HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS January 22, 2004
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR A TWO LOT
SUBDIVISION: LANDS OF KEARNS. FILE 171-03-TM-GD-ND
FROM: Debbie Pedro, Associate Planner
APPROVED BY: Carl Cahill, Planning Director
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission:
1. Review and make comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and proposed
Tentative Map; and
2. Forward the application to the City Council with a recommendation for approval,
subject to the conditions in Attachment 1, including adoption of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The following are the discretionary actions that are required for the approval of the
subdivision:
1. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by the City Council.
2. Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan by the City Council.
3. Approval of the Tentative Map by the City Council.
The Planning Commission's actions relative to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Tentative Map are recommendations to the City Council.
TENTATIVE MAP REVIEW
In order to approve a subdivision, the Planning Commission must determine that the
PP
project is consistent with the General Plan, Subdivision and Zoning Regulations, and that
none of the findings for denial can be made, as specified in Section 66474 of the State
Subdivision Map Act. Staff has prepared findings for approval of the project
(Attachment 2). Comments on the Tentative Map have been received from the Town
Geotechnical Consultant,the Town Engineer, Santa Clara County Fire Department, PG&
E, Environmental Design Committee and the Pathways Committee; and are attached for
the Planning Commissions review. Neighboring residents and propertyowners within
500 feet of the site have been notified of the public hearing.
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 2 of 13
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Draft Mitigation Monitoring
Program have been prepared for the project. The review period for the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (Attachment 3) for the proposed two lot subdivision will end on
February 17, 2004. The Planning Commission may make comments on both the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Tentative Map. The Negative Declaration must
be accepted in order to approve the Tentative Map. In order to recommend approval of
the document, the Commission needs to find that any potential significant environmental
effects are addressed through the proposed mitigation measures.
Recommended mitigation measures include: geotechnical consultant review of site
development plans; site specific drainage improvements; installation of a fire hydrant or
sprinklered buildings as required by the Fire District; tree protection during construction;
and observation of State and County requirements for handling archaeological remains
and artifacts if found.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting approval of a two lot Tentative Map on 2.32 acres located on
the north side of Magdalena Road. The parcel is bounded by Magdalena Road to the
South, and residential lots containing single family dwellings to the west, north, and east.
The existing parcel is developed with a one story residence, concrete patios, and an
asphalt driveway. The existing driveway approach is off of Magdalena Road at the
southwest comer of the property. The surrounding land use is single family residence
with a minimum lot size of 1 acre.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TABLE
=A Lflt S Sva .lc�p4 #r ss Net n MDA` vfl S A
k Acreage s Acreages F Esq ftp Esq it)
1 16.4 1.16 1.16 1.002 12,625 5,691
2 16.4 1.16 1.16 1.003 12,638 5,697
Total Site 16.4 2.32 2.32 2.005
Source: Tentative Map
Floor and Development Area for Parcel 1 after subdivision:
Area T3�pe Maxim�?ms 1t) t Existing{ q ft emaYung{ rl:It}'
Development 12,625 7;297 5,328
Floor 5,691 3,747 1,944
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 3 of 13
Lot Design and BuildingSites:
ites:
The proposed lot line extends from north to south following the natural topography of the
land to create two 1.16 acres parcels. The tentative map shows a 160-foot diameter
building circle on each lot. No change is proposed for the existing house on parcel one.
All of the existing structures located on Parcel 1 are within side and rear yard setbacks
except for a legal nonconforming driveway/parking area located within the north property
line setback. Pursuant to section 10-1.401.c of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code, at
such time when more than fifty (50%) percent of the nonconforming portion of the
subject driveway/parking area is repaired or replaced, it shall be brought into
conformance with current zoning requirements or a request for a variance shall be
submitted for Planning Commission review.
Parcel 2 consists of 1.16 acres of rolling hills and pasture land. The lot is currently
undeveloped and most of the parcel is open with clusters of oak, pine, and acacia trees
along the edges of the north and west property lines. A large drainage swale running
across the parcel is located in the southern portion of the site. The proposed building site
is located on open land near the center of the lot above the drainage swale.
�Y g��C ��t4 a z.� P . • ��f t y'�
41
�'-
,5wya
��
'�yy,�
Mr�<`
ON,
r i �T��•P�rte'y�'.°�'ie die ��°` �fi�'d, _°r�C'.:
caa
View of Parcel 2 looking south towards Magdalena Road
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 4 of 13
Utilities:
Water supply will be provided by California Water Service Company. The septic system
serving the existing residence is to be abandoned, and both parcels are to be connected to
the sanitary sewer system along Magdalena Road. PG & E will provide gas and electric
services underground, and Pacific Bell will provide telephone service.
Access:
Magdalena Road currently provides access to the project site via a driveway entrance at
the southwest corner of the property. Driveway access to Lot 2 is proposed at the
southeast comer of the property off of Moody Road as shown on the Tentative Map. The
Santa Clara County Fire Department requires a 14-foot wide paved driveway for each
dwelling with a maximum slope of 15%. Additional study for the proposed driveway will
be undertaken at the time of site development plan review for Lot 2.
