HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 14
OSC Final_Minutes18-0614.docx 1
Los Altos Hills Open Space Committee
Los Altos Hills Parks and Recreation Building
FINAL Minutes of special Meeting June 14, 2018
Members and Associates Present: Peter Brown, Richard Contreras, Nancy Couperus, Kit Gordon, Jean
Struthers, Wendie Ward, Sue Welch (Members); Alice Sakamoto, Sharen Schoendorf (Associates)
Members and Associates Absent: George Clifford (Member); Karen Lemes (Associate)
Council Liaison Absent: Roger Spreen
Member of Public Present: Jeff Wang (12735 Alto Verde Lane)
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. NC moved to accept with minor amendments the minutes from the
meeting of May 8, 2018. PB seconded and the vote was 6 in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW) and WW
abstaining (not present at April meeting).
C. Announcements.
i. Articles in Town Newsletter. OSC thanked KG for authoring two interesting articles in the last issue
of the newsletter (on creeks and mountain lions). An article on the history of the Westwind
Community Barn is planned for a future issue.
2. Planning
A. OSC Site Reviews and Recommendations for Development Projects.
i. 12375 Alto Verde Lane (Lands of Wang and Yu; APN 175-54-016; #208-17-ZP-SD). OSC
reviewed this project in August 2017, with a recommendation to 1) label creek banks on the
developers’ maps; 2) dedicate a riparian setback 25 feet from top on bank of Barron Creek on both
sides of the creek (Concepcion Road side and parcel side); 3) dedicate an open space easement
(OSE) as indicated by the line drawn on the map from the creek to include the canopy of the oaks
along the eastern side of the creek (approximately along the 250 ft elevation line); and 4) remove
invasive palm tree from creek. Purpose of OSE is protection of an incised tributary of Barron Creek
running along the western part of the parcel, and protection of riparian vegetation including heritage
oaks near the creek. Steep slopes (>30%) close to the building site were not required to be in OSE.
The project was approved at the Fast Track meeting of April 24, 2018 with the OSE as
recommended by OSC and required as a condition of approval.
At today’s meeting, the developer, Jeff Wang, requested a reduction in the area of the OSE to
accommodate fruit trees and an irrigation system. He argued that there is not a creek on his lot and
this area is not steeply sloped. OSC reviewed Town policies and ordinances for protecting creeks,
riparian vegetation, and heritage oaks with OSEs and discussed applicability of the policies to this
parcel. It was noted that regulatory agencies consider the incised channel on this parcel (which has
bed, banks, and OHWM) a tributary of Barron Creek (e.g., SCVWD creek map Attachment A). The
development map (Attachment B) shows that the eastern border of the recommended (and
approved) OSE along the 250-ft elevation line extends only about 6-8 feet beyond the canopy of the
heritage oaks on the eastern side of the creek. It would be impractical to plant fruit trees and install
an irrigation system under the oak canopy. JS moved that OSC reaffirm the original
recommendation of Aug 2017 (and required as a condition of approval at the Fast Track
meeting of April 24, 2018) for the OSE on 12375 Alto Verde to extend to the 250-ft elevation
line. This initial recommendation is in conformance with General Plan policies to protect
creeks, riparian vegetation and heritage oaks. SW seconded and the vote was unanimously in
favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW, WW).
ii. 26201 Elena Subdivision (Lands of Tan; APN 182-05-039; TM18-0001). OSC discussed the draft
review for this proposed 4-lot subdivision (Attachment C). The 6.8-acre site on the east side of
Elena Road immediately adjacent to I-280 has an average slope is 26.7% with some areas in excess
of 30% slope. Two large natural drainage swales trisect the parcel and join a deep channel that
flows under the fence into a concrete drainage channel on Caltrans property. At site visit, OSC
members observed incised channels, moist soil, and wetland plants in parts of the swales. The site
has mature native trees and shrubs, as well as large infestations of invasive plants (acacia trees,
stinkwort, Italian thistle). Wildlife was observed (fawns). Staff indicated that the proposed
OSC Final_Minutes18-0614.docx 2
subdivision plan has a number of unresolved issues and OSC will have time for additional review.
Draft OSC recommendations 6/24/18 (Attachment C) include request review of site geology reports,
site visit during the rainy season to assess drainage; dedication of OSEs and riparian setbacks based
on drainage findings; reduction in number of lots from four to two; early management of invasive
plants; and removal of trash.
iii. 13581 Wildcrest Drive (Lands of Sutaria & Capozzola; APN 175-36-021; SD18-0013). Reason for
OSC review is construction of a new residence. OSC discussed the draft review (Attachment D) for
this very steep parcel (avg slope 40%) with established oak woodland, drainage swales, and a
tributary of Robleda Creek running along the southern border. Other issues include existing and
proposed retaining walls, proposed removal of two heritage oaks, and a fence outside the property
boundary. An OSE already exists on the parcel. OSC reviewed and discussed the plans. KG moved
OSC recommend the Town ask the developer to modify the existing OSE to match the location
of the existing retaining wall as shown on the figure on page 2 of the 6/14/18 Draft OSC
Property Review and to make a special note to protect the oaks close to the house (#6, 8, 10,
11) during construction. PB seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC,
KG, JS, SW, WW).
iv. 13439 Mandoli Drive (Lands of Dong and Wang; APN 175-42-026; SD18-0011). Reason for OSC
review is an addition and major remodel. OSC discussed the draft review for this project
(Attachment E). The parcel is a flag lot off the end of Mandoli that slopes up gently from the road
with steeper slopes and an old roadbed at the rear of the lot. A drainage swale and catch basin are
located on the NW side of the house. Native trees on the site include valley oak, coast live oak and
toyon. Several tree species are mislabeled on the plans (e.g., “maples” are actually sycamores;
“madrones” are toyon). Invasives on the site that should be removed include eucalyptus and acacia
trees, tamarisk, broom, and Italian thistle. PB moved that OSC recommend the Town ask the
developer to dedicate an OSE over the steep slope above the old road bed at the rear of the
parcel as shown on the map (Attachment E) to protect the oaks and slopes >30%. Steep slopes
>30% close to the building site need not be in OSE. WW seconded and the vote was
unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW, WW).
v. 10275 Kenbar Road (Lands of Luu; APN 331-17-020; #SD18-0020). Reason for OSC review is
construction of a new residence. OSC discussed the draft review (Attachment F) for this project.
This parcel is in the recently annexed part of southeast LAH and abuts Rancho San Antonio open
space lands. The building site is relatively flat, but the parcel drops off steeply behind the house
with slopes >30%. Swale at rear of property drains to Permanente Creek. There are heritage oaks,
including a very old coast live oak over 6 ft in diameter. Although oaks #1, 2, 3 and 4 are not
proposed for removal, the new house appears to impinge on their roots and canopies and may
eventually kill them. Draft recommendations are:
1. Dedicate OSE at elevations below and west of the house over slopes >30% with mature oak
trees.
2. Consider realigning house and excavated areas more closely with the existing house footprint to
protect oaks, especially oaks #3 and #4 on diagram in 6/14/18 draft OSC Property Review
3. Remove old barbwire fencing on site and at southern border to meet current code.
4. Remove large stand of reed (Arundo donax spp or Phalaris arundaceae species) near and across
western border. This plant is highly flammable, consumes large amounts of water, and is
invasive. This plant typically grows in creek beds—it may be tapping a water source.
