Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.2ITEM 4.2 TOWN: OF LOS ALTOS HILLS July 10, 2014 Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN; LANDS OF SHARP AND :HARRIS; 26958 DEZAHARA WAY; FILE 477-14-ZP-SD. FROM: Suzanne Avila, AICP, Senior Planner APPROVED: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Community Development Directo RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1) Approve the requested Site Development Permit for.the Landscape Screening Plan, subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment #1; or 2) Approve the requested Site Development Permit with additional or modified conditions; or 3) Continue the matter to a date certain providing direction to the applicant and staff on desired plan changes. BACKGROUND On March 27, 2012, the Planning Director approved a Site Development Permit for a new 4,275 square foot two story residence with a 2,035 square foot basement and 706 square foot attached garage, and a swimming pool, through the Fast Track process. That decision was appealed by Mayor Larsen. On May 3, 2012, the Planning Commission considered the appeal and voted 4-0 (Collins absent) to approve the project with added conditions requiring the height of the residence to be reduced by at least two feet, removal of the chimney, a Grading Policy exception to allow grading within 10 feet of the front property line for the installation of a 5 foot berm, and review of the landscape screening plan by the Planning Commission (see May 3, 2013 Planning: Commission meeting minutes, Attachment #2). The staff report to the Planning Commission is attached for additional background on the project (see Attachment 3). CODE REQUIREMENTS The requested Site Development Permit is referred to the Planning Commission for review, pursuant to Section 10-2.1305(c) of the Site Development Ordinance. Criteria from Article 8 of the Site Development Code is utilized to evaluate landscape plans, address erosion, noise, visual effects, maintenance, tree preservation, views, size and placement, and amount of planting required to adequately screen new construction. Planning Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris — Landscape Screening July 10, 2014 Page 2 DISCUSSION Landscape Screening Plan The proposed landscape screening plan includes new shrubs along the new wrought iron fence, roughly parallel with the front property line, and four small groups of shrubs near the two side property lines. Disturbed slopes will be planted with ground.cover and native grasses. No new trees are proposed. Although the house is set down into the site, there is not currently any landscaping between the front of the house and Dezahara Way.. Five - gallon shrubs will not be large enough to provide effective screening. Addition of some trees ,could help soften and screen the front of the. new residence. Planting is also needed along the two side property lines to fill-in gaps between existing trees. The applicant states that neighbors have reviewed and approved the proposed screening plan, and that they would like to have screening minimized in order to not obstruct views (see Attachment 5). The Commission should discuss whether to increase the amount of planting, if any new trees should be added, and whether larger size containers should be required. Staff recommends that the 5-gallow shrubs be upgraded to 15 -gallon size in order to provide more immediate screening, particularly along the front elevation. Planting larger shrubs would not obstruct views. As an alternative to requiring 15 -gallon shrubs, the Commission could specify a minimum height for the shrubs at time of planting. If any new trees are required, the minimum planting size should be 24 -inch box, and trees should be an evergreen species. Given the concern about view preservation expressed by neighbors, location and species of any new trees should be carefully selected. Landscape Berm At the May 3, 2012 Planning Commission hearing, there was discussion of adding a berm along the Dezahara Way frontage to help mitigate the visual impact of the residence (see Attachment 2). Condition of approval #22 required the grading:plan to be revised to show a five foot landscape berm in the front yard. The condition specifies that the berm shall be as close to the front property line as possible, and that it shall be parallel to the front property line and extend from the driveway to the northeastern property boundary. The landscape screening plan does not show the berm. The new residence sits well below the road and planting on the slope between the house and front property line should provide adequate screening provided larger size shrubs and/or trees are planted. However, the applicant agreed to the berm at the public hearing (see page 4 of Attachment 2) and the berm was required as a condition of approval. Additionally, the neighbor directly across Dezahara Way would like the berm to be installed and planted to provide maximum screening of the new residence. The applicant believes that the berm was suggested as an option, but is not a required element. The applicant also asserts that the house can be adequately screened without adding a berm (see Attachment 6). The Commission should discuss whether to allow a deviation from the requirement to install a landscape berm. Planning Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris — Landscape Screening July 10, 2014 Page 3 Drivewav Modification The approved plans for the new residence show driveway access on Dezahara Way. The applicant is proposing to relocate the access to the private driveway that runs along the westerly side of the property (see sheet L-1 of Attachment 8). This change