HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 10OSC FINAL_Minutes2_19-0110.docx 1/7/19 1
Los Altos Hills Open Space Committee
Los Altos Hills Parks and Recreation Building FINAL
Minutes of Regular Meeting January 10, 2019
Members and Associates Present: Peter Brown, Richard Contreras, Nancy Couperus, Kit Gordon, Jean
Struthers, Sue Welch (Members); Kjell Karlsson, Karen Lemes, Sharen Schoendorf (Associates)
Members and Associates Absent: George Clifford, Wendie Ward (Members); Alice Sakamoto (Associate)
Council Liaison Present: Roger Spreen
Council Member: Michelle Wu
LAH Planning Commissioner: Rajiv Patel
Member of Public Present: Pat Lang
Jeremiah Gerard (Hidden villa)
1.Call to Order and Approval of Minutes
A.Roll Call. KG called the meeting to order at 9:07 am.
B.Acceptance of Meeting Minutes. Minutes of the Dec 12, 2018 OSC meeting were approved with edits.
KG moved, PB seconded, and the vote was 5 in favor, with JS abstaining (not present at that meeting).
C.Announcements.
i.Town Hall Expansion. On Jan 22, 2019, the Planning Commission will hold a study session on the
proposed Town Hall addition and remodel and will also discuss possible changes to the Fast Track
Guide and process (see below).
2.Planning
A.Planning Site reviews.
ii.27150 Julietta Lane. (RC, KG; Lands of Chan; APN 182-23-017; SD18-0072). RC presented
information and draft recommendations (Attachment A). Reason for OSC review is a new residence
and landscape screening plan. This is a relatively flat lot on the south side of Julietta at the intersection
with Altamont Road, with frontage on both streets. The lot has a number of oaks and cork oak; a small
portion of the lot behind the tennis court has a slope >30%, but this area has no connection to other
OSEs. Although it is close to Byrne Preserve, it has no wildlife movement routes because of fencing.
SW moved that the OSC recommend the Town not require an open space easement on this
parcel. NC seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW).
iii. 26460 Taaffe Lane. (RC, KG; Lands of Haehnel; APN 182-14-005, SD19-0001). KG presented
information and draft recommendations (Attachment B). Reason for OSC review is a second unit,
addition/major remodel, and fence permit. This 1.01-acre lot is located on the west side of Taaffe Lane
adjacent to the east side of the Packard orchard property; it has an average slope of 14% and a fault
trace running thru it. Much of the lot is open grassland; trees include a mature oak in the center of the
lot (to be protected with a retaining wall), oaks along the northern border, redwoods along the
southeast border, and two (probably invasive) palms. A small portion of the parcel (eastern corner) has
slopes >30%, but OSC does not recommend an OSE for this small isolated segment. NC moved OSC
accept the recommendation as written: developer to remove the palm trees near the driveway
and slope and to remove the invasive stinkwort behind the house. No open space easement is
recommended. PB seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW).
C.Fence Permit reviews.
i.26400 Aric Lane. (Lands of Scheinman; APN 175-32-024; ZP19-003). KG RC presented the
information and draft recommendations (Attachment C). The parcel is on the south side of Aric Lane
one lot away from Esther Clark Park. Aric Road (in front of this parcel) and an off-road pathway
running along the northern border of the adjacent parcel (off-road) provides access to the park lands
for humans and wildlife. The plan is to extend an existing property-line fence with new wood and wire
fencing and enclose a new pool. The front yard will remain unfenced. KG moved OSC send the
review to the Planning Department receommending the fence plan as written. NC seconded and
the vote was unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW).
ii.25380 Becky Lane (APN 182-16-027). The lot is on the east side of Becky Lane and also has frontage
on Moody Road. Moody frontage has a drainage ditch near the road and then slopes up steeply to the
property. Owners have requested a variance to install a 7-ft high solid fence along the Moody frontage
that would not be in compliance with height and setback limits required by LAH fencing ordinance.
Owners argue that neighbors have non-compliant fences that exceed 7 ft in height, including one that
OSC FINAL_Minutes2_19-0110.docx 1/7/19 2
was recently installed without a permit. OSC discussed this fence proposal and issues with Town
response/ lack of response to code compliance complaints.
3. New Business
A. Neglected sites with stinkwort infestations. OSC will address this in the spring.
B. Criteria for OSC review and Fast Track Guidelines. KG distributed a memo from OSC to Planning
Commission with draft recommendations to improve the process. LAH Planning Commission will discuss
the Fast Track process at the Jan 22, 2019 meeting. They have noted problems with projects that have
been approved via the Town FastTrack process. In addition, some development projects with
conservation issues that should have been addressed were not sent to OSC for review. At the Dec 2018
meeting, OSC proposed to prepare a list of immediate and longer-term priorities to help improve the
review process (including Fast Track) and to send these ideas to the Planning Commission. KG
distributed a memo from OSC to Planning Commission with draft recommendations to improve the
process. After OSC discussion memo and edits, PB moved that OSC submit the revised memo
(Attachment C) to the Planning Commission. RC seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor
(PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW).