NC moved that OSC send all recommendations listed in the 6/14/18 draft OSC Property
Review to the Town with an added note expressing concerns about the proximity of the
proposed new house to oaks #3 and #4. RC seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor
(PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW, WW).
vi. 26896 Alejandro Drive (Lands of Lam and Stepanov; APN 175-44-065; SD18-0015). Reason for
OSC review is construction of a new residence. OSC discussed the draft review for this project
(Attachment G). This steep (approx 30% slope) 1.2-acre lot is at the end of Alejandro with the west
(uphill) border along La Cresta. The existing building site is relatively flat and flanked above and
below by very steep sections with numerous mature oaks. EDPC reported that not all mature trees
are shown on the developers map. A swale runs from La Cresta along the southern boundary (shown
OSC Final_Minutes18-0614.docx 3
on SF EcoAtlas) that drains towards the Barron Creek watershed. There is a large catch basin and
storm drain at the driveway entrance that should be cleared of debris. KG moved that OSC
recommend the Town ask the developer to 1) dedicate OSE at elevations above, below, and to
the north of the house over areas with slopes >30% with mature oak trees (as shown on map
in 6/14/18 draft OSC Property Review; the objective is to have OSE areas contiguous); and 2)
take measures to protect the mature Valley oak roots and canopy at driveway. NC seconded
and the vote was unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW, WW).
vii. 23281 Mora Heights (OSC reviewed in Jan 2018 and May 2018)—plans withdrawn. Not discussed
viii. 25380 Becky Lane (approved without OSC review). OSC discussed whether this lot included a
flood plain. It does not per FEMA maps.
B. Fence Permit Reviews.
i. 27835 Lupine. Staff addressed fence setbacks from Matadero Creek, which runs through this parcel.
C. OSC recommendations to be adopted by Council.
i. 14510 Manuella Road (reviewed March 2018)
ii. 13120 East Sunset Drive (reviewed Aug 2016, May 2018)
3. New Business
A. Guest speaker Ted Sayre, Town geologist. He will discuss LAH Hazard Map at the June July OSC
meeting.
B. Living with Wildlife Series. OSC discussed and put on the agenda for next month organizing or hosting
a seminar or panel discussion covering common wildlife species in the hills.
4. Continuing Business
A. Town weed management. OSC discussed planning and preparations for this summer’s Dittrichia
spraying. A subcommittee (PB, RC, KG, SW) was formed to work on this with LAH Public Works
Director, Allen Chen. OSC also discussed methods to address “private infestations (e.g., contacting
residents with large infestations; engaging help from Fire District weed abatement program) and
methods to map infestations and follow them year-to-year (ideally a Town-hosted GIS system).
B. Grassroots Ecology update. Byrne Brigade workdays are continuing every Monday with focus on
removal of milk thistle, purple star thistle, teasel, and Italian thistle and YST. New natives planted in the
flood plain are flourishing and mulch is helping with weed control.
C. Final Landscape Guide. PB, who has been revising this document, reported that EDPC approved the
guide and it is now in staff hands
D. Updates from other Town meetings. Council will review tentative map for Natoma subdivision on June
21, 2018.
5. Open Discussion
6. Communications from the Floor. None.
7. Adjournment.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 am
Next Regular Meeting: Thursday, July12, 2018
9:00 AM at LAH Parks and Recreation Building
Attachment A: SCVWD creek map showing Barron Creek on 12375 Alto Verde
Attachment B: Plans showing recommended OSE on 12375 Alto Verde
Attachment C: Draft OSC recommendation for proposed 26201 Elena Subdivision
Attachment D: OSC Property Review for 13581 Wildcrest Drive
Attachment E: OSC Property Review for 13439 Mandoli Drive
Attachment F: OSC Property Review for 10275 Kenbar Road
Attachment G: OSC Property Review for 26896 Alejandro Drive
Final minutes were approved with minor amendments (in red) at the Regular OSC meeting of July 12, 2018.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 1
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date: June 14, 2018
Property address: 26120 Elena Road Subdivision (between
Date of Site Visit: June 4, 2018
Lands of Tan APN 18205039
Town
Planner
Steve Padovan Project
Number
TM180001
Reason for review (check one)
Subdivision
New Residence
Second Unit
Addition/Major Remodel
Fence Permit
OSC RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: June 14, 2018
Voting of review:
DRAFT OSC recommendation:
The 6.749 acre irregularlyshaped property is bordered by I280 at the northeastern
boundary and Elena Road on the southwestern boundary. The average slope of the
parcel is 26.65%, with Elena Road at the highest elevation (X ft) and 280 at the lowest
(Y ft). Unnaturally There is a very steep dropoff from Elena Road (probably the result
of cutandfill to create the road bed) that will create challenges for driveway access.
Two large natural drainage swales cut the parcel approximately into thirds. The swales
angle down from Elena Road and widen as they approach the flatter terrain on the
lower elevations and join in a deep channel that flows under to fence onto Caltrans
property.
A storm drain culvert diverts water from Elena Road to the head of the northern swale.
At the lowest elevation a wet habitat area exists with possible artificial fill. Numerous
incised natural drainage channels were noted at lower elevations of both swales
(beginning approximately half way down from Elena). Most of the channels have bed,
banks, and high water mark erosion.
A concrete drainage structure runs parallel to the northeastern border along the full
length of the property on Caltrans land between the property and the I280 roadway.
Moist, possibly hydric, soil and wetland vegetation (both facultative and obligate) were
found in both swales and in the lower wet habitat area.
Vegetation in the swale areas includes a number of plant species that grow in moist or
wet habitats and/or are designated as obligate or facultative wetland indicator species
These include Iris leaf rush (Juncus xiphiodes; obligate wetland species) and other
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 2
juncus species; rabbitfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis); poison hemlock (Conium
maculatum); and cyperus species.
Significant stands of nonnative invasive plants are thriving throughout the parcel
Italian thistle, poison hemlock, acacia, rabbitsfoot grass. Patches of Dittrichia
(stinkwort) are also present. Numerous heritage oak trees, toyon, native coyote brush
and native clarkia were noted.
A pathway easement runs along the Caltrans fence along the full length of the
northeastern boundary through the lower wet habitat area.
Recommendations:
1. The OSC would like to review geology reports on the property and make a site
visit during the wet season to assess the hydrology of the site.
2. OSC recommends waiting to establish boundaries for open space easements
(OSE) until the site can be investigated during the wet season. At minimum, OSC
recommends:
• Dedicate an OSE over both swales and lower wet habitat area (or area deemed
appropriate after a wetseason investigation).
• Dedicate an OSE over most of the areas with slope > 30%.
• Riparian setback 25 feet from centerline of both swales and from top of bank
of any channels not in OSE.
3. Merge parcels A&B and merge parcels C&D.
4. Manage invasive plants: Italian thistle, stinkwort, poison hemlock, rabbitsfoot
grass. Consider removing acacia trees, which are considered invasive?
5. The proposed offroad path that runs along the northern border adjacent to
Caltrans land was removed from the Master Path Plan Map in 2005. However,
this pathway easement must not be obstructed with vegetation, fencing, or other
structures.
6. Remove numerous car tires, car batteries, car fender and other debris.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 3
The areas of slope greater than 30% are shown in red diagonal lines. The colluvial drainage
swale areas are outlined with blue.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 4
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot ____26.65%____
Areas with slope ≥30%? Yes
Check slope/LUF worksheet on subdivisions
Review Geologic Hazard Report, if applicable. Check for colluvial soil, earthquake faults,
springs, seeps, shallow groundwater. Two large colluvial swales exist.
