HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.4 TOWN OF Los ALTOS HILLS December 13, 1995
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: 2-LOT SUBDIVISION (#195-94-TM-ND-GD), CONDITIONAL
EXCEPTION AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13940 LA PALOMA ROAD (LANDS OF REED)
FROM: Curtis Williams,Planning Director
RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission:
Recommend adoption of the Negative Declaration and approval of the
subdivision and conditional exception by the City Council, subject to the
conditions outlined in Attachment 2.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is lot 5 of the Lynndale Knolls Subdivision, recorded in
1946. Since 1990, the three lots immediately to the south of this property on the
east side of La Paloma Road have been split in a very similar manner, including
13870 La Paloma (Nelson - 1990), 13930 La Paloma (Weidman - 1990), and 13820
La Paloma (Hoover - 1992). Similar issues of discussion have included setbacks
from the street, building height, drainage, and right-of-way for access roads from
La Paloma. The next lot to the south, 13800 La Paloma Road (Nutter) was split
in 1971.
The Weidman parcel map in particular is relevant as that property shares the
access road with the Reed parcel. On Parcel Map #640, the Town required the
applicant to offer for public dedication a 25-foot half street (approving a
conditional exception), and limiting the building on the front lot to a setback of
80 feet from La Paloma Road and a maximum height of 23 feet. A 25-foot public
half street dedication was also required for the Hoover Subdivision (the Nelson
property used a common driveway for only two lots). Setback and height
requirements for those two subdivisions were 50 feet setback and 22 feet height
(Nelson) and 60 feet setback and 23 feet height (Hoover).
DISCUSSION
The proposed subdivision would split an existing 2.75 acre parcel into two
parcels of 1.23 and 1.52 acres. The project site currently contains an existing
residence at the rear of the property (proposed Parcel 2) with a long driveway
from La Paloma Road. The land has an average slope of 6%, and has little
significant vegetation on the undeveloped front portion, although numerous
small fruit trees exist. To the south, a new home exists near La Paloma (Tsui),
and the home at the rear has been demolished as development plans are
pending.
1
Planning Commission: December 13, 1995
Reed Subdivision
Page 2
i
The pertinent development information for the two proposed parcels is as
follows:
Parcel 1 Parcel 2
Lot Area 1.23 acres
i 11.52 acres
I
LUF 1.23 1.52
I
MFA 7,380 sf j 9,120 sf
1
MDA 18,450 sf 22,800 sf
Note: The actual numbers will be somewhat less than shown, as the access
easement/rightfof--way must be deducted, depending on the outcome of the private
road/public road issue and ri;ht-of-way width. Calculations based on the proposed 20
foot easement will be provided prior to the Commission meeting.
A key element of the project proposal is that the applicant requests that the
access road to the four lots remain private, and be limited to an easement half-
width of 20 feet. Sanitary sewer service and all other utilities are available to the
site and publilc utility easements would be granted to provide access for their
maintenance.
Code Requirements
I
Review authority for subdivisions is outlined in Chapter 9-1 of the Town's
Municipal Code (Subdivisi p ns) and in the State's Subdivision Map Act, which
require findings of consistency with the Town's General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance, as well as other findings related to the adequacy of access and
services, the suitability of the land, and minimization of environmental impacts
(see Attachment 1).
As Section 9-1.703(a) requires a minimum width of 60 feet for all public or
private road rights-of-way, a conditional exception to this provision would be
required, as the street right iof-way would only be 50;feet, as recommended by
the City Engineer. In order o approve a conditional exception to the subdivision
ordinance, the Commission and Council must determine that undue hardship
may result from strict compliance with Code provisions, and that the exception
would not be contrary to the public interest (Section 9-1.1501). Findings must be
made which ir}dicate the special circumstances applicable to the property and
that the excep#ion will cause no undue hardship to any other landowner (see
Attachment 1 for recommended findings, if approved).
•
Planning Commission: December 13, 1995
Reed Subdivision
Page 3
Analysis
Both parcels would comply with Zoning standards for new lots, and indicate an
adequate 160-foot building circle, per the Subdivision Code. Issues of concern
regarding the project include whether the access road should be public or private
(and its width), drainage, and setback and height restrictions on Parcel 1:
1. Access Road - The Town's Subdivision Code requires all new street rights-
of-way to be a minimum of 60 feet in width, and the Town's Right-of-Way
Policy, subsequently adopted by the City Council in 1989, states that "it is
the policy of the Town not to approve the creation of new private roads . .
. " In this instance, the City Engineer has recommended that a 50 foot
right-of-way would be adequate for the access road and consistent with
the Town's policy for "short cul-de-sacs", as well as with past Town
actions on adjacent properties, including the Weidman subdivision which
shares the existing access road. That project was required to dedicate a
25-foot half width, explicitly in anticipation of the future subdivision of
the Reed parcel. The dedication was not accepted in 1990, but was
intended to be accepted, as indicated in the road maintenance agreement
which was part of the Weidman subdivision approval. Findings are
suggested in Attachment 1 to support the conditional exception (width of
less than 60 feet).
The applicant has submitted a petition from a number of nearby residents
requesting that the road be left as a private road. While Town policy is
not to create new private roads, the Subdivision Code requires that private
roads, where permitted, shall not be through roads, and that a roadway
maintenance agreement must be in place to assure long-term maintenance
by the residents. If the Planning Commission and City Council determine
to allow the road to remain private, a condition of approval should require
appropriate revisions to the existing road maintenance agreement with the
neighboring property owners.
The City Engineer has recommended (condition #14) that the existing
roadway pavement be widened to a width of 22 feet to accommodate two
adequate travel lanes. The Fire Department requires a minimum of 20
feet of pavement. The existing pavement is 18 feet in width.
2. Drainage - The La Paloma Road drainage corridor has experienced
problems in recent years, especially during last winter and spring's heavy
rains. The area is very flat, and the capacity of many of the drainage
channels which used to carry runoff downstream has been significantly
reduced by land alteration, especially filling, in the area, while new
development has increased the amount of runoff. This has resulted in
water ponding on private property or in the street.
Planning Commission: December 13, 1995
Reed Subdivision
Page 4
Due to increasing concerns of area residents, the Town contracted with
Wilsey & Ham to prepare a drainage analysis and recommend
improvements to correct the problem (see Attachment 4). The study has
suggested a number of improvement alternatives, each of which requires
residents to grant drainage easements, and would rely on property
owners, especially those in the development process, to construct the
improvements. In the case of this project, the applicant would be
required to make three drainage improvements: 1) upgrade the ditch in
front of the property along La Paloma Road up to the culvert on the lot to
the south (Tsui), including a culvert crossing at the subdivision access
road; 2) relocate the existing culvert across La Paloma Road somewhat to
the north, and increase it to a 15" diameter, 'rather than the current 12";
and 3) construct a drainage swale across 'the Lands of Burkhart to
intercept the proposed main channel. Condition #9 requires such
improvements to e made prior to any future development on the
property.
1
3. Setbacks and Height - Conditions of approval for the Weidman
subdivision limited the setback on the front lost (Tsui) to a minimum of 80
feet anld the structu ie height to a maximum of 23 feet. These limitations
were imposed "to retain the openness of the La Paloma corridor." Staff
suggests that it wo4}ld also be appropriate to; similarly limit the setback
and height on Parcel 1, and condition #18 addresses this concern directly.
It should be noted, however, that the Nelson and Hoover subdivisions
were only limited to 50 and 60 foot setbacks, respectively.
1
Other Staff and Committee Comments j
The Town Geologist has determined that there are no significant geotechnical
constraints on the property, and has recommended standard conditions of
approval (conditions #1 and #2). The Fire Department requires a minimum of
20 feet of pavement width for the access road and a turnaround at the terminus
of the road. These requirements are addressed in 'condition #14. Other Fire
Department requirements for water service) are to be addressed as part of the
improvement plans (condition#10).