In accordance with Section 10-2.1202 of the Municipal Code, the Town Engineer is
recommending the dedication of a 30' wide half-street right-of-way on Magdalena Road as
shown on the Tentative Map. (Condition of Approval#5)
Geotechnical Review:
Cotton, Shires and Associates has reviewed both the original geotechnical investigation
prepared in August 1996 and the supplemental report dated November 18, 2003. In the
supplemental geotechnical-feasibility report, the project consultant concluded that no
geotechnical conditions were identified that would preclude development of' a new
residence on Parcel 2. Cotton, Shires and Associates reviewed the reports and
recommends approval of the Tentative Map with conditions of approval related to future
development of Parcel 2. (Conditions of Approval#s 1, 2, and 3)
Drainage:
Drainage pattern on the property is r
generally characterized by sheet flow to
the southeast into an existing swale that a �
� � 5"
extends through the central and southern µ er F �� ', -R '
portions of parcel 2. Surface drainage
along the swale is directed to dual 24-inch
diameter culverts extending beneath an
existing driveway adjacent to the property
at 11271 Magdalena Road. The culvert
connects to a natural swale that continues
east across the properties at 11281 and � � - �• -
11291 Magdalena Road. 24"culverts under driveway at 11271 Magdalena
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 5 of 13
The applicant proposes to narrow the existing swale and direct surface water towards a 4'
wide x 3' deep box culvert under the proposed new driveway. The modification will
involve 30 cubic yards of cut and 600 cubic yards of fill. Rock line diversion banks are
proposed at the western edge of the swale to prevent erosion.
W SWALE
6- I 3' I 6'
-----TF I 7r-
15' SWALE SEC77ON
N.7 S.
Proposed swale design on Lot 2
A preliminary drainage plan has been provided as part of the submittal. A trench
retention chamber is proposed along the property line northeast of the swale to capture
water runoff from the proposed development on Lot 2. The applicant has provided a 100
year storm flow analysis and calculations to show that the drainage improvements will
mitigate impacts of future site development and the quantity and flow rate of onsite
surface runoff will not increase. The Town Engineer is requiring a final subdivision
improvement plan to be submitted for review prior to approval of the Final Map
(Condition of Approval#8).
COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The Subdivision Committee comprising of Commissioner Mordo, the Planning Director,
and Planning and Engineering staff convened on January 6, 2004 to review and discuss
the subdivision proposal. Pursuant to Section 9-1.509 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal
Code, neighbors within 500' of the property were notified of the hearing. A summary of
the discussion at the Subdivision Committee meeting is provided on the fact sheet and
hearing report(Attachments 7 and 8).
The issues discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting are as follow:
1. Verification of the existing development and floor areas on the property to ensure
compliance with new MDA and MFA after subdivision.
2. The proposed subdivision and subsequent site development will result in additional
water runoff, causing further erosion to the natural swale on a neighboring property.
Staff notes the following in response to the preceding comments:
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 6 of 13
1. Staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 7, 2003 and verified that
the existing floor and development areas on the property do not exceed the new MFA
and MDA for Parcel 1 after the subdivision.
2. A preliminary drainage plan has been provided as part of this submittal. The
applicant is proposing to modify the existing swale, construct rock line banks and
install a retention chamber onsite to mitigate the potential drainage impacts of the
development. According to the drainage analysis submitted by the applicant using
100 year storm flow calculations, the quantity and flow rate of water runoff will not
increase with the proposed drainage improvements.
Environmental Design Committee reviewed the proposal and noted that no trees will be
affected.
The Pathway Committee recommends the construction of a Type II-B path within the
public right-of-way along Magdalena Road. The path should spanthe entire frontage of
both lots and be designed to meander around the existing trees and power pole as
necessary. The committee also recommends that several existing wood posts installed
within the right-of-way in front of Lot 2 be removed. (Condition of Approval#11)
1;bIr ON
. z
.y
i
,�rV
o ,tea &q s� t
Ms .: � s fa
.t iTM°u� a H'f
a'"�'� MI E�
"pt s r sum s fr 3 yz err
'•���5""f f� �^M���.�`
-'OO
NA
yws` �' 'b�i'
x 4 „.F ✓r. -.r.1`- ...s 4�`� 's` £�' v 7'" tv�Vii. 'Y ':
y'�--�
rr 8 yyWRA�
1
�� �'��fm.'zrx�,f�'TY�tn.'`>bi«"s� 'c" �J a�� `" `� rNs'�7' � `�`� �+�t '}•'u"�+'�.k >.n L.�h J ��
Type H-B path to be constructed along Magdalena Road
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 7 of 13
Fire Department:
The Santa Clara County Fire Department has reviewed the Tentative Map and has no
comments at this time. Thea applicant will be required to submit future site development
PP
plans to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to building permit submittal.
CONCLUSIONS
The Commission must determine if the proposed subdivision is in compliance with the
General Plan, and if the proposed lots would allow development to occur which meets the
provisions of the Zoning and Site Development Ordinances, and the Design Guidelines.
Upon direction from the Commission, staff will modify the conditions as needed, and
proceed to the City Council for action; or return to the Commission if any significant
redesign is requested.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recommended Conditions of approval.
2. Findings for Subdivision Approval.
3. Initial Study &Mitigated Negative Declaration.
4. Cotton, Shires and Associates Report,December 30, 2003
5. Santa Clara County Fire Department Review comments, September 17, 2003
6. PG&E Letter, September 24, 2003
7. Subdivision Committee Hearing Fact Sheet, January 6, 2004
8. Subdivision Committee Hearing Report, January 6, 2004
9. Environmental Design Committee Review comments, September 23, 2003
10. Pathways Committee Review comments, September 22, 2003
11. Tentative Map, January 8, 2004
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 8 of 13
ATTACHMENT 1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR THE TWO LOT
SUBDIVISION OF A 2.32 ACRE PARCEL
LANDS OF KEARNS, 11261 MAGDALENA RD.,FILE#171-03-TM-GD-ND
GEOTECHNICAUEARTHW ORK
1. Geotechnical Investigation for Parcel 2 - The applicant's Geotechnical
Consultant should complete necessary site subsurface investigation and
evaluations to prepare appropriate geotechnical design recommendations for
residential development of Parcel 2. Detailed geotechnical design criteria should
be prepared for all proposed site improvements. Anticipated site seismic
conditions and appropriate Uniform Building Code design parameters should be
quantified. Results of the above investigation should be submitted to the Town
for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical Consultant, prior to
approval of a development plan for site improvements, or acceptance of
documents for building permit plan-check.