will reduce the length of the driveway and will locate it on a roadway with less traffic. With the driveway relocation and the addition of a walkway and steps from Dezahara Way, the total development area will be reduced by 193 square feet. Fencing The applicant is proposing -to install a 41/2 foot high wrought iron fence to be located about 15 feet from the front and side property lines, and along the edge of the open- space easement at the rear of the property (see sheet L-1 of Attachment 8). Gates will be installed across the driveway and a pedestrian gate will be installed at the front walkway. Fencing and gate details are shown on sheet L-2 of the plans.. Outdoor Lighting Outdoor lighting was approved with the new residence. The only new lighting that has been proposed with the landscape screening plan consists of two hidden down directed lights that will beset into the two columns on either side of the entry gate for the front walkway (see Attachment 7). : Town Committee Review The Environmental Design and Protection Committee reviewed the plans and visited the site. The Committee commented that Osmanthus ilicifolia would create a denser screen than the proposed Pittosporum tenuifolium (see Attachment 4) ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE (CEQA) The proposed landscape screening and fencing is categorically. exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15303(e) and 15304.(b). IINaKIT M_UT Ia21 1. Recommended Conditions of Approval 2. Excerpt from May 3, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes (four pages) 3. May 3, 2012 Staff Report to Planning Commission (five pages) 4. Environmental Design and Protection Committee comments (one page), received May 9, 2014 5. Applicant's letter (one page), received May 14, 2014 6. Applicant's letter (two pages with three page attachment), received May 14, 2014 7. Entry column lighting specification (two pages) 8. Landscape Screening Plans (three sheets) Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1 Lands of Sharp and Harris — Landscape Screening July 10, 2014 Page 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLAN AND DRIVEWAY MODIFICATION LANDS OF SHARP AND HARRIS, 26598 DEZAHARA WAY File # 77-14-ZP-SD A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any further changes; or modifications to the approved plan or the required landscaping shall be first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or Planning Commission, depending on the scope of changes, prior to planting or commencement of work. 2.: All required plantings shown on the plans shall be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. All exposed slopes must be replanted for erosion control to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. 3. Two down directed scones are approved for the columns on each side of the gate for the front walkway as shown on the landscape screening plans. No other lighting is permitted within setbacks. The two sconces are in addition to. the outdoor lighting approved with the Site Development Permit for the new residence. Any additional lighting shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to installation. Lighting shall be the minimum needed for safety, shall be down shielded, low wattage, shall not encroach or reflect on adjacent properties, and the source of the lighting shall not be visible from off the site. 4. A landscape maintenance and water use deposit of $5,000.00 shall be posted prior to final inspection of the new residence. An inspection of the screening plantings to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after installation. Prior to deposit release, the property owner shall also furnish to the Town the second year (months 13-24 following receipt of the Certificate of Completion) of water use and billing data from the subject property's water purveyor. If the site water usage exceeds the calculated PWB, the deposit will be held for an additional 12 months. At the end of the additional 12 month period, the property owner shall provide the Town with the previous 12 months (months 25-36) of water use and billing data from the subject property's water purveyor. If the water usage still exceeds the estimated PWB, the deposit shall be forfeited to the Town, in full. All Town staff time and materials expended to ensure compliance with this condition will be deducted from the deposit. 5.. The water feature that will be located within the front setback shall not exceed four -feet in diameter. Planriing.Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris — Landscape Screening July 10, 2014 Page 5 6. The property owner shall contact the Building Department and acquire any and all required building permits prior to commencement of work on landscape or .hardscape. B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 7. :Any revisions or additions to the previously approved grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for review by the Town Engineering Department. The plan shall be reviewed and approved prior by the Engineering Department prior to the commencement of the project. The approved plan shall be stamped and signed by the project engineer and shall supersede the previously approved grading and drainage plan. 8. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (October 15 to April 15) except with prior: approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line. 9. Final grading and drainage shall be inspected by the Engineering Department and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final approval. 