar, Inc. 247 N. Third Street San Jose, CA 95112 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TWO LOT SUBDIVISION OF 3.07 ACRE PARCEL LANDS OF BLAIR - 27161 FREMONT ROAD Geotechnical/Earthwork 1. Site specific design recommendations for the new residences and related construction shall be submitted at time of application(s) for site development permit, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Town geotechnical consultant prior to forwarding of plans for individual lot development to the Planning Commission for review and approval. The project consultant shall specify minimum foundation pier reinforcement and diameter and shall address the potential need for pressure relief valves to prevent uplift if pools are proposed. See Cotton, Shires &Associates' letter of July 16, 1998 for more details. 2. The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the subdivision improvement plans to assure that the consultant's recommendations have been properly incorporated as required by the Town geotechnical consultant. The results of the plan review shall be summarized in a letter by the project geotechnical engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final approval of the subdivision improvement plans. 3. 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: excavations, grading, and trench excavation and compaction. The results of these inspections shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to final project approval for the subdivision improvements and for each of the new residences. Land and Easement Dedications 4. The Final Map shall provide for any requested easements to all utility companies, including but not limited to Pacific Bell, Pacific Gas &Electric Company and Sun Country Cable. 5. The applicant shall grant public utility easements and public utility access easements to the Town of Los Altos Hills where needed within the subdivision for utility construction and maintenance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The dedications shall all be completed in conjunction with Final Map approval, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 6. The applicant shall grant utility easements and utility access easements to Purissima Hills Water District where needed within the subdivision for water main construction and maintenance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 • Page 9 Purissima Hills Water District. The dedications shall be completed prior to Final Map approval. 7. Fifteen (15) foot wide sanitary sewer easements shall be granted to the Town of Los Altos Hills at locations that are determined to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant shall submit a legal description and plat map prepared by a licensed land surveyor for the granting of the easements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer as part of the final map process. 8. Conservation and storm drain easements shall be granted over Barron Creek, to include areas within 25 feet of the tops of the creek banks. The applicant shall submit legal description and plat exhibits prepared by licensed land surveyor, and the easement grants shall be completed as part of the final map process, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Improvements 9. A project grading plan which includes an approved drainage and erosion control plan to minimize the impacts from erosion and sedimentation shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. This plan shall conform to all requirements of the Town of Los Altos Hills and shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control including, but not limited to: (a) restricting grading during the grading moratorium (November 1 to April 1); (b) protecting all finished graded slopes from erosion using such techniques as erosion control matting and hydroseeding; (c) protecting downstream storm drainage inlets from sedimentation; (d) use of silt fencing to retain sediment on the project site; and (e) any other suitable measures outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)Manual of Standards. 10. The site drainage associated with the proposed development must be designed as surface flow whenever possible to avoid concentration of the runoff. The applicant shall: (a) Construct storm drainage improvements, including a drainage swale, along the northerly property line to accommodate the site drainage in 100 year storm conditions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The proposed storm drainage improvements shall be designed so that there is no grading required within 10 feet of the property line and so that the site drainage is released into the creek on-site; and (b) Construct the necessary storm drainage improvements so that the 100 year storm flow in the creek is contained within the creek banks and is also carried under Fremont Road and into the continuation of the creek on the east side of Fremont Road. Improvements for Fremont Road can be either a larger culvert to replace the existing culvert or an additional parallel culvert to provide the necessary additional capacity. All drainage improvements shall be constructed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. 11. Both lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public water system to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Purissima Hills Water District. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 10 Services shall be installed to the property lines prior to the recordation of the Final Map or shall be bonded for. Any necessary fees shall be paid prior to recordation of the Final Map 12. All existing and proposed utilities located within the subdivision that serve the subdivision shall be placed underground, in accordance with Subdivision Ordinance, Sec. 9-1.1105.- Cable television, gas, electric, and telephone services, to the property lines are included in this requirement. Plans for location of all such utilities are to be included in the improvement plans for the subdivision. Improvements shall be installed prior to recordation of the Final Map or shall be bonded for. 13. Both lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public sanitary sewer system to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Services shall be installed to the property lines prior to the recordation of the Final Map or be bonded for. Any necessary fees shall be paid prior to recordation of the Final Map. 14. The applicant shall apply for and receive necessary permits from the Santa Clara Valley Water District for the storm drain outfall and any other work relative to subdivision improvements in the vicinity of the creek, prior to commencement of construction of the subdivision improvements. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. - 15. Fire protection improvements, including installation of any required hydrants, shall be constructed as requested by Santa Clara County Fire Department. Improvements shall be constructed and ready for use prior to the recordation of the Final Map, or shall be bonded for. The driveway access to Parcel 2 shall be installed prior to commencement of any construction on that lot. 16. Plans for new residences shall be reviewed and approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department at the time of site development permit application. Conditions that will be applied at that time include, butare not limited to, providing an acceptable water supply based on the size of the new residences, providing an emergency vehicle turnaround on Parcel 2, placement of property address signs that are clearly visible from Fremont Road and providing an approved access system if the lots are fenced and gated. 17. A grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the subdivider for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to issuance of any permits for subdivision improvements. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian safety on Fremont Road and other 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. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 11 18. A Type IIB pathway shall be constructed within the public right-of-way along the Fremont Road frontage. Driveway shall be roughened or treated with a non-slip surface where they cross the path and no irrigation may be placed closer then five feet to the path. Improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map or shall be bonded for. 19. All applicable subdivision conditions of approval shall be satisfied- and subdivision improvements shall be constructed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits for new residences or other site development. Planning and Zoning 20. The applicant shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by construction of the subdivision improvements to pathways, private _ driveways, and public and private roadways prior to final approval of the subdivision. 21. Any, -and all, wells on the property shall be shown on the Improvement Plans, shall be properly registered with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), and shall be either maintained or abandoned in accordance with the SCVWD standards. 22. Payment of Storm Drainage fees, Park and Recreation fees, Pathway or Roadway fees, and all other applicable fees shall be required prior to recordation of the Final Map. 23. Fremont Road addresses shall be assigned and approved by the Town for the two lots as required by the Santa Clara County Fire Department and in accordance with the Town's policies. 24. Upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced by human skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site may be made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the County Coroner's Office and the Planning Director, as may be necessary during the construction of the subdivision improvements or individual lot development. - 25. If any development is proposed which will encroach into the dripline of any of the 40-inch Black Walnut on Parcel 1, a report from a certified arborist must be submitted providing information on the health and condition of the tree along with any recommendations on the proper construction techniques and any needed mitigation measures for protection of the tree. Planning Commission Lands of Blair September 23, 1998 Page 12 26. A landscape plan shall be submitted for re-vegetation of Barron Creek. The landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department (with input from the Environmental Design & Protection Committee), prior to recordation of the final map. The planting shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permits for the new residences. 27. - Prior to beginning any grading or construction operations, Barron Creek and any significant trees in the vicinity of construction shall be fenced at the dripline for protection from equipment, debris or materials storage, as determined by the Planning Department. The 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 the creek or trees. 28. If any archaeological artifacts or human remains are discovered during grading or construction, 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 form DPR 422 (Archaeological Site) and/or form DPR 523 (Historic Resources). If human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. ATTACHMENT 2 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION OF 3.07 ACRES INTO TWO LOTS LANDS OF BLAIR- 27161 FREMONT ROAD 1. The subdivision as proposed would create two lots of 1.77 and 1.16 net acres, with Lot Unit Factors of 1.77 and 1.16 respectively, and would provide two viable building sites. In this and all other respects, the lots conform to the Town of Los Altos Hills Subdivision Ordinance. 2. The proposed subdivision would create lots which would meet the General Plan standards of one acre minimum net lot area for land with an average slope between 0 and 10 percent, and in all other respects would be consistent with the General Plan. 3. Access to both lots is proposed off Fremont Road, a public roadway. Adequate services, including septic, water, fire and police protection, are available to serve the subdivision, as described in the attached information and the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. All lots are physically_ suitable for the proposed development. The Town Geologist has stated concerns that can be addressed through mitigation measures and conditions set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and conditions of approval for the project. It has been determined that each of the proposed lots contains a site suitable for building, and the site is suitable for the proposed density of development. 4. Since all potentially significant environmental impacts of the project as identified in the Initial Study for the project would be mitigated as discussed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 5. All potentially significant environmental impacts of the project as identified in the Initial Study for the project have been mitigated as discussed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and therefore the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 6. The City Engineer has reviewed the project and has determined that the design of the subdivision and the improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. AUACHM N Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 INITIAL STUDY &NEGATIVE DECLARATION In accordance with _the policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, this document, combined with the attached supporting data, constitutes the initial study on the subject project. This initial study provides the basis for the determination whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If it is determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental impact report will be prepared which focuses on the areas of concern identified by this initial study. 