2. Geotechnical Plan Review for Parcel 2 - The applicant's geotechnical
consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final project
construction plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements
and design parameters for foundations and driveway) to ensure that their
recommendations have been properly incorporated and that the project is designed
in conformance with standards of good geotechnical practice.
The results of thelan review should be summarized b the geotechnical
P Y
consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review along with
other documents for building permit plan-check.
3. Geotechnical Field Inspection for Parcel 2 — The geotechnical consultant shall
inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project
construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to:
site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements,
and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel
and concrete. The consultant should inspect site excavations to verify anticipated
subsurface conditions and observe the drilling of foundation piers to confirm
satisfactory embedment into supporting materials.
The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be
described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town
Engineer for review prior to final (as-built)project approval.
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 9 of 13
LAND AND EASEMENT DEDICATION
4. The applicant shall relocate or abandon existing public utility easements and grant
new public utility easements where needed to all utility companies for utility
construction and maintenance, including but not limited to: Pacific Bell, Pacific
Gas and Electric Company, cable television, and California Water Service Company.
The dedications shall all be completed in conjunction with Final Map approval, to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5. The applicant shall dedicate right-of-way on Magdalena Road to the Town of Los
Altos Hills to create a 30' wide half-street right of way as measured from the
existing centerline as shown on the tentative map. The dedication shall be
irrevocable and the road right-of-way shall be located to the satisfaction of the
Town Engineer.
DOPROVEMENTS
6. A grading and drainage plan which includes an erosion control plan shall be
submitted for review and .approval by the Town Engineer as part of the
subdivision improvement plans. This plan shall conform to all standards adopted
by the Town of Los Altos Hills and shall comply with all appropriate
requirements of the Town's NPDES Permit relative to grading and sediment
erosion control including but not limited to: a) restricting grading during the
moratorium from November 1 to April 1 except with prior written approval from
the Town Engineer; b) protecting all finished graded slopes from erosion using
such techniques as hillside benching, erosion control matting and/or
hydroseeding; c) protecting downstream storm drainage inlets from
sedimentation; d) appropriate use of silt fencing to retain sediment on the project
site; e) any other suitable measures outlined in the ABAG Manual of Standards.
7. The site drainage shall be designed as surface flow whenever possible to avoid
concentration of runoff. The proposed drainage shall be designed to maintain the
existing flow patterns. The applicant shall design and construct all subdivision
drainage improvements as deemed necessary by the Town Engineer. Storm
drainage design shall be for the 100 year storm and shall include analysis of the
existing downstream drainage channels and pipes that will receive drainage from
the subdivision to determine if they have adequate capacity to safely
accommodate the additional flows. All required drainage improvements shall be
constructed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map.
8. The proposed retention chambers shall be designed for storm water runoff based
on a 100 year storm with 2 hour rainfall duration. The final drainage improvement
plans shall be submitted for review by the Town Engineer prior to approval of
Final Map.
• Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 10 of 13
9. Both lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public water.system to
the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and California Water Service Company.
Services shall be installed to the property lines or be bonded for prior to
recordation of the Final Map. An encroachment permit shall be required to be
issued by the Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public
right of way. Any necessary fees shall be paid prior to the recordation of the
Final Map.
10. All existing and proposed utilities located within the subdivision that serve the
subdivision shall be placed underground, in accordance with Subdivision
Ordinance, Sec. 9-1.1105. Cable television, gas, electric, and telephone services,
to the property lines are included in this requirement. Plans for the location of all
such utilities are to be included in the improvement plans.for the subdivision.
Improvements shall be installed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final
Map.
11. Both lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public sanitary sewer
system. The applicant shall be required to pay the sewer reimbursement fee prior
to recordation of the Final Map. All sanitary sewer improvements shall be
constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. An encroachment permit
shall be required to be issued by the Public Works Department for all work
proposed within the public right of way. Services shall be installed to the
property lines or bonded for prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
12. A Type IIB pathway shall be constructed within the public right-of-way along the
Magdalena Road frontage. The path shall be separated from the edge of pavement
by three to five feet, and to meander around trees and power pole as necessary.
The existing wood .posts installed within the right-of-way shall be removed.
Driveway shall be roughened or treated with a non-slip surface where they cross
the path and no irrigation may be placed closer then five feet to the path.
Improvements shall be bonded for or constructed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map.
13. A grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the subdivider
for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to
issuance of any permits for subdivision improvements. The grading/construction
operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and
vehicular and pedestrian safety on Magdalena Road and other surrounding
roadways; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities;
parking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction personnel. A
debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction
debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the
debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is
allowed within the Town limits.
Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 11 of 13
14. Improvement plans for the subdivision shall be submitted for review and approval
by the Town Engineer prior to commencement of improvement work. These plans
shall conform to all standards adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills.
15. All street improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Town
Engineer or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map.
16. All subdivision conditions of approval and subdivision improvements shall be
constructed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of any site
development or building permits.
PLANNING AND ZONING
17. Payment of storm drainage fees, park and recreation dedication fees and all other
applicable fees shall be required prior to recordation of the Final Map. The park
and recreation dedication fees shall be provided in accordance with sections
9.1.1403 and 9.1.1404 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code.