The City Engineer has recommended several standard conditions regarding
utility and service easements and regarding improvement plans, including
grading and drainage contitols. A non-access restriction from La Paloma Road
has also been requested (condition #4), consistent with similar restrictions on the
previous sub ivisions on the street.
The Pathwa is Committee, has recommended that a Type IIB pathway, be
constructed within the right-of-way of La Paloma Road across the property
frontage (condition#15).
Planning Commission: December 13, 1995
Reed Subdivision
Page 5
Negative Declaration
Attachment 3 is comprised of the Negative Declaration and Initial Study for the
project, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.
The only environmental issue of concern identified in the analysis was the
potential drainage impact, and mitigation measures as discussed above (see
condition #9 of the Conditions of Approval) would reduce the impact to a level
of insignificance. Adoption of the Negative Declaration must precede action on
the Tentative Map.
CONCLUSION
The proposed subdivision will result in lots which remain consistent with the
Town's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, and the conditional exception would be
appropriate, given the short street length and the limited number of lots being
served. The Commission and Council will need to determine whether the access
road is to be public or private, the extent of required drainage improvements,
and development restrictions on Parcel 1.
Staff is available to respond to questions from the Commission or the public.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings for Approval
2. Conditions of Approval
3. Negative Declaration
4. "Preliminary Study for the Improvement of the Drainage Corridors for the
Town of Los Altos Hills", prepared by Wilsey & Ham; October, 1995
5. Pathways Committee Memo (7/25/95)
6. Petition From Residents Supporting Private Road
Planning Commission: December 13, 1995 '
Reed Subdivision
Page 6
ATTACHMENT 1
F INDINGS FOR APPROVAL
2-LOT SUBDIVISION AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
13940 LA IALOMA ROAD (LANDS OF REED)
1. The supdivision as proposed would create 2 lots of 1.23 and 1.52 acres in
size, with Lot Unit Factors in excess of 1.0. In this and all other respects,
the lots will confoi1m with the Town of Los Altos Hills Zoning and
Subdivision Standards. 1
i
2. The subdivision would create lots which are consistent with the General
Plan standards of one acre minimum lot area for land with an average
slope of less than 10 percent, and would create residential use and
accessory structures consistent with the General Plan.
3. Access to the proposed lots will be provided by a public road which
connects to La Paloma Road. This access road, as required to be
upgraded by the conditions of approval, would be adequate to serve the
two proposed lots, ash well as the two existing lots south of the access road.
4. Adequate public services, including sewer, water, fire, and police
protection, are available to serve the subdivision.
i
5. Both lots are phylically suitable for the , proposed development.
Adequ4te area has been demonstrated to exist on each lot for a future
building site. Topography is gentle and there Fare no geologic constraints
limiting developmertt. Drainage concerns hove been addressed by the
proposed drainage improvements outlined in the Negative Declaration.
6. The designlof the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. All potentially significant environmental effects
of the project as identified in the Initial Study,and Negative Declaration
would be mitigated td a level of insignificance.
7. The design of the su division and proposed improvements are not likely
to cause serious public health problems, as outlined in the Negative
Declaration. Sanitary sewer service is available to the site, and drainage
concerns would be addressed by the proposed mitigation measures.
8. The City Engineer hats reviewed the project and has determined that the
design olf the subdivislion and the proposed improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large; for access through or use
of, property within the proposed subdivision. ,
1
Planning Commission: December 13, 1995
Reed Subdivision
Page 7
9. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with the regional housing
needs of the region, as the project would allow the property to be
developed at its maximum density, under the Town's zoning and
subdivision regulations.
10. The design of the subdivision would provide for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, as the property is over
one acre in size and may take advantage of various landscaping and
building orientation options for energy conservation.
Findings for Conditional Exception (to 60-Foot Right-of-Way Requirement):
1. Strict application of the 30 foot half street (60 foot total right-of-way)
dedication requirement would burden this property with right-of-way
dedication in excess of that required in 1990 for the other half of the road,
and in excess of that needed to accommodate the four lots which will
ultimately use this road. The road is short (approximately 300 feet long),
straight, and will provide access to only four lots. A similar roadway
width and lot configuration exists only a few properties to the south.
2. The conditional exception would not unreasonably burden any other
property owner since the property to the south already offered for
dedication an identical 25-foot right-of-way width in 1990. The provision
of adequate access to the four lots allows elimination of additional access
to La Paloma Road for individual lots.
ATTACHMENT 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SUBDIVISION OF LANDS OF REED
13940 LA PAL OMA ROAD
#195-94-TM-ND
Geotechni cal/Earthwork
1. 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 Geologist. 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.
2. 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.
Land and Easement Dedications
3. The Final Map shall provide for the requested easements to all utility
companies, including but not limited to: Pacific Bell, Pacific Gas &
Electric Company and cable television.
4. Vehicular access for Parcel 1 shall be prohibited from La Paloma Road
(other than from the common roadway) and such prohibition shall be
shown on the Final Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5. The applicant shall offer for dedication to the Town of Los Altos Hills a
25 foot public right-of-way as shown on the Tentative Map, adjacent to
and northerly of the existing 25' street right of way dedication on the
property to the south. The dedication shall be accomplished and
accepted by the Town as part of the Final Map, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer .
Reed Subdivision: Conditions of Approval •
Page 2
1
{I
6. 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, including
but not limited to access for installation and maintenance of the public
water system, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant
shalledicate 15' wide sanitary sewer easements to the Town of Los
Altos ills at locations that are determined to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. The dedications shall be accomplished as part of the
Final Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Improvements
7. Improvement plans shall be submitted to the Town, outlining all of
the proposed subdivision improvements specified below. The plans
must be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, and
improvements shall be constructed prior to approval of the Final Map,
unless a subdivision improvement agreement (and bonding for
improvements) is approved by the City Council at the time of Final
Map approval. In such an event, the improvement plans must be
approved by the City Engineer prior to acceptance of applications for
site deiielopment pei
Irinits, and all subdivision improvements must be
constructed prior to cceptance of applications for building permits.
1
8. A project grading plan which includes an approved drainage and
erosion control plan to minimize the impacts from erosion and
sedime n tation shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of grading permits. This plan shall conform to all
standards adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills and shall comply
with all appropriate requirements of the! Town's NPDES permit
relative to grading aand erosion/sediment control including, but not
limited to: a) restricng grading during the grading moratorium from
November 1 to April 1; b) protecting all finished graded slopes from
erosion using such techniques as hillslope benching, erosion control '
matting( hydroseedir_g; c) protecting downstream storm drainage inlets
from sdimentation; d) use of silt fencing to retain sediment on the
project site; e) any other suitable measures outlined in the Association
of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Manual of j Standards.
I
9. The site drainage asociated with the proposed development must be
designed as surface flow whenever possible to avoid concentration of
the runoff. The applicant shall:
Reed Subdivision: Conditions of Approval
Page 3
(a) construct drainage improvements along La Paloma Road for the
length of the subdivision frontage and including crossing the
new public road to the required new culvert crossing under La
Paloma Road, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The
proposed storm drainage system shall also include relocation
and replacement of the existing 12-inch diameter culvert to a
minimum 15-inch diameter culvert; and
(b) construct a swale from the La Paloma culvert crossing, across the
Burkhart property located at 13935 La Paloma Road, to the point
where it intersects the main drainage channel as shown as a part
of the Town's La Paloma Road Drainage Corridor Study and
Improvements (Wilsey & Ham, November 1995).
10. Fire protection improvements shall be constructed as requested by Los
Altos Fire Protection District.