10. Any, and all, areas on the project site that have the native material disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 11. The covenant agreement to allow private utilities and unlock gates within the sanitary sewer easement shall be recorded prior to installation of utilities and gates within the easement. C. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 12. Gate installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specification G-1, and when open, shall not obstruct any portion of the required width for emergency access roadways or driveways. Locks, if provided, shall be Fire Department approved, prior to installation. If the gates are operated electronically, an approved Knox key switch shall be installed. If operated manually, an approved Knox padlock shall be installed. Gates providing access from a road to a driveway or other roadway shall be at least 30 feet from the road being exited. Planning .Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris — Landscape Screening . July 10, 2014 Page 6 Project -approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the action. Building Permits cannot be accepted.until the appeal period has -lapsed. NOTE: The Site Development Permit is valid for.one year from the approval date (until July 10, 2015). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. Please refer to the Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein: If you believe that these Conditions impose any fees, dedications, reservation or other exactions under the California Government Code Section 66000, you are hereby notified that these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and/or a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90 -day approval period in which you may protest such fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90 -day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such -exactions. Planning Commission Minutes May 3, 2012 Page 4 AYES: Commissioners: Abraham, Clow, NOES: None ABSENT: Cho HIS ATTACHMENT 2 Approved June 7, 2012 3.2 LANDS OF SHARP AND HARRIS, 26958 Dezahara Way; File #28.3- I I -ZP-SD-GD; 283_11-ZP-SD-GD; Appeal of a Site Development approval of a 4,981 square foot two-story new residence with a 2,035 square foot basement (Maximum height 26'8") and a 592 square foot swimming pool. CEQA Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a)&(e) (staff -Brian Froelich). APPEALED FROM THE MARCH 27, 2012 FAST TRACK MEETING. Brian Froelich, Associate Planner, presented the staff report for a new 4,981 square foot two story residence with a 2,035 square foot basement, and a swimming pool. The property is one acre, with Purissima Creek traversing the southern portion of the property. An open space easement is recommended over the portion of creek on the property. The project was appealed following a Fast Track approval on March 27, 2012. The main concerns of the neighbors are the CC&R's for the Rosehill Estates subdivision, building height and bulk, blocked views, and drainage. COMMISSIONER PARTRIDGE OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING Dr. Harris, applicant, stated that the proposed home meets all of the Town's requirements and protects the privacy of neighbors. The design of the home has a maximum roof slope of 4-12, and the home is cut into the ground so that the front door sits four feet below grade. and the second story is at street level. Cutting beyond the four feet would result in issues with the driveway, would require stairs to the front door which will impacts accessibility, and would require a variance. Moving the home further downhill would require a longer ramp to the door which would impact the MDA of the project, which is already at the maximum allowable. The alternative of a single story home would have greater ground coverage and generated environmental impact concerns. . Tom Sloan, Architect; stated that the home is parallel to the topography of the site and mitigation measures including landscape screening which will draw focus away from the house will lessen the views from the street. . Commissioner Clow asked Dr. Harris about placing an earth berm in front of the home to create the visual illusion.that the house is only one story. Dr. Harris supports the inclusion of a berm to mitigate the visual impacts of the residence. Commissioner Partridge asked the applicant if there was a way to lower the height of the roof. Planning Commission Minutes Approved June 7, 2012 May 3, 2012 Page 5 Dr. Harris explained that the home was designed to be located away from the two pathway easements and creek easement along the property, and to be accessible without stairs to the front door and garage. Mr. Sloan stated that lowering the roof pitch below 4:12 is not standard and currently there is barely any attic space. Adolf Pfefferbaum, neighbor on Dezahara Way, believes that the project will have a great impact on views from his home. He does not support the project because he does not believe that it meets the goals of the Town's General Plan. He would like the applicant to come up with a new design that reduces the height of the building and is more compatible with the rest of the neighborhood. Katy Serverti, neighbor on Dezahara Way, does not support the project because the home will impact neighbor's views, is not compatible with other homes in the neighborhood, and does not comply with the neighborhood CC&R's. Bob Serverti, neighbor on Dezahara Way, does not support the project for the following reasons: the bulk of the home is too great, neighbor views are blocked, and the home is not compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. He believes that landscape screening will add to the bulk of the building. Mark Scheible, neighbor on Dezahara Way, does not support the project because he believes it does not comply