18. The applicant shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage
caused by construction of the subdivision improvements to pathways, private
driveways and public and private roadways prior to final acceptance of the
subdivision by the Town. The applicant shall provide the Town with photographs
of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to recordation of
the Final Map.
19. Any, and all, wells on the property shall be shown on the Improvement Plans,
shall be properly registered with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD),
and shall be either maintained or abandoned in accordance with the SCVWD
standards.
20. Prior to beginning any grading or construction operations, all significant trees
shall be fenced at the dripline; and shall be of material and structure to clearly
delineate that dripline. Town staff must inspect the fencing and trees to be fenced
prior to starting grading or construction. The fence must remain in place
throughout the course of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris
shall be allowed within the driplines.
21. Upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced by human
skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately
notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site
may be .made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs.
This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the County Coroner's Office and
the Planning Director, as may be necessary during the construction of the
subdivision improvements or individual lot development.
• Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 12 of 13
22. The Magdalena Road address for Parcel 2 shall be assigned and approved by the
Town for the two lots as required by the Santa Clara County Fire Department and
in accordance with the Town's policies.
23. The new residence on parcel 2 shown on the Tentative Map plan is
conceptual only and no approval of any residence is indicated by approval of
the Tentative Map. A site development application for the new residence
shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
FIRE DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS
24. Fire protection improvements, including installation of any required hydrants,
shall be constructed as requested by Santa Clara County Fire Department.
Improvements shall be constructed and ready for use prior to the recordation of
the Final Map, or shall be bonded for. The driveway access to Parcel 2 shall be
installed prior to commencement of any construction on that lot.
25. Plans for new residences shall be reviewed and approved by the Santa Clara
County Fire Department at the time of site development permit application.
Conditions that will be applied at that time include, but are not limited to,
providing an acceptable water supply based on the size of the new residences,
providing an emergency vehicle turnaround on Parcel 2, placement of property
address signs that are clearly visible from Magdalena Road and providing an
approved access system if the lots are fenced and gated.
• Planning Commission
Lands of Kearns
January 22,2004
Page 13 of 13
ATTACHMENT 2
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF
SUBDIVISION OF 2.32 ACRES INTO TWO LOTS
LANDS OF KEARNS, 11261 MAGDALENA ROAD
FILE#171-03-TM-GD-ND
1. The subdivision as proposed would create two lots of 1.61 acres each with Lot
Unit Factors ranging from 1.002 and 1.003 respectively, and would provide two
viable building sites (one of which is already existing). In this and all other
respects, the lots conform to the Los Altos Hills Subdivision Ordinance.
2. The proposed subdivision would create one lot which would meet the General
Plan guidelines for land with an average slope between 10 and 30 percent, and in
all other respects will be consistent with the General Plan.
3. Access to the proposed lots will be provided from Magdalena Road, a public road.
Adequate services including water, sewer, gas and electric, telephone, fire
protection and police protection are available to serve the subdivision as described
in the Staff Report and the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. Future
development on Parcel.2 would require connection to the sewer system.
4. All lots as proposed on the Tentative Map are physically suitable for the proposed
development. The Town Geotechnical Consultant has indicated that stated
concerns can be addressed by adherence to the Project Geotechnical Report and
conditions of approval for the project. It has been determined that each of the
proposed lots contain a suitable building site, and that the proposed density is
consistent with the General Plan.
5. All potentially significant environmental effects can be reduced to a level of
insignificance as mitigated in the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration. The
design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
6. The Town Engineer has reviewed the project and has determined that the design
of the subdivision and the improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within
the proposed subdivision.
. ATTACHMENT3
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
MITIGATED NEGATIVE.DECLARATION
PROJECT TITLE: LANDS OF KEARNS SUBDIVISION
PREPARED BY: Debbie Pedro, Associate Planner
NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT SPONSOR:
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
LOCATION OF PROJECT: The project site is located at 11261 Magdalena Road, on the
north side of Magdalena Road east of Elise Court and across
from Hooper Lane.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This proposal consists of the subdivision of a 2.32 acre lot into
two residential lots.
FINDING: The Town of Los Altos Hills has completed a review of the
proposed project, and on that basis has determined that the
project is covered by the attached Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration, and has determined that the project, as
mitigated, will reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO AVOID
POTENTIALLY SIGNICIANT EFFECTS:
1. To mitigate potential changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or rate and amount of
surface runoff, both on and off-site storm drainage improvements shall be installed prior to
the recordation of the final map or bonded for. Individual site storm drainage systems will
be reviewed and approved by the Town prior to public hearings for site development
approval for the new residences.
2. To avoid impacts associated with seismic ground shaking, Geotechnical review of
improvement plans will be required during the final map approval process and at the time
of site development review of the new residences to determine appropriate design measures
including minimum foundation reinforcement and pier depth.
3. To reduce the risk of fire hazards, public fire hydrant location and adequacy shall be
determined by the Santa Clara County Fire Department and California Water Service
Company. Hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet, with a minimum single flow of
1,000 GPM at 20 psi, residual. Alternatively, a sprinklered building may be proposed
subject to Fire Department approval.
4. Prior to beginning any grading or construction operations, any significant trees in the
vicinity of construction shall be fenced at the dripline for protection from equipment, debris
or materials storage, as determined by the Planning Department. The fencing must remain
in place throughout the course of construction.
5. If any archeological artifacts or human remains are discovered during grading or
construction, work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately, until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find. Project
personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources. Identified cultural resources shall be
recorded on form DPR 422 (Archaeological Site) and/or form DPR 523 (Historic
Resources). If human remains are found, the county Coroner shall be contacted
immediately.