11. All lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public water
system as part of the subdivision improvements. A water main shall
be designed and installed to serve the subdivision to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and the Purissima Hills Water District. Services shall
be installed to the property lines. Plans for the location and design of
the water main and services shall be included in the improvement
plans for the subdivision. 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 installed 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.
13. A sanitary sewer main shall be designed and installed to serve the
subdivision to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Services shall be
installed to the property lines. Plans for the location and design of the
sewer main shall be included in the improvement plans for the
subdivision. Any necessary fees shall be paid prior to recordation of
the Final Map.
Reed Subdivision: Conditions of Approval I '
Page 4
14. The applicant shall design roadway improvements for the new public
road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.1 The usable paved width
of the street shall be 22 feet. The terminus of the roadway shall be
designed as a turnaround that is adequate for a fire truck, to the
satisfaction of the Ciity Engineer and the Los Altos Fire Department.
15. A Type IIB pathway shall be constructed within the right-of-way of La
Paloma Road along the property frontage, providing for the maximum
feasible separation f vehicular and non-vehicular traffic.
I
16. The applicant shallinform the Town of anY damage and shall repair
any damage caused by construction of the siubdivision improvements
to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways prior
to final approval of he subdivision.
17. A grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the
subdivider for revie and approval by the City Engineer and Planning
Director prior to issuance of grading permits for subdivision
improvements. The grading/construction operation plan shall address
truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian
safety qn La Paloma 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 fpr the debris box, since they have a franchise with
the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits.
Planning and Zoning
18. The applicant shall record a restrictive covenant limiting development
on Parcel 1 as follow :
"Development on Parcel 1 shall be designed fp' protect the openness of
the La Paloma Road corridor. In order to accomplish this, any and all
development on this parcel shall be set back a minimum of 80 feet
from the right-of-wa i of La Paloma Road and shall be no greater than
• 23 feet in height. Any fencing within the 80 foot setback shall be at
least 50% open and cnstructed of wood materials."
Reed Subdivision: Conditions of Approval
Page 5
The restriction shall be prepared by the City Attorney, shall run with
the land, and may only be revised with the approval of the City
Council. The restriction must be recorded concurrent with the
recordation of the Final Map.
19. Prior to approval of site development permits for Parcel 1, a street tree
planting plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Site
Development Committee. The plan shall include plantings along La
Paloma Road and along the access road to the two lots and shall be
installed at the time of construction on Parcel 1. A landscape
maintenance deposit equivalent to the cost of purchase and installation
of the trees (but not to exceed $5,000) shall be provided to assure the
continued maintenance of the plantings. Staff shall inspect the site
two years after landscape installation, and shall refund the deposit if
plantings remain viable. Re-planting of dead or unhealthy plants
may be required, with the deposit reduced accordingly.
20. 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.
21. Payment of Storm Drainage fees, Park and Recreation fees, Pathway in-
lieu fees, Roadway in-lieu and all other applicable fees shall be required
prior to recordation of the Final Map.
22. The name for the new public road shall be approved by the Town
Historian and the Los Altos Fire Department and addresses shall be
assigned and approved by the Town for all four lots as required by the
Los Altos Fire Department and in accordance with the Town's policies.
23. All subdivision conditions of approval shall be met and subdivision
improvements shall be constructed and accepted by the City Engineer
prior to acceptance of applications for building permits.
Reed Subdivision: Conditions of Approval
Page 6
24. Upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced
by human skeleta 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 Country Coroner's Office and the
Planning Director, as may be necessary during the construction of the
subdivision improvements.
II
ATTACHMENT 3
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT TITLE: LANDS OF REED SUBDIVISION
#195-94-TM-ND-GD
NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT SPONSOR:
Juanita Turek Reed,Trustee
Rosario D. Turek 1990 Trust
13940 La Paloma Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
LOCATION OF PROJECT: 13940 La Paloma Road
Los Altos Hills, California
APN 173-23-5
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A two-lot subdivision of a 2.75 acre parcel.
The Town of Los Altos Hills has completed a review of the proposed project, and
on the basis of the attached Intitial Study determined that the project, if subject to
the attached mitigation measures, will not have a significant effect upon the
environment for the following reasons:
a. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or pre-history.
b. The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
c. The project would not have impacts which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable.
d. The project would not have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
amk) UJ-&A, Nov. z-1, 19
Curtis S. Williams,Planning Director Date
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 2
MITIGATION MEASURE S , IF ANY, INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO
AVOID POTENTIALLY S IGNIFICANT EFFECTS:
1. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall;prepare a detailed
drainage improvement plan for review and approval by the Engineering
Department. The drainage improvements shall include:
a) improvements along La Paloma Road along the subdivision frontage,
including a new crossing of the subdivision road to the existing culvert
crossing under La Paloma Road, and replacement of the existing culvert;
and
b) construction of a swale from the La Paloma culvert crossing, across the
property at 13935 La Paloma Road (Burkhart) to the point where it
intersects the main swale as shown as a part of the Town's La Paloma -
Road Drainage Corridor Study and Improvements (Wilsey & Ham, 1995).
Required drainage improvements shall be installed prior to final map approval,
or an improvement agreement and bonding shall be submitted to assure the
improvements are installed prior to acceptance of building permit applications
for the site.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Responsible i Must Be
Mitigation Measure Department Completed By: Done
1. Drainage improvement Engineering Final Map
plan, construction, anct/ Department Approval
improvement agreement
or bonds
- II
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 3
INITIAL STUDY
LANDS OF REED SUBDIVISION
Case No#175-94-TM-ND-GD
13940 La Paloma Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
PROTECT DESCRIPTION
The Tentative Parcel Map proposes to subdivide a 2.75 acre parcel into two lots
of 1.23 acre and 1.52 acre,respectively, for the future development of one single
family residence on Parcel 1, in addition to the one single family residence
already present on the property (proposed Parcel 2). Existing development is to
remain and no new structures are indicated on the submitted maps. Access to
the new Parcel 1 is proposed from the existing private road off La Paloma Road
currently serving the existing residence and two homes to the south of the
subject property.
Proposed Parcel 1 is required to connect to the sanitary sewer (Palo Alto Sewer
Basin). There is existing sanitary sewer service to proposed Parcel 2 (existing
residence). Water service would be provided to proposed Parcel 1 by the
Purissima Hills Water District. There is existing water service to Parcel 2. The
project will be required to underground all existing power and utility lines
located on the property.
PROTECT LOCATION
The property is a 2.75 acre parcel (Assessor's Parcel Number 173-23-5) located at
13940 La Paloma Road, approximately 340 feet south of Fremont Road, in the
Town of Los Altos Hills.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The subject property is presently developed with one single family dwelling unit,
a swimming pool, and a barn, which are located on the eastern half of the site.
The access driveway to the existing house is from a private access easement from
La Paloma Road,shared with two houses immediately to the south. Vegetation
on the site consists primarily of a number of fruit trees in poor condition, located
on the front half of the lot. The site is very flat, with an average slope of
approximately 6%.
The site is underlain by bedrock of the Santa Clara Formation at a depth of
approximately four feet. The bedrock is overlain by plastic clay with a high
expansion potential.
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 4
POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
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 and review of the project plans; application for
Tentative Parcllel Map to the own of Los Altos Hills, which includes the
Tentative Map, Aerial Photograph, Slope Classification Map and Conceptual Site
Plan prepared by Kier &Wr�ght Civil Engineers, dated May 11, 1995 (date-
stamped May 15, 1995); Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation prepared by
Donald E. Banta and Associates, dated October 24, 199;4; Preliminary Study for
the Improvement of the Drainage Corridors for the Town of Los Altos Hills,
prepared by Wilsey &Ham, dated October, 1995; and;the Town's General Plan
and Municipal Code. Additionally, the Town Geologist, William Cotton and
Associates, has provided a December 8, 1994 letter response to the geotechical •
report,including recommendations for conditions of approval.
