HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.1ITEM 3.1
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS December 4, 2014
Staff Rep01i to the Planning Commission
SUBJE CT : SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPE SCREENING
PLAN AND FENCING FOR A NEW RESIDENCE; LANDS OF
CRESTON DEVELOPMENT; 26880 ELENA ROAD; FILE #250-14-ZP-
SD.
FROM: Cynthia Richardson, Consulting Planner <JY
APPROVED: Suzanne Avila, Interim Planning Director ffi
RECOMMENDATION : That the Planning Commission:
Approve the requested Site Development Permit for the Landscape Screening Plan subject
to the conditions of approval in Attachment 1.
BACKGROUND
On July 19 , 2012 , the Planning Commission approved an application for a new residence
with basement, swimming pool and driveway , the removal of three heritage oak trees and
a Grading Policy Exception for the subject property .
At the public hearing of July 19 , 2012 , several neighbors spoke about concerns with the
driveway location and the removal of the heritage oak trees (see meeting minutes ,
Attachment 2).
DISCUSSION
Site Data:
Gross Lot Area:
N et Lot Area:
A verage Slope :
Lot unit Factor
Development Area
Floor Area
Basement
Basement Garage
1.19 acres
1.19 acres
21.98%
.887
Maximum
9 ,320
5 ,000
Landscape Screening Plan
Proposed Existing
0
0
9 , 152
5,000
(2 ,746)
(719)
Increase Left
0
0
168
0
Pursuant to Section 10-2 .805(a) of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code , in evaluating the
ad equacy of proposed landscaping, the applicant must demonstrate that the shape , outline,
Planning Commission
Land s of Cres ton Developm e nt
Dece mber 4, 2014
Page 2
color, and form of all structures will be unobtrusive when viewed from any location off-
site at the time landscaping has matured.
The proposal includes fully developed landscape plans with trees , slu·ubs and ground cover.
Water use calculations demonstrating compliance with Ordinance 520 (Water Efficient
Landscape) have been provided. A variety of plantings are proposed at the perimeter of
the new residence and along the frontage and driveway. The applicant proposes to plant
11 , 36-inch box si z e coast live oaks and 2, 36-inch box size valley oaks. Nine replacement
trees were required due to the removal of three heritage oaks . Five of the thirteen new oak
trees will be located at the lower elevation near Elena Road. These tree when mature
(approximately 40 feet tall), will soften the view of the property from Elena Road.
Plantings near the home include Olive trees , Arbutus Marinas , Coast Live Oak and
Japanese Maples . These trees will help soften the view of the home from off site. Along
the western property line the applicant is proposing Olive Trees , Grecian Laurel and
Strawberry trees to screen the home and driveway from the adjacent neighbor. Five new
oak trees are proposed along the rear property line along with pacific wax myrtle to screen
the house from the uphill neighbor. Along the eastern property line pacific wax myrtle ,
olive trees and oaks are proposed between the two existing large oaks trees. The center of
the property will be left native. Seeding or other erosion control will be done on exposed
slopes that are not planted per condition two . See plan sheets L4.1 & 2 and L4.0 for full
planting plan.
Outdoor Lighting Plan
The applicant has provided a lighting plan that complies with Town standards. The
driveway lights alternate on each side of the driveway to avoid a "runway " appearance and
are spaced approximately 20 feet apart. Recessed down shielded lights are proposed and
will be mounted to the retaining wall along the driveway (see Lighting Policy, Attachment
3 and cut sheets for light fixtures, Attachment 4).
Heritage Oak Trees
Prior to construction the site contained five Heritage Oak trees (Section 12-2.101 ). Three
of these trees were removed for construction of the new residence. Per condition 3 of the
original approval , tree replacement for the removed Heritage Oaks is required on a 3: 1 ratio
at a minimum of 36-inch box size . The proposed plans indicate 13 , 36-inch box size oaks
to be planted on the property which addresses this condition.
Fencing
The applicant is proposing five foot high property lin e fencing. The proposed fencing will
be constructed of wood and wire. The proposed driveway gate will be constructed of corten
steel. The existing solid rear property line fence and a po1iion of the northern property line
solid fence will remain (see sheet L 7.0 of the plans for details of the fencing and steel gate).
Planning Commission
Land s of Creston Development
December 4, 2014
Page 3
Town Committee 's Review
The Environmental Design and Protection Committee commented that additional trees
should be added to the landscape plan to help screen the new home (see Attachment 5). As
a result the applicant added three new large trees to the plan to help screen the house (as
shown on sheet L7 .0 of the plans).