with the Town's regulations and the Architectural Control Committee (ACC). He is concerned about the amount of water runoff from the residence. He explained that John Chau, Assistant Engineer, ensured him that a retaining wall will stop water runoff from flowing into the creek. However he is still concerned about erosion to the creek. Steve Chan, neighbor on Dezahara Way, is concerned about anything that might impact soil stability. Kathy Newton-Scheible, neighbor on Dezahara Way and member of the Architectural Control Committee (ACC), does not believe that the project has neighbor buy -in, and believes that it does not meet the needs of the neighbor's in protecting views. Mare Shibuya, neighbor on Dezahara Way, supports the project and would like to see it approved. Chung Shu -Kim, neighbor, is concerned about the sewer pipe that clogs in the winter. She would like for the applicants to maintain the property and preserve the views of neighbors. Lily Shibuya, neighbor on Dezahara Way, is in support of the project because she believes that the applicants have tried to appease the neighbors. She also .believes that the applicants are entitled to build their dream house. Regarding the CC&R's, she stated that many other neighbors have violated them as they built their homes. Planning Commission Minutes Approved June, 7; 2012 May 3, 2012 Page 6 Dr. Harris clarified that neighbor considerations were taken into account when planning the home. She stated that the home does fit with the characteristics of the neighborhood, as about half of the homes -in the neighborhood have a two story elements. Commissioner Harpootlian believes that moving the home downhill will generate problems. He agrees with some 'of the neighbors that there is a perception of bulk with the home and would like to see a reduction in height of about five feet. Dr. Harris stated that the major.obstacle in dropping the house by five feet is accessibility, which is a main concern for her. Mr. Sharp, applicant, stated that there could be room to lower the roofline. He expressed that increasing cut to lower the roofline is not a viable option because the home needs to be wheelchair accessible. He also stated that increasing the slope of the driveway could violate the rules and regulations of the fire department. Shad Shokralla, developer, explained that lowering the home could impact drainage. He explained that there is also a requirement that drainage be thirty feet from the residence. He stated that lowering the roof pitch to 3:12 is the lowest pitch obtainable without having a flat roof. Reducing the height from 4:12 to 3:12 would reduce the height of the home by about a foot. Director Pedro stated that with regard to grading, staff is concerned about the driveway which is already at a fifteen percent slope. Additional grading will require additional review by the fire department. Commissioner Harpootlian asked the applicant if the chimney could be minimized or eliminated. Mr. Shokralla stated that the chimney could be reduced without impacting the efficiency of the fireplace. COMMISSIONER PARTRIDGE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Harpootlian supports the overall design of the house and believes that the applicants have been considerate of neighbor concerns regarding views: He is interested in alternative designs which could reduce the bulk of the project, such as reducing height through grading or adjusting the roof. He would like to see a height reduction of up to five feet. Commissioner Abraham believes that the project is appropriate for the site. He believes that when someone buys , property is Los Altos- Hills they should have the right to develop their property, just as others were able to develop their property. He stated that the project is compliant with the Fast Track guidelines, which means that all requirements have been met for the project. He believes that a berm in front of the home will make the house appear to be one story. He does not support moving the home downhill. He fully supports the project as presented. Commissioner Clow believes that once the property is fully landscaped it will look like other properties in the neighborhood. He explained that the challenge of the home is to make the second story look like it is on a level surface, and make the residence appear'to be one story. If Planning Commission Minutes Approved June 7, 2012 May 3, 2012 Page 7 executed properly, he believes the project will fit in with the community. He noted that the property begins several feet in from the road, resulting in a twelve to fifteen foot setback before dirt can be placed on the property, which makes constructing a berm difficult. As part of the resolution, he would like to grant the applicant an exception on grading to allow the applicant to . build an earth berm of up to five feet,. He supports the project and believes it makes sense to lower the roof by one foot and to reduce the height of the chimney. Commissioner Partridge expressed appreciation for the design of the residence which meets all of the Town's requirements. It is clear to him that the lot is buildable and that any structure on the site will impact `the views of some neighbors. He would like to see mitigation measures implemented to lesson these impacts. He does not support moving the home downhill but does believe the residence should be lowered by two to five'feet, and the chimney made less visible. He supports adding a berm in front of the home. MOTION MADE, AMENDED, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Commissioner Abraham moved to approve the plans as presented with the following changes: reduce the roof pitch to 3:12, the chimney component be removed in its entirety and replaced with an appropriate roof vent, and a grading policy exception be granted for the landscaping plans to locate a five foot berm within ten feet of the property line facing Dezahara Way. Commissioner Harpootlian suggested that the roofline be lowered by two feet, instead of specifying a roof pitch, and that the landscape plans be brought back to the Planning Commission for review. Commissioner Abraham amended the motion to include the suggestions presented by Commissioner Harpootlian. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Clow AYES: Commissioners: Abraham, Clow, Harpootlian, and Partridge NOES: None ABSENT: Chairman Collins ABSTAIN: None 3.3 LANDS OF YIU, 26880 Elena Road;. F' 5-12-ZP-SD-GD; A request for a Site Development Permit fo 4,999 square foot new two story residence with a 2,371 s foot basement and a 694 square foot basement garage (M um height: 27'), a new driveway access, swimming pool removal of two (2) heritage oak trees. The applicant is also requ . g a grading policy exception for portions of the driveway. CE Review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303 (a) & (e) staff -Cynthia Richardson). Arrthe request of the applicant Item 3.3 was continued to the June 7, 2012 Planning Commission meeting. ATTACHMENT 3 n 3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS May 3, 2012 Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: APPEAL OF. A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPROVAL FOR A NEW 4,981 .SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH A 25035 SQUARE FOOT BASEMENT AND A 592 SQUARE FOOT SWIMMING POOL; LANDS OF HARRIS AND SHARP; 26958 DEZAHARA WAY; FILE #283-11-ZP-SD-GD. FROM: Brian Froelich, AICP, Associate Planner APPROVED: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director -,PT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: Uphold the Fast-track approval of the Site Development Permit for the new residence, basement, and swimming pool subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment #1. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the south side of Dezahara Way with direct roadway frontage. The lot is the last undeveloped property within the subdivision and has a regular, five -sided shape. The lot was created in 1966 via the Rose Hill Estates Tract. The site contains a semi -circular driveway easement along the west boundary for benefit of adjacent properties. Other site characteristics include: three heritage oak trees, a hillside location, and the property slopes down to a riparian area and Purissima Creek. The project was approved at a Fast-track hearing on March 27, 2012. At that hearing, two neighbors supported the project while eight neighbors voiced concerns about the project design, view loss, the planning process, and raised issue regarding the applicant's responsibility under the Rose Hill Estates Conditions Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's). The Fast-track approval was appealed per Section 10-2.1305.1(b)(13) by Mayor Larsen. DISCUSSION Site Data: Gross Lot Area: 1.02 acres Net Lot Area: 1.00 acres Average Slope: 21.8% Lot Unit Factor: 0.747 F Planning Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris May 3, 2012 Page 2 Area Maximum Proposed Existing Increase Left Development 7,900 8,379* 0 8,379 .0. . Floor 5,000 4,981 0 4,981 19 *Solar Bonus Development Area per Section 10-1.502(b)(6) (500sf of solar panels proposed) "Basement exempt from Floor Area 2,035 square feet Site and Architecture The 1.00 acre site has a 21.8% slope that descends evenly from the street level to Purissima Creek. The proposed site layout includes the driveway, primary building, an attached two -car garage, one -car garage attached by a breezeway, rear yard patio, and swimming pool. The proposed driveway takes access from Dezahara Way toward the western property boundary. The proposed building location is 44 feet from the front property line and the first floor elevation is approximately eight feet six inches (8'6") below the street level. The residence includes a partial basement (2,035 sf). The exterior building materials include beige plaster, stone trim, and clay tile roof. (Materials Exhibit — Attachment 10) The proposed residence complies with all setbacks, Floor Area, Development Area, and height standards per Title 10 of the Municipal Code. Driveway& Parking The proposed driveway will create a new access from Dezahara Way. The driveway incorporates one (1) surface parking space. Three (3) parking spaces are accommodated in garages. A firetruck turnaround was not a requirement of the project. Outdoor Lighting Outdoor lighting is shown on the floor plan sheets. Standard lighting is proposed, with two (2) fixtures at some double door exits and one (1) fixture per single door exit. Several recessed fixture units are shown at the veranda at the rear of the residence. The standard lighting Condition 8 for outdoor lighting, requires that fixtures be down shielded or have frosted/etched globes. All applicants are required to submit outdoor. landscape lighting details with the required landscape screening plan. Grading & Drainage The Engineering Department has reviewed the project Civil Engineering plans .and has determined that the proposal complies with the Grading Policy and the Town's drainage standards. Grading quantities include: • 1,335 cubic yards of cut • 250 cubic yards of fill Planning Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris May 3, 2012 Page 3 • 1,085 cubic yards export The site grading and cut- are primarily for the basement excavation, swimming pool excavation, and driveway. The front porch entry of the house is cut