•
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 5
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent: Juanita Turek Reed,Trustee
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 13940 La Paloma Road
Los Altos Hills, California
94022
(415) 855-5182
3. Date of Checklist Preparation: November 20, 1995
4. Name of Proposal: LANDS OF REED SUBDIVISION
#195-94-TM-ND-GD
13940 La Paloma Road
APN 175-23-5
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are found on the last sheet.)
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: yes maybe no
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes
in geologic substructures? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction,
or overcovering of soil? X
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering, or modification
of any unique geologic or physical
features? X
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site? X
II .
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 6
• yes maybe no
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sand or changes in Siltation, deposition, •
or erosion which May modify the
channel of a river o� stream or the bed
of an ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? X
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudsides, ground failure, or similar
hazards? X
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air qualilty? I X
b. The creation of objectionable odors? X
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally? X
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents or in the course or
direction of water movements in either
marine or fresh waters? ! X
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff? j X
c. Alterations to the course or flow of
flood Waters? X
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in any water body? X
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 7
yes maybe no
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature, •
dissolved oxygen,or turbidity? X
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters? X
g. Change in the quality of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals,or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public
water supplies? X
i. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or
tidal waves? X
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops,
and aquatic plants)? X
b. Reduction of numbers of any unique,
rare, or endangered species of plants? X
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species? X
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop? X
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 8
yes maybe no
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals •
(birds, land animals including reptiles,
fish and shellfish, enthic organisms,
or insects)? X
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique,
rare, or endangered species of animals? X
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier to
the migration or movement of animals? X
d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife
habitat? X
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels? X
b. Exposure of people to severe noise
levels? X
7. Light and Glare. Will th- proposal produce
new light or glare? X
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area? X
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result
in an increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources? X
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including, but
not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals
or radiation) in the event of an accident
or upset condition? X
� I
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 9
yes maybe no
b. Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan? X
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the
location, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area? X
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing, or create demand for additional
housing? X
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? X
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or
demand for new parking? X
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air
traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles,bicyclists, or pedestrians? X
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an
effect upon or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
following areas:
a. Fire Protection? X
b. Police Protection? X
Reed Subdivis'on: Negative Declaration
Page 10
yes maybe no
c. Scho ls? X
d. Parks and other recreational facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? X
f. Other governmental services? X
15. Energy. 711 the propos 1 result in:
.
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or
energy? X
b. Substantial increase in demand upon
existing sources of energy, or require
the de'elopment of ew sources of
energy? X
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substlantial alterations to
utilities? X
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creati n of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)? X
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards? X
18. Aesthetics. Will the proppsal result in the
obstruction 1 o any scenic (vista or view open
to the public, or will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically offensive site open
to public view? X
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities? X
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 11
yes maybe no
20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. The alteration of or the destruction of a •
prehistoric or historic archaeologic
site? X
b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object? X
c. Or have the potential to cause a physical
change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values? X
d. The restriction of existing religious or
sacred uses within the potential
impact area? X
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 12
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality)of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of 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 of animal, or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of Caftifornia history or
prehi tory? X
b. Does fhe project have the potential to
achieve short-term,'Ito the disadvantage
of long-term, environmental goals?
(A short-term impact on the environment
is one which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the future.) X
c. Does Ile project hay e impacts which are
individually limited(but cumulatively
considerable? (A prject may impact on
two ori more separate resources where
the impact on each resource is relatively
small,but where th9 cumulative effect
of those impacts on the environment is
significant.) X
d. Does the project hav environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on h I man beings, either
directly or indirectly? X
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 13
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(Explanations of "yes" and "maybe" responses.)
•
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of soil?
Grading will disrupt, displace, and compact soils at the time of
construction of a residence. Due to the flat slope of the property,
along with the recommendations set forth in the geologic review
letter submitted by the Town Geologist,it is anticipated that the site
can accommodate the proposed residential development without any
special grading restrictions, and that the related projected impacts
will not be significant.
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
Compaction of soils and added impervious cover associated with
construction of a future home, other structures, and driveway and
parking areas on proposed Parcel 1 will likely result in decreased
absorption rates for runoff. Relative to the number of properties in
the drainage area, the impact on flooding along La Paloma Road is
expected to be insignificant. However, there could be an incremental
impact to an existing drainage problem. In October of 1995, Wilsey
&Ham, an engineering consultant for the Town, prepared a
"Preliminary Study for the Improvement of the Drainage Corridors
for the Town of Los Altos Hills", including addressing the La Paloma
Road drainage problems. A mitigation measure has been added to
the project to improve and upgrade the existing channel along La
Paloma in front of the property, to relocate a culvert across La
Paloma, and to improve a drainage channel across an adjacent
property (Lands of Burkhart), as called for by the plan. The
improvements would be required to be constructed prior to the
acceptance of any building permit applications for new construction
on the site.
Reed Subdivision: Negativ Declaration
Page 14
I
I
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Grading, future construction activities and in the future the normal
residential use proposed for the site will cause temporary noise
increases during construction and then long term increases in noise
lHels from occupation by an additional family. These noise levels
are not considered significant, however,since they are normal noise
levels associated with single family residential use.
I
7. Light and Glare. Wil the proposal produce new light or glare?
The future normal residential use proposed will cause increases in
light and glare levels that are not considered to be significant in the
residential zone. Residential lighting is controlled by the Town's
Site Developmet Ordinance.
I
11. Population. Will theproposal alter the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of an area?
Population will be increased slightly by the.addition of one new
house site. The project would, however,be consistent with the
Ton's allowable zoning density and the increase would not,
therefore,be considered significant. I
12. Housing. Will the pr posal affect existing housing, or create demand
for additional housing?
Housing will be increased slightly by the addition of one new house
on the property. The project would, however, be consistent with the
Town's allowable zoning density and the increase would not,
therefore,be considered significant.
18. Aesthetics. Will the p oposal result in the obstruction of any scenic
vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view?
The future residetial construction will convert an open space area
with fruit trees to1-1a residential appearance. The proposed design
will be subject toeview by the Town for design and landscaping,
however, so that the impact will not be significant.
II
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 15
IV. DETERMINATION OF THE LEAD AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT REQUIRED
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 has been prepared.
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 the attached sheet have been
added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED. X
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Curtis S. Williams, Planning Director Date
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Attachments
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Monitoring Program
/reednd.rep
Reed Subdivision: Negative Declaration
Page 16
Mitigation M asures:
1. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall prepare a detailed
drainage improvement plan for review and approval by the Engineering
Department. The drainage i� provements shall include: •
a) improvements along La Paloma Road along the subdivision frontage,
including a new crossing of the subdivision road to the existing culvert
crossing under La Pal ma Road, and replacement of the existing culvert;
and
b) construction of a swale from the La Paloma culvert crossing, across the
property at 13935 La Paloma Road (Burkhart) toithe point where it
intersects the main swale as shown as a part of the Town's La Paloma
Road Drainage Corridor Study and Improvements (Wilsey & Ham, 1995).