Carl Cahill, Planning Director Date
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Circulated on: January 28, 2004
Adopted on:
Exhibit"A"
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
INITIAL STUDY
In accordance with the policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970, this document, combined with the attached supporting data, constitutes the initial study on the
subject project. This initial study provides the basis for the determination of whether the project may
have a significant effect on the environment. If it is determined that the project may have a significant
effect on the environment, an environmental impact report will be prepared which focuses on the areas
of concern identified by this initial study.
1. Project Title: Lands of Kearns Subdivision (2 Lot)
(171-03-TM-ND-GD)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Carl Cahill, Planning Director(650) 941-7222
Initial Study prepared by: Debbie Pedro, Associate Planner
4. Project Location: 11261 Magdalena Road(APN 336-41-006)
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Robert and Patric Kearns
11261 Magdalena Road
Los Altos Hills CA 94022
6. General Plan Designation: -Residential(Very Low to Low Density)
7. Zoning: R-A (residential- agricultural)
8. Description of Project: Proposed two lot subdivision of 2.32 gross acres including:
Lot 1-1.16 acres; and Lot 2-1.16 acres. The existing parcel
is developed with a one story residence, concrete patios,
and an asphalt driveway. The existing driveway approach
is off of Magdalena Road at the southwest corner of the
property. Access to both parcels will be from Magdalena
Road. Both lots will have sanitary sewer line service and
water service will be provided by California Water Service
1
Company. All existing and new power and utility lines will
be placed underground.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project is located on the north side of Magdalena
Road. The parcel is bounded by Magdalena Road to the
South, and residential lots containing single family
dwellings to the west, north, and east. The proposed new
subdivision site consists of open land with few trees along
the north and south property lines. The site contains and
average slope of 16.4%. The surrounding land use is
single family residence with a minimum lot size of 1 acre.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Santa Clara County Fire Department
2
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Hazards&Hazardous Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning
L) Hazards
❑
❑ Mineral Resources Noise ❑ Population/Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic
❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
This Initial study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Information and
conclusions in the Initial Study are based upon staff research and the Town's General Plan and Municipal Code.
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE ❑
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a
significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added
to the project.A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one effect 1)
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and 2)has been ❑
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets,if the effect is a
"potentially significant impact" or" potentially significant unless mitigated."An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there WILL NOT
be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately ❑
in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that
earlier EIR,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature: Date:
Carl Cahill,Planning Director
3
Potentially less Than less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
I.AESTHETICS--Would thero'ect:
P J
a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑
b)Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited to, trees, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c)Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and ❑ ❑ ❑
its surroundings?
d Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely/
ZD b J
❑ ❑ ❑
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
II.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)prepared by the
California Dept.of Conservation as an optional model to use in.assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland.Would the project:
a)Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide ❑ ❑ ❑
Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency,to non-agricultural use?
b)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a Williamson Act L3 Ll Ll Q
contract?
c)Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to their ❑ ❑ ❑
location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural
use?
III.AIR QUALITY
Where available,the significance criteria established by the applicable air
quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to
make the following determinations.Would the project:
a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ❑ ❑ ❑
b)Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑ ❑
projected air quality violation?
c)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑
for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ ❑
e)Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ ❑
4
a
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
IV.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES--Would the project:
a)Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or through habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ z
modifications,on any species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or special
status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service?
b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive ❑ ❑ ❑ z
natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,regulations
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c)Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as ❑ ❑ ❑
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(including,but not limited to,
marsh,vernal pool,coastal,etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological
interruption,or other means?
d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ ❑
resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, ❑ ❑ L3 n(
Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved local,regional,or L�I
state habitat conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES--Would the project:
a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical ❑ ❑ ❑
resource as defined in'15064.5?
b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ❑ ❑
archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5?
c)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or ❑ ❑ ❑
unique geologic feature?
d)Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
❑ Z ❑ ❑
VI.GEOLOGY AND SOILS--Would the project:
a)Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving:
i)Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist ❑ L3 L) 1 /f
for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?Refer to IJ
5
•
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑
iii)Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑
iv)Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑
c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that would become
unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on or off-site ❑ ❑ ❑
landslide,lateral spreading,subsidence,liquefaction or collapse?
d)Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform ❑ ❑ ❑ rlf
Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? L�
e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for ❑ ❑ ❑
the disposal of wastewater?
VII.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS--Would the project:
a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the L) ❑ Ll
transport,use,or disposal of hazardous materials?
b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through ❑ ❑ ❑
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c)Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑
materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites ❑ ❑ ❑ R1
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan ❑ ❑ ❑
has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project ❑ ❑ ❑
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
g)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
6
• Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
h)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death Ll LJ L
involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
VIII.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY--Would the project:
a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? L3 U L Q
b)Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with J L3 J
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume
or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(e.g.,the production rate of
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, L L] Ll
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
d)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, L3 Ll
including'through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on-or off-site?
e)Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of L L Ll
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f)Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? L) L J Q
g)Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Ll J L Q
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h)Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede L3 ❑ J
or redirect flood flows?
i)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death L) Ll Ll Q
involving flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or
dam?
j)Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? Ll Ll L Q
IX.LAND USE AND PLANNING-Would the project:
a)Physically divide an established community? ❑ Ll
LJ
b)Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or regulation of an Ll ❑ ❑ Q
agency with jurisdiction over the project(including,but not limited to the
general plan,specific plan,local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)
7
t
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c)Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
community conservation plan?
X.MINERAL RESOURCES--Would the project:
a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be
of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource ❑ ❑ ❑
recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land
use plan?