ENVIRONMENT AL CLEARANCE CCEQA)
The proposed landscape screening is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act by provision of Section 15304(b) Minor Alterations
to Land .
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recommended Conditions of Approval
2 . Planning Commission meeting minutes July 19, 2012
3 . Los Altos Hills Lighting Policy
4 . Light fixture cut sheets
5. Environmental Design and Protection Committee Comments, September 19, 2014
6. Proposed Landscape plans (Commission only)
Planning Commission
Lands of Creston Development
Dece mber 4 , 2014
Page 4
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A
LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN
LANDS OF CRESTON DEVELOPMENT, 26880 ELENA ROAD
File # 250-14-ZP-SD-GD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
1. Any further changes or modifications to the approved plan or the required landscaping
shall be first reviewed and approved by the Plaiming Director or Plaiming
Commission, depending on the scope of changes , prior to planting or commencement
of work.
2 . All required plantings and lighting shown on the plans shall be installed prior to final
inspection of the new residence. All exposed slopes must be replanted for erosion
control to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection of
the new residence .
3. A landscape maintenance and water use deposit of $5,000.00 shall be posted prior to
final inspection of the new residence. An inspection of the screening plantings to
ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after
installation. Prior to deposit release , the prope1iy owner shall also furnish to the Town
the second year (months 13-24 following receipt of the Certificate of Completion) of
water use and billing data from the subject property's water purveyor. If the site water
usage exceeds the calculated PWB , the deposit will be held for an additional 12
months. At the end of the additional 12 month period , the property owner shall provide
the Town with the previous 12 months (months 25-36) of water use and billing data
from the subject property 's water purveyor. If the water usage still exceeds the
estimated PWB , the deposit shall be forfeited to the Town, in full. All Town staff time
and materials expended to ensure compliance with this condition will be deducted
from the deposit.
4 . Exterior and outdoor lighting locations are approved as shown on the plans. Please
note that any additional lighting shall be first submitted for Planning Department
review and approval prior to installation . Generally, lighting shall be the minimum
needed for safety , shall be down shielded , low wattage , shall not encroach or reflect
on adjacent properties , the source of the li ghting shall not be visible from off the site.
5. All landscaping r equired for screening purposes or for erosion control , as determined
by the City E ngineer, must be installed prior to final insp ec tion of the new r es idence .
6. The propo se d fencing as shown on the project plan set is approved.
7. The property owner shall contact th e Building Depaiiment and acquire any and all
required building permits prior to commencement of work on landscape or hardscape.
Planning Commission
Lands of Creston Development
December 4 , 2014
Page 5
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
8. Any revisions or additions to the previously approved grading and drainage plan shall
be submitted for review by the Engineering Department. The plan shall be reviewed
by the Engineering Department and approved prior to commencement of this project.
The approved plan shall be stamped and signed by the project engineer and shall
supersede the previously approved drainage plan.
9. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (October 15 and April 15)
except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within
ten feet of any property line.
10. Any, and all , areas on the project site that have the native material disturbed shall be
protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to
final inspection.
11. All irrigation systems must be located at least five feet from the Town's pathways and
outside of the public right of way and public utility easements. The Town staff shall
inspect the site and any deficiencies shall be corrected to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department prior to final inspection.
FIRE DEPARTMENT:
12. Gate installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specification
G-1 and, when open shall not obstruct any portion of the required width for emergency
access driveways. Locks, if provided shall be Fire Department approved prior to
installation. Automatic gates shall be equipped with a knox key switch.
Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the action.
Building Permits cannot be accepted until the appeal period has lapsed .
NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until
December 4 , 2015). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and
work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and
completed within two years .
ATTACHMENT 2
Planning C o mmis s ion Minute s
Jul y 19 , 2012
Appro ved Augu st 22, 2012
Page 4
CHAIRMAN PARTRIDGE OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING
There were no comments from the public.
CHAIRMAN PARTRIDGE CLOSED PUBLIC HEARfNG
Commissioner Abraham stated he saw no negative issues with the project request.
Commissioner Mandie acknowledged that the project is an improvement but would like to see
the five foot strip planted with native plantings .
Commissioner Harpootlian stated he supports the project.
Commissioner Couperus agreed that the project is an improvement but expressed caution for
erosion where the creek curves after the bridge.
Chairman Pai1ridge stated that he would like to see less of an impact from the bridges but felt the
project is an improvement over the prior proposed project. He would like to see a buffer on the
west bank to keep weeds from growing into the channel.
Planning Director Debbie Pedro advised that staff can work with the applicant and the City
Engineer on any modifications to the landscaping in the maintenance corridor.