Required drainage improvements shall be installed prior to final map approval,
or an improvement agreement and bonding shall be submitted to assure the
improvements are installed prior to acceptance of building permit applications
for the site.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Responsible Must Be
Mitigation Measure Department Completed Bv: Done
1. Drainage improvement Engineering Final Map
plan, construction, and/ Department Approval
improvement agreement
or bonds
ATTACHMENT 4
•
PRELIMINARY STUDY
FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE
DRAINAGE CORRIDORS
FOR THE
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
RECEIVED
DEC Q 6 1995
T0WN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Wilsey & Ham
331 Lakeside Drive, Suite B
Foster City, California 94404
Job No. 156-30
October 1995
Revised November 1995
PHASE I-LA PALOMA &ROBLEDA DRAINAGE CORRIDORS
■ INTRODUCIIION
During the winter of 1994-1995 the Town of Los Altos Hills experienced drainage
problems in tributaries to Barton and Adobe Creeks. At the La Paloma drainage corridor
tributary to Byron Creek, storm drainage is carried by pipe beneath La Paloma Road to a
small improved ditch and therl in an ill-defined drainage course to a crossing of Fremont
Road. During the winter rains, flooding occurred at the drainage course just above
Fremont Road and threatened several structures in the area. At the Robleda drainage
corridor tributary to Adobe C eek, storm drainage is carried from Robleda Road in a small
�
improved ditcij and then in an underground system beneath Fremont Road. Flooding
occurred at the entrance to th?underground system, storm drainage over-topped the ditch
and threatened an adjacent home while seeking an alternate route to Adobe Creek.
The scope of tpis preliminary phase is to accumulate data to identify the cause of the
flooding and o er practical sdlutions to these drainage problems. In addition preliminary
cost estimates of the various olutions are provided.
• ROBLEDA ROAD DRAIN E CORRIDOR
The topograp 'c survey for t e Robleda Drainage Corridor; from Robleda Road to
Fremont Road is shown on a attached drawing. We have also reviewed the Town
Storm Drainage Master Plan ith respect to this corridor and have spoken with Scott
Wilson of the anta Clara Val ey Water District regardingtheir plans for the improvement
of Adobe Cre k and the impa&the improvement of this corridor would have on those
plans.
Storm Flow
A review of the Storm Drainage Master Plan indicates that the cognizant drainage
subbasins for this section of the Adobe Creek Drainage Area are areas 2-1-5 thru 2-1-2.
The Storm Drainage Master Pllan provides storm drainage quantities, or Q's, for 3 year
and, 10 year return period storms. Given the Run-off Coefficient, C, and Acreage, A, and
the Rainfall Intensity, i, the Tine of Concentration, Tc, can be determined. From the Los
Altos Hills Rai fall Intensity-Duration-Frequency curves, the Q's for 25 year and 100 year
return period storms can be estimated. These values are tabulated below in cubic feet(of
flow)per second(cfs).
Q3 104.9 cfs- Storm Dr ' age Master Plan
Q10 151.1 cfs - Storm Dr ' ge Master Plan
Q25 169 cfs -Estimated y Wilsey&Ham
Q100 227 cfs-Estimated y Wilsey&Ham
D:IWPWIN6Q\WPDOCSPRODUCfl'RTC1PRESIUDY.WPD 1 NOVEMBER 30.1995
Existing Conditions
At present storm drainage flow is via open channel to the southerly corner of the Lopez
property at 25541 Fremont Road where it is carried by two 33" diameter reinforced
concrete pipes (RCPs) diagonally across this property and under the Lopez residence to
Fremont Road, then under Fremont Road in a 2.7'x 5'box culvert to a wood flume on the
Hau(25561 Fremont Road) property to Adobe Creek. Last winter(1994-1995)the.inlet
to the two 33"RCPs was blocked and storm drainage "backed-up" and flooded the
southerly adjacent property at 25531 Fremont Road. The Santa Clara Valley Water
District has indicated that the first 1994-95 winter storm was a 25 year return period
storm. As indicated below it would appear that the two 33" RCPs and the box culvert
cannot convey Q25 flows by a wide margin(60 cfs< 169 cfs).
The capacity of the two 33" RCPs beneath the Lopez residence is approximately 60 cfs,
considerably less than even the Q3 quantity of 104.9 cfs. The Storm Drainage Master
Plan indicates that the Fremont Road crossing is a 2.7'x 5' box culvert which has
approximately the same flow area as the two 33"RCPs and the same approximate
capacity. The box culvert cannot be located in Appendix 2 of the Storm Drainage Master
Plan where the capacities of individual lines are tabulated.
There does not seem to be a practical method to increase the capacity of this particular
route. It appears that a suitable alternative would be to split the flow at two locations.The
first down stream split would, when combined with the existing improvements, carry the
Q25 flow. This split would be located where the present open channel leaves Robleda
Road at the Rossi property located at 13867 Robleda Road. A portion of the Q25 flow
would be carried in a storm drain along the north side of Robleda Road, crossing beneath
Fremont Road to Adobe Creek and the remaining Q25 flow in the existing improvements.
Due to the lack of depth beneath Fremont Road it will be necessary to transition to a
shallow box culvert in this location or to raise the grade of the road.
The additional flow from Q100 would be carried by a future graded earth channel or RCP
along the south easterly side of Robleda Road, beneath Fremont Road to Adobe Creek.
These alignments are shown in the attached plan.
Santa Clara Valley Water District
The Santa Clara Valley Water District is presently planning to improve Adobe Creek. The
District has provided preliminary plans for the improvements in this area. In reviewing
these plans, it appears that the proposed new Q25 storm drain could enter Adobe Creek
one foot above planned flow line of the creek. Mr. Scott Wilson, a Planner with the
District, indicated that it would satisfactory to enter Adobe Creek at the prolongation of
Robleda Road, which is upstream of the existing connection point, conditional upon the
quantity of drainage. Mr Wilson indicated that between the existing connection point and
the proposed new/additional connection point, Adobe Creek widens and becomes
shallower and that additional flow in this portion of the creek may become a problem. Mr.
D:\WPWINEJAWPDCCS.PRODUCIMTOPRESlUDY.WPD 2 NOVEMBER 30.1995
Wilson further said that ther was a proposed subdivision of the Hau property at 25561
Fremont Road on the east si e of Fremont Road, north of�.dith Road in the area of the
existing woo4 flume and anti?ipates some modifications to the flume or possibly
replacement with an underground pipe.
Proposed Im rovements -R bleda Road Drainage Corridor
A 48" RCP in conjunction with the two 33" RCPs beneath the Lopez residence will carry
the Q25 storm flow. A double 2.25 ft. by 4.5 ft. box culvert will be required under
Fremont Road. These improiements are estimated to cost)approximately$155,000 for
design, construction and construction administration. Consideration should be given to
any future sanitary sewer line planned in Fremont Road and how those lines may be,
affected by the storm drain c ossing.
• LA PALOMA ROAD D AGE CORRIDOR
La Paloma Road to Fremont toad is shown on the attached drawing. We have also
reviewed the Town Storm Dr nage Master Plan with resect to this corridor and the
documentation for the Lands of Hoover subdivision located at 13 820 La Paloma Road
which is presently under construction.
Storm Flows
A review of the Storm Drain ge Master Plan indicates that the cognizant drainage
subbasins for this section ofte Barron Creek Drainage are areas 1-13-4 to 1-13-2. The
Storm Drainage Master Plan rovides storm drainage quantities, or Qs, for 3 year and 10
year return peiod storms. ven the Run-off Coefficient, C; Acreage, A; and the Rainfall
Intensity, i; theTime of Concentration, Tc, can be determined. From the Los Altos Hills
Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency curves, the Qs for 25 year and 100 year return
period storms can be estimat d. These values are tabulated below in cubic feet (of flow) -
per second (c s).
Q3 58.3 s- Storm Drainage Master Plan
Q10 79.5 cfs- Storm Drainage Master Plan
Q25 99 ccs-Estimated b'Wilsey&Ham
Q100 134 cfs-Estimated b Wilsey&Ham
The above storm drainage qu tities should be increased by 5%if the additional drainage
from La Paloma Road east to Fremont Road is anticipated to enter the system. This
quantity woul l be confirmed a more detailed engineering analysis but is within the
tolerance of s preliminary esign.