C. Associate Membership. Following OSC discussion, KG moved that OSC approve Kjell Karlsson,
Karen Lemes, Alice Sakamoto, Sharen Schoendorf, and Jeremiah Gerard as Associate Members of
the OSC. PB seconded and the vote was unanimously in favor (PB, RC, NC, KG, JS, SW).
4. Continuing Business
A. Tree Ordinance. EDPC has a list of native and invasive trees to be added to the document. Document will
be circulated in March.
B. Town weed management. Stinkwort will be addressed in spring.
C. Grassroots Ecology. Using funds from a SCVWD pollution prevention grant, Grassroots Ecology has
modified the topography of the seasonal wetland below the Westwind Community Barn (formerly the site
of four paddocks). They have constructed a series of channels, berms and dams and added a layer of
mulch to the lowest area near the creek. The objective is to slow and clean the substantial storm water
run-off from the barn areas before it enters Moody Creek.
D. Green Stormwater Infrastructure. Weather permitting (saturated soil and sufficient rain) in February KG,
KK, and WW plan to visit specific sites in Town that have had excessive run-off or flooding in the past.
The objective is to identify locations where green infrastructure projects could be installed to reduce
flooding and pollution and increase groundwater recharge.
E. Wildlife Forum. Not discussed.
F. Updates for City Council and Planning Commission meetings, Site Development meetings, Committee
meetings. See above.
G. Sign-ups for FastTrack/Site Development meetings. Meetings are held most Tuesdays from 10 to 11 am.
KG and NC volunteered to attend the Fast Track meeting in January and early February.
5. Open Discussion and Communications from the Floor. None
6. Adjournment. Meeting was adjourned at 11:00 am.
Next Regular Meeting: Thursday, February 10, 2018
9:00 AM at LAH Parks and Recreation Building
Attachment A: OSC review for 27150 Julietta Lane
Attachment B: OSC review for 26460 Taaffe Lane
Attachment C: OSC review for fence at 26400 Aric Lane
Attachment D: OSC memo to PC on standard and review process and Fast Track review process
Final minutes were approved at the Regular Open Space Committee meeting of Feb 14, 2019.
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date:
Property address: 27150 Julietta Lane
Date of Site Visit: 8 January, 2019
Reason for review :
Fence Permit
Background:
New wood and wire fence, replacing some current fencing and enclosing new pool area.
Fig 1. Aerial view of property (pre new dwelling)
Lands of Scheinman APN
Town
Planner
Cody Einfalt Project
Number
ZP19-0003
! 1
OSC Site Review 27150 Julietta Lane Thursday, January 10, 2019
Fig 2. Plans of new house
OSC PRELIMINARY
RECOMMENDATION
Only small areas of slope >30% exist
(see oranges shading on figure to the
left) and do not really continue onto
neighboring properties (which would
possibly allow later joining of space).
Consequently not a Open Space
Easement is not recommended for this
property.
! 2
OSC Site Review 27150 Julietta Lane Thursday, January 10, 2019
OSC Final RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: January 10, 2019
Final OSC recommendation
Follow Preliminary Recommendation: No action to be taken by OSC
Voting of review: All present in favor
! 3
OSC Site Review 27150 Julietta Lane Thursday, January 10, 2019
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot _
Areas with slope ≥30%? YES
Check slope/LUF worksheet on subdivisions
If applicable, Review Geologic Hazard Report,
(For more information see Slope and Soil in Appendix)
CREEKS
None
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
Heritage oaks? Yes
Significant trees? Yes
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)?
Significant native vegetation? No
Significant invasive pest plant vegetation? No
(For more information see Trees, Native Vegetation & Invasive Plants in Appendix)
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS & FENCING
No wildlife corridors noticed
Lot is fenced
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
No existing OSE found on this or nearby parcels
Identify on plans and attach copy (photo) of areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%,
significant trees, wildlife corridor, creeks, drainage swales)
(For more information see Open Space/Conservation Easements, in Appendix)
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and nearby
parcels. Pathway easement of 10’ along Altamont Road
! 4
OSC Site Review 27150 Julietta Lane Thursday, January 10, 2019
FOLLOW-UP
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda
! 5
OSC Site Review 27150 Julietta Lane Thursday, January 10, 2019
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 1
To: Los Altos Hills Planning Department
From: Open Space Committee
Date: Jan 10, 2019
Property address: 26460 Taaffe Lane
Date of Site Visit: Jan 8, 2019
Lands of Haehnel APN 182-14-005
Town
Planner
Dylan Parker Project
Number
SD19-0001
Lot size 1.01 ac Lot slope ~14%
Reason for review (check one)
ü New Residence
Second Unit
Addition/Major Remodel
Fence Permit
OSC RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROPERTY
Date of OSC review: Jan 10, 2019
Voting of review: Unanimously in favor (NC, RC, SW, PB, KG) Absent (WW, GC)
Final recommendation
- Remove invasive palm trees near driveway and on the slope
- Remove stinkwort at back of existing house.
