HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 11OSC_FINAL_Minutes18-0111.docx 3/9/18 1
Los Altos Hills Open Space Committee
Los Altos Hills Parks and Recreation Building
FINAL Minutes of Regular Meeting January 11, 2018
Members and Associates Present: George Clifford, Richard Contreras, Nancy Couperus, Kit Gordon, Alice
Sakamoto, Sharen Schoendorf, Jean Struthers, Wendie Ward, Sue Welch (Members); Peter Brown (Associate)
Members and Associates Absent: Karen Lemes (Associate)
Council Liaison Present: Roger Spreen
Member of Public Present: Pat Lang (LAH resident)
1. Call to Order and Approval of Minutes
A. Roll Call. KG called the meeting to order at 9:02 am.
B. Acceptance of Meeting Minutes. No minutes reviewed.
C. Announcements.
i. Info from SFEI. KG reported several articles of interest (on planting replacement oaks and flood
control) from San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI).
ii. Planning and Conservation League Conference. PCL will hold their annual Environmental
Assembly at UC Davis on Feb 24, 2018. Title is New Strategies for Chaotic Times.
iii. Yoriko Kishimoto (MROSD Board Member representing LAH). Unable to attend OSC today.
iv. 27333 Ursula. Planning Commission will review the landscape project for 27333 Ursula tonight
(01/11/18).
v. OSC Membership. SS’s term ends in February. She plans to apply to continue as an Associate
Member. Members were asked to try to identify potential new members.
vi. Top Elegant Investment Subdivision. City Council will review this project at the regular Council
meeting on Jan 18, 2018. The project was conditionally approved by the Planning Commission in a
4:1 vote on Nov 2, 2017.
2. New Business
A. Publicity for 2018 OSC seminars. OSC seminars will be posted in the LAH Parks and Recreation
Catalog and Town Newsletter.
B. Distribution of OSC Recommendations. OSC discussed a new practice by some planners to provide
OSC property reviews without modification directly to site development applicants. OSC reports are
public but are intended to be advisory to staff—i.e., observations and recommendations for staff to
evaluate and use (or not) in their staff reports for projects. Applicants may misunderstand the OSC
reviews as representing the Town’s official opinion, whereas these reviews are intended only to be
advisory to staff, who prepares the official Town recommendation. OSC will add a statement on the
OSC review form clarifying that observations and recommendations are for staff to evaluate (and adopt
or not), as well as text of policies and ordinances supporting OSC recommendations.
3. Planning
A. Fence Permit Reviews.
i. 12950 Robleda Road. At their Dec 7, 2017 meeting, Planning Commission reviewed a fence permit
for 12950 Robleda Road requesting a 5-ft post and wire 3,300 -linear-foot perimeter fence around
the 12-acre parcel. Commissioners had concerns about fencing in conservation easement areas that
had been proposed for earlier development projects (but never dedicated) and impact on rural
character and wildlife movement. They continued the item and recommended the owners return
with a modified proposal. A number of neighbors spoke and requested that the new fence not
obstruct wildlife movement in the area or block the neighborhood pathway used by local residents.
Conditions of approval for a major addition in 1999 at 12950 Robleda required conservation
easement (CEs) to protect Heritage oaks and areas with slopes greater than 30% (Attachment A).
Council approved the CE in 1999. However, the lot was sold, the project was abandoned, and the
CEs were not recorded. In 2003, the CEs were again required as a condition of approval for a
subdivision, which was not completed.
NOTE: In 1991 and 2003, the term “conservation easement” was used for the areas proposed to for
protection. The Town now uses the term “open space easement”.
OSC_FINAL_Minutes18-0111.docx 3/9/18 2
Although the CEs were never recorded, the natural resources of the property remain the same
and open space easements will almost certainly be required over these areas at the time of future site
development. Any fencing in and around these areas must be wildlife permeable.
Planning Commission will review the plans at the Feb 1, 2017 meeting. SW presented the
revised proposal submitted by the owners (dated 1/05/18) and a DRAFT OSC recommendation for
the new plan (Attachment A). The revised plan is improved, but still does not use the type of fence
that allows animals to easily pass through and does not include short breaks where active wildlife
trails cross it. The revised plan includes:
• Has bigger setbacks from Robleda Road (100 to 200 feet);
• Uses 5-ft high, 3-rail open post and rail fence on most of the perimeter (instead of the same post
and rail fence with wire mesh that would make it impermeable to wildlife);
• Uses about 80 linear feet of 6-ft high solid wood fence set back 5-ft from the property line along
the NE border. This provides a small setback (should be 10 ft) for the path and provides privacy
for the home.
• Fence set back 10 feet from SE border to leave the utility easement open.