D:\WPWIN601WPDOCSIPRODUCRIR RESIUDY.WPD 3 NOVEMBER 30,1995
Existing Conditions
At present storm drainage flows from a 36" RCP which crosses La Paloma Road just
downstream from the Hoover subdivision, west in an open channel along the north side of
Maurer Lane to the westerly line of the Lands of Papoulias located at 26101 Maurer Lane
and then north along the westerly line of the Lands of Papoulias to the northerly line of the
Lands of Papoulias and then via an ill defined drainage course, diagonally northwest to the
westerly line of the lands of Maurer located at 26170 Fremont Road and then continuing
northerly along that westerly line to Fremont Road where the storm drainage enters an
inlet and continues northwesterly. A non-engineered channel has been graded along the
Lands of Maurer. This alignment is shown on the enclosed plan along with some typical
cross sections of the proposed channel sections.
From preliminary calculations the 36" RCP crossing La Paloma is slightly under capacity
for Q10 without a backwater condition and very much undersized for Q3 if operating
under inlet control The existing downstream open channels and courses are also
undersized.
Proposed Improvements
Several alternatives are available to convey Q100 from the south side of La Paloma Road
to the northwest corner of the Papoulias property. (1) The system in its present
alignment can be rebuilt to accommodate the Q100 flows. (2) A new system can be built
in La Paloma Road and along the north side of the Papoulias property to supplement the
existing system for Q100 flows or(3) a new system can be built along the new alignment
for the full Q100 flow. Each of these alternates is shown in the enclosed drawings.
Rebuilding the present system adjacent to the Papoulias property would have significant
impact on the property. As the present alignment is not in a public easement, splitting the
low increases the easement acquisition and future maintenance cost. It appears that a
new system along La Paloma Road and the Papoulias'northerly property line is the least
impactive. This alternative also provides options for picking up storm drainage along La
Paloma Road from the Papoulias property to Fremont Road. This area currently sheet
flows to the existing drainage course.
All of the alternates conveys the Q100 flow to the northwest corner of the Papoulias
property. From that point a graded and engineered open channel, with a bottom width of
6 feet and 2:1 side slopes will carry the storm drainage to the inlet at Fremont Road. The
open channel, when carrying Q100, would flow approximately 2.1 feet deep. Velocity in
the open channel is approximately 6 feet per second.
The improvement costs for each of the three alternatives, including design, construction
and construction administration, is estimated to be: •
Alternate 1 (Existing Alignment) - $95,000
Alternate 2 (Split Flow) - $75,000
Alternate 3 (New Alignment) - $92,000
D.\WPWIN601WPDOCSIPROD(JC DRTC'PRESRJDY.WPD 4 NOVEMBER 30,1995
•
These estimat s do not includ?fencing or a maintenance road but do include erosion
control fabric o stabilize the ?arth channel. It is assumed that easements for the
improved syst m can be obtained at no cost.
■ RECOMMENDATIONS:
ROBLEDA ROAD DRAINAGE CORRIDOR ,
We 'recommend the following course of action with respect to the improvement of the
Robleda Road Drainage Corridor.
i
1. Conwith the Santa Clara Valley Water District the plan for the outfall(s) into I
Adobe Creek.
l
2. Determine the alignme t, vertical and horizontal, of any proposed sanitary sewer 1
line in i emont Road t avoid future conflicts.
3. Determine the feasibility of a channel, pipe and/or box culvert along the south side '•
i
of Roble'da Road to carry Q100 overflow.
1
• t;,
;;,
LA PALOMA ROAD DRAINAGE CORRIDOR
We recommend the following course of action with respect to the improvement of the La
Paloma Road Drainage Corridor. ;
1. Determine the preferred alignment for the drainage improvements.
2. Investi te thepossible conflict with utilities, the existin sanitarysewer most ,I
gl g
import. tly, for the crossing of La Paloma Road. 11
- li
IE
I
!i
l;
II
If
it
ii
li
Il
i ,
DAWPWIN601WPDOCSPRODUCITRTC\PRE5[l1DY.WPD 5 NOVEMBER 30,1995
C 1 _ - _- I I I ORA.NAGE EASCVL4T PE0.1aEJ I
O l' l ' ' illll ; I . , I { 1 X111
$TORN(LOWS :_,�A.0 L.:C-- M1• , t
]13.-N m-mew SO YA)T01 PIAN '0'S:.`.,'Air SP.-4'cA5F11T•� C':e. •,3 4 i. - �.0 @+.!' `., ``}� • i I I I 1 [ I 1 I I 1 I -I
to,R-wrn-rLou 13 Y.15a PL. 0a c 6i-,6�Lr P I ' 1 ; iI ! ' 11
11 rN.-..m-RT.rnlEsn.Y3N \ el....:C. ^ `.
IGC T4- NCO-CST.I3 NNSp t NAY -- �,=G+ //!, •LL:- _Q:Clec=- `:4 y ,. 'r .:�. r� I ;
_ T" I I i i 1 ! I •
w - :y: z=� c.._ I ._r•3;;=.., �' •• -L,.c I I I I i 1 ' I i ! I : 1 I
- y f C._,G4,� . a I c. e-�2, .t,. � , i j I I i 1 I i I I I
lEGctlp F.1 ✓ fJ t+ `C LeG.- +t ` •t?.i . ; ; . 1 i j I
-. -- C m PROPOSED CNANNR Q' / .f fi. • ca. } �4 $ ?• V CaCC:C•:lc.lG L.._L 1 i I I I. I • I : ! 1
-. now 01010113.1 1••1 _ .• i• L '.''4. ^'• V' 3C'CY G'a?C. {.L: I 1 ; . 1 1 ! I ! I '~
4005 OF WESTER `:J a y -6 11• I A i j
1 SSS V I C• c. .i ! ' ; i .....,„-.....„>,,,,i,.......-_, , i ; !
• I w l I ..:- . t I o l 1 I 1 , ' ,: , • ,
r! a m 4o ., 120 ;! a� ,V ..,�.. .c '..c. LANDS OF wLRER a 1 I ki I I ' I I ; . I ! I, • I '
Y''''Mr'%61.1 l7 , �. I•a '.0 SOS Y 1 I I I ' ! , 1 I 1
I. �,7//�v.:,,..0 I� I, ,Si lext ,• ,R c g ;.. I I I I t j i ! I I I I
SCALE 1•=40• Q' r S�'ss: ca,L=�4 B r•- _.c 0ra a [O,
«' ;` • •1 -
I/ .o. 4_92__ 4. ` �Fo,r7 L Y I E . '.'� �i1
>__ F-_/ rc.3n.r C 3 l.-'. r I S�. v1 'J-. ea ! IISSJ i-Ei�r/ 1•i I t t
03-Ge.,:_ - NF,Ec: C,=G':2 #'e O 4• I 1 1 I ! 1 ''1 1.0.0',0S i i'}vt_
-ct.N+ /.� ;S§ 702 3-t' -• • _c:_9'.!L' c I 1 i I I
\c„,..3] I' 0 c+c-A 7) .G�, - - - - - - (x I I, I I I• I 1 , ! I ' I
I Lt1n3 CCR ./ :c.__u_4/ 0:=0..41, 6. I I W I l i� • 4444 iavry,
V"' , { I I
2I_sts� I LANDS OF I R,c:•sae I I I I ;a t •
1 . !
� i I I I 1 ,!