1. Project Title: Lands of Blair Subdivision Lead Agency Name and Address: Town of Los Altos Hills - 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Stan Gamble, Trafalgar, Inc. (408) 292-0797 4. Project Location: 27161 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 APN 175-32-026 & 027 - 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Robert & Cheryl Blair 917 Rock Canyon Circle San Jose, CA 95127 6. General Plan Designation: Low density residential 7. Zoning: R-A(residential- agricultural) 8. Description of Project: - The property is located on the west side of Fremont Road, south of Arastradero Road and across from Old Trace Lane, in the Town of Los Altos Hills. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 3.07 acre parcel (assessor's parcel numbers 175-32-026 and 027) into two lots of 1.77 and 1.16 net acres. Existing development including a residence, detached garage and barn will be demolished. Access to both parcels will be from Fremont Road (Parcel 2 is a flag lot). Barron Creek bisects the property through proposed parcel 2. The two lots will be connected to the public sanitary sewer(Palo Alto Sewer Basin) and water service will be provided by Purissima Hills Water District. All existing and new power and utility lines will be placed underground. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The property is presently developed with a single family residence, detached garage, barn and hardscape. The driveway is off Fremont Road, approximately 55 feet from the north property line. All surrounding properties are at least one acre and are developed with single family residences and related uses, except for the adjacent parcel to the west, - which is the location of Congregation Beth-Am, a religious institution. There are scattered trees on the site including walnut, palm, and Liquidambar as well as several unidentified trees. Barron Creek bisects the site across proposed Parcel 1. The creek is vegetated along its banks. The property is presently accessed from Fremont Road. The site is relatively flat with an average slope less than 10%. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Santa Clara Valley Water District - z • 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 [] Transportation/Circulation [] Public Services [] Population and Housing [] Biological Resources [] - Utilities and Service Systems [] Geological Problems [] Hazards [] Aesthetics [X] Water [] Noise - [] Cultural Resources [] Air Quality [] Energy and Mineral [] Recreation Resources [] Mandatory Findings of Significance This Initial study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Information and conclusions in the Initial Study are based upon staff research, site visits, and review of project plans;application for Tentative Parcel Map to the Town of Los Altos Hills which includes an environmental questionnaire; the Tentative Map prepared by the project engineer, Giuliani &Kull, Inc., dated July 17, 1998(date stamped August 20, 1998); preliminary geotechnical investigation prepared by Friar Associates, Inc., dated March 1998; Town geotechnical consultant, Cotton, Shires &Associates report dated July 16, 1998; correspondence from the Santa Clara Valley Water District;and the Town's General Plan and Municipal Code. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: [] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [X] 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have.been added to the project.A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that 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 I)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact"or" potentially significant unless mitigated."An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it 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. Signature OAA) 2LVv I Date: September 11, 1998 Curtis S.Williams,Planning Director 3 MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS: 1. The site drainage associated with the proposed development must be designed as surface flow whenever possible to avoid concentration of the runoff. The applicant shall: (a) construct storm drainage improvements, including a drainage swale, along the northerly property line to accommodate the site drainage in 100 year storm conditions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The proposed storm drainage improvements shall be designed so that there is no grading required within 10 feet of the property line and so that the site drainage is released into the creek onsite; and (b) construct the necessary storm drainage improvements so that the 100 year storm flow in the creek is contained within the creek banks and is also carried under Fremont Road and into the continuation of the creek on the east side of Fremont Road. Improvements for Fremont Road can be either a larger culvert to replace the existing culvert under Fremont Road or an additional parallel culvert to provide the necessary additional capacity. All drainage improvements shall be constructed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. All easements shall be shown on the final map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2. Supplemental geotechnical investigation report(s) shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town's geotechnical consultant at the time of site development review for the new residences. The Town Geologist shall also review and approve the subdivision improvement plans, prior to issuance of any building permits for construction of the improvements. 3. Significant trees, as identified by the Planning Department shall be fenced at the dripline throughout all phases of grading and construction of subdivision improvements and individual residences and related improvements. Protective fencing shall also be installed along the top of the bank of Barron Creek during any grading or construction to prevent debris and construction materials from being stored too close to the creek and to prevent equipment from damaging creek banks. 4. If any archaeological artifacts or human remains are discovered during grading or construction, 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 form DPR 422 (Archaeological Site) and/or form DPR 523 (Historic Resources). If human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING.Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning [] [] [l [X] b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with [] [] [] [X] jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? [] [] [] [X] d) Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g.impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts [] [] [] [X] from incompatible land uses)? e) Disruptor divide the physical arrangement of an established community(including a [] [] [] [X] low-income or minority community)? II. POPULATION AND HOUSING.Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? [] [] [] [X] b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly(e.g. through projects in an [] [] [] - [X] undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure? - c) Displace existing housing,(specially affordable housing? [] [] [X] [] III. GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS.Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts - involving: a) Fault rupture? [] [l [l [X] b) Seismic ground shaking? I] [l [X] I] c) Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? [] [l [] [X] d) Seiche,tsunami,or volcanic hazard? I] [l [] [X] e) Landslides ormudflows? - I] [] [] [X] 0 Erosion,changes in topography or unstable sii conditions from excavation,grading,or fill? [] [] [X] [X] g) Subsidence of the land? [l [] [] [X] h) Expansive soils? [] [l [l [X] i) Unique geologic or physical features? I] [l _ [] [Xi IV. WATER.Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runoff [] [X] [] [] b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? [] [] [X] [l c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality(e.g.temperature, [] [] [] [X] 5 _ Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water-in any water body? [l [] _ [] [X] e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water movements? [] [l [] [X] f) Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through direct additions or withdrawals,or [] [] [] [X] through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capacity? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? [] [l [l - [X] h) Impacts to groundwater quality? [l [] [] [X] i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water [] [] [l [X] supplies? V. AIR QUALITY.Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or [l [] [l [X] projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [] [l [] [X] c) Alter air movement,moisture,or temperature,or cause any change [] [l [] [X] in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? [] [] [l [X] VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [] [] [X] [] b) Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or [] [] [l [X] incompatible uses(e.g.farm equipment)? - c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? [] [] [] [X] d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [l [l [l [X] e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [l [l [l [X] f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.bus turnouts, [] [] [] [X] bicycle racks)? • g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? [] [l [l [X] 6 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered,threatened or rare species or their habitats(including but not limited to plants, [1 [I [l [X] fish,insects,animals,and birds)? b) Locally designated species(e.g.heritage trees)? [] [] [I [X] c) Locally designated natural communities(e.g.oak forest,coastal habitat,etc.)? [1 [1 [] [X] d) Wetland habitat(e.g.marsh,riparian and vernal pool)? [1 [] [] [X] e) Wildlife dispersal or migration condors? [l [l [I [X] VIII.ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.Would the proposal: - a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [1 [] [] [X] b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? [1 [] [] [X] c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to [] [1 [] [X]. the region and the residents of the State? LY. HAZARDS.Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including,but not limited [1 [1 [] [X] to:Oil,pesticides,chemicals or radiation? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [] [] [] [X] c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [] [l [] [X] d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? [] [I [I [X] e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass,or tree? [] [I [] [X] X. NOISE.Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? [1 [1 [X] [l b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [l [l [I [X] 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? [1 [1 [1 [X] b) Police protection? [1 [] [l [X] c) Schools? [1 [1 [I [X] d) Maintenance of public facilities,including roads? [l [1 [l [X] e) Other governmental services? [I [l [] [X] 7 - Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or - supplies,or substantial alterations toThe following utilities: - a) Power or natural gas? [1 [] [] [X] b) Communications systems? - [1 [1 [] [X] c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? [1 [1 [1 [X] d) Sewer or septic tanks? [1 [] [X] [1 e) Storm water drainage? [1 [X] [] [] f) Solid waste disposal? [1 [] [1 [X] g) Local or regional water supplies? [] [] [] [X] XIII. AESTHETICS.Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? _ [1 [1 [1 [X] b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? _ [1 [1 [X] [] c) Create light or glare? [1 [1 [] [X] XIV.CULTURAL RESOURCES.Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? [] [1 [1 [X] b) Disturb archaeological resources? [1 [1 [X1 [1 c) Affect historical resources? [1 [1 [l [X] d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural [1 [] [l [X] values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [] [] [] [X] XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhoodor regional parks or other recreational facilities? [1 [1 [1 [X] b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [1 [1 [] [X] 8 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVI.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially [] [] _ [] [X] reduce the habitats of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the - number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, - [] [] [] [X] environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts thatare individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? [] [] [] [X] ("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) d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on [] [] [] [X] human beings,either directly or indirectly? 9 . DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Explanations of"less than significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated" responses.) II. POPULATION& HOUSING. Would the proposal result in: c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? One existing residence will be demolished, but it will be replaced with two new homes. The home to be demolished is not considered affordable housing. M. GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: b. Seismic ground shaking? The property is in a seismic Zone A, which is the area of least impact, however, the area in general is susceptible to ground shaking in a seismic event. Geotechnical review will be required at the time of site development review for the new residences to determine appropriate design measures including minimum foundation reinforcement and pier depth. f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? Grading (excavation and/or fill) will be required to construct subdivision improvements and new residences. Increased runoff is anticipated due to increased impervious surface on the property once the two parcels are developed. To minimize the potential for erosion, erosion control plans will be required with the construction of subdivision improvements and new residences, and landscape plans will be required at the time of site development. IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Although there is existing development on the site, compaction of soils and added impervious cover associated with construction of two new homes, other structures, and driveway and parking areas may result in decreased absorption rates for runoff. Individual site storm drainage systems will be reviewed and approved by the Town prior to public hearings for site development approval for the new residences. A mitigation measure requires storm drainage improvements to be installed prior to recordation of the final map. 10 b. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Although a portion of the property is in a 100 year flood plain, most of the proposed building site for Parcel 1 would be outside this area. If any portion of the new residence on Parcel 1 encroaches into the flood plain, it will need to meet 1-hMA requirements. V. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a. Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? One additional driveway would be added on Fremont Road with the proposed plan. While there will be an increase in traffic due to the development of two new residences, the increase would not be considered significant. A new Type II pathway will be constructed within the Fremont Road right-of-way to facilitate safe pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle travel. X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Grading and future construction activities will cause temporary noise increases during construction and then possibly long term increases in noise levels from occupation by additional residents. These noise levels are not considered significant, however, since they are normal noise levels associated with single family residential use. To minimize the impact of construction related noise on neighboring properties, hours of construction shall be restricted pursuant to Town Ordinance 318. XII. UTILITIES& SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to utilities? d. Sewer or septic systems? e. Storm water drainage? - The property will be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer which would include installation of a new sewer lateral. Both on and off-site drainage improvements will be required to be installed prior to recordation of the final map. In addition, storm drainage systems will be reviewed and approved by the Town.in conjunction with review of individual site development proposals. 11 - XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: c. Create light or glare? The future residential use will cause increases in light and glare levels that are not considered to be significant since residential lighting is controlled and limited by the Town's Site Development prdinance. XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in: a. Disturb archaeological resources? The property is not designated as a historic or cultural resource in the Town's General Plan. The applicant is not aware of any archaeological artifacts or human remains on the site, which has been developed since 1946. However, a condition has been included requiring assessment by a qualified archaeologist should anything of significance be unearthed during grading or construction. 12 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM LANDS OF BLAIR- 27161 FREMONT ROAD File#115-98-TM-IS/ND-GD Responsible Must Be Mitigation Measure _ Department - Completed By: Done _ 1. Drainage improvement Engineering Final Map plan, easements, Department approval construction and/or improvement agreement or bonds 2. Geotechnical review Town Geologist Improvement of improvement plans plans & site and design of new development residences review 3. Pre-construction tree Planning Commencement protection fencing Department of Grading or Construction 4. Archaeological Planning During evaluation (if necessary) Department construction 13 I W ACHMENT TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills,California 94022 • (415) 941-7222 • FAX(415)941-3160 PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORKSHEET #1 ' CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE, LOT UNIT FACTORA?ip, 1 19,96 MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA, AND MAXIMUM FLOOR ARig tos,, -!„1st • TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION • 44 PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME g_oa -r a,2 PROPERTY ADDRESS 2.1 I c,l Win,,,,,r A,C.p - a_,..,114 N 114 c 5, Tic CALCULATED BY G t v L,/,..0, 1 �c--.J`,-. DATE -Li. -ct • 1. CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE A. CONTOUR LENGTH WITHN NET AREA OF LOT (An) • CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) I (INCHES) I3? 0-Cb /'f6 37.3 /5-'-f -7,S. I 131 0•$ Pi+ 2o.P • /Ss 6.3 . Iia 8- • lq S 15.4 !s6 S-d. IV( -er, /Y9 13.3-- /n 3.4- I fill, 5.3 /So 12.3 /5-8 -2•1- /q3 .2/y3 2...3/2. /5/ lI-d /s9 O-r /qv 5 31-- /52- 1,? /1-1( 69,S /53 a,(o p_1 o ± ai.-1 > S-Cc/a Sw el , TOTAL Soc-1-.'t- L`aATe�=(5-r)Co.10) -i-e, . 001.1 = 2 3 ,3 9 I Convert inches to feet (multiply by map scale) _ (L) = (30 4.ti�x(201 .. 2,3g r = gt4-�S feet B. AVERAGE SLOPE WITHIN NET AREA OF LOT S = (0.0023) (I) (L) I = contour interval L= total length of. An. =net acreage A n in feet contours in feet _ of lot S = (0.0023) ( ( ) ( gy-7S ) = ( 3.o?-3• ) . 6.S To nearest 0.1% 2. CALCULATION OF LOT UNIT FACTOR (LUF) LUF = (An){1 - (0.02143(S-10)]} = 3 . OX-3 3 - O'7 C> If the average slope is less than 10%,the LUF for the lot is equal to the net area. C> If the LUF is equal to or less than 0.50, you will need a Conditional Development Permit. Make an appointment with the Planning Director for further information. REV.8/1/94 Page 1 of 2 - WORKSHEET #1 (continued) 3. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA (MDA) A. for S equal to or less than 10% MDA= (LUF) (15,000) = (---[G, 050 square feet* B. for S greater than 10% and less than 30% MDA= (LUF) [15,000 - 375(S - 10)] = square feet* C. for S equal to or greater than 30% MDA= (LUF) (7,500) = square feet* * If the MDA is less than 5,000 square feet(and the LUF is greater than 0.50), use 5,000 square feet for your MDA 4. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA (MFA) A. - for S equal to-or less than 10% MFA= (LUF) (6,000) = L + 42_0 square feet** B. for S greater than 10% and less than 30% MFA=(LUF) [6,000 - 50(S - 10)] = square feet** C. for S equal to or greater than 30% MFA= (LUF) (5,000) = square feet** ** If the MFA is less than 4,000 square feet (and the LUF is greater than 0.50) use 4,000 square feet for your MFA. NOTE: The MDA and MFA are maximums allowed by the Town Municipal Code. The City Council or the Planning Commission may further limit development area or floor area due to site specific constraints or site visibility (see"Site Development Policy Statement"). TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY �l,(2,,s ale ()8,(ilS DATE 9 319 REV.8/6/97 _ Page 2 of 2 • fOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills,California 94M2 • (415)941-7222 • FAX(415)941-3160 PLANNING DEPARTMENT • WORKSHEET #1 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE, LOT UNIT FACTOR MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA, AND MAXEMUM FLOOR AREA • TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION • PROPERTY OWNERS NAME gOL VZ � g. PROPERTY ADDRESS PpcYL cal_ — 27 I GI CALCULATED BY [U, i DATE (o 1. CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE 4g-c44,- (,N=T) _ I. 73 A-E- , A. CONTOUR LENGTH WITHIN INET AREA OF LOT (An) CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH . CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH (INCHES) I (INCHES) (INCHES) I (INCHES) 13 ' O o 6 121.5 I 139 6c $ l419 2..! /-1/ -� /GU I -c�- <<f'y 5,2 - ��f3 2.2,9 «4 go.67 (4{S 4-6,cv o. a ss-% SLc e TOTAL /5 o 3 LE (s S)(O.Io) + = 2,3 9( Convert inches to feet (multiply by map scale) = (L) = I 50,3 x 20 +2,341. _ 534 7_.. feet B. AVERAGE SLOPE WITHIN NET AREA OF LOT S = (0.0023) (I) (L) I = contour interval L= total length of. An = net acreage A n in feet contours in feet of lot S = (0.0023) ( I ) ( 5,34P) = ) .O nearest 0.1% 2. CALCULATION OF LOT UNIT FACTOR CLUF) LUF = (An){1 - [0.02143(S-10)]] = 1 ,1-3-3 I ' '7'1 C> If the average slope is Iess than 10%, the LUF for the lot is equal to the net area. C> If the LUF is equal to or less than 0.50, you will need a Conditional Development Permit Make an appointment with the Planning Director for further information. REV.8/1/94 Page 1 of 2 - • Pct • WORKSHEET #1 CONTINUED CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA (MDA) A. for S equal to or less than 10% l ZCo, MDA = (LUF) (15,000) = l(I.soci0) square feet* B. for S greater than 10% and less than 30% MDA = (LUF) [15,000 -375(S-10)] = - - square feet* C for S equal to or greater than 30% MDA = (LUF) (7,500) = square feet* * If the MDA is less than 5,000 square feet (and the LUF is greater than 0.50), use 5,000 square feet for your MDA • • CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA (MFA) - A. for S equal to or less than 10% t :7 7 l o` (pw MFA = (LUF) (6,000) = (t -�-�� o�� _ l l square feet** B. for S greater than 10% and less than 30% . MFA = (LUF) [6,000 -50(S-10)] = square feet** C. for S equal to or greater than 30% - - - MFA = (LUF) (5,000) = - square feet** ** If the MFA is less than 4,000 square feet (and the LUF is greater than 0.50) use 4,000 square feet for your MFA TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY 61J-7,-1v1 Davis DATE 91,. / 1.8/1/94 Page2of2 • TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills,California 94022 • (415) 941-7222 • FAX(415)941-3160 PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORKSHEET #1 CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE, LOT UNIT FACTOR MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA, AND MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA • TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION • PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS 'c' c EL ,�7 1�0• CALCULATED BY G�cuC-iAf I _ (c vL` DATE Co 1. CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE A-4 ��`'ss 3 P, N� = 1. I S(a A. CONTOUR LENGTH WITHIN' LVET AREA OF LOT (An) CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH CONTOUR LENGTH (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) (INCHES) rte-- 2. in el 9S lD.$ / 53 Ffb' • 1.44 . 14•x= /sy 7.5 • 4-4- 15 ,ti i.s_s (f:3 14-8 - 154 5.� 145 13.'x- I�''7 3.7 , - ISO 12.,S /S3 . 23- /s/ ( 1t.-n' Lci S TOTAL 31,3 Convert inches to feet (multiply by map scale) = (L) = 13a 3- k 2� = Co feet B. AVERAGE SLOPE WITHIN NET AREA OF LOT S = (0.0023) (I) (L) I = contour interval L= total length of. An = net acreage A n in feet contours in feet of lot S = (0.0023) ( 1 ) (z786 ) = ( t.t 5Cv ) �, nearest 0.1% 2. CALCULATION OF LOT UNIT FACTOR (LUF) LUF = (An){1 - [0.02143(5-10)]} = I. 15C0 1 • r C> If the average slope is less than 10%, the LUF for the lot is equal to the net area. C> If the LUF is equal to or less than 0.50, you will need a Conditional Development Permit. Make an appointment with the Planning Director for further information. REV.8/1/94 Page 1. of 2 WORKSHEET #1 CONTINUED • CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA (MDA) A. for S equal to or less than 10% I , IC, I?lig DO MDA = (LUF) (15,000) = Cl square feet* .lSc��l �,�� 0 — � B. for S greater than 10% and less than 30% MDA= (LUF) [15,000 -375(S-10)] = square feet* C. for S equal to or greater than 30% • . MDA = (LUF) (7,500) = square feet* * If the MDA is less than 5,000 square feet (and the LUF is greater than 0.50), use 5,000 square feet for your MDA CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA (MFA) - A. for S equal to or less than 10% Co alb (LUF) ( ` MFA = OF 6,000) = (t-S(.o) ((arOclo), square feet**= �G ��' B. for S greater than 10% and less than 30% • MFA = (LUF) [6,000 -50(S-10)] = square feet** C. for S equal to or greater than 30% •- - MFA = (LUF) (5,000) = square feet** _ ** If the MFA is less than 4,000 square feet (and the LUF is greater than 0.50) use 4,000 square feet for your MFA TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY ,12. V AAL pis I DATE e(319P) r.8/1/94 Page 2 of 2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills,California 94022 • (415)941-7222 • FAX(415)941-3160 PLANNING DEP WORKSHEET #2 EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA • TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION • PROPERTY OWNERS NAME oaT goe_ PROPERTY ADDRESS Zlccc,( L� orT (LoP�J • CALCULATED BY- �iJc-� � J" - DATE p 1. DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total (Additions or Deletions) A. House and Garage (from Part B) 3, 2 Sc, 3,ZSO B. Decking -a - C. Driveway and Parking (Measured 100' along centerline) 3 al)o 3,soo D. Patios and Walkways So - so E. Tennis Court F. Pool and Decking • "^ - G. Accessory Buildings (from Part 13) tS - 31 H. Any other coverage - O • TOTALS 1,2. GS ►1-C" Maximum Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1) 2. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total (Additions or Deletions) A. House and Garage a. 1st Floor 1170 I,97o - b. 2nd Floor CQcx7 400 c. Attic and Basement - — d. Garage 6 vo Yo B. Accessory Buildings a. 1st Floor 3'l S '31 S b. 2nd Floor c. Attic and Basement -�— �'— TOTALS 3, S G 3 COs Maximum Floor Area Allowed - MFA (from Worksheet #1) i °Z.jp 1 v, (o"3 F TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY J1 'UVI_Q_ D sAA I DATE 319 Ij Revised 12/09/93 LRL• MAC HD/ORIGINALS/PLANNING/Worksheet I2- JUL-16-98 15:28 FROM:COTTON SHIRES ASSOC ID:4063541852 PAGE 1/3 •: ATTACHMENT 5 rai COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS • July 16,1998 13168 TO: Suzanne Davis - - Planner TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road - Los Altos Hills,California 94022 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Review RE: Lands of Blair,Two Lot Subdivision 27161 Fremont Road #115-98-TM-IS/ND-GD At your request,we have completed a geotechnical review of permit applications for proposed construction using • Geotechnical Investigation (report)prepared by Friar Associates, Inc.,dated March 6,1998; - • Tentative Map and Site Development Plan (4 sheets, 20-scale)- prepared 0-scale)- prepared by Giuliani&Kull,Inc.,dated April 22, 199& In addition, we have reviewed pertinent technical documents from our office files and completed a recent site inspection. DISCUSSION Our review of the referenced documents indicates that the applicant is proposing to demolish the existing house, garage, and