XI.NOISE--Would the project result in:
a)Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards ❑ ❑ ❑
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b)Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
or groundborne noise levels?
c)A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d)A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ❑
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
f)For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING--Would the project:
a)Induce substantial population growth in an area,either directly(for ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for
example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b)Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c)Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑
replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII.PUBLIC SERVICES
a)Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
8
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? L3 J Q Ll
Police protection? Ll J J Q
Schools? Ll L J
Parks? J L Q LJ
Other public facilities? L) Ll L Q
XIV.RECREATION
a)Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional Ll J L Q
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b)Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction J LJ J Q
or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
XV.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC--Would the project:
a)Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing Ll
La
traffic load and capacity of the street system(i.e.,result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio
on roads,or congestion at intersections)?
b)Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of service standard J Ll U
established by the county congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c)Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase inLl L3 JQ
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
d)Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g.,sharp curves J U L3 Q
or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)?
e)Result in inadequate emergency access? Q
f)Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ Ll Ll Q
g)Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs supporting alternative L3 U L Q
transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)?
9
i
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
XVI.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS-Would the project:
a)Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ J LJ Q
Water Quality Control Board?
b)Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment J L Q
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c)Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities LJ J L) Q
or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing J
entitlements and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e)Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which Ll ❑ D
serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f)Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate Ll Ll L Q
the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g)Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations related to J J L
solid waste?
XVII.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the LJ ❑ LJ Q
environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
b)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but LJ U J Q
cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively considerable"means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial L Ll J
adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly?
Sources: Los Altos Hills General Plan
Los Altos Hills Municipal Code
10
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(Explanation of responses)
I.AESTHETICS
c.) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Aesthetic impacts are expected to be minimal when the new residence is built on Lot 2. At
the time of any proposed development, a site development hearing will be required in order
to evaluate such aesthetic impacts as grading, fencing, tree preservation and general design.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
b.) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to 15064.5?
d.) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
No archaeological resources should be affected by the project. However, if any artifacts or
human remains are discovered during any future grading or construction onsite, work in the
vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the site
and determine the significance of the find per mitigation measure#5.
VI. GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
a.ii.)Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking?
Berrocal Fault is located approximately 400 feet to the northeast of the site. While the
potential for ground surface rupture from the fault is low, Berrocal Fault is considered
potentially active and estimates of upper bound Richter magnitudes for the fault range from
6.5 to 7.4. Therefore, it may be assumed that development on both lots will be subjected to
seismic induced hazards at some time during their lifetime. To mitigate this potential impact,
a supplemental geotechnical investigation report is required for review and approval by the
Town's getoechnical consultant at the time of site development for the new residence with
emphasis on foundation and other structural designs.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
c.) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site?
d.) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the
11
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(Explanation of responses)
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
The applicant proposes to narrow the existing swale and direct surface water towards a 4' wide
x 3' deep box culvert under the new driveway. The modification will involve 30 cubic yards of
cut and 600 cubic yards of fill. Rock line diversion banks are proposed at the western edge of
the swale to prevent erosion. The swale terminates 10' from the west property line where
water runoff will be directed towards two existing 24" diameter culverts.
A preliminary drainage plan has been provided as part of the submittal. A trench retention
chamber is proposed along the property line northeast of the swale to capture water runoff
from proposed development on Lot 2. The applicant has provided a 100 year storm flow
analysis and calculations to show that the drainage improvements will mitigate impacts of the
site development and the quantity and flow rate of onsite surface runoff will not increase.
The Town Engineer is requiring a final, detailed drainage improvement plan to be submitted
for review prior to approval of the Final Map. The drainage improvements must be designed
to mitigate drainage impacts based on 100 year storm flow calculations. While surface runoff
may increase due to the proposed site development, the proposed drainage improvements will
mitigate storm water runoff offsite to a less than significant impact.
e.) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
See above. Storm flow calculations show that added runoff can be accommodated by the
proposed drainage improvements onsite.
XI. NOISE
d.) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Interim construction external noise levels associated with subdivision improvements will
periodically exceed 60dB(A) but can be held to less than significant by adherence to Town
standards for hours of construction. At such time that future development is proposed on Lot
2, the grading and construction phases would produce short-term increase in noise. Once
development is complete, a minimal increase in the existing noise level that is typical of
residential uses will occur. No significant noise impacts are anticipated.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
12
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(Explanation of responses)
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for
any of the public services?
Fire Protection- the proposal will require additional services for the one (1) new unit within
the service area of the Santa Clara County Fire District; a less than significant impact.
Schools-The proposed new dwelling unit will probably generate between 1-2 school age
children based on average family size in Los Altos Hills; a less than significant impact.
Parks-The proposal will result in a population increase of 3-4 people that would not place
significant demands on the park system.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
a.) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
The subdivision will allow one additional new dwelling and thereby generate an additional
10-12 vehicle trips per day. The minor increase in traffic is not anticipated to create traffic
congestion on existing local roadways. The Tentative Map shows a 30-foot half-street right-
of-way over Magdalena Road to meet Town standards.
XVII.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Although the project may have potentially significant impacts on the environment, there will
not be significant effects based on the mitigation measures included in this document.
13
NIITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO AVOID
POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS:
1. Supplemental geotechnical investigation reports shall be submitted for review and approval
by the Town's getoechnical consultant at the time of site development review for the new
residences with emphasis on foundation and other structural designs. The Town Geologist
shall also review and approve the subdivision improvement plans prior to issuance of any
building permits for construction of the improvements.
2. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall prepare a detailed drainage improvement plan
for review and approval by the Engineering Department. Required drainage improvements
shall be installed prior to final map approval, or an improvement agreement and bond shall be
submitted to assure the improvements are installed prior to acceptance of building permit
applications for development of the lots. All easements shall be shown on the final map to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
3. At such time as development on Lot 2 is proposed, public fire hydrant location and adequacy
shall be determined by the Santa Clara County Fire Department and California Water Service
Company. Hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet, with a minimum single flow of 1,000
GPM at 20 psi, residual. Alternatively, a sprinklered building may be proposed subject to
Fire Department approval.
4. Significant trees, as identified by the Planning Department shall be fenced at the dripline
throughout all phases of grading and construction of subdivision improvements and
individual residences and related improvements.
5. If any archaeological artifacts or human remains are discovered during grading or
construction. Work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find. Project
personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources. Identified cultural resources shall be
recorded on form DPR 422 (Archaeological Site) and/or form DPR 523 (Historic Resources).
If human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately.
14
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Responsible Must Be
Mitigation Measure Department Completed By: Done
1. Geotechnical Reports Engineering Site Development Review
(Supplemental) Town Geologist
2. Drainage Improvement Plan Engineering Prior to Final Map
3. Fire Hazard Fire Department Prior to Final Map Recordation
Reduction Facilities and Building Permit as Applicable
4. Protective Tree Fencing Planning Prior to Construction of
Subdivision Improvements
5. Archaeological Findings Planning Ongoing
15
COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. I A]TA" MENT
CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
December 30,2003
L0113A
TO: Debbie Pedro
Assistant Planner
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills,California 94022
SUBJECT: Supplemental Geotechnical Review
RE: Kearns,Two-Lot Subdivision
#171-03-TM-ND-GD
11261 Magdalena Road
i
At your request, we have completed a supplemental geotechnical review of the
Tentative Map application using:
• Geologic Feasibilty (letter) prepared by Romig Consulting Engineers,
dated November 18,2003;and
• Tentative Map and Conceptual Development Plan (2 sheets)
prepared by Giuliani&Kull,dated August 1,2003.
In addition, we have discussed local geologic conditions with the Project
Geotechnical Consultant, and reviewed pertinent technical maps and reports from our
office files.
DISCUSSION
The applicant proposes to subdivide the subject 2.3-acre property into two lots.
Proposed Parcel 1 (to the northwest) contains the existing residence. Proposed Parcel 2
(to the southeast) is currently vacant. In our previous review report (dated September
16, 2003), we recommended that a supplemental geotechnical feasibility evaluation be
completed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant prior to approval of the Tentative
Map. This evaluation was to include examination of potential fault rupture hazards.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Project Geotechnical Consultant has completed an evaluation of the
proposed subdivision and concluded that the potential for fault rupture or secondary
seismic hazards is low, and that no geotechnical conditions were identified that would
preclude development of a new residence on Parcel 2. The consultant recommends that
a geotechnical investigation be completed for Parcel 2, associated with the future
building permit process,to provide recommended geotechnical criteria for the design of
site improvements. Consequently, we recommend geotechnical approval of the
referenced Tentative Map with the following conditions related to future development
of Parcel 2.
Northern California Office Southern California Office
330 Village Lane 5245 Avenida Encinas • Suite A
Los Gatos, CA 95030-7218 Carlsbad, CA 92008-4374
(408) 354-5542 9 Fax (408) 354-1852 (760) 931-2700 • Fax: (760) 931-1020
e-mail: losgatos@cottonshires.com www.cottonshires.com e-mail: carisbad@cottonshires.com
Debbie Pedro December 30,2003
Page 2 L0113A
1. Parcel 2 Geotechnical Investigation — The applicant's
Geotechnical Consultant should complete necessary site
subsurface investigation and evaluations to prepare appropriate
geotechnical design recommendations for residential
development of Parcel 2. Detailed geotechnical design criteria
should be prepared for all proposed site improvements.
Anticipated site seismic conditions and appropriate Uniform
Building Code design parameters should be quantified.
Results of the above investigation should be submitted to the
Town, for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical
Consultant, prior to approval of a development plan for site
improvements, or acceptance of documents for building permit
plan-check.
2. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical
consultant should review and approve all geotechnical aspects of
the final project construction plans (i.e., site preparation and
grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for
foundations and driveway) to ensure that their recommendations
have been properly incorporated and that the project is designed
in conformance with standards of good geotechnical practice.
The results of the plan review should be summarized by the
geotechnical consultant in a letter, and submitted to the Town
Engineer for review, priorto acceptance of documents for
building permit plan-check.
3. Geotechnical Field Inspection - The geotechnical consultant
should inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical
aspects of the project construction. The inspections should
include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and
grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and
excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the
placement of steel and concrete. The consultant should inspect
site excavations to verify anticipated subsurface conditions and
observe the drilling of foundation piers to confirm satisfactory
embedment into supporting materials.
The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the
project should be described by the geotechnical consultant in a
letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to
final (as-built)project approval.
LIMITATIONS
This review has been performed to provide technical advice to assist the Town
with discretionary permit decisions. Our services have been limited to review of the
documents previously identified,and a visual review of the property. Our opinions and
conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices of
COTTON, SHIRES& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Debbie Pedro December 30,2003
Page 3 L0113A
the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either
expressed or implied.
Respectfully submitted,
COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES,INC.
TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
Ted.Sayre
Supervising Engineering Geologist
G 1795
Patrick O. Shires
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
GE 770
POS:TS:st
COTTON, SHIRES& ASSOCIATES, INC.