Safety Policy 1.1 Open space easements, zoning and other land use regulations shall
be used to limit and, in some cases, prohibit development in areas of unstable terrain,
active fault traces, water channels, flood plains, excessively steep slopes and other
areas determined to be hazardous to public welfare and safety.
Safety Policy 2.2 Locate development so as to avoid geologic hazards, including
slope instability, to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.5 Steep slopes, canyons and ravines generally in excess of 30%
slope, as well as natural swales and drainage channels, and geologic hazard areas
within areas designated for residential development shall be left undisturbed and
preserved in their natural condition to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.6 Limits on the development of individual residential lots shall be
determined based on evaluation of such factors as natural vegetation, topographic
characteristics, soils and geology.
CREEKS
Creeks or waterways or swale on parcel? Name of creek/tributary of: Flows to Robleda
Creek on the east and Deer Creek to the west.
Shown on USGS map? SCVWD creek map? LAH Hazard Map? EcoAtlas? No
Condition of banks? Shallow and wide.
Existing riparian or OSE or SCVWD easement along creek on this property or nearby parcels?
No existing OSE.
Does SCVWD want to expand their easement?
Proposed setbacks for structures?
Evidence of bed, banks, or Original High Water Mark (OHWM)? Evidence of banks & OHWM
Identify any structures including fences within 25 feet of top of bank? Within OHWM?
Area within the OHWM are regulated as Waters of the United States and protected by the
Clean Water Act. Any development, vegetation removal, or stream bank modifications within
this area may require permits from regulatory agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, CA Dept
of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 5
Source: US Army Corps of Engineers
Safety Policy 3.1: Leave natural channels and flood plains in a natural state,
unencumbered by development to the maximum extent feasible.
Conservation Policy 5.1: Keep or restore major drainage courses in their natural
condition insofar as possible because of their importance in supplying major
vegetation, land forms and wildlife habitat, and storm drainage.
Conservation Policy 1.3: Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors as unique and
environmentally sensitive resources.
Conservation Policy 3.1: Maintain and protect creeks and riparian corridors for
wildlife that use this resource for food, shelter, migration and breeding.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Municipal Code 102.702 Siting.
(e) Creek Protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty‐five (25) feet
from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks
in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning
Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear
natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. Creeks
and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible.
They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be
allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures
shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of
riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing
development and required improvements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eff. December 11,
1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; § 1, Ord. 504, eff. October 28, 2006)
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 6
Heritage oaks? Yes, several
Significant trees? Groves of significant trees? Mature oak trees and nonnative species
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)? Unknown.
Significant native vegetation? Yes, native toyon and other chaparral and woodland species.
Significant invasive pest plant vegetation?
Note major infestation of invasive weeds such as stinkwort, oxalis, Italian thistle, purple
starthistle, yellow starthistle, pampas grass, broom, teasel, giant reed (Arundo donax), poison
hemlock, etc.
Conservation Policy 2.2: Minimize disturbance of the natural terrain and vegetation.
Preserve and protect native and naturalized plants, with special attention to
preservation of unique, rare or endangered species and plant communities such as
oak woodlands.
Conservation Policy 2.3: Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks
and other significant trees, on public and private property.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Conservation Program 2.5 Encourage the dedication of conservation/open space
easements or the public acquisition of areas that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile
ecological nature to ensure their protection
Open Space Policy 1.2: Protect and maintain those areas necessary to the integrity of
natural resources and processes, with special emphasis on, but not limited to, the
groundwater recharge and drainage system, open spaces vital for wildlife
habitat, open spaces suitable for agriculture, and other areas of major or unique
ecological significance.
Land Use Program 2.3 Encourage the preservation of existing trees, rock
outcroppings, ridgelines and other significant natural features
Municipal Code 102.702 Siting.
(f) Tree Preservation. Every feasible attempt should be made to preserve existing
trees except those trees identified in the Los Altos Hills Landscape Guidelines invasive
plant
CA FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL CODE FAC
DIVISION 4. PLANT QUARANTINE AND PEST CONTROL [5001 8808]
5401.
Any premises, plants, conveyances or things which are infected or infested with any
pest, or premises where any pest is found, are a public nuisance, and shall be
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 7
prosecuted as such in all actions and proceedings. All remedies which are given by law
for the prevention and abatement of a nuisance apply to such a public nuisance.
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS & FENCING
Check 2006 Live Oak Associates map (not official)
Evidence of wildlife (e.g., deer trails, spoor)? Yes, several animal trails and animals on site
Identify location and type of existing fencing: None.
Check that fencing on plans agrees with fencing on the ground
Note any fence that does not meet current fencing regulations
Conservation Policy 2.7: Avoid the development of environmentally sensitive areas
that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile ecological nature, such as areas of rare or
endangered species of plants, or riparian areas.
Conservation Goal 3: Maintain and enhance the integrity of wildlife habitat.
Conservation Program 3.3: Assess the potential for development patterns to
fragment and isolate significant wildlife habitats.
Conservation Section 315: Planning for natural movement of wildlife can help
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.
Municipal Code 101.507 (d) Prohibited Fences, Walls, Gates, and Column Types. The
following fences are prohibited:
(1) Chain‐link or cyclone fences, including any fence with bare lengths of wire
stretched between metal poles, with the exception of dark green, black, or brown vinyl‐
coated chain‐linked fences with matching vinyl‐coated cross bars and caps.
(2) Barbed or razor wire fences, including any fence with attached barbs, sharp
points, or razors. Electric fences, including any fence designed to produce an electric
shock, except where necessary for animal husbandry operations.
(3) Any fence, wall, and/or gate that may cause harm to people, pets, and/or wildlife
due to points, spikes, or sharpened edges on the top or bottom part of the fence, wall
structure and/or gate.
(9) Open Space/Conservation Easement Perimeter Fences.
(i) Maximum height of open space/conservation easement perimeter fences: six (6) ft.
(ii) Minimum distance of lowest fence strand or rail from ground: twelve (12) inches
above grade.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 8
(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.
(10) Any fence crossing or intersecting an officially designated wildlife corridor shall
conform to the requirements specified above for an open space/conservation easement
perimeter fence.
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
Identify areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%, significant trees, wildlife corridor,
creeks, drainage swales)
Open Space Policy 1.1 Provide, during the development process, for the maximum
feasible preservation of open space in and adjoining the Town, with spaces ranging in
size from regional scale to small‐scale open space on individual lots.
Open Space Policy 1.4: Preserve the natural beauty and minimize disturbance of the
natural terrain and vegetation.
Open Space Policy 1.7: To the extent possible, link open spaces together visually and
physically to form a system of open spaces.
Open Space Policy 1.8: Ensure that land uses and structures are compatible with the
general open space quality of the planning area.
Open Space Policy 2.6 New residential subdivisions shall provide open space for
recreation in order to meet their appropriate share of local recreation needs.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 9
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and
nearby parcels.
Pathway easement exists at the northeast boundary with a width of ~10 feet at the
western boundary expanding to ~50 feet at the southern boundary.
Attachments:
‐ Photos from site
‐ Easement history and research
‐ Photo of site plan with marked OSE
FOLLOWUP
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 10
Portion of storm drain culvert from Elena Road.