MOTION MADE, AMENDED, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion
made by Commissioner Abraham and seconded by Commissioner Harpootlian to approve the
Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration in Attachment # I and approve the requested
modifications to the previously approved Site Development Permit for creek realignment, a
fence exception , a setback variance for bridges and paths, subject to the modified variance of
approval in Attachment #2 and modified conditions of approval in Attachment #3 of the staff
report dated July 19, 2012. Additionally, the applicant and staff should look at the planting of the
5 ' wide Town maintenance corridor with appropriate vegetation; and approve the modification of
condition # 14 , as reported by staff.
AYES:
NOES :
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
5.2
Commissioners: Abraham , Couperus, Harpootlian, Mandie, and Chairman Partridge
None
Non e
None
LANDS OF YTU , 26880 Elena Road ; File #5-12-ZP-SD-GD ; A request for a Site
Development Permit for a 5,000 square foot new two story residence with a 2 ,746
square foot basement and a 719 square foot basement garage (Maximum height:
27'), a new driveway access to E lena Road , swimming pool and removal of three
(3) heritage oak trees. The applicant is also requesting a Grading Policy E xception
for portions of the driveway and Fire Truck Turnaround . C E QA Review :
Cate gorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a) and (e) (staff-Brian Froelich).
Planning Commis s ion Minute s
Jul y 19 , 2012
Pa ge 5
Appro ved Au gust 22 , 2012
CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 7 , 2012, PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING.
Brian Froelich, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. The proposal is for a new residence,
swimming pool , and removal of three heritage oak trees . The property includes an existing single
story, ranch style home which will be demolished. The driveway easement is shared with 26875
Elena Road and is to be abandoned with the new construction. A two-story residence with nearly
a full basement, two parking spaces in the garage, and two surface parking spaces along the
driveway lane are proposed. With regard to the Grading Policy Exceptions, there are three areas
of additional cut associated with the driveway and fire truck turnaround. The areas total 610
square feet with cuts up to 11 feet in depth; the fill area, along the driveway lane is 1,266 square
feet of fill up to five feet, where three feet would be allowed. There is a small area of six square
feet where an additional six inches of fill is requested associated with the swimming pool. A
petition was received with opposition to the oak tree removal , and concerns about the driveway
slope were received . Compliance issues relate to the basement and a wall at the end of the
basement.
CHAIRMAN PARTRIDGE OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING
Simon Yiu , applicant, explained that he purchased the property to build a house for his parents.
He has met with several neighbors and Commissioners to discuss the scope of the project.
Steve Stept Architect, stated the proposed home is 5,000 square feet with a master suite on the
main level and space for family gatherings . The project took into consideration the privacy of the
neighbor to the north. Concerns expressed by neighbors were considered with regard to privacy,
tree removal, landscape screening, noise pollution, hydrology, grading and drainage. Two
options were looked at in the site analysis : having the driveway bisect the front of the site with a
fire truck turnaround on the southern portion of the site or moving the driveway straight up the
hill with the fire truck turnaround in the back and shift the pool to the southern portion. A more
confined area for the pool was created. The design of the building was sensitive in terms of
massing, natural materials , and scale.
Pete Carlino , Civil Engineer, stated that the site was a constrained, upsloping lot. Three
constraint issues were looked at: driveway location , drainage, and the proposed septic system.
The driveway was shifted away from the intersection of Elena Road and centered to give clear
line of sight distance and smooth transition out into the road. The drainage system was designed
for extra storage of water. Water runoff from the property was a big concern . A culvert will be
added to drain down the road to the Foothill Lane catch basin .
The architect added that the design was created to be sensitive to neighbors and to meet the
needs and goals of the family. With regard to compliance issues , an error in the CAD drawings
of the basement was found. The error was fixed and there is no change in the design. Another
issue had to do with reducing the house by 6.25 square feet.
Director Pedro clarified that the proposed 24' 1" wall is not in compliance with the basement
ordinance; however, if the natural grade is put back to meet the 28 inch requirement, that portion
Pl annin g Commi ss io n Minut es
Jul y 19 , 2012
Page 6
App rov ed August 22 , 2012
would not be counted as daylighted , and the 25 percent daylight requirement would be met. The
window needs to be made smaller in order to meet the daylight requirement.
The Architect stated he is willing to make the necessary changes and added he is confident that
there are no other errors .
Commissioner Couperus asked about the location of air conditioning, electrical, mechanical and
compressors.
The Architect explained that the location of the mechanical equipment is on the southwest corner
of the building.