1. c�93e7 I I1 r 4, 1 I I i �4_.. I
_2-5'.2:_ `t_ '4as t7, , `4,471 'I I
G3-9'.e 'an' .F( 41 '`.4- a1 l T ry i I I I i
`.- --L7,P.D ,. FL 4'P.0 SG:C(0.'; �I I ` " LANDS or S'ODOARD I I ! I I I •\I j I , ' I I 1
�� t LANDS Of 9URKNANT LANDS or BURKNART SSS Y I I I • , t l•
OPC 3X01 1l 1 2.9ortoN 13351.'' 370 Y 32 370 Y 32 1 1 + 1 i I I
3 1 FL.' INC-OS,(,:•! •,C I . ORUNAGE 01090 I I I i j I W
'!•.. -Sk71(/ \CL-9131 ' 1 I`''6. 'yi:. 'C',,:,.. V.;I ! I I I ' I1 • I ! f'(F.::�I // - }.\`. y9 'NI I i. ! , i I 3I ' I
•� {// ==C 5e. 9:.Gt. ; . iL.:!Ta_`Gt.2e : I I I 1,1 1 . 1 ° ' 1 i I
-C3 CF GGI{ �A'��• r..-.-. I _' G.=Lt.tG I- - - - - - - - '•; I I , I ~ (I . 1 ,
Q q• •si.HEM INLET E.-29.0, 1'' Ei_G7.6: I i i{L_��`I I I
&' ,t •9'ANOOE ., I -�, __2,c.e� I I°• I 1 11 1 dYJll... I I 1 !
y_v. CC>1C•"ieim,'1 as uw --__- _ccc+,\ ^:_;i, LA PALOMA ROAD ,
-_Cw':_A.- OD.00
•.nEL 9'.4 , 1 - -. '_ - - - -__!�5-._',-_,•-____________________________________4," ' 1 l I ! I ➢ :iI i I i l
N, _P-tL,w_ \_-:V"PC -�- `E).s' �- .w _ "IG: --ssT - - -ss - - -si I I I
__��C+.4iQ1-9C42 T /�¢ 0�- (f ti 0Ci.Ca-59.31
EXIST.55 I I I I . I i , I . , I 1 I ' I I
:,CY:3 CL.4,.40-,,' `0 tiCQC9 _ _r.Ca-LCC]'' REa.A. ! I I !
CONST.NEW INLET k 51RUCMiE r TER t2•CNP rn'M 17'COLVa PI AN • w •
-4'
i i i j i I ' - 1 1 , ' 1 , 1 „ 1 1 • 1 - i-- 1 I i i I 1 T I I I i t : I •
I 1 OD 1 1 I I I I 1 ! ' 1 1 11 I I . I i ! I : 1 I I t i I I I I I I ' ; ! 1 I • -; •
I I ! � I II • • i ill I 11 • i 1 1 I ! I I1- -I ;1 ! 5 i 1 I 1 ; , j 100
-� ��P`�`Q'"� _ ill Ii , I I : ! { ; I ,, I II ; I l . 1 II ' 1i , I 1 1 , i !i •
I- I 11x31 a•,�t.No-4 ,*�.�,'�NlO. 1' 1 I I _I I i I I I i I i I I I-I -I I i I I i I i 1 I j j I I I I 1 I I ? I I i 1
I I • ! gni 1 -I 1330,: �• i _ '1 . FI i . ' I i 1 1 1 1 1 • I I ' I• II
I i +! _ I I ---r, ' I 1 • ! -4A0--..,-r-:-,�i,-�� I I I ' I I I I i i
90 I '-• i • ICf' I ! i 1 I I i I I o- 1• ! 1 �'_� ��.m�1�.:1..'G�+J ti��I I �� I I I I l • 1 I i• s ""�_
l d 1 1 i --, i ! I f ___( ! 1
}} Ii 11 I a , l I I1J II I 1 ' i I I 1 ! . I 1f 1 , 1 `-f-.'-
• 1 I I i 1 ! 1 I I I i I I ' I I I • .• I ; i 1 t I I • • 1 i I 1 I 171-} _-
1• I i r I _ I
{ i I I L1 ; ii ( . : II 1 I i I II : ! 11 I W►` _ i
' 1 ! i I I I I I i H 1 . I I • . 1 I I I l_' I ! , 1 i l i 1 I I 1. _t.-I `r-I-n I I ,
11 ( _i i i i I I ' I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 . I - I . 1 : I 1 1 I ' 1 . ' I i 1 j . • I Fes' • .
- oo//�� ' 1 I I 1 I I i I I I I L I I I �, l �{1 p I 1 i I I I tI` i I 1 1 I } j i •
I I i i l .. •1y
Illi ` 1 1 I I I III ( I 1 1 I I I • i I I 1 I I I I 1 , ` I� 1 I i 1 i ,-I r I , .I
{ i I ; 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 I I i I ' 1 ' i 1 1 OSOl t•_T I ; ;111 I l • . ? I 1 . Ii : '• t _ l An
! 1 I I 1 • I• 1 I I 1 • • 1 I11 . I 1iI 111 I I ! ' 1 • I i I 1 . I . I� •
•
0-300 +00 2+00 3+00 '4100 3+000+00 7+00 8-3oo 3100 10100 It.00
WILSEY & NEC!
i I I
I_ 111 4111.3E:PE.)UTE E /DSL CLE Cl1TC0NY 1 HAM (.,L)Hi-1,11
. I DRAINAGE STUDY-ALTERNATE 1(EXISTING ALIGNMENT) r
r LA PALOMA DRAINAGE CORRIDOR ��4
�� 1w ,01 q.13/-3L1-01
n P. PLAN AND PROFILE :wE:N 511300
3A1[ 15501/011111015 • By- V.D.-E EOE ALTO.1•AJ
GAL/PHA DATE:oa.t 1RG
ATTACHMENT 5
Town of Los Altos Hills
7/2 5/9 5
To: :Planning Commission & Staff d(/Z 2S
From: Les Earnest, Pathways Committee Chair 19,
Subject: Pathway requests
27979 Baker Lane; Lands of Rouse: Acquire pathway easements along the
northwest side of the property as follows: a 10 foot easement along the
westernmost edge of the property next to Baker Lane and along the
adjacent property boundary that runs approximately northeastward; a 20
foot easement adjacent to the next boundary segment in approximately a
north by northwest direction, a 10 foot easement along the next
boundary segment heading northeastward, ending at the northernmost
corner of the property. Also Acquire pathway easement over Baker Lane.
13073 Cumbre Vista; Lands of Wu: Restore asphalt path along La
Barranca as needed.
12080 Green Hills Court; Lands of Powers: Restore I1-B path along Green
Hills Court, including a path around the mailbox. Remove small pine
trees growing in and immediately adjacent to the path.
Kingsley Way Parcel A; Micko Subdivision: Construct II-B path along
Altadena Drive and Kingsley Way.
24990 La Loma Drive; Lands of McNees: Construct Il-B path along La
Loma. Acquire a 10 foot easement along the West edge of the property
and 20 foot easement along the South edge of the property. These
easements will permit a future path to be constructed just North of the
creek, given that the creek and a steep slope are along the South edge of
the property.
13940 La Paloma Road; Reed Subdivision: Construct a II-B path along La
Paloma.
12101 Oak Park Court; Lands of Lohr: Restore II-B path along Oak Park
Court as needed. Construct a II-B path along Stonebrook Drive.
27435 Natoma Road; Lands of Geers: Restore path with fines along
Natoma and clear to 5 foot width as needed.
13850 Paseo del Roble; Lands of Mathiason: Construct a II-B path around
the corner of Paseo del Roble and Page Mill Road, as follows. There is a
small tree near the power pole on the corner. Trim back the branches on
the sides away from the roads, then construct a path adjacent to Page
Mill Road beginning about 45 feet from the corner and going between the
power pole and a large oak tree there, then around the small tree to a
point on Paseo del Roble that is directly across the street from the
pedestrian bridge.
Note: where construction or upgrading of paths to the 11-B standard is
recommended, this is to include irrigation at least 5 feet away from path
and a non-slip surface on any crossing driveways. Where there is "no
request" we recommend that in lieu fees be collected where possible.