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 11
Poison hemlock and acacia in lower wet habitat region
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 12
OSC_Review12620Elena Subdivision18‐0613.docx 8/22/18 13
Wetland Cyperus spp
Wetland Rush
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 1
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date: June 14, 2018
Property address: 13581 Wildcrest Drive
Date of Site Visit: May 31, 2018
Lands of Sutaria & Capozzola APN 175-36-021
Town
Planner
Suzanne Availa Project
Number
SD18-0013
Reason for review (check one)
ü New Residence
Second Unit
Addition/Major Remodel
Fence Permit
OSC RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: June 14, 2018
Voting of review: Unanimously in favor (RC, WW, NC, SW, JS, RC, PB, KG)
Absent (GC)
Final OSC recommendation:
The property is a steep (~40%) 1.15 net acre lot that has had significant cut & fill &
retaining wall construction. The plan proposes to cut and export ~3400 cy of soil and
redo retaining walls. A tributary to Robelda Creek traverses the southern boundary. An
open space easement exists on the lower southern third of the property but with a
loopy boundary that does not correspond with existing cut/filled contours. There are
swales and open spaces easements on west and east boundaries of the property
covering steep slopes and established oak woodlands. Two significant oaks trees (#7,
#9) are planned for removal. Swales near western and southern boundary drains to
Robleda Creek.
Recommendations:
1. Redraw the Open Space Easement to match the existing fill contours at the
border of lower retaining wall and oak canopy; approximately between elevation
lines 340 & 350.
2. Riparian setback 25 feet from southern border.
3. Remove chain link fence at western boundary. The fence appears to be
connected to this site but is just outside the property boundary.
4. How will proposed drainage system traverse lower retaining wall? Will this wall
be removed?
5. Concerns about eastern building abutting edge of OSE and under oak canopy –
how can oaks be protected?
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 2
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 3
Blue line is Robleda Creek
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 4
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot ____40%____
Areas with slope ≥30%? Yes
Check slope/LUF worksheet on subdivisions
Review Geologic Hazard Report, if applicable. Check for colluvial soil, earthquake faults,
springs, seeps, shallow groundwater.
Safety Policy 1.1 Open space easements, zoning and other land use regulations shall
be used to limit and, in some cases, prohibit development in areas of unstable terrain,
active fault traces, water channels, flood plains, excessively steep slopes and other
areas determined to be hazardous to public welfare and safety.
Safety Policy 2.2 Locate development so as to avoid geologic hazards, including
slope instability, to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.5 Steep slopes, canyons and ravines generally in excess of 30%
slope, as well as natural swales and drainage channels, and geologic hazard areas
within areas designated for residential development shall be left undisturbed and
preserved in their natural condition to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.6 Limits on the development of individual residential lots shall be
determined based on evaluation of such factors as natural vegetation, topographic
characteristics, soils and geology.
CREEKS
Creeks or waterways or swale on parcel? Name of creek/tributary of: Robleda
Shown on USGS map? SCVWD creek map? LAH Hazard Map? EcoAtlas? YES
Condition of banks? We did not go down to creek.
Existing riparian or OSE or SCVWD easement along creek on this property or nearby parcels?
Existing OSE on eastern and western and southern boundaries.
Does SCVWD want to expand their easement?
Proposed setbacks for structures?
Evidence of bed, banks, or Original High Water Mark (OHWM)?
Identify any structures including fences within 25 feet of top of bank? Within OHWM?
Area within the OHWM are regulated as Waters of the United States and protected by the
Clean Water Act. Any development, vegetation removal, or stream bank modifications within
this area may require permits from regulatory agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, CA Dept
of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board.
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 5
Source: US Army Corps of Engineers
Safety Policy 3.1: Leave natural channels and flood plains in a natural state,
unencumbered by development to the maximum extent feasible.
Conservation Policy 5.1: Keep or restore major drainage courses in their natural
condition insofar as possible because of their importance in supplying major
vegetation, land forms and wildlife habitat, and storm drainage.
Conservation Policy 1.3: Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors as unique and
environmentally sensitive resources.
Conservation Policy 3.1: Maintain and protect creeks and riparian corridors for
wildlife that use this resource for food, shelter, migration and breeding.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(e) Creek Protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet
from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks
in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning
Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear
natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. Creeks
and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible.
They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be
allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures
shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of
riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing
development and required improvements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eff. December 11,
1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; § 1, Ord. 504, eff. October 28, 2006)
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
Heritage oaks? Yes, several
Significant trees? Groves of significant trees? Several oak trees and non-native species
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)? Two significant oak trees planned for
removal. Redwood trees also planned for removal as well as other non-native trees.
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 6
Significant native vegetation? Yes, native toyon and other chaparral and woodland
species.
Significant invasive pest plant vegetation?
Note major infestation of invasive weeds such as stinkwort, oxalis, Italian thistle, purple
starthistle, yellow starthistle, pampas grass, broom, teasel, giant reed (Arundo donax), poison
hemlock, etc.
Conservation Policy 2.2: Minimize disturbance of the natural terrain and vegetation.
Preserve and protect native and naturalized plants, with special attention to
preservation of unique, rare or endangered species and plant communities such as
oak woodlands.
Conservation Policy 2.3: Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks
and other significant trees, on public and private property.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Conservation Program 2.5 Encourage the dedication of conservation/open space
easements or the public acquisition of areas that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile
ecological nature to ensure their protection
Open Space Policy 1.2: Protect and maintain those areas necessary to the integrity of
natural resources and processes, with special emphasis on, but not limited to, the
groundwater recharge and drainage system, open spaces vital for wildlife
habitat, open spaces suitable for agriculture, and other areas of major or unique
ecological significance.
Land Use Program 2.3 Encourage the preservation of existing trees, rock
outcroppings, ridgelines and other significant natural features
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(f) Tree Preservation. Every feasible attempt should be made to preserve existing
trees except those trees identified in the Los Altos Hills Landscape Guidelines invasive
plant
CA FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL CODE - FAC
DIVISION 4. PLANT QUARANTINE AND PEST CONTROL [5001 - 8808]
5401.
Any premises, plants, conveyances or things which are infected or infested with any
pest, or premises where any pest is found, are a public nuisance, and shall be
prosecuted as such in all actions and proceedings. All remedies which are given by law
for the prevention and abatement of a nuisance apply to such a public nuisance.
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS & FENCING
Check 2006 Live Oak Associates map (not official)
Evidence of wildlife (e.g., deer trails, spoor)? Yes, several animal trails on E, W & S portions
Identify location and type of existing fencing: Old segment of chain link in OSE near W
border. Chain link fence along lower retaining wall/fill section.
Check that fencing on plans agrees with fencing on the ground
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 7
Note any fence that does not meet current fencing regulations
Conservation Policy 2.7: Avoid the development of environmentally sensitive areas
that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile ecological nature, such as areas of rare or
endangered species of plants, or riparian areas.
Conservation Goal 3: Maintain and enhance the integrity of wildlife habitat.
Conservation Program 3.3: Assess the potential for development patterns to
fragment and isolate significant wildlife habitats.
Conservation Section 315: Planning for natural movement of wildlife can help
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.
Municipal Code 10-1.507 (d) Prohibited Fences, Walls, Gates, and Column Types. The
following fences are prohibited:
(1) Chain-link or cyclone fences, including any fence with bare lengths of wire
stretched between metal poles, with the exception of dark green, black, or brown vinyl-
coated chain-linked fences with matching vinyl-coated cross bars and caps.