Jeff Pack, Acoustical Engineer , stated that , given the distance to the nearest property, he would
not expect any noise problems. He added he has not looked at the equipment in detail.
Commissioner Harpootlian stated he visited the property and discussed with the Architect about
lowering the driveway area. He added that the Architect indicated a couple feet might be
feasible which would reduce the overall slope of the driveway.
The Architect explained that it is possible to lower the driveway area which would lower the
slope of the driveway . There is no benefit to lowering the building. Additional excavation and
higher retaining walls would be an added expense to the property owner.
Commissioner Harpootlian would like to see an option with the driveway , noting that there is a
difference between a 20 percent driveway and an 18 percent driveway.
The Architect stated the driveway could be lowered where the fire truck turnaround is which
would lower the level of the garage by two feet and the entry of the house by two feet. Lowering
the building would lose the opportunity to bring light into the whole house from both sides .
Discussion was held about undergrounding utilities. Mr. Carlino indicated he spoke with PG&E
about the utility line coming from Elena Road and options. The utility line can be placed
underground , at a cost ; a new easement line will need to be rededicated under the utility line and
an all weather access will need to be placed over the line. The neighbor 's utilit y line would also
have to be underground.
Commissioner Abraham suggested an alternative to put the meter close to the property line at
Elena which would be the termination point for PG&E. No further access roads would be
needed .
Larry Del Carlo, neighbor at corner of Elena and La Baranca , objected to the removal of the
heritage oak trees and the slope of the driveway.
Carl Snyder, neighbor, objected to the removal of the trees and offered that his architect designed
his residence without having to remove any trees. He stated that the applicant 's driveway
perspective on the architect's drawing is misleading in scale. He encouraged the Planning
Commission to give careful consideration to the project before approving it.
Planning Commission Minutes
Jul y 19, 2012
Page 7
Approved August 22, 20 12
Don Harriman, neighbor on Elena, objected to the swimming pool in the front yard because it
wil l be a nuisance to the neighborhood.
John O 'Connell , neighbor, stated that the 2,000 square foot driveway turnaround at the rear of
the property adjacent to his prope11y intruded on his privacy. He suggested it is feasible to design
the house to maintain one or two of the oak trees. He objected to the 20 percent gradient of the
driveway which will generate much noise from vehicles traveling up and down the driveway and
objected to the basement being exempt from floor area.
Steven Chang, neighbor, referred to prior comments made about an existing easement off his
driveway to the Yiu property. He explained that the easement was extinguished, and the Yiu's
property access is on a Driveway Site License that will expire at a set time period or if a new
property is bui It. He added that the free use of the driveway will expire on August 23, 2012 , and
the absolute use of the driveway expires in three years. His prior concerns related to privacy and
soi l instability have been satisfactori ly addressed by the applicant.
Lennie Mok, daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Yiu , spoke in support of the application and urged the
Planning Commiss ion to approve the project.
Jeff Pack, Acoustic Engineer, stated that he visited a Storyh ill Lane property with a similar grade
and similar pavers that are planned for the proposed project and measured three scenarios: cars
traveling up the driveway, cars in the flat area in front of the garage, and cars traveling down the
s lope. He summarized details that were presented in the noise anal ysis report.
The Architect addressed the issue of the basement ordinance and stated he is convinced the
project is in compliance. With regard to the proposed tree removal, he stated that it is necessary
for the fire truck turnaround. He stated that he looked at other options to try to save a tree but the
location of the fire truck turnaround wou ld require removal of the trees.
CHAIRMAN PARTRIDGE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING
Commissioner Harpootlian supports the design of the project and acknowledged that the property
is a challenge. One of his concerns is to try to reduce the steepness of the driveway. He is
interested in addressing the undergrounding goals of the Town and supports granting more cut in
order to allow lowering the driveway a coup le of feet.
Commissioner Abraham did not concur with the idea of lowering the driveway to reduce the
slope. He supports the removal of the oak trees and added that the applicant has been very
considerate of the privacy of the neighbors. He supports the id ea of undergrounding the utilities.
Commissioner Mandie pointed out that the previous project that was approved would have
removed the same trees and was approximately the same size house with a driveway in
approximately the same location. She supports the proposed turnaround location because it is
below grade level and will help with noise reduction. She is not in favo r of lowering the
driveway but would like to see screening between the new house and the neighbors prior to
approval.