four (4) feet, which is the maximum permitted for yard areas per the Grading Policy (Attachment 2). The drainage design directs Water into area drains conveyed into 4" pipes that connect to a detention basin consisting of 36" high density polyethylene pipes to be installed below grade. The volume to be stored is based on the amount of rain water from a 10 -year storm event, 1 -hour duration over the proposed two dimensional impervious surfaces. Overflow would meter out to an energy dissipater. Geotechnical Review The applicant has provided a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation prepared by GeoForensics Inc and a Fault Investigation prepared by Steven F. Connelly, C.E.G. The Investigations were peer reviewed by the Town of Los Altos Hills' Geotechnical consultant; Cotton, Shires, and Associates (Attachment 3). A fault trace crosses the property, however, Cotton, Shires, and Associates has reported that sufficient investigation was completed to support the conclusion that the fault trace is inactive and have recommended standard conditions that include follow up documentation and review of the construction documents by the project geologist (Conditions 19a & 19b). Trees & Landscaping The majority of the site is generally devoid of landscaping but does include three (3) heritage oak trees and a riparian area adjacent to Purissima Creek. No trees are proposed for removal. Green Building Ordinance . The applicant has submitted a GreenPoint checklist in compliance with the Town's Green Building Ordinance. The building is designed to achieve 81 points in the GreenPoint Rated certification program. . Fire Department Review The Santa Clara County Fire Department reviewed the plans and has required that the building be equipped with fire sprinklers. The property is also located within the Wildland-Urban Interface Zone. (Attachment 7) Planning Commission. Lands of Sharp and Harris May 3, 2012 Page 4 Sanitation A Los Altos sewer main line currently traverses the property down slope of the proposed residence. Tie in is proposed. No sewer easement exists on the property; however the property owner has agreed to dedicate a sewer easement with the project (Condition 28). Neighborhood Comments As of the writing of the staff report, the Town has received -16 written comment letters both in support and in opposition to the project (Attachment 9). Concerns cited by neighbors include: loss of views, structure height, color and materials, drainage, the project's noncompliance with the .Rose Hill Estates Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) and lack of approval by the Architectural Control Committee. CC&R's are private agreements between the parties to the CC&R's that runs with the land. The enforcement is executed privately by the parties entitled per the contract. The Town has no responsibility or right to enforce CC&R's. The Town attorney has provided a legal opinion on the matter for Planning Commission review (Attachment 8). There was extended discussion of the Fast -Track Guide and the eligibility checklist at the March 27, 2012 hearing. Neighbors expressed concern over the resulting score that allowed the project to be eligible for Fast -Track. Per Section 10-2.1305.1 (b)(2), the Planning Director has the authority to determine the scoring and eligibility of projects. The Fast -Track Guide checklist, or a project's conformance with the Fast -Track Guide checklist, shall not provide the basis for the Site Development Authority's approval, conditional approval, or disapproval of a project. Town Committee's Review The Pathways Committee has recommended that the applicant pay a Pathway in -lieu fee (Condition 29). The Open Space Committee has recommended that an Open Space Easement be placed over riparian area and Purissima Creek on the property. (Open Space. Easement Map - Attachment 6) The Environmental Design and Protection Committee commented that the new residence will need substantial screening on three sides. ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE (CEM The proposed single family residence and swimming pool are categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act by provision of Section 15303(a) & (e). Planning Commission Lands of Sharp and Harris May 3, 2012 Page 5 ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Grading Policy 3. Cotton and Shires Associates Letters, -December 20, 2011 4. Environmental Design and Protection Committee Comments, December 19, 2011 5. Pathways Committee minutes from meeting on December 12, 2011 6. Recommended Open Space Easement Map —Exhibit A 7. Fire Department Comments, December 2, 2011 S. Town Attorney Memo regarding CC&R's, April 26, 2012 9. Neighbor Letters – chronological order received 10. Materials Exhibit - (Commission in color) h r ATTACHMENT 4 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN and PROTECTION COMMITTEE ?.p..P..iication_for:-_--.-..- --� .....�_.� . t _. �...._. � .................... .".«................_.......�......_..........._. App[[cant_Name: - - `. ' ; - :. V....` :.p- . -�. s_..:......-:. _. _•— - .........«. _.....__...... - - , ll .T._ .:..........._.._.._.._._......_._..............: Appticant_Address: S ................... .« ........-._... ..... _..........._................ ...................................... .. sKz - • __... ..._......._._......-..... -..... _ ._.«.:.............._._._..._. Reviewed. bY�...._.... ' .... _.. ........................................................................................... _ ..... Date Y_ ._ « �:«._.:. ___ _ ._ ...«_. - r t :, •-•R^- _•---•_- -- - --•-_--..--- r --- _.---..-.. _ ........«._.... _.........._ .. r-- ........... .......... .... _..