(2) Barbed or razor wire fences, including any fence with attached barbs, sharp
points, or razors. Electric fences, including any fence designed to produce an electric
shock, except where necessary for animal husbandry operations.
(3) Any fence, wall, and/or gate that may cause harm to people, pets, and/or wildlife
due to points, spikes, or sharpened edges on the top or bottom part of the fence, wall
structure and/or gate.
(9) Open Space/Conservation Easement Perimeter Fences.
(i) Maximum height of open space/conservation easement perimeter fences: six (6) ft.
(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 Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 8
(10) Any fence crossing or intersecting an officially designated wildlife corridor shall
conform to the requirements specified above for an open space/conservation easement
perimeter fence.
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
Identify areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%, significant trees, wildlife corridor,
creeks, drainage swales)
Significant OSE on western property border extends nearly the entire length of
property.
Open Space Policy 1.1 Provide, during the development process, for the maximum
feasible preservation of open space in and adjoining the Town, with spaces ranging in
size from regional scale to small-scale open space on individual lots.
Open Space Policy 1.4: Preserve the natural beauty and minimize disturbance of the
natural terrain and vegetation.
Open Space Policy 1.7: To the extent possible, link open spaces together visually and
physically to form a system of open spaces.
Open Space Policy 1.8: Ensure that land uses and structures are compatible with the
general open space quality of the planning area.
Open Space Policy 2.6 New residential subdivisions shall provide open space for
recreation in order to meet their appropriate share of local recreation needs.
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and
nearby parcels.
Attachments:
- Photos from site
- Easement history and research
- Photo of site plan with marked OSE
FOLLOW-UP
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 9
OSC Site Review 13581 Wildcrest.docx 8/18/18 10
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 1
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date: June 14, 2018
Property address: 13439 Mandoli Drive
Date of Site Visit: June 12, 2018
Lands of Dong & Hwang APN 175-42-026
Town
Planner
Suzanne Avila Project
Number
SD18-0011
Reason for review (check one)
New Residence
Second Unit
ü Addition/Major Remodel
Fence Permit
OSC RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: June 14, 2018
Voting of review: Unanimously in favor (RC, WW, NC, SW, JS, RC, PB, KG)
Absent (GC)
Final OSC recommendation:
The property is a ~18% 1.07 acre lot. The proposed remodel adds a basement and
second story increasing the MFA from 3006 sqft to 5703 sqft and MDA from 7547 sqft to
10218 sqft. The property gently slopes up from the road and driveway with a steeper
section at rear of lot. There appears to be an old road behind the house with slopes
~30% both above and below the old road. Evidence of wildlife near the rear of house
(deer scat, coyote scat, fur, bones). Fencing exists only around the pool area. Drainage
swale along NW side of house. There is drainage catch basin near the driveway in
shallow drainage swale that drains to Barron Creek.
Several oaks trees (live & valley) and native toyon grow on this property. Some trees
are mislabeled on the plan: the trees labeled “maple” are actually sycamores; the trees
marked “madrones” are toyons. There are several non-native invasive plants that may
need to be removed including: large eucalyptus trees, several acacia trees, tamarisk,
scotch broom (along driveway) and Italian thistle.
Recommendations:
1. Open Space Easement (OSE) at elevations on and above the old road/flatter area
on slopes with >30% and mature oak trees.
2. Evaluate and remove invasive plant species: eucalyptus, acacia, tamarisk, Italian
thistle.
3. Minimize fencing near the proposed OSE.
4. Minimize development and landscaping on the drainage swale, north of house, in
line with culvert under driveway.
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 2
Suggested OSE shown in red at rear of house. Drainage area marked but not recommended for
OSE.
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 3
old road/flat section, lined with toyon, oaks and acacia
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 4
Evidence of wildlife; bones, trails, scat (deer, coyote) and fur
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 5
Large mature Valley oaks
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 6
Invasive plants broom, acacia, tamarisk
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 7
shallow drainage swale and culvert
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 8
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot ____~18%____
Areas with slope ≥30%? Yes at rear (western) boundary of lot
Check slope/LUF worksheet on subdivisions
Review Geologic Hazard Report, if applicable. Check for colluvial soil, earthquake faults,
springs, seeps, shallow groundwater.
Safety Policy 1.1 Open space easements, zoning and other land use regulations shall
be used to limit and, in some cases, prohibit development in areas of unstable terrain,
active fault traces, water channels, flood plains, excessively steep slopes and other
areas determined to be hazardous to public welfare and safety.
Safety Policy 2.2 Locate development so as to avoid geologic hazards, including
slope instability, to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.5 Steep slopes, canyons and ravines generally in excess of 30%
slope, as well as natural swales and drainage channels, and geologic hazard areas
within areas designated for residential development shall be left undisturbed and
preserved in their natural condition to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.6 Limits on the development of individual residential lots shall be
determined based on evaluation of such factors as natural vegetation, topographic
characteristics, soils and geology.
CREEKS
Creeks or waterways or swale on parcel? Name of creek/tributary of: Small swale drains to
Barron Creek
Shown on USGS map? SCVWD creek map? LAH Hazard Map? EcoAtlas? No
Condition of banks? No banks but swales drain toward Barron watershed.
Existing riparian or OSE or SCVWD easement along creek on this property or nearby parcels?
None.
Does SCVWD want to expand their easement?
Proposed setbacks for structures?
Evidence of bed, banks, or Original High Water Mark (OHWM)?
Identify any structures including fences within 25 feet of top of bank? Within OHWM?
Area within the OHWM are regulated as Waters of the United States and protected by the
Clean Water Act. Any development, vegetation removal, or stream bank modifications within
this area may require permits from regulatory agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, CA Dept
of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board.
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 9
Source: US Army Corps of Engineers
Safety Policy 3.1: Leave natural channels and flood plains in a natural state,
unencumbered by development to the maximum extent feasible.
Conservation Policy 5.1: Keep or restore major drainage courses in their natural
condition insofar as possible because of their importance in supplying major
vegetation, land forms and wildlife habitat, and storm drainage.
Conservation Policy 1.3: Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors as unique and
environmentally sensitive resources.
Conservation Policy 3.1: Maintain and protect creeks and riparian corridors for
wildlife that use this resource for food, shelter, migration and breeding.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(e) Creek Protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet
from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks
in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning
Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear
natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. Creeks
and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible.
They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be
allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures
shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of
riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing
development and required improvements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eff. December 11,
1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; § 1, Ord. 504, eff. October 28, 2006)
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
Heritage oaks? Yes, several
Significant trees? Groves of significant trees? Several oak trees and non-native species
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)? Only non-native trees marked for
removal: olive, pepper, fruit.
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 10
Significant native vegetation? Yes, native toyon, oaks (live & valley) and other chaparral
and woodland species.
Significant invasive pest plant vegetation? Acacia, tamarisk, Scotch broom, Italian thistle
Note major infestation of invasive weeds such as stinkwort, oxalis, Italian thistle, purple
starthistle, yellow starthistle, pampas grass, broom, teasel, giant reed (Arundo donax), poison
hemlock, etc.
Conservation Policy 2.2: Minimize disturbance of the natural terrain and vegetation.