SACLARA% FIRr- DEPARTMENT PLAN REVIEW NUMBER 03 1969
FE SANTA CIl.!'LRA COUNTY BLDG PERMIT NUMBER
� IR, �'
14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818A
COURTESY 6 SERVICE (408) 378-4010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax) •www.sccfd.org CONTROL NUMBER
FILE NUMBER
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS
;ODE/SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT
Review of a Tentative Map for a proposed two lot residential subdivision
1 Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and
water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be
construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with
adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make
application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable
construction permits.
2 No fire department conditions or requirements at this stage of submittal. Future
site development plans shall be routed to this department for review and approval
prior to building permit submittal.
City PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST.TYPE ApplicantName DATE PAGE
,H ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ GIULIANI & KULL INC 9/17/2003 1 OF 1
:JFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY
Residential Development Hokanson,Wayne
,ME OF PROJECT LOCATION
11261 Magdalena Rd
Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District
Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino,Los Altos,
Los Altos Hills,Los Gatos,Monte Sereno,Morgan Hill,and Saratoga
S3 E P 2 ?� Uj
Pacific Gas and ATTACHMENT j
Electric Company J ' y w�..
Land Services 111 Almaden Boulevard
San Jose,CA 95115
September 24, 2003
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Attn: Carl Cahill
Fax: 650-941-3160
RE: Tentative Map Review
Lands of Kearns, Two-lot subdivision
11261 Magdalena Rd., Los Altos Hills
Map prepared by Giuliani &Kull, Inc., dated- 8/1/2003
PG&E file: 40228132-MR-y03-152
Dear Mr. Cahill:
We have completed the review of above said Map. PG&E has no objection to the map.
PG&E owns and operates a variety of gas and electric facilities which may be located
within the proposed project boundaries. Project proponents should coordinate with PG&E
early in the development of their project plans to promote the safe and reliable
maintenance and operation of existing utility facilities. Any proposed development plans
should provide for unrestricted utility access and prevent interference with PG&E
easements.
Activities which may impact our facilities include, but are not limited to,
permanent/temporary changes in grade over or under our facilities, construction of
structures within or adjacent to PG&E's easements, and planting of certain types of
vegetation over,under, or adjacent to our facilities.
The installation of new gas and electric facilities and/or the relocation of existing PG&E
facilities will be performed in accordance with common law or Rules and Tariffs as
authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Please contact me at(408)2.82-7401 if you have any questions regarding our comments.
Sincerely,
Alfred Poon
Land Agent
Corporate Real Estate
South Coast Area- San Jose
ATTACHMENT
Town Of Los Altos Hills January 6, 2003
Subdivision Committee Hearing Fact Sheet
Project Description: Two Lot Subdivision
File Number: 171-03-TM-ND-GD
Site Address: 11261 Magdalena Road
Owner(s): Robert and Patric Kearns
Staff Planner: Debbie Pedro, Associate Planner
Site Data
Net Lot Area: 2.324 acre
Average Slope: 16.4%
Lot Unit Factor: 2.00
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TABLE
Ave Slope Gros$ Net 1 MDAk h hZFAh
Lot % Acreae Acreage LUF {sq ft)e= (sq ft)
1 16.4 1.16 1.16 1.002 12,625 5,691
2 16.4 1.16 1.16 1.003 12,638 5,697
Total Site 16.4 2.324 2.32 2.005
Grading: Cut: 30-CY Fill: 600-CY Import: 570-CY
Sewer/Septic: Sewer System
Environmental Design Committee Comments: None
Pathway Committee Comments: Construct 11-13 path along the road, separated by 3-5
feet from roadway; to meander around trees, obstacles as necessary.
Fire Department Comments: None
Geotech Comments: Recommends approval with conditions.
Utility Company Comments: None
ATTACHMENT
Town Of Los Altos Hills January 6, 2004
Subdivision Committee Hearing Report
Project Description: Two-Lot Subdivision
File Number: 171-03-TM-ND-GD
Site Address: 11261 Magdalena Road
Owner(s): Robert and Patric Kearns
Staff Planner: Debbie Pedro, Associate Planner .
Planning Comments:
Applicant to correct net area and LLF figures for parcel 2 and submit one (1) copy of the
tentative map on an 8.5" x 11" transparency prior to the public hearing.
Planning Commission Comments:
Commissioner Mordo directed staff to verify existing floor and development areas on
Parcel 1.
Neighbor Comments:
James Shively-11181 Magdalena-no comments.
Fred Brutschy-11291 Magdalena-had concerns about excessive water runoff causing
erosion to the drainage swale along the rear of his property.
Jo!✓Iva�� / b / 03
Carl Cahill, Planning Director Dat
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE ATTA HM,E1
SUBDIVISION EVALUATION
Applicant's Name: L%�/�'/1i1 J SEP 2 3 2003
Address:
�
Reviewed by: d��i''�� �� Date:
Existing Trees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building
site.)
e�6 - ;fi r% Y--
Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby vegetation. Erosion potential. All
grading at least 10' from property line?)-
Creeks and drainage: (Should a conservation easement be recommended? Will
construction impact wildlife migration(bridges, fences)?
Other Comments:
A7TACNNIENTIO
Debbie Pedro
Subject: Pathway recommendations
>From the minutes of our September meeting:
2. 11261 Magdalena Road (Kearns property) . Mr. Kearns was present. Path
along Magdalena Rd. switches sides periodically. MK noted there were new
posts in the road right-of-way. Kearns said posts had been put in by a
previous owner to stop motorcycle use; the new posts were replacements
into old holes. He has no problem with removing them. Motion: Construct
II-B path along the road, separated by 3-5 feet from roadway; to meander
around trees, obstacles as necessary. Unanimous approval.
1