Planning Commi ssion Minutes
July 19 , 2012
Appro ved A ugu s t 22, 2012
Page 8
Commissioner Couperus supports the proposed driveway which is an improvement over the plan
that came before the Planning Commission two years ago. He is sensitive to hydrology runoff
and notes that the applicant has done more than what he was asked to in order to capture runoff,
hold it and dissipate it through an energy dissipater. He supports the project.
Chairman Partridge supports ensuring that the house meets the Town's codes which he believes
the applicant can work out with staff. He supports the design of the house and applauds the
applicant for addressing the neighbor 's concerns and concurs with his fellow Commissioners on
the undergrounding utility issue.
Director Pedro noted that the current policy on undergrounding has been in place for quite
awhile; the ordinance that carries out the policy can be amended or modified if the Commission
wished to make a suggestion . She recommended that the discussion be agendized for a future
meeting, at which time the Commission could make changes. She explained that the applicant is
in compliance with the ordinance.
Commissioner Abraham wants to see a discussion with a representative from the City Council in
order to come up with a policy and ordinance that will suppo11 undergrounding.
Director Pedro pointed out that the Town had an ad hoc Undergrounding Committee which could
be revived to study the issue .
Chairman Partridge commented that the landscape screening plan comes after the framing of the
house is finished ; the Planning Commission has the option to request that the plan come back for
further review .
MOTION MADE, SECONDED , AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Motion made by
Commissioner Abraham and seconded by Commissioner Harpootlian to approve the requested
Site Development Permit for the new residence, driveway, swimming pool , removal of three (3)
heritage oak trees and the Grading Policy exception for the driveway, subject to the
recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment #1 of the staff report dated July 19, 2012,
and findings for the Grading Policy Exception in Attachment #2. Additionally, the applicant and
staff will work together to modify the grade at the planter area along the west wall outside the
stairwell and entry area, to be at an elevation of 532.9 or higher; add a condition to require the
applicant to submit a revised floor plan to reduce the floor area by a minimum of 6.25 square
feet ; and landscaping plan to be brought back to the Planning Commission.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners: Mandie, Harpootlian, Abraham, Couperus; and Chairman Partridge
None
None
None
Richard Chiu , City Engineer/Public Works Director, suggested that discussion be held with
several Council Members regarding the undergrounding of utilities and then to form a
subcommittee to further the discussions .
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills , CA 94022
Phone : (650) 941-7222
www.losaltoshills.ca .gov
ATTACHMENT 3
Outdoor Lighting Policy
Approved by City Council -9/30/97
Amended by City Council -5/17 /12
Code Sections and Fast Track Guide for New Residences:
Article of Title I 0 Chapter 2 of the Site Development Ordinance out lin es criteria for outdoor
lighting. In particular, Section 10-2.1005 indicates that outdoor lighting should use "the
minimum wattage lights which will safely illuminate the area" and that outdoor light sources
"shall be shielded so as not to be directly visible from off-site." Goal IV (C3) of the Fast Track
Guide for New Residences suggests that exterior lights be carefully placed to prevent light
shining onto neighboring houses. The Zoning and Site Development Ordinances limit lighting
within the property line setbacks to "driveway light fixtures , limited to one fixture on each side
of a driveway, for a maximum of two (2) fixtures per lot," but additional fixtures may be
approved if necessary for safety.
The purpose of Zoning and Site Development Ordinances and the Fast Track Guide regarding
outdoor lighting is to assure that the open and peaceful character of the Town is maintained, that
adequate lighting is provided for the enjoyment of outdoor use areas, lighting does not intrude on
the privacy of neighbors , light pollution is reduced, and the glare is minimized onto adjacent
properties. The intent of this policy is to clarify the types and numbers of li g htffig fixtures that
are genera ll y consistent with the ordinances and the Fast Track Guide, yet to a llow flexibility for
additiona l lighting when it is necessary for safety purposes or where it is not visible from off the
site.
Policy:
1. The number of lights on the exterior of a structure should be limited to providing for one
li ght per doorway , with the exception of two lights at the main entrance, at double doors
or garage doors , etc., and additional li ghts only where the Planning Director or Planning
Commission determines they are needed for safety .
2 . Pathway and driveway lighting should be restricted to low-height fixtures and should be
spaced the maximum distance apart which w ill still provide for safe use . In order to
avoid a "runway" appearance, it is recommended that li ghting be placed on only one side
of the driveway or walkway, or alternate from one side to the other. Recessed louvered
lights are suggested for walkways and steps.
3. Light fixtures should be shielded or down lights, so that the light source is not visible
from off site . Exceptions may be permitted in limited locations (entry, garage, etc .) or
where the fixtures would not be visible from off site.