Preserve and protect native and naturalized plants, with special attention to
preservation of unique, rare or endangered species and plant communities such as
oak woodlands.
Conservation Policy 2.3: Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks
and other significant trees, on public and private property.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Conservation Program 2.5 Encourage the dedication of conservation/open space
easements or the public acquisition of areas that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile
ecological nature to ensure their protection
Open Space Policy 1.2: Protect and maintain those areas necessary to the integrity of
natural resources and processes, with special emphasis on, but not limited to, the
groundwater recharge and drainage system, open spaces vital for wildlife
habitat, open spaces suitable for agriculture, and other areas of major or unique
ecological significance.
Land Use Program 2.3 Encourage the preservation of existing trees, rock
outcroppings, ridgelines and other significant natural features
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(f) Tree Preservation. Every feasible attempt should be made to preserve existing
trees except those trees identified in the Los Altos Hills Landscape Guidelines invasive
plant
CA FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL CODE - FAC
DIVISION 4. PLANT QUARANTINE AND PEST CONTROL [5001 - 8808]
5401.
Any premises, plants, conveyances or things which are infected or infested with any
pest, or premises where any pest is found, are a public nuisance, and shall be
prosecuted as such in all actions and proceedings. All remedies which are given by law
for the prevention and abatement of a nuisance apply to such a public nuisance.
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS & FENCING
Check 2006 Live Oak Associates map (not official)
Evidence of wildlife (e.g., deer trails, spoor)? Yes; scat, bones, fur, animal trails
Identify location and type of existing fencing: No fencing on this property except around
the pool/patio area.
Check that fencing on plans agrees with fencing on the ground
Note any fence that does not meet current fencing regulations
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 11
Conservation Policy 2.7: Avoid the development of environmentally sensitive areas
that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile ecological nature, such as areas of rare or
endangered species of plants, or riparian areas.
Conservation Goal 3: Maintain and enhance the integrity of wildlife habitat.
Conservation Program 3.3: Assess the potential for development patterns to
fragment and isolate significant wildlife habitats.
Conservation Section 315: Planning for natural movement of wildlife can help
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.
Municipal Code 10-1.507 (d) Prohibited Fences, Walls, Gates, and Column Types. The
following fences are prohibited:
(1) Chain-link or cyclone fences, including any fence with bare lengths of wire
stretched between metal poles, with the exception of dark green, black, or brown vinyl-
coated chain-linked fences with matching vinyl-coated cross bars and caps.
(2) Barbed or razor wire fences, including any fence with attached barbs, sharp
points, or razors. Electric fences, including any fence designed to produce an electric
shock, except where necessary for animal husbandry operations.
(3) Any fence, wall, and/or gate that may cause harm to people, pets, and/or wildlife
due to points, spikes, or sharpened edges on the top or bottom part of the fence, wall
structure and/or gate.
(9) Open Space/Conservation Easement Perimeter Fences.
(i) Maximum height of open space/conservation easement perimeter fences: six (6) ft.
(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.
(10) Any fence crossing or intersecting an officially designated wildlife corridor shall
conform to the requirements specified above for an open space/conservation easement
perimeter fence.
OSC Site Review 13439 Mandoli.docx 8/18/18 12
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
Identify areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%, significant trees, wildlife corridor,
creeks, drainage swales)
No OSE found on neighboring properties.
Open Space Policy 1.1 Provide, during the development process, for the maximum
feasible preservation of open space in and adjoining the Town, with spaces ranging in
size from regional scale to small-scale open space on individual lots.
Open Space Policy 1.4: Preserve the natural beauty and minimize disturbance of the
natural terrain and vegetation.
Open Space Policy 1.7: To the extent possible, link open spaces together visually and
physically to form a system of open spaces.
Open Space Policy 1.8: Ensure that land uses and structures are compatible with the
general open space quality of the planning area.
Open Space Policy 2.6 New residential subdivisions shall provide open space for
recreation in order to meet their appropriate share of local recreation needs.
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and
nearby parcels.
Attachments:
- Photos from site
- Easement history and research
- Photo of site plan with marked OSE
FOLLOW-UP
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 1
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date: June 14, 2018
Property address: 10275 Kenbar Road
Date of Site Visit: June 11, 2018
Lands of Luu APN 331-17-020
Town
Planner
Suzanne Avila Project
Number
SD18-0020
Reason for review (check one)
ü New Residence
Second Unit
Addition/Major Remodel
Fence Permit
OSC RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: June 14, 2018
Voting of review: Unanimously in favor (RC, WW, NC, SW, JS, RC, PB, KG)
Absent (GC)
Final OSC recommendation:
The property is a steep (~30%) 1.477 acre lot. The existing house is situated on a flat
portion downhill from mature oak trees and above steep slope that abuts with Rancho
San Antonio. The proposed new house has three levels with an excavated basement.
Total cut volume of ~1645 CY. There is a very old oak tree with DBH of over 6 feet
downhill from proposed garage. The house location and pathways impinge on the roots
and canopy of heritage oak trees. New landscaping is with native plants. Swale at rear
of property drains to West Branch of Permanente Creek.
Recommendations:
1. OSE at elevations below and to the west of the house over slopes >30% with
mature oak trees.
2. Concern that the house and excavated areas are impinging on roots and canopy
of mature oaks, especially oaks labeled #3 & #4 on attached diagram, and will
kill the trees.
3. Old barb wire fencing on site and at southern border. Recommend removing
barbwire fence to meet current code.
4. Remove large stand of reed (Arundo donax spp or Phalaris arundinacea spp) near
and across western border. This plant is highly flammable, consumes high
amounts of water, and is invasive. This plant typically grows in wet arears – it
may be tapping into a water source.
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 2
Recommended open space easement shown in green.
Recommended open space easement shown in green.
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 3
Blue line is tributary of West Branch of Permanente Creek
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 4
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 5
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 6
Invasive reed plant should be removed.
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 7
Above: barbed wire fence;
Below: shallow drainage path at southern boundary
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 8
Above the house
Below the house
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot ____~30%____
Areas with slope ≥30%? Yes
Check slope/LUF worksheet on subdivisions
Review Geologic Hazard Report, if applicable. Check for colluvial soil, earthquake faults,
springs, seeps, shallow groundwater.
Safety Policy 1.1 Open space easements, zoning and other land use regulations shall
be used to limit and, in some cases, prohibit development in areas of unstable terrain,
active fault traces, water channels, flood plains, excessively steep slopes and other
areas determined to be hazardous to public welfare and safety.
Safety Policy 2.2 Locate development so as to avoid geologic hazards, including
slope instability, to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.5 Steep slopes, canyons and ravines generally in excess of 30%
slope, as well as natural swales and drainage channels, and geologic hazard areas
within areas designated for residential development shall be left undisturbed and
preserved in their natural condition to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.6 Limits on the development of individual residential lots shall be
determined based on evaluation of such factors as natural vegetation, topographic
characteristics, soils and geology.
CREEKS
Creeks or waterways or swale on parcel? Name of creek/tributary of: West Branch of
Permanente Creek
Shown on USGS map? SCVWD creek map? LAH Hazard Map? EcoAtlas? YES
Condition of banks? No banks but swales drain toward this watershed.
Existing riparian or OSE or SCVWD easement along creek on this property or nearby parcels?
None.
Does SCVWD want to expand their easement?
Proposed setbacks for structures?
Evidence of bed, banks, or Original High Water Mark (OHWM)?