ATTACHMENT 6
RECEIVED
13940 La Paloma Rd.
MAY 1 5 1995 Los Altos Hills
CA 94022
TOM Xxn^AtT'?SHILLS
May 12, 1995
The Honorable Town Council
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
To The Honorable Town Council:
In addition to submitting the Tentative Map for the
lot split of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, I am also submitting a
petition requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather than a public street
across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma at the
above address.
The petition has been signed by sixty-seven (67)
resident neighbors who agree that the public, as a whole,
would not benefit from this proposed public road, and
that, private driveways are more in keeping with the
rural nature of our Town and tend to screen our areas
from non-residents, while at the same time fulfill our
public safety requirements .
Yours very truly,
Juanita Turek Reed, Trustee
Rosario D. Turek 1990 Trust
.
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
We, the undersigned resident neighbors of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, hereby join Juanita T. Reed in requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather th a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel that the public, a/
s a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
also feel that private dri1eways would be more in keeping with the rural nature of our Town and would
tend to screen our areas from non-residents, while at the same time fulfill our public safety requirements.
Signature Address Date
/s5,7 0 41z ,e- ,79z,z,4/ 6-4 -9-3—
OP tri
�? Ar / alZ7II, IW-, -. it e .5- gr
"
/ o
i
L1
' c / . <� 6 0 ) A ;4,6 /266 , 5-6 -/5
1 %C)e eCN\ %4Api\\-TP\N' '. -L.-.19's-
L . J -1 / l'--\\acs, I\ ,i6tv,:c Il c. s -( _cis-
:, 9
W
C1, --, ,..,/
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
We, the undersigned resident neighbors of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, hereby join Juanita T. Reed in requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather than a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel that the public, as a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
also feel that private driveways would be more in keeping with the rural nature of our Town and would
tend to screen our areas from non-residents, while at the same time fulfill our public safety requirements.
Si I na +fie Address Date
I* 511'1 61/Li (au
\,61.„
y ���
C(/' / 0 a e
/Air,
J"
t*.iiVe (7rmy
/ • _ y
• /.' 5/7
/sem 0 -5 .�" �`� �,��i�-� S/7/ 7S
-?Ntif; Q ) CA"E. 17 I 9 r
//t--e 14/aPri-AA--S, Y2A-
(1.s
jy /77 / 3 yor `r 37/Ms-
Lf
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
We, the undersigned resident neighbors of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, hereby join Juanita T. Reed in requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather than a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel that the public, as a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
also feel that private driveways would be more in keeping with the;rural nature of our Town and would
tend to screen our areas from non-residLts, while at the same time fulfill our public safety requirements.
Signature Address Date
I A 17 O0 1-1-\ PAL->M H t� .„7_
7 5/7 72 3--
690,46...kJ 444, -26 eE. ,=•do( i'7/q
1,UM UL W � ' ,Aa D 3 5 -Todd Lf1 . 5 - 7- q 5
a, lad.. 260;;
,2Z7/2 7 �✓2ted �5- 7- 9
1 x4/ 774- . 26.Oa /6)-4 -re-tee
6 0 v.”
e /cam 2,‘ ae?.5-47�. 4,-/// 7 .�5
•
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
We, the undersigned resident neighbors of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, hereby join Juanita T. Reed in requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather than a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel that the public, as a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
also feel that private driveways would be more in keeping with the rural nature of our Town and would
tend to screen our areas from non-residents, while at the same time fulfill our public safety requirements.
Signature 9 Address Date
%7? 4 ,„?(,.o.),. W • -rtt-,i-..,Nr( , 5-7- ��
.."-\::4,-.itl.44 . aEiViLA MixI3eei 1--)-D S-'1-mss
d `, ,u-i2.-- OZ.07 T )1 7 , 'W
BP /9q3/ 144tett.tca 5-5- ?,
/ (-- ,
�,� _ _ - __ Pi Lis t myrivicect d- C.--..c--- 5'
iJ 026 0 7 0 D,/ ,2f,t.. s- 7- S_
•
' 0,.7, 16< , 7 /eZ �5.--7,9$
LI , I 1 4/tt Oe 57-
(7,4e.7444.___
A6ok r. ,5-7-95-
.)-1 ,(--,. e `to07:; ,�/z. v� "_::,� 1 , S`— .1>— i..5"i
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS BILLS
We, the undersigned re ident neighbors of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, herebyjoin Juanita T. Reed in re uesting that the Council make an exception
q P
and allow a private driveway rather than a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel that the public, as a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
also feel that private driveways would be more in keeping with the rural nature of our Town and would
tend to screen our areas from non-residents, while at the same timefulfill our public safety requirements.
Signature Address l Date
���T 7 ✓ Do.s 7 /r 1� vif. 7 — 9.s'
\\ /CW 135\ \- 4\ �- � 2 L `�
*oh, 111116.
(.4
QQ l 3RD f � --P� N" /7 9s
% _i;1 ` . ._- � (391 / ! owfJ& j // 5/71615
I'Cli%?;1):10(Dt-- 139* 6(\°(kvA4-1 .01,L-1 Lt- 5 13- c
2 13 7� A• PRI b.7)).4 y
`-'17(4/t/i-LA-i/ 111/d1 /a 67 7 Z2c- /1/11(_e_
, /3S0/ 578/ 9S^
// ! �%C'S v Keit51140(t-)r /1/(j_S
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
We, the undersigned resident neighbors of the parcel located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, hereby join Juanita T. Reed in requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather than a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel that the public, as a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
also feel that private driveways would be more in keeping with the rural nature of our Town and would
tend to screen our areas from non-residents, while at the same time fulfill our public safety requirements.
Signature Address Date
24051 To re )6 Lvt.e. Lftiel SIr ks-
g.tw 'G'- M . es-3oStNZ.I TR. MJF .
, , X05-0 �,. (/s/9s-
Ctdt.-nteAmioNr �� �.P-
- , . , 01 0.gav‘ /t t_ 14-1
201r),0 . /g/qr
61CtA
o�� j� O W- r-5s—"
Asztn� O' CLFipAy 26/ad L✓• 1F2Pttetin
l'57VVitIVA,91,1-2/ye_ 2!c(2013 EU, F‘wwzr44- RI( 5/0/SL .
J(26 Ale=7-veelo6 I
/ yr o �o0c Aleo e '9 5 7 rZ
- = �(� GYM 'S �acki611c
I
PETITION TO THE HONORABLE TOWN COUNCIL
OF LOS ALTOS HILLS '
I
We, the undersigned resident neighbors of the parcell located at 13940 La Paloma Road,
Los Altos Hills, California, hereby jail Juanita T. Reed in requesting that the Council make an exception
and allow a private driveway rather than) a public street across the property (Parcel 1) fronting La Paloma
at the above address.
We feel art the public, s a whole, would not benefit from this proposed public road. We
dri' ewa s would more in keeping with the rural nature of our Town and would
also feel that private y y p g I
I
tend to screen our areas from non-residents, while at the same time fulfill our public safety requirements.
i
Signature Address � Date
11 /5 -. t -1/4//eceiG4li / le Y 7 // 1 S
'N •.• , a4od � �47 Y' /7qs
I
I
4--/i ( 4. dei(a.,9..),,..e_da....._ .. . I, . /4- J�ic/fie ./, •� 4,41, , e?, / ),)
�
1
,r-)5',". w, y”0--
,______. , /I - i / 4411. /.s ,0 44 4,1-Lc /U. /
�._ ii. .. _, I - 1350 a---P �.12 _ P\0-09 , /99
1
21 .. 6. • /'a —C:J_6-c-LO ,(0 ! 1 •7 ie, Lel S.--, . , c 11 1 ? 5
l" . ri; 0Z/ /7 /ice r�..17 it; 9' ' / S
( L
j��- L L�� ----h
=_ 4 241 - iJ / -1 o l 7� d
f
I
p4, //z_
1