OSC discussed revised permit at length, including location and type of fencing, fencing on steep
areas, leaving drainages unfenced, and alternative options for “wildlife friendly” fencing that would
provide easier access to both young and adult animals. Areas previously identified for dedication in
OSE should remain unfenced or use wildlife permeable fencing that allows animals to jump over
and crawl under easily without injury. The proposed fence style has a 5-foot top rail height and
three closely spaced three rails (only 12 to 15 inches apart) that both present barriers. Better options
for wildlife permeable fencing is 36 to 40 inches high (top rail) with wider openings between
horizontal members. OSC recommendation shows examples of better wildlife permeable fences in
LAH, including a 3-ft high 2-rail open split rail fence on the adjacent parcel. OSC also recommends
breaks in fence and vertical boundary posts in areas where active trials are identified. OSC will try
to identify these. KG moved that OSC approve the updated recommendation for the revised
fence permit on 12950 Robleda Road (dated 1/05/18) with the addition that OSC will try to
identify active wildlife trails for fence breaks. NC seconded and the vote was unanimously in
favor (GC, RC, NC, KG, AS, SS, JS, WW, SW).
B. OSC Site Reviews and Recommendations for Development Projects.
i. 14195 Wild Plum Lane (Lands of X; APN X; file#). The reason for OSC review is a landscape plan
and fence. The parcel is on the south side of Wild Plum (east off Manuella), one lot away from
Adobe Creek and within designated Open Space Conservation Area (Attachment B). RC presented
the plans for discussion; no site visit has been made. The old driveway may be a wildlife corridor.
The pictured fence has vertical protrusions on the top rail that would be a risk to wildlife. It was
suggested that OSC ask the planner to clarify why OSC was asked to review this landscape plan and
whether a fence permit was issued. OSC will identify any OSEs in the area.
ii. 23281 Mora Heights (Lands of X; APN X; file#). The reason for OSC review is construction of a
new residence. This newly annexed flag lot is off Mora Drive in southeast LAH. The parcel was not
accessible for a site visit because the driveway was gated. The 1.6-acre lot has numerous oaks and
very steep slopes (>30%) above and below the house and the calculated LUF appears to be less than
1. Behind and below the house, a steep canyon descends to Loyola Creek, which runs along the
parcel border. EcoAtlas shows several drainage swales and OSC had concerns about development
over one of the swales. No records for OSEs are available because this area was only recently
annexed. A large part of the parcel meets criteria for OSE to protect oaks and steep slopes. After
lengthy discussion, OSC conditionally recommended to planner: 1) identify existing OSEs in the area
if records are available; 2) dedicate OSE over steep areas above and below the house to protect oaks
and steep slopes; 3) note on map the creeks and drainages; 4) confirm location of drainage swales
and note that a retaining wall and hardscape appear to extend over a drainage swale; if so, the plans
should be modified; 5) “top of bank” marked on map does not appear to be the top of creek bank;
please clarify; 6) confirm fence is not in creek riparian setback; 7) confirm MDA-MFA are compliant
as new development area appears larger than existing. What is LUF and average slope of lot? KG
moved to send OSC conditional recommendation, notes, and questions to the planner. OSC will
try to access the site, determine location of OSEs, and if needed OSC will review again next
OSC_FINAL_Minutes18-0111.docx 3/9/18 3
month. GC seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (GC, RC, NC, KG, AS, SS, JS,
WW, SW).
4. Continuing Business
A. Grant Application to Santa Clara Valley Water District. Grassroots Ecology will submit a pollution
prevention grant to SCVWD on Jan 12. The objective is to improve the wetland area in the lower
Westwind Barn with berms and swales planted with natives in order to capture pollutants flowing from
the horse areas. OSC approved a letter to SCVWD supporting the grant application. City Manager Carl
Cahill also sent a letter of support.
B. OSC Volunteer work plans at WWCB. OSC volunteers will continue to remove invasives in the lower
WWCB area over the winter. However, in light of the Grassroots grant application for the area, will not
submit work plans to Allen Chen at this time.
C. Rodenticide Use in Town; Education and Actions. GC has asked the Town to post on Nextdoor a short
information item about the dangers of using rodenticides to kill rodents and offering safer management
alternatives and links to other information sources.
D. Landscape Guidelines Update. PB is continuing to work with EDPC to update this guide for residents.
He sent a draft to OSC in November and requested input from OSC on text, plant list tables, and useful
reference books. KG will resend. PB and subcommittee will meet to review it within a few weeks.
E. Byrne Preserve: Grassroots Ecology Update. Byrne Brigade workdays for planting, invasive weed
removal, and other work in the preserves will be held every Monday from Jan 22 through March.