Identify any structures including fences within 25 feet of top of bank? Within OHWM?
Area within the OHWM are regulated as Waters of the United States and protected by the
Clean Water Act. Any development, vegetation removal, or stream bank modifications within
this area may require permits from regulatory agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, CA Dept
of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board.
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 9
Source: US Army Corps of Engineers
Safety Policy 3.1: Leave natural channels and flood plains in a natural state,
unencumbered by development to the maximum extent feasible.
Conservation Policy 5.1: Keep or restore major drainage courses in their natural
condition insofar as possible because of their importance in supplying major
vegetation, land forms and wildlife habitat, and storm drainage.
Conservation Policy 1.3: Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors as unique and
environmentally sensitive resources.
Conservation Policy 3.1: Maintain and protect creeks and riparian corridors for
wildlife that use this resource for food, shelter, migration and breeding.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(e) Creek Protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet
from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks
in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning
Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear
natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. Creeks
and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible.
They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be
allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures
shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of
riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing
development and required improvements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eff. December 11,
1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; § 1, Ord. 504, eff. October 28, 2006)
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
Heritage oaks? Yes, several
Significant trees? Groves of significant trees? Several oak trees and non-native species
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)? Not noted
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 10
Significant native vegetation? Yes, native toyon and other chaparral and woodland
species.
Significant invasive pest plant vegetation? Some type of reed plant should be removed.
Note major infestation of invasive weeds such as stinkwort, oxalis, Italian thistle, purple
starthistle, yellow starthistle, pampas grass, broom, teasel, giant reed (Arundo donax), poison
hemlock, etc.
Conservation Policy 2.2: Minimize disturbance of the natural terrain and vegetation.
Preserve and protect native and naturalized plants, with special attention to
preservation of unique, rare or endangered species and plant communities such as
oak woodlands.
Conservation Policy 2.3: Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks
and other significant trees, on public and private property.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Conservation Program 2.5 Encourage the dedication of conservation/open space
easements or the public acquisition of areas that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile
ecological nature to ensure their protection
Open Space Policy 1.2: Protect and maintain those areas necessary to the integrity of
natural resources and processes, with special emphasis on, but not limited to, the
groundwater recharge and drainage system, open spaces vital for wildlife
habitat, open spaces suitable for agriculture, and other areas of major or unique
ecological significance.
Land Use Program 2.3 Encourage the preservation of existing trees, rock
outcroppings, ridgelines and other significant natural features
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(f) Tree Preservation. Every feasible attempt should be made to preserve existing
trees except those trees identified in the Los Altos Hills Landscape Guidelines invasive
plant
CA FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL CODE - FAC
DIVISION 4. PLANT QUARANTINE AND PEST CONTROL [5001 - 8808]
5401.
Any premises, plants, conveyances or things which are infected or infested with any
pest, or premises where any pest is found, are a public nuisance, and shall be
prosecuted as such in all actions and proceedings. All remedies which are given by law
for the prevention and abatement of a nuisance apply to such a public nuisance.
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS & FENCING
Check 2006 Live Oak Associates map (not official)
Evidence of wildlife (e.g., deer trails, spoor)? Yes.
Identify location and type of existing fencing: No fencing on this property but there is a
fence at the eastern neighboring property and old barb wire fencing at southern
border.
Check that fencing on plans agrees with fencing on the ground
OSC Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 11
Note any fence that does not meet current fencing regulations
Conservation Policy 2.7: Avoid the development of environmentally sensitive areas
that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile ecological nature, such as areas of rare or
endangered species of plants, or riparian areas.
Conservation Goal 3: Maintain and enhance the integrity of wildlife habitat.
Conservation Program 3.3: Assess the potential for development patterns to
fragment and isolate significant wildlife habitats.
Conservation Section 315: Planning for natural movement of wildlife can help
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.
Municipal Code 10-1.507 (d) Prohibited Fences, Walls, Gates, and Column Types. The
following fences are prohibited:
(1) Chain-link or cyclone fences, including any fence with bare lengths of wire
stretched between metal poles, with the exception of dark green, black, or brown vinyl-
coated chain-linked fences with matching vinyl-coated cross bars and caps.
(2) Barbed or razor wire fences, including any fence with attached barbs, sharp
points, or razors. Electric fences, including any fence designed to produce an electric
shock, except where necessary for animal husbandry operations.
(3) Any fence, wall, and/or gate that may cause harm to people, pets, and/or wildlife
due to points, spikes, or sharpened edges on the top or bottom part of the fence, wall
structure and/or gate.
(9) Open Space/Conservation Easement Perimeter Fences.
(i) Maximum height of open space/conservation easement perimeter fences: six (6) ft.
(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 Site Review 10275 Kenbar.docx 8/18/18 12
(10) Any fence crossing or intersecting an officially designated wildlife corridor shall
conform to the requirements specified above for an open space/conservation easement
perimeter fence.
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
Identify areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%, significant trees, wildlife corridor,
creeks, drainage swales)
No OSE found on neighboring properties.
Open Space Policy 1.1 Provide, during the development process, for the maximum
feasible preservation of open space in and adjoining the Town, with spaces ranging in
size from regional scale to small-scale open space on individual lots.
Open Space Policy 1.4: Preserve the natural beauty and minimize disturbance of the
natural terrain and vegetation.
Open Space Policy 1.7: To the extent possible, link open spaces together visually and
physically to form a system of open spaces.
Open Space Policy 1.8: Ensure that land uses and structures are compatible with the
general open space quality of the planning area.
Open Space Policy 2.6 New residential subdivisions shall provide open space for
recreation in order to meet their appropriate share of local recreation needs.
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and
nearby parcels.
Attachments:
- Photos from site
- Easement history and research
- Photo of site plan with marked OSE
FOLLOW-UP
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 1
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date: June 14, 2018
Property address: 26896 Alejandro Drive
Date of Site Visit: June 11, 2018
Lands of Lam & Stepanov APN 175-44-065
Town
Planner
Steve Padovan Project
Number
SD18-0015
Reason for review (check one)
New Residence
Second Unit
ü Addition/Major Remodel
Fence Permit
OSC RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: June 14, 2018
Voting of review: Unanimously in favor (RC, WW, NC, SW, JS, RC, PB, KG)
Absent (GC)
Final OSC recommendation:
The property is a steep (~>30%) 1.2 acre lot. The existing house is situated on a flat
portion ~ 50 feet below Cresta Drive and above a ~30% slope with mature oaks. The
proposed remodel is in the same footprint as existing. No trees are marked for removal.
The species of trees are not marked on the plans but most are oaks. There is a large
storm drain basin at the foot (southeast end) of the driveway and EcoAtlas shows a
drainage swale near the southern boundary, draining into Barron Creek watershed.
The committee questions why the neighboring property, 26890 Alejandro, was not
reviewed by the Open Space Committee. Property has steep slopes, oak woodland and
drainage swale. Contiguous open space easements are a state goal in the General Plan.
Recommendations:
1. OSE at elevations above, below and to the north of the house over slopes >30%
with mature oak trees.
2. Take measures to protect mature valley oak roots and canopy at driveway.
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 2
Blue line is Barron Creek tributary
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 3
Recommended OSE shown in red.
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 4
Storm drain at base of swale and additional drainage from neighboring property. Debris
should be removed from drainage.