horse barn and construct two single family houses with attached garages- The two houses will each have a basement. Swimming pools and guest houses will also be constructed on each parceL SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is generally characterized by a gentle slope inclined to the northeast. Drainage is generally characterized by sheet flow to the northeast to a property. existing creek channel present on the east side of the two lot subdivision ro rThe Town Geotechnical Hazards Map indicates that the property is underlain, at depth,by bedrock materials of the Santa Clara Formation. The bedrock is overlain by silty day (potentially expansive soil,colluvium.,and alluvium). A mapped trace of the potentially active Berrocal fault is located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the subject property. The exterior stucco walls of the existingresidence beenon relatircel 1 v ely able in the r to be in good condition,indicating that the property groundsy past. Laouthern California Office NorthernCaliforniafernia Office 5245 Avenida Encinas•Suite A 330 Village LaCarlsbad,CA 92008.4374 Los Gatos,CA 95030-7218 (760)931 2700•Fax(760)931-1020 (408)354-5542 •Fax(408)354-1852 e-mail:ail•carl@csageo.com Inco@rcavc�A_COin JUL-16-SB 15.29 FROM=COTTON SHIRES ASSOC ID:4083541852 PAGE 2/3 Suzanne Davis July 16,1998 Page 2 L3168 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION The proposed development is constrained by potentially expansive soils and potential flooding. We note that the limits of the 100-year flood zone are depicted to impact the property, and we understand that potential flood issues are to be addressed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. Based on our review of the referenced report, we conclude that the Project Geotechnical Consultant has, in general, adequately characterized site conditions and demonstrated subdivision geotechnical feasibility. Consequently,we recommend geotechnical approval of the Tentative Map_ Prior to issuance of building permits for residential construction, the Project Geotechnical Consultant should provide specific supplemental design criteria and review all geotechnicalocdr� uently, we recommend that the following conditions be adequately addressed prior to issuance of building permits on individual lots: 1_ Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluations - The Project Geotechnical Consultant should specify minimum foundation pier reinforcement and diameter. The standard-of-care design for foundation piers within the Town at similar sites is a minimum 16-inch diameter pier reinforced with a minimum of four #4 or four #5 vertical rebars. The consultant should also address the potential need for pressure relief valves to prevent uplift of the proposed swimming pools. Appropriate geotechnical and seismic design parameters consistent with 1997 UBC requirements should be provided,including- Soil Profile:S, Seismic Coefficient Ca Seismic Coefficient C Near-Source Factor Na Near-Source Factor N, The results of these evaluations should be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town for appropriate technical review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 2_ Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for the foundation, retaining walls, and swimming pool) 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 to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. COTTON,SHIRES&ASSOCIATES,INC. JUL-1S—SEI 15:29 FROM:COTTON SHIRES ASSUC: 1u:41411=t.ib41t1b2 rHlat Ji0 Suzanne Davis July 16,1998 Page3 L3168 This review has been performed�t�Co�rovide ces haeve been limited to reviewical advice to assist the Town of the with discretionary permit dews documents previously identified,and a visual review of the property. Our opinions and condusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. Respectfully submitted, COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT Ted Sayre Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG 1795 - atrick O.Shires Principal Geotechnical Engineer - GE 770 POS:TS:ES - • COTTON, SHIRES&ASSOCIATES,INC_ • ATTACHMENT 6 „,�� EIRE DEPARTMENT . . ''��r4 SANTA CLARA COUNTY CONTROLNUMBER �f, FII� 1.. E 1� •JuN 2 3 1594 1116 , 41i 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER COURTESY (408) 378-4010 (phone) • (408) 378-9342 (fax) reifia a zero'; Vii , PLAN REVIEW NUMBER "L 5 FILE NUMBER #115-98-TM-I DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS CODE/SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT - Review of proposed Tentative Map and Development Plan. This proposal creates a flag lot condition for Parcel#2. - The following conditions apply to both parcels #1 & #2 as development occurs. The planner for this project is Ms. Suzanne Davis. 1 Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall apply to the Building Department for applicable construction permits. District 2 Flagged Lots: Flagged Lots shall conform with all access and water supply Policy requirements in accordance with Fire Code Article 9. Contact Fire Department for applicable means of compliance. UFC 3 Fire Apparatus (Engine)Access Driveway Required: Provide an access driveway 902.2.2 with a paved all weather surface and a minimum unobstructed width of 14 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. UFC 4 Fire Department (Engine) Driveway Turn-around Required: Provide an 902.2.2.4 approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. DISTRICT PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST.TYPE PERMITTEE DATE PAGE LAH 0 0 0 0 0 GIULIANI & KULL INC 06/19/98 1 OF 2 SECJFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY Residential Development Hokanson,Wayne NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION LANDS OF BLAIR 27161 Fremont Rd A California Fire Protection District serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos. Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos. Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga Gti�A C . �. °e FIRE /�DEPARTMENT CV R�jIC SANTA CLARA COUNTY CONTROL NUMBER ■ 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER �o�q,ESYBSER�,CE (408) 378-4010 (phone) • (408) 378-9342 (fax) PLAN REVIEW NUMBER 98- 1625 FILE NUMBER #115-98-TM-I DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS CODE/SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT - UFC 5 Timing of Required Driveway Installations: Required driveway installations 901.3 shall be in place, inspected, and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of construction. Bulk combustible construction materials may not be delivered to the construction site until installations are completed as stated above. Clearance for building permits also may be held until installations are completed. UFC 6 Required Access to Water Supply (Hydrants): Portions of the structure(s) are 903.2 greater than 150 feet of travel distance from-the centerline of the roadway containing public fire hydrants. Provide an on-site fire hydrant OR provide an approved residential fire sprinkler system throughout all portions of the building. UFC 7 Premises Identification: Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all 901.4.4 new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background and be a minimum of four inches in height. UFC 8 Emergency Gate/Access Gate Requirements: When open gates shall not 902.2.4.1 obstruct any portion of the required access roadway or driveway width. If provided, all locks shall be fire department approved. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications G-1. • DISTRICT PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST.TYPE PERMITTEE DATE PAGE LAH ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ GIULIANI & KULL INC 06/19/98 2 OF 2 SECJFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY Residential Development Hokanson,Wayne NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION LANDS OF BLAIR 27161 Fremont Rd A California Fire Protection District serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos. Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga Aa iActlJt61 'i Town of Los Altos Hills FIECilii:-... . 6/23/98 .-, JUN 2 4 'S To: Planning Commission & Staff 27760 Edgerton Road; . . of Birnbaum: Construct I ifiC$Iiims$I Front Les Earnest, Pathways Committee Chair Edgerton. 5/21/98NS Subject: 1998 Pathway 12010 Elsie Way; Lands of Murthy& recommendations Srinath: Restore II-B path along Concepcion Road. 3/23/98 This is a cumulative listing of all 25935 Estacada Way; Lands of Lee: No pathway recommendations for 1998, in request. 2/23/98 alphabetical order by street and number, with the effective date at the end of 25461 Fremont Road; Lands of each item. In cases where a Zatparvar: Restore II-B path along recommendation for a given address has Fremont and construct II-B path along been revised, two dates are shown but Robleda. 5/21/98 only the final recommendation is listed. 27161 Fremont Road; Lands of Blair: Where construction or upgrading of Construct a II-B path along Fremont paths to the II-B standard is separated from the pavement by at least recommended, it is to include irrigation 5 feet. 6/22/98 at least 5 feet away from path and a 25518 Hidden Springs Lane; Lands of non-slip surface on any crossing Bower: Restore II-B path along driveways. Where there is "no request" Altamont; reconstruct II-B path along the Committee recommends that in lieu eastern boundary. 2/23/98 fees be collected where possible. Recommendations 13940 La Paloma Road; Lands of Owen: Construct a II-B path along La Paloma. 12025 Adobe Creek Lodge Road; Lands of 6/22/98 Chang: Construct II-B path along Adobe 25625 O'Keefe Lane; Lands of Borns Creek Lodge Road separated from the Construction: Restore II-B path along road by 5 feet. Construct II-B path in a O'Keefe Lane. Invite donation of a 10 20 foot easement adjacent to Moody foot pathway easement along either the Road at the toe of the slope. 1/26/98 Northern or Eastern boundary of the 26131 Altadena Drive; Lands of Ewald: property, to connect the cul-de-sac to the Acquire pathway easement and pathway next to the freeway. 6/22/98 construct a II-B path parallel to 25665 O'Keefe Lane; Lands of Euro Altadena. 4/27/98 Development: Restore II-B path along 26157 Altadena Drive; Lands of Korman: O'Keefe Lane. Invite donation of a 10 Require easement along Kingsley Way foot easement along the Western and construct a II-B path from the boundary of the property to connect the entrance to Esther Clark Park to a point cul-de-sac to the pathway next to the 20 feet beyond where the path begins freeway. 6/22/98 on the other side of Kingsley. 5/21/98 24004 Oak Knoll Circle; Lands of 12238 Via Arline; Lands of Robinson & Gorman: Restore II-B path along Oak- Ikeda: No request. 1/26/98 Knoll Circle; construct a II-B path along 12246 Via Arline; Lands of Godby: No Stonebrook from Oak Knoll Circle to a request. 3/23/98 point opposite the beginning of the II-B path on the West side of Stonebrook and 14470 De Bell Road; Lands of Wong: No from that point construct a native path request. 1/26/98 at the toe of the slope along Stonebrook 27525-Edgerton Road; Lands of Cheek: connecting to the existing native path No request. 6/22/98 leading to Juan Prado Mesa Preserve. 1/26/98 . ATIAC HMEN) b ENVIRONMENTAL;DESIGN COMMITTEE ) NEW RESIDENCE EVALUATION JUN 2 9 1998 Applicant's Name: ansa;g 5 Address: Bpi 1/ - LO TS g L,`- � , J� Reviewed by: ,0,2-7 16 / Fv:e42a fi Date: G2te_ 7 ExistinTrees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building site. Recommended protection during construction.) LSkU Veyk -7y a,lee3 4)v - ---,..5kno-c _6;v ind-v_e_Jew/ Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby vegetation. Erosion potential. All grading at least 10' from property line?) Lf 02 110 �r,ePs rvil/ /Lee /1f/fC 77 idrotzt 47,4/ Creeks and drainage: (Should a conservation easement be recommended? Sufficient space between house and conservation easement for circulation. Will construction impact wildlife migration (bridges, fences)? Is there a need for removal of invasive species?) ./ Lo// La2 >1c/c/ 7u kare4 0 • Siting: (View impact: ridgeline, across valley, on neighbors. Will driveway _ impact neighbors' privacy (lights, noise)? Recommended mitigation (height, color, landscape).) _ &Ude, , atig‘y Kje € 6ut-e,i4 �LG2' ✓t -C4L-12j44A &4L ( 5' Other Comments: ATTACHMENT 9 Santa Clara Valley Water District 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE, CA 95118-3686 TELEPHONE (408) 265-2600 FACSIMILE (408) 266-0271 AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER July 1, 1997 Mr. William Kull Giuliani and Kull, Inc. 20431 Stevens Creek Blvd Ste 230 Cupertino, CA 95014-2254 Dear Mr. Kull: Subject: Barron Creek Realignment and Enclosure at 27161 Fremont Road The Santa Clara Valley Water District(District)has reviewed the draft plans submitted with your letter dated May 21, 1997. • Barron Creek, a District flood control facility, traverses the site. According to Federal Insurance Rate Maps, the parcel would be subject to flooding of less than 1 foot in the event of a 1 percent flood. There are no wells-located on the property. The District's policy regarding the enclosure of an existing creek follows: "Flood protection or other improvements by others that would fully or partially enclose and cover a natural creek will not be acceptable except at road and railroad bridge crossings." As such, the conceptual proposal that you have submitted consisting of the realignment and backfill of the existing creek channel is not allowable. In addition, there are environmental impacts and requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fish and Game that may make the proposal unfeasible. Please reference District File Number 19535 on further correspondence regarding this matter. If you have any. questions or need further information, you can reach me at (408) 265-2607, extension 2253. Sincerely, e a Sue A. Tippets, P.E. Supervising Engineer Community Projects Review Unit cc: Ms. Sheryl Proft Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 W Fremont Rd Los Altos Hills, CA 94022-2698 trecycled paper