«_.«..._. COMMENTS Site Impact .. S ,. Li�htin� -- _....._....._...:. ....... .......-` L .... ..«-......_......_..__--......__« ..-..._... .... �_ ��.----�---•_ -. __..- .. ....... Noise _ .._....---._._........... _.. 1ti Q ° L�- ,. ��57' «...._...._..._........ .__...............................__._........_._...._......................... __....................... _ ... ____.........._.__............... _... _ ......_._ _ _- -. -- __ ___._... ..... ............. .. _... ..... ._...... Lot. .. ._.....r�.... .......... . .....« — _._.._. ___...... ..__._ �._.._-.._ _ ........... ? ". .... ...... _........... ........_......._,.......-..._ ...................-_........-.._............................_.....«_v--.-_....-.......--.._-....._..-..........._.......................... ......................__................_ Drainage.........._.._. ....._....- ._.........-.«...-....-....._........................................................_.............«_............._.........._.............._- _........___....,_..«...._................ Easements ._..... -__...._..................................... ................................................... _... Existing Vegitation _._ _..«.«._.........._..... ...... ................ _............. _..._...._..................... ...... ............... ..... _............ _........... _...... _..... __. _ •--..-«_......._....._..................._.......................__......-----•--••-----•-.........._..._._..._..._.............._.---......- _...«...- - ........................................... Mitigation ®� _....... _......... «_._.................... ..... .......... _............................. .............................................. .......................................:..........__.. 0 e Landscaping for 26958 Dezahara, item 11, Screening 26958 Dezahara Way Los Altos Hills, CA 94022-4310 May 13, 2014 Cynthia. Richardson Town of Los Altos Hills, Planning Dept 26379 Fremont Rd Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Dear Ms. Richardson, ATTACHMENT 5 RECEIVEp 14 2211 TOWN 5HIUS Re: Lands of Sharp — Harris. 26958 Dezahara Way. 77-14-ZP-SD Landscape Screening item 11 - Screening Through the process of building our home at 26958 Dezahara Way, the neighbors have made it clear that view obstruction is the major concern. Neighbors have asked that plantings screen the front (north side) of the house, and have not requested screening anywhere else. In fact, they wanted us to minimize screening. With that in mind we designed, and shared with the neighbors, landscaping that does just that, and we heard back from them that they are fine with plantings just on the north side of our property. And the neighborhood committee (ACC) representing all the neighbors approved the landscaping (and fence) plan. Regards the east side of our property, the neighbors on that side have a view away from our home, have screening between us, and- Were concerned about losing evening sunlight, which screening on the east of our property might do. With the above in mind, we developed a landscape screening plan that screens the house from the north. Notwithstanding this, given your request, which you kindly explained this morning, we have edited our initial submission and included additional clumps of shrubs on the west and east side of the property. You will find these in the updated submission. Thank you for your prompt handling of this matter. It is:deeply appreciated. Yours sincerely, Landscaping for 26958 Dezahara, item 12, Berm 26958 Dezahara Way Los Altos Hills, CA 94022-431:0 May 13, 2014 Cynthia Richardson Planning Dept Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Rd Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Dear Ms. Richardson, ATTACHMENT 6 Re: Lands of Sharp — Harris. 26958 Dezahara Way, 77-14-ZP-SD Landscape. Screening item 12 - Berm During the planning committee meeting approving plans, for 26958 Dezahara Way, the neighbor to the North, Dr. Pfefferbaum, requested our house be lowered by several feet, including down to 1 story. The Planning Commission rejected this request, and passed a motion that lowered the roof by 2', removed the chimney at the top of the roof, gave us the option of putting in a 5' berm within the setback to help screen the house, and asked that the landscaping plan be brought back to the planning commission for review. Here is the wording from the Planning Commission meeting: MOTION MADE, AMENDED, SECONDED, AND PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE: Commissioner Abraham moved to approve the plans as presented with the following changes: reduce the roof pitch to 3:12, the chimney component be removed in its entirety and replaced with an appropriate roof vent, and a grading policy exception be granted for the landscaping plans to locate a five foot berm within ten feet of the property line facing Dezahara Way. Commissioner Harpootlian suggested that the roofline be lowered by two feet, instead of specifying a roof pitch, and that the landscape plans be brought back to the Planning Commission for review. Commissioner Abraham amended the motion to include the suggestions presented by Commissioner Harpootlian. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Clow. Landscaping for 26958 Dezahara, item 12, Berm AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 3.3 Commissioners: Abraham, Clow, Ha.rpootlian, and Partridge None Chairman Collins None There was some confusion in the translation of this motion to the letter of plans acceptance,.which stated that a 5' berm was.the only way to screen the house. To address this confusion, in the revised grading plan that was required by the Planning Department prior to plan check, the Town Planner, Brian Froelich; agreed that a berm was not required on those plans, but instead the plans state words such as "landscape berm up to 5 feet tall to be installed in this area" with the goal of reduction of the visibility of the emplaced structures. As a result of this, the approved plans state "final landscape design (including berm at front yard) shall be determined when planning commission reviews final landscape plan per. COA #3 (landscape berm design shall be per COA #21 - max 5' ht.)". Now that the house is up, and the screening and landscaping can be visualized, we believe that the house can be adequately screened with plantings, without the environmental impact of putting up to 5' of dirt in the 10' setback as allowed by the initial planning commission approval. The neighborhood committee (ACC) agreed with us, do not want the berm and approved plans without it (see attached 'approval-fence_and_landscaping.pdf). The proposed plans have been circulated to the neighbors. There were varied responses. Some wish the berm, others wish no berm. As the ACC is designated to represent the neighbors their approval has guided our submission. In summary, the berm was suggested to screen the house. We believe the house will be screened more naturally and beautifully with just plantings, at a lesser environmental impact. The neighborhood ACC agrees with us. We believe the planning commission will too, and it is this planning commission that has been given responsibility to make that call. Yours sincerely, Edward Sharp Architectural Control Committee, Rose Hill Estates, Tract 4215 (ACC) 26898 Dezahara Way Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 650 948-4856 December 26, 2013 Edward Sharp 26958 Dezahara Way Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Dear Edward: The ACC received your email and plot plan and I have gathered the member's comments and stated them below. I received a full size plot plan (24"X36") and offered or twice tried.to offer other committee members a.chance to view this larger plan. This full sizelan answere all my questions because I was able to read the lettering4lhe response was not a consensual ACC approval so the individual views are listed below: Greg Hyver: Approves the landscape and fence plan only. Mare Shibuya: Approves the landscape and fence plan. Understands the contour lines are accurate at the time the drawing.was made but do: not represent the current topography of the lot. Thus, if a berm is to be constructed, a plan showing contour lines that show the placement and height:the berm would be.helpful. Understands the final landscape design shall be.determined when the planning commission reviews the final landscape plan. Kathy Scheible: Does not feel your submittal has sufficient information to make comment. Kathy has already submitted her comments to you. The:ACC will approve all mandates placed upon you by the Town of Los Altos Hills. Yours truly, Mare Shibuya 'AC Cc: Kathy Scheible, Greg Hyver � a D.: OT Or _ pMCA- tit 1 _ I 4 1 1 0 o ` o \\ . 10 7N �w..r )JEW MME iARr- ARRIS SIDGNGC MSIONS 5IT6 PLAN WTE : T -s -la - OfUNNBY:Ia/n aE0Q:0Br: » MOIITECf:ioH PNOJECT NO: )lea SHEET NUMBER A-1 ti \\ . 10 7N �w..r )JEW MME iARr- ARRIS SIDGNGC MSIONS 5IT6 PLAN WTE : T -s -la - OfUNNBY:Ia/n aE0Q:0Br: » MOIITECf:ioH PNOJECT NO: )lea SHEET NUMBER A-1 ` ATTACHMENT 7 Outdoor shielded down -lighting at Columns 16958 Dezahara Way Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Sea Gull Lighting Vangard — Hardscape Lighting 24V Product # 91501-147 F10 Vitt our web Me at www, SeaGutlLighting.com 91501-147 - page 1 of 1 Job Name: Seaulighting...,Comments: r;i' fiboll,1117teff slave 1410 91501-147: Vangaurd Hardscape Lights, 24v Collections: Signature (Primary) Van Guard Job Type: Quantity: Specification Images: Dimensions: Width: 5„ W1n: 300" (color/Brown) Bulbs: 1 - G4 bi-pin T-3 10w Max. 24v - included Material List: 1 Construction - Brass - Weathered Brass A step beyond the normal recessed wall light, our unique hardscape lights are perfect for illuminating short retaining walls and other niche Safety Listing: locations. The brass cover directs and spreads light to the Intended area, while the extendable mounting plate secures the fixture allowing cETL Listed for Wet Locations for face plate adjustments. Simply remove the mounting plate for installations under railings and other tight fitting spaces. The frosted lens is perfect for the desired light output. Brass Construction Pre -Greased Beryllium Copper Socket Anti -Moisture Migration Connections Recessed, Under Wall Cap Mount Includes Removable Plate & Mounting Straps Use of other manufacturers' components and power management system materials will void warranty, listing, and present a possible safety hazard. Please use caution when specifying lamps by selecting the proper voltage, base type, and wattage lamp when designing and installing any lighting system. UPC #1:785652129018 Finish: Weathered Brass (147) Shipping Information: Length ! Width ! Height I Cube Individual 91501-147 1 1785652129018 8-3t Uahenp raenes the 1pM b rertea 1M e.apn m cortgonenb of any prodtrd d w ro parte awYMery or crepe b .Hely ww a eW dera wMoul .esumine arty eblpatlen or f wary to modlly •ny produeb ae eh nw ur.ceww end ut notlu. Thk MereNn depinae a pred1M Melpn UUiN N en wle end.:rinN. properly of Mont. Cw1e Fan Comp�ry. In eompf.noe Wlh U.S copyrldAf wM yotent requlremero, no0calon 4 hereby presented In ad• bm Uet Mk theraaae, or the product It depicts. Is not to be copied, altered or used In arty manner whheut the expnes rwgen consent o1, a carttny b he DM Ndeneh el$e. t'IN Lk#dWp — A Generation Brenda Company.