Weeding work is focusing on removal of milk thistle and the remaining purple star thistle rosettes. PST
is almost totally extirpated from Byrne. Planting natives and mulching is ongoing. A number of local
high school students attended work sessions over the holidays. The Town removed the swing installed
on the Valley oak at the top of the main hill.
F. Site Development and Fast Track Review Meetings. OSC members were reminded to volunteer to
attend these important planning meetings (held Tuesdays at 10 am) to provide input on potential impact
of proposed development projects on creeks, trees, and other conservation resources.
5. Open Discussion
A. Stinkwort Article. KG was interviewed by the Palo Alto paper about LAH actions to control this
invasive weed.
B. Buckeye Problems. OSC discussed problems and possible solutions to gophers killing buckeyes and
other plants.
C. Field Trip to O’Keeffe OSP. Maybe next month.
6. Communications from the Floor. None.
7. Adjournment.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 am.
Next Regular Meeting: Thursday, February 8, 2017 2018
9:00 AM at LAH Parks and Recreation Building
Attachment A: Revised OSC recommendation for 12950 Robleda Fence Permit
Attachment B: Adobe Creek and OSCA near 14195 Wild Plum Lane
Final minutes were approved with minor amendments (in red) at the regular OSC meeting of Feb 8, 2018.
12950 Robleda _OSC_RECOMMENDATION_Revised fence_plan18‐0123F.docx 3/9/18 1
To: LAH Planning Commissioners Basiji, Couperus, Mandle, Partridge, and Tanaka
Erin Horan, LAH Assistant Planner
Date: January 23, 2017
From: Open Space Committee
Subject: Recommendations for revised fence permit at 12950 Robleda Road
Introduction
At their Dec 7, 2017 meeting, Planning Commission reviewed a fence permit for 12950 Robleda
Road requesting a 5‐ft post and wire 3,300 ‐linear‐foot perimeter fence around the 12‐acre
parcel. Commissioners had concerns about fencing in conservation easement areas that had been
proposed for earlier development projects (but never dedicated) and impact on rural character
and wildlife movement. They continued the item and recommended the owners return with a
modified proposal. A number of neighbors spoke and requested that the new fence should not
obstruct wildlife movement in the area or block the neighborhood pathway that sees frequent
use by local residents.
Owners of 12950 Robleda Road submitted a revised proposal dated 1/15/18. The Open Space
Committee (OSC) discussed the revised permit proposal at the Jan 11, 2018 OSC meeting and
voted unanimously in favor of recommendations for specific restrictions for fencing at this site,
as detailed below.
History
Conditions of approval for a major addition in 1999 for a proposed development at 12950
Robleda required conservation easement (CEs) to protect Heritage oaks and areas with slopes
greater than 30% (Attachment 1). Council approved the CE in 1999. However, the lot was sold,
the project was abandoned, and the CEs were not recorded. In 2003, the CEs were again required
as a condition of approval for a subdivision, which was not completed.
NOTE: In 1991 and 2003, the term “conservation easement” was used for the areas proposed for
protection. The Town now uses the term “open space easement”.
Although the CEs were never recorded, the natural resources of the property remain the same
and open space easements will almost certainly be required over these areas at the time of future
site development.
The owners submitted a revised fence plan on 1/15/18 that proposes:
• Approx 80 linear feet 6‐ft high solid wood fence along the northeast border set back 5 feet
from the property line.
• Approx 215 linear feet of 5‐ft high 3‐rail fence along the southeast border set back 20‐feet
from the property line (to provide access for removing eucalyptus debris?)
• Approx 350 linear feet of 5‐ft high 3‐rail fence along the southeast border set back 15‐feet
from the property line to accommodate a water line easement
• Approx 500 linear feet of 5‐ft high 3‐rail fence along the Robleda Road frontage connecting
from the northern border to the existing gate columns and from there to the southern border;
and set back 150 to 200 feet from the front property line.
• 5‐foot high three‐rail wooden fence on the property line around the rest of the parcel
perimeter
12950 Robleda _OSC_RECOMMENDATION_Revised fence_plan18‐0123F.docx 3/9/18 2
Open Space Committee Recommendations
OSC appreciates that the owners have modified their proposed fence plan to be more consistent
with LAH goals and polices to preserve open space and the semi‐rural character of the Town.
1. OSC recommends prohibiting fencing in the areas previously approved for dedication as
conservation easement. This opinion is consistent with open space easement protocol for
newly developed properties and the Conservation Element of the LAH General Plan.
2. If any fencing is allowed in areas previously approved for dedication as conservation
easement, it must accommodate the free passage of wildlife. Neighbors report this is an active
wildlife area and this is supported by evidence on the site (i.e., presence of wildlife and
abundant tracks). LAH fence ordinance requires wildlife permeable fencing in
conservation/open space easements:
10-1.507(9) Open Space/Conservation Easement Perimeter Fences.