4. Downlighting from trees is acceptable if provided for safety or for outdoor use areas,
where minimal in number, and where the light source is not visible from off site .
5. Uplighting of trees is not allowed , unless it is clearly demonstrated that the number of
such lights are minimal and the glow of the up lighting would not be visible from off site.
6 . Spotlights should be limited in number, and directed away from clear view of neighbors.
Shielding of spotlights with shrouds or louvers is suggested.
7. High intensity discharge lighting, such as mercury vapor, high and low pressure sodium ,
and metal halide lighting, is prohibited.
8. Lighting within the property line setbacks is limited to two driveway light fixtures ooly,
for the purpose of locating and identifying the site. No lights are allowed in side or rear
yard setback areas, except where determined to be necessary for safety.
9. The Planning Commission and /or staff may allow lighting different from that outlined
above when the proposed outdoor lighting is determined to be necessary to safely
illuminate the area , or where the size of the property and /or extensive screening will
assure that the light source is not visible from off site.
10 . Artificial lighting is not permitted for tennis courts or other recreation/sports courts.
11. Pool lighting is allowed under the following conditions :
Definitions
• Lights are placed beneath the surface of the water in the pool or spa to illuminate
the water
• Other exterior lights used to illuminate the surrounding area use the m1111mum
number and wattage of lighting which will safely illuminate the area
• No direct light is cast beyond the immediate area of the pool
* Glare -Lighting entering th e eye directl y from luminaries or indire ctl y from refl e cti ve s urfaces that cau se s v is ual
di scomfort or reduced v is ibility . * Light Pollution -An y ad verse e ffect of ai1ificial li ght including, but not limited to , glare , li ght tres pass, sky glo w,
e ne rgy waste, compromi sed sa fe ty and security , and impacts on th e nocturnal env ironment.
FX Luminaire
I
MS: Wall Light
NUMBER OF LEDS:
HALOGEN LUMEN OUTPUT EQUIVALENT: 10 Watt
USEFUL LED LIFE (L70): 50,000 hr s avg
INPUT VOLTAGE: 10to15V
VA TOTAL: (Use this numbertosizethetransformer) 2.4
WATTS USED: 2.0
LUMENS PER WATT (EFFICACY) 25
MAXLUMENS. 52
CCT (Ra) 78.5
I Learn more about FX Lum in ai re wall lights. Visit: fxl.com
ATTACHMENT 4
LEO Wall Lights
Th e MS pairs the popular styling of the MM with
the energy efficiency and long life of LED tec hnology.
Choose brass or a variety of powder coat fi nishes
to add contrast or subtly comp leme nt the
surroundings.
2 "/5 .1 cm
0
.375"/1 cm
760.744.5240
2
'" ~
Ci
6
"' "' .....
~
I
4 /12
ORDERING INFORMATION LED
MS: Wall Light
FACTORY INSTALLED OPTIONS: Order 1 +2 (optional )+ 3 + 4
Step Description Code
FIXTURE MS
2 OPTIONALZD ZD (Refer to the Lu xor page in the Lighting Control section)
3 LAMP lLED (50,000 avg. life hours)
4 FINISH AB*, AT*, BS, NP*, WG, FW, AL, BZ, DG, WI, VF, SB, FB
EXAMPLE: MS-ZD-1LED-BZ =MS -ZD Option -1LED Board -Bronze Metallic Finish
PHOTOMETRICS:
MS 1LED ILLUMINANCE AT A DISTANCE
Center Beam FC Beam Width
1.7 ft l .9ft 3 .6 ft
3.3 ft 2 .91 fc 3.8ft 7.3ft
5.0 ft 1.29 fc 5 .8ft 10 .9ft
6.7 ft 0.73 fc 7.7ft 14 .6ft
8.3 ft 0.47fc 9.6 ft 18 .2ft
10 .0ft 0.32 fc 11.5 ft 21.8ft
Ve rti cal Sp read: 59 .8° • Honzon ta l Spread : 95 .0°
Beam angle 1s calcul ated usin g LM -79 met hod for SSL Lu minai res :
"Beam angle 1s defined as two tw1es the ve't1cal angl e at which the 1ntens1ty s 50% of the maximum."
760.744.5240 I fxl.com
METALS • •
AB= Antique Bronze•
(On Brass)
AT= Antique Tumbled•
(On Brass)
NP= Nickel Plate•
BS= Natural Brass
POWDER COAT
WG =White Gloss
FW =Flat White
AL= Almond
• BZ =Bronze Metallic
DG = Desert Granite
• WI= Weathered Iron
• VF= Verde Speckle
• SB = Sedona Brown
• FB =Flat Black
The MS includes o 1LED
board, choice of finish and
9 ft lead wire.