Discussion
A new residence is proposed to replace existing house. A fault trace runs through the property
requiring the house to be set back from the road further than existing house. The neighboring
property to the southwest is within a geologic fault hazard area and is a wide expansive slope
down to Purisima Creek. The property has a few oaks at the northern border and redwoods at
south eastern border. Two palm trees were noted and they may be of an invasive species.
Stinkwort was noted at the back of the existing house.
There is a small area in the eastern corner of the property with slopes at or above 30%. However,
the committee does not recommend an open space easement for this small isolated segment.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 2
Google map view
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 3
EcoAtlas view
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 4
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 5
Large Valley oak in front.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 6
Recommend removing palm tree; front slope with oaks.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 7
Recommend removing stinkwort.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 8
Recommend removing stinkwort.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 9
Expansive area looks like it may have been disced in past – no shrubs and
monoculture vegetation.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 10
Palm tree may be of invasive variety.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 11
Recommend removing stinkwort.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 12
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 13
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
SLOPE AND SOIL
Average slope of lot ____portions of lot are >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.
CREEKS
Creeks or waterways or swale on parcel? No Name of creek/tributary of:
Shown on USGS map? SCVWD creek map? LAH Hazard Map? EcoAtlas? No
Condition of banks?
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?
TREES, NATIVE VEGETATION & INVASIVE PLANTS
Heritage oaks? Yes, a few
Significant trees? Groves of significant trees? A few oak trees and native species
Trees proposed for removal (number and species)?
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.
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: Existing chain link on eastern property boundary.
Check that fencing on plans agrees with fencing on the ground
Note any fence that does not meet current fencing regulations
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
Check Town records for existing CE or OSE on this property and adjacent and nearby parcels.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 14
Identify areas where OSE are recommended (slope ≥30%, significant trees, wildlife corridor, creeks,
drainage swales)
No OSE found on this or neighboring properties.
PATHWAY EASEMENTS (PE)
Check Town records for existing or newly proposed PE on this property or adjacent and nearby parcels.
No PE found on this or neighboring properties.
FOLLOW-UP
Attachments:
- Photos from site
- Easement history and research
- Photo of site plan with marked OSE
Send final copy to OSC Chair & Secretary
Upload to TraKit ?
Add address to list of easements to track on OSC agenda
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 15
SUPPORTING GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
SLOPE AND SOIL
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
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.
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.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 16
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
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.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 17
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
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.
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 18
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.
OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS (OSE)/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (CE)
OSC Site Review 26460 Taaffe Lane.docx 19
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.
Fast Track OSC review.docx Page 1 of 2
To: Planning Commissioners Mandle, Couperus, Patel, Smith, Abraham & Planning Director
Avila
From: Open Space Committee
Date: January 10, 2019
RE: Fast Track & Open Space Committee Review Criteria
The Open Space Committee requests the opportunity to review and comment on any
development project with the criteria listed below:
• Properties proposed for subdivision or lot line adjustment
• Site contain areas with slope >30%
• A creek, swale, seasonal drainage or other drainage feature within or adjacent to site
• Site contains established oak woodland or Heritage oaks
• Site with history of landslide or flooding
• Site within a flood plain
• Site with fault line (fault lines and streams are often connected)
• Project with proposed excavation more than 1000 cubic yards
• Site where any part of parcel is within the designated Open Space Conservation Area as
defined in the LAH Land Use Element
• Site with or adjacent to a Santa Clara Valley Water District easement
• Parcel or adjacent parcel has an existing open space easement or conservation
easement
• Parcel with area less than 1 acre or LUF less than 1
• Site has mature cottonwoods, alders, willows, or other obligate wetland species
(indicators of wetland or swale)
• Lots greater than 3 acres
• Lots with existing or proposed fence length greater than 1000 linear feet
The Open Space Committee is requesting to review any development project with potential
conservation issues, regardless of the size of the project. The LAH General Plan and ordinances
specify that development projects adding >900 sqft of habitable area, barns or stables (i.e., a
“major addition”) must comply with pathway requirements and are reviewed by the Pathway
Committee. In contrast, there is no minimum development area requirement for review by
the Open Space Committee. The General Plan specifies:
Each parcel shall be evaluated on a case-by-case basis during the site development
review process to determine whether an open space easement should be required, based
on the extent of steep slopes generally in excess of 30% slope and the presence of
heritage oak trees and/or creek corridors – LAH General Plan: Land Use Element pg LU-9
Open space easements (OSE’s) may be required as a condition of approval for site
development. When an OSE is required, the property owner signs and agreement with
the Town to keep the easement area undeveloped and in its natural condition – LAH
General Plan: Land Use Element pg LU-10
Fast Track OSC review.docx Page 2 of 2
We also recommend that projects with criteria listed below NOT be eligible for a Fast Track
hearing:
• Project has existing or proposed structures that are within 25 ft from top of bank of
creek, swale or other drainage
• Site with history of landslide or flooding
• Site within a flood plain
• Site with fault line
• Project proposed excavation of more than 1000 cu yards
• Site containing >10% area within the Open Space Conservation Area
• MFA or MDA within 95% percent of maximum
• Lot size less than 1 acre or LUF less than 1
• Site with average slope greater than 30%