(i) Maximum height of open space/conservation easement perimeter fences: six (6) feet.
(ii) Minimum distance of lowest fence strand or rail from ground: twelve (12) inches above grade.
(iii) Open space/conservation easement perimeter fences shall provide openings sufficient to accommodate
the free passage of wildlife through the easement. A split-rail wood fence (see exhibit) or equivalent
design shall be required. Where a pathway is located within an open space/conservation easement, the
perimeter fence shall be required to have at least two (2) openings at least as wide as the width of the
pathway easement.
OSC recommends a one‐rail or two‐rail open fence for these CE areas, rather than the 5‐ft
high three‐rail fence that is proposed. Both the 5‐foot top rail height and the closely spaced
three rails (only 12 to 15 inch spacing) present barriers. OSC recommends a fence similar to
the fence installed on the adjacent property to the south on Brendel Drive or one of the
wildlife‐friendly fences on other LAH lots shown below.
A wildlife‐friendly two‐rail open fence on Brendel Drive, immediately adjacent to the 12950
Robleda property.
12950 Robleda _OSC_RECOMMENDATION_Revised fence_plan18‐0123F.docx 3/9/18 3
A wildlife‐friendly two‐rail open fence on Mir Mirou Drive in Los Altos Hills provides easy
passage wildlife.
A 3‐foot high wildlife‐friendly fence in Los Altos Hills. Adult deer that cannot easily pass between
the rails can jump over.
12950 Robleda _OSC_RECOMMENDATION_Revised fence_plan18‐0123F.docx 3/9/18 4
3. Breaks in the fence are recommended in locations where wildlife trails running the parcel are
identified to provide a route unobstructed by horizontal fence rails. This is important when
animals are in flight. Vertical boundary posts can be placed at intervals in the breaks.
4. The 6‐ft high solid fence along the northeast border adjacent to pathway should be set back
from the property line by 10 feet (not 5 feet) to accommodate the adjacent path.
5. The fence on the northeast border should not run across the two drainages that flow down
the hill to the east to join the drainage on the adjacent La Rena parcel.
6. Fencing along the Robleda frontage on the south side of the driveway could be set back closer
to the driveway to avoid running it up the steep slope.
7. REMOVE INVASIVE PLANTS. The site has a major infestation of stinkwort on the southern
slopes (Attachment 7). This highly invasive plant is a fire hazard (resin is flammable) and a
health hazard (resin causes headaches and dermatitis). It spreads easily and will create work
and expense for neighboring property owners. OSC recommends the owners begin removing
stinkwort plants as soon as they emerge in spring and continue management throughout the
summer to prevent another crop of seed.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
LAH General Plan Land Use Element
GOL 1: Maintain the semirural character of the community while providing for residential uses, open space,
and the minimum public and private facilities and services needed to serve residents on a continuing basis.
Policy 1.1 Uses of land shall be consistent with the semirural atmosphere of the community, minimize
disturbance to natural terrain, minimize removal of the natural vegetation, and create the maximum
compatibility of development with the natural environment through site design and landscaping.
Hillside Protection
It is important to provide safe residential development while preserving the natural features, environmental
integrity, and scenic character of the hills.
GOAL 2 Ensure that all development occurs in a manner that minimizes disturbance of natural terrain,
vegetation and wildlife, and maximizes the preservation of natural resources and open space.
LAH General Plan, Conservation Element
314. In the past, development occurred with little conscious regard for impacts on wildlife habitat,
sometimes with the result that natural species were driven out. Today the open space areas in and
around Los Altos Hills are relatively undisturbed and serve as habitat for a diverse wildlife population.
Conservation of this habitat is not only important for the protection of wildlife, but also for the
conservation of the semirural atmosphere of the community. To protect areas of significant wildlife
habitat, such as creeks and riparian corridors, the dedication of conservation/open space easements
should be encouraged.
315. There is a need for planning to provide for effective protection and conservation of the Town’s wildlife
heritage, while continuing to allow appropriate development and land use. Planning for natural
movement of wildlife can help to avoid, minimize and compensate for serious negative impacts on
wildlife and humans. Areas that link wildlife habitat have become vital because native animals such as
deer, fox, bobcat and coyote are prevented by roads, fences, homes, and other development from
moving freely as they once did.
12950 Robleda _OSC_RECOMMENDATION_Revised fence_plan18‐0123F.docx 3/9/18 5
Attachment B: Open Space Committee meeting Jan 11, 2018
14195 Wild Plum Lane
14195
Adobe Creek
14197
Hatched area = Open Space Conservation Area