All MS wall lights come
standard with amber,
and frosted filters
• May require longer lead time
c@us
LISTED
3YJ8
FX Luminaire
Page 1 of 1
http://www.vistapro.com/files/pictures/colors/4202 _ Z.jpg 11/4/2014
PROFESSIONAL
OUTDOOR LI GHTING
SPECIFICATION SHEET
Type:
Model :
Project: --------------------
MODEL 4202-LED Landscape Series • Path & Spread Lights
FIXTURE SPECIFICATIONS :
HOUSING :
Die-cast, copper-free aluminum.
STEM:
1 " sq. aluminum tube with W' NPT.
FINISH :
Polyester powder-coat finish availab le in Black, Verde, Architectu ral
Brick, Arch itectura l Bronze, Light Bronze, Dark Bronze, Granite, Pewter,
Terracotta, Rust, Hunter Green, Mocha, Weathered Bronze, Weathered
Iron, and White.
LENS :
Clear, high-impact, polycarbonate lens.
LAMP TYPE:
High Output LED w it h Vista exclusive smart-driver, powered to operate
for 50,000 hours.
ELECTRICAL:
Input voltage range 6-1 SV AC, regulated to achieve uniform i llumi nation
throughout the cab le run of fixtures. Integral surge & re verse polarity
protection.
DIMENSIONS:
283/."
730 .3mm
MOUNTING :
Bottom of stem threaded with W ' NPT. Fixture may be mounted into
threaded hubs in junction boxes, ground stakes , or floor-mounting
canopies. Please see fixture ordering information for mounting selection.
FASTENERS :
All fasteners are stainless stee l.
WIRING :
Prew ired with a three-foot pigta il of 18-2 direct-buria l cable and
underground connectors for a secure connection to supply cable.
Al l Vista lu m ina ires are MADE IN U.S.A.
3'/."
79.4mm
-1
O t
5"
127
1
mm
1 -4"~ 101.6mm
Visra Professional Outdoor Lighting reserves the right W modify the design and/or construction of the fixture shown without further notification.
1625 Surveyor Avenue • Simi Va ll ey, CA 93063 • (805) 527-0987 • (800) 766-VISTA (8 478)
FAX: (888) 670·VISTA (8478) • email@vistapro.com • www.vistapro.com
PROFESSIONAL
OUTDOOR LIGHTING
SPEC IFIC A T ION SH EET
MODEL 4 2 0 2-L ED Landscape Series • Path & Spread Lights
FIXTURE ORDERING INFORMATION
TO ORDER FI XTURE: Se lect appro pri ate ch oice from eac h col u mn as in th e followi ng exa m p le.
EXAMPLE: PR -4202 -B -W-L B2ND
MOUNTI NG MODEL FINISH
PR -ABS ground stake 4202 B - Black
G -Verde
BR -Architectura l Brick
Z -Architectural Bronze
LZ -Light Bronze
DZ -Da rk Bronze
GT -Granite
P -Pewter
TC -Terracotta
R -Rust
HG -Hunter Green
M -Mocha
WB -Weathered Bronze
WI -Weathered Iron
W-White
Fixtures shipped wit h standard lamp, un less ot h erwise specified .
Fixtures shipped with specified mounting hardware.
Not e: Optional custom length stems avai lab le. Cons ult loca l distributor.
COLOR TEMP
W-Warm
N -Neutral
C-Cool
LAM P
LB2ND -2.5 watt
LBSND -5 watt
LED -Group B
Emitter Oty - 1
Temperature -Warm 0Nl,
Neutral (N), Coo l (C)
Operating vo ltage range -
6 to 15V.
(P lease see lamp order
code co lumn on lamp
guide, V ista product
ca t alog.)
Vista Profess ional Outdoor Lighting reseNes the right to modify the design and/or constru ct ion of the fi xture sho wn without further notification .
1625 Surveyor Avenue • Simi Valley, CA 93063 • (805) 527-0987 • (800) 766-VISTA (8478)
FAX: (888) 670-VISTA (8478) • email@vistap ro .com • www.vistapro .c om 4202-LED 04.1 4
G
( )
~';)~ ~,,,o,~,. e'KtoSToN JJ:fVV--
____.. ------~-~ ATTACHMENT 5
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN and PROTECTION COMMITTEE
~:~:P.JI~~~i ~6=fgf;::::·.:.:·:::-.:::::i:=~.·~:~·:: .. ~:~:::::·.::::::·:-.:·:·.:::·.::::·.·::::.::::::::.:-.::::.
EP.~P.If~~-fB_a.:6]~~:~:::=::-.-.::l~••h~h~~K•~•<t>·~-.:.::~~~-~f~.L .. ~-m••::=:::: .. •-•:•••hh~::::.
:~:~.i?Jl~~:6-~~_g~:f.~~i~:::-.:::t···.:::~.·-~:~q:::-.: .. ::.~:::::: ... ~~~~~:~=:.~::::::.-.:::::~::::::~::~::::
~~_yl~~~e <! bY..: ............ ·-····-···~····~··-. ~-··-·-···--·····················'········~-.-~--······························································
~~~~=:-.~~-.===-.·::::::=:~-.::J:::::=::?.c ~-.::cc:i=~-.r -.~:-.~:-.-.-.=:::::-.==-.::::-.::::-.:-.:-.::::::::::::-.=:~=::::-.:::-.:::=:~~-.-.-.::-.-.-.:::-.::-.::::::~:::-.::
··-··---------------·-········------· ·-·~-----··-·········-·····--···-·--···--····--·······--·-------------···-·--·-·-··-·······-···--·····--··-··-··-······-··--·-···--·-----
COMMENTS ···-··----------·--------------------··--······-··-----------·-··-··--··-·--···-·--·--·--···---------·········---------------------------------·------
·-·········--······----········-········-···-·· ·····--~~···-~·-··~~·········-·······-·-··
~i~hl~~~-=-~::~:~•: ~::-~r:1~=~:-~3=: :~:=~~~~i::~
::~~:::::·:~::~:::~:==~-.:-.::~::::-.·::~=:::: ::::=:~:::~:~:~::::~~~t::::::-.::~~:::·-.:::::::::::·=:::::~:~:::-.
.~9.!?~-·--·--······················--···· ·····--·-~··-·········'.:'.t:: ........ ~-·-·····~LP ... · .......... · ...... ·····---~-·--·~-·-·····
·--·--···········-·--··-:·······------.. --····-·······-··::rg·········~·t;,·-c;;~h••···;;::r··-···0-:;;··~··;;-·~-~-··.-···~·-···~········-······
····-----------·-·-_-----·-------·--·----···----··-----------·-·-·--·-·-·-·--·-·····--·-----··--------l·--------·--------·------·--·--··-·--·--·~--: .... :... __________________________ _
~r.~E ~--~:~-~:::::~:::::~-.:::::::::~: ::-.~~:::::::~::::::::::~:::;::::::::~=:::::-.~:~~-~::.-.:-.:·:::::::::-.:::::-.~:::=::::-.:::::::::~~:::~:~.:::
··--·····-····-···--····-··············-;---· ...... _, ...... -........... , ···-'-·;:.-··· ··········-······································-······ -···············-~····················
-------------------------·----·· -----··-··----------------------·--·-··--------------------------------·---·-··--··------·---·-----· ------------------------------····-····-··-----
-···-··---------·------·-·-------------.. ··---------···-··--·---------··----· ·----------··-·-·····----·-··· . -·-·------·-·-------. ---···-····-·-----···----·-----·-·········· . ----·-·-··--------
----------------------····---------------- -------------····· -··--........ --·------·--------·-·····-----·············----····----·----········-·----··--······:-.... ________________________________ : ___________ _
.~.?-~e m~Q~-·······-·········---··· ····-·-·-----·-· ·····-···-....... ... . . ......... ··-··-·· ······-······ ....... ········-·-··-··-·--···-·--··-··--· ·····-··· .............. .
""""''.~rn .ff'"
---·----··-···------·-··--·--·----·-····-···-····-··-······-··-····-······---···-·····-·····-··-····--·· ·--·············-····-·--··--···':s .c _~.tav. .. ::.k ....... --.
~.~l.sti~.9 .. Yeg.!!.?.1.~!.g.Q. ____ ._ .... _ ... ··--········ ... ·-· -·-··-········· ·-... ··-···
--···----·-··-·-·--·--··· ··-·····-·· ... . ....... .. .. ··--·········--·-·-·-········---··· ·:-.:::::.::::·::-.::.=:~_::::: :~·:··~-~.::-.::SJ".P.J::~:-~:O.IL :-.=~:~:~:~:
--------·------··-------·· . ···-···· -------·-·· --·-· ···--------------····· ---··-··-.. --·--. ··----------·------·· --·····--· ······-... -------. ·····-·-··---·· --------·-··-·-·-------·· -----