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 5
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 6
Above the house
Below the house
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 7
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot ____>30%____
Areas with slope ≥30%? Yes
Check slope/LUF worksheet on subdivisions
Review Geologic Hazard Report, if applicable. Check for colluvial soil, earthquake faults,
springs, seeps, shallow groundwater.
Safety Policy 1.1 Open space easements, zoning and other land use regulations shall
be used to limit and, in some cases, prohibit development in areas of unstable terrain,
active fault traces, water channels, flood plains, excessively steep slopes and other
areas determined to be hazardous to public welfare and safety.
Safety Policy 2.2 Locate development so as to avoid geologic hazards, including
slope instability, to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.5 Steep slopes, canyons and ravines generally in excess of 30%
slope, as well as natural swales and drainage channels, and geologic hazard areas
within areas designated for residential development shall be left undisturbed and
preserved in their natural condition to the maximum extent feasible.
Land Use Policy 2.6 Limits on the development of individual residential lots shall be
determined based on evaluation of such factors as natural vegetation, topographic
characteristics, soils and geology.
CREEKS
Creeks or waterways or swale on parcel? Name of creek/tributary of: Barron Creek
Shown on USGS map? SCVWD creek map? LAH Hazard Map? EcoAtlas? YES
Condition of banks? No banks but swales drain toward this watershed. Large catchbasin
near driveway.
Existing riparian or OSE or SCVWD easement along creek on this property or nearby parcels?
None.
Does SCVWD want to expand their easement?
Proposed setbacks for structures?
Evidence of bed, banks, or Original High Water Mark (OHWM)?
Identify any structures including fences within 25 feet of top of bank? Within OHWM?
Area within the OHWM are regulated as Waters of the United States and protected by the
Clean Water Act. Any development, vegetation removal, or stream bank modifications within
this area may require permits from regulatory agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, CA Dept
of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board.
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 8
Source: US Army Corps of Engineers
Safety Policy 3.1: Leave natural channels and flood plains in a natural state,
unencumbered by development to the maximum extent feasible.
Conservation Policy 5.1: Keep or restore major drainage courses in their natural
condition insofar as possible because of their importance in supplying major
vegetation, land forms and wildlife habitat, and storm drainage.
Conservation Policy 1.3: Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors as unique and
environmentally sensitive resources.
Conservation Policy 3.1: Maintain and protect creeks and riparian corridors for
wildlife that use this resource for food, shelter, migration and breeding.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(e) Creek Protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet
from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks
in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning
Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear
natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. Creeks
and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible.
They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be
allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures
shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of
riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing
development and required improvements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eff. December 11,
1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; § 1, Ord. 504, eff. October 28, 2006)
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
Heritage oaks? Yes, several
Significant trees? Groves of significant trees? Several oak trees and non-native species
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)? Not noted
Significant native vegetation? Yes, native valley and live oaks.
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 9
Significant invasive pest plant vegetation?
Note major infestation of invasive weeds such as stinkwort, oxalis, Italian thistle, purple
starthistle, yellow starthistle, pampas grass, broom, teasel, giant reed (Arundo donax), poison
hemlock, etc.
Conservation Policy 2.2: Minimize disturbance of the natural terrain and vegetation.
Preserve and protect native and naturalized plants, with special attention to
preservation of unique, rare or endangered species and plant communities such as
oak woodlands.
Conservation Policy 2.3: Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks
and other significant trees, on public and private property.
Conservation Policy 11.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to conserve
the natural slope, preserve existing native vegetation, limit invasive species, and
conserve natural drainage channels and swales.
Conservation Program 2.5 Encourage the dedication of conservation/open space
easements or the public acquisition of areas that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile
ecological nature to ensure their protection
Open Space Policy 1.2: Protect and maintain those areas necessary to the integrity of
natural resources and processes, with special emphasis on, but not limited to, the
groundwater recharge and drainage system, open spaces vital for wildlife
habitat, open spaces suitable for agriculture, and other areas of major or unique
ecological significance.
Land Use Program 2.3 Encourage the preservation of existing trees, rock
outcroppings, ridgelines and other significant natural features
Municipal Code 10-2.702 Siting.
(f) Tree Preservation. Every feasible attempt should be made to preserve existing
trees except those trees identified in the Los Altos Hills Landscape Guidelines invasive
plant
CA FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL CODE - FAC
DIVISION 4. PLANT QUARANTINE AND PEST CONTROL [5001 - 8808]
5401.
Any premises, plants, conveyances or things which are infected or infested with any
pest, or premises where any pest is found, are a public nuisance, and shall be
prosecuted as such in all actions and proceedings. All remedies which are given by law
for the prevention and abatement of a nuisance apply to such a public nuisance.
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS & FENCING
Check 2006 Live Oak Associates map (not official)
Evidence of wildlife (e.g., deer trails, spoor)? Yes.
Identify location and type of existing fencing: No fencing on this property but there is a
fence at the northern neighboring property.
Check that fencing on plans agrees with fencing on the ground
Note any fence that does not meet current fencing regulations
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 10
Conservation Policy 2.7: Avoid the development of environmentally sensitive areas
that are rich in wildlife or of a fragile ecological nature, such as areas of rare or
endangered species of plants, or riparian areas.
Conservation Goal 3: Maintain and enhance the integrity of wildlife habitat.
Conservation Program 3.3: Assess the potential for development patterns to
fragment and isolate significant wildlife habitats.
Conservation Section 315: Planning for natural movement of wildlife can help
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.
Municipal Code 10-1.507 (d) Prohibited Fences, Walls, Gates, and Column Types. The
following fences are prohibited:
(1) Chain-link or cyclone fences, including any fence with bare lengths of wire
stretched between metal poles, with the exception of dark green, black, or brown vinyl-
coated chain-linked fences with matching vinyl-coated cross bars and caps.
(2) Barbed or razor wire fences, including any fence with attached barbs, sharp
points, or razors. Electric fences, including any fence designed to produce an electric
shock, except where necessary for animal husbandry operations.
(3) Any fence, wall, and/or gate that may cause harm to people, pets, and/or wildlife
due to points, spikes, or sharpened edges on the top or bottom part of the fence, wall
structure and/or gate.
(9) Open Space/Conservation Easement Perimeter Fences.
(i) Maximum height of open space/conservation easement perimeter fences: six (6) ft.
(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.
(10) Any fence crossing or intersecting an officially designated wildlife corridor shall
conform to the requirements specified above for an open space/conservation easement
perimeter fence.
OSC Site Review 26896 Alejandro.docx 8/18/18 11
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
Identify areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%, significant trees, wildlife corridor,
creeks, drainage swales)
No OSE found on neighboring properties.
Open Space Policy 1.1 Provide, during the development process, for the maximum
feasible preservation of open space in and adjoining the Town, with spaces ranging in
size from regional scale to small-scale open space on individual lots.
Open Space Policy 1.4: Preserve the natural beauty and minimize disturbance of the
natural terrain and vegetation.
Open Space Policy 1.7: To the extent possible, link open spaces together visually and
physically to form a system of open spaces.
Open Space Policy 1.8: Ensure that land uses and structures are compatible with the
general open space quality of the planning area.
Open Space Policy 2.6 New residential subdivisions shall provide open space for
recreation in order to meet their appropriate share of local recreation needs.
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and
nearby parcels.
Attachments:
- Photos from site
- Easement history and research
- Photo of site plan with marked OSE
FOLLOW-UP
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda