Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 ITEM 6.1 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS August 23, 2016 Staff Report to the Planning Commission SUBJECT: A REQUEST FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO DEMOLISH TWO EXISTING COTTAGES AND CONSTRUCT A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENCE (MAXIMUM HEIGHT 27') WITH A RELOCATED DRIVEWAY AND RELATED HARDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS; LANDS OF ADL 5 LLC; 10800 MAGDALENA ROAD; FILE#55-16-ZP-SD-GD. FROM: Steve Padovan, Consultant Planner APPROVED: Suzanne Avila, AICP, Planning Director RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: Approve the Site Development Permit subject to the recommended conditions of approval in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the west side of Magdalena Road, approximately 600 feet south of Stonebrook Drive. The 1.033 acre parcel was created in 1960 with the recordation of Tract Map 2811. The parcel (originally Lot 2 of the three lot subdivision) is bisected by a 28 foot wide driveway easement that provides access to a landlocked internal parcel which contains the original residence (Lot 3). In addition, there are public utility easements along the northwesterly property line and a slope easement along Magdalena Road which limit street access to the property to the existing driveway location. The parcel was placed under a Williamson Act contract in 1975. Existing development on the property consists of two small cottages, a paved driveway and a parking area that are associated with the original residence. The upper portions of the lot are heavily forested with a mixture of oaks, bays and buckeyes and the area below the existing driveway is more gently sloping grassland with a row of oaks along the road. The other two lots in the original subdivision are being developed by the same owner. New residences were approved on Lots 1 and 3 at Fast Track hearings on June 14, 2016 and June 21, 2016, respectively. In order to develop this lot, the owner decided to relocate the existing driveway easement further down the hill towards Magdalena Road to accommodate the required 30 foot building setback from a vehicular access easement and to enlarge the building envelope. PROPOSED PROJECT The applicant is proposing to demolish all existing structures and improvements and construct a two-story, 5,000 square foot residence with an attached two-car garage. All utilities will be Planning Commission Lands of ADL 5 LLC August 23,2016 Page 2 placed underground and the home will be connected to the public sewer. The existing driveway apron on Magdalena Road will be retained and a new shared driveway will be constructed below the proposed residence to provide joint access to the subject property and to the adjacent parcel (Lot 3). A fire truck turnaround located on the adjacent lot will be shared by both properties. This design feature and the relocated driveway easement allow for the residence, parking and garage to be moved closer to the street resulting in the protection of additional trees. However, five heritage oak trees are still scheduled for removal, necessitating the need for Planning Commission review of the project. The following information provides a summary of the proposed project: Site Data Gross Lot Area: 1.033 acres Net Lot Area: 0.880 acres Average Slope: 25.63% Lot Unit Factor: 0.585 Area Maximum Existing Proposed Increase Remaining Development 7,500 901 7,495 6,594 5 Floor 5,000 901 5,000 4,099 0 DISCUSSION Architecture and Site Design The proposed residence is within the maximum floor area and development area requirements and meets the minimum setback and height requirements. The structure utilizes a contemporary modern style architecture with multi-level flat roofs,extensive wall articulation, rectangular building elements, and a second story deck. The exterior building materials will consist of a mixture of smooth stucco, stone veneer wall and horizontal wood siding,with trim around windows and doors and steel railings on the roof decks and balconies. These design features sufficiently break up the overall mass of the structure and the proposed materials blend well with the surrounding environment. In addition, the building has been cut into the hillside to reduce the height of the structure and its visibility from Magdalena Road. Retaining walls have been incorporated into the building walls and the maximum cut will be eight feet which complies with the Town's Grading Policy. No basement is proposed and only 220 cubic yards of soil is proposed for export. Driveway&Parking The existing driveway easement splits the property creating two,small building envelopes once the required 30 foot setbacks are applied. The upper envelope is heavily forested and the lower one is highly visible. By realigned the driveway,the existing area of the property that is already Planning Commission Lands of ADL 5 LLC August 23,2016 Page 3 developed with cottages and pavement can be more efficiently utilized and fewer trees removed. The realignment does result in the removal of one heritage oak. Staff is requiring that all oaks that are removed be replaced with three new 24-inch box trees of the same species. The new driveway will utilize the existing street access, drop down the slope below the new residence and then rise up to a fire truck turnaround which will be used for both new residences. The new driveway easement has been recorded and the existing easement will need to be vacated prior to issuance of building permits for the new residence. The driveway will consist of permeable cement pavers and incorporates two surface parking space adjacent to the garage. There are two(2)additional parking spaces in the attached garage for a total of four(4)parking spaces,which meets Zoning Ordinance requirements for a new residence. Outdoor Lighting Outdoor lighting is not currently shown on the plan set. Any new outdoor lights will be required to comply with the Town's Outdoor Lighting Policy which states that all fixtures be down lights, shielded and/or have frosted/etched globes. In addition, staff is recommending that lighting be limited to doorways and the garage and that only minimal lighting of the driveway be permitted. The applicant will be required to submit building lighting details with the building permit plans and 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. Estimated grading quantities are as follows: • 520 cubic yards of cut • 300 cubic yards of fill • 220 cubic yards export As stated previously, the site grading and cuts meet the Town's Grading Policy and are necessary to place the residence deeper into the hillside and to create the new shared driveway. Regarding drainage, roof drains and swales direct water into area drains that connect to a retention pipe that is located downslope from the residence. The volume to be stored is based on the amount of rain water from a 10-year storm event, one-hour duration over the proposed two dimensional impervious surfaces. Overflow water will be metered out into an energy dissipater. Geotechnical Review The applicant has provided a Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Silicon Valley Soil Engineering dated February 2016. The report was peer reviewed by the Town Geotechnical Planning Commission Lands of ADL 5 LLC August 23,2016 Page 4 Consultant,Cotton,Shires,and Associates,whose recommendations have been included in the conditions of approval (Condition#25). 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 75 points in the GreenPoint Rated certification program(50 points is the minimum needed for certification). 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 which requires the use of fire resistant exterior materials and includes landscape restrictions. Sanitation The new residence will connect to the sewer line that serves the existing dwelling. No additional easements are required. Tree Impacts According to the arborist report provided by the applicant(see Attachment 2),there are a total of 50 trees on the property which are native trees greater than six inches in diameter (not including the oaks within the Magdalena Road right-of-way). The proposed project includes the removal of five oak trees (all of which are heritage trees), a pine,bay and a buckeye. The original design for the property included a separate driveway for the new house which would have required the removal of 13 trees, nine of which are oaks. The new shared driveway proposal reduces the number of trees being removed and lowers the home on the slope which results in reduced impacts to the trees that remain. The applicant has provided additional reports which specifically examined the five oaks to be removed. Based on these reports, each of the five trees have areas of decay, exhibit heavy leans and have other structural issues that make them candidates for removal. Condition #7 requires the planting of three,24-inch box oaks for each tree being removed. In addition,staff will inspect the tree fencing and require that an arborist of the Town's choosing be on-site during initial grading operations to monitor grading activities and ensure that proper methods are used for root pruning and tree preservation(Condition#6). Town Committee's Review The Pathways Committee recommended the payment of an in-lieu fee (Condition#34). Planning Commission Lands of ADL 5 LLC August 23,2016 Page 5 The Environmental Design and Protection Committee provided general comments related to the removal of trees, sharing driveways to reduce tree removal and the placement of an open space easement over the upper, steeper slopes. The Open Space Committee reviewed the project and recommended that an open space easement be placed on the slopes above the residence. The owner has agreed and the proposed easement is shown on the plans. Condition #12 requires the easement agreement to be completed prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. PUBLIC COMMENT A public notice was mailed to all owners of record with 500 feet of the property on August 12, 2016. As of the writing of this report, no public comments have been received. Public comments were received at the Fast Track hearings for the other two parcels. These comments centered on utility easements, driveway location and stormwater runoff (see Fast Track Hearing Reports under Attachment 4). ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE(CEQA) The proposed single family residence is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303(a) — construction of a new single family residence in a residential zone. ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended Conditions of Approval 2. Arborist Reports from Kielty Arborist Services dated February 11,2015 and May 27,2016 3. Arborist Letter from Urban Tree Management dated August 1,2016 4. Fast Track Reports for Residences on Lots 1 and 3 dated June 14, 2016 and June 21, 2016 5. Proposed Plans—Planning Commission only ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE LANDS OF ADL 5 LLC: 10800 MAGDALENA ROAD FILE# 55-16-ZP-SD-GD PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. All existing Blue Gum(E. globulus), Pink Ironbark(E. sideroxylon rosea),River Red Gum(E. camaldulensis), Swamp Gum (E. rudis), Honey Gum (E. melliodora), or Manna Gum (E. viminalis) eucalyptus trees and any dead or dying pine trees on the property located within 150' of any structures or roadways shall be removed prior to final inspection of the new residence. Removal of all trees shall take place between the beginning of August and the end of January to avoid disturbance of nesting birds protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA)and California Department of Fish and Game Code Section 3500 et seq unless a nesting bird survey is first conducted and there is a determination that there are no active nests within the tree. 3. After completion of rough framing or at least six (6) months prior to scheduling a final inspection,the applicant shall submit landscape screening and erosion control plans for review by the Site Development Committee. The application for landscape screening and erosion control shall be accompanied by the applicable fee and deposit. The plans shall be reviewed at a noticed public hearing. Attention shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to break up the view of the new residence from surrounding properties and streets. All landscaping required for screening purposes and for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. The landscape screening plan shall comply with Section 10-2.809 (water efficient landscaping) of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. 4. A landscape maintenance deposit in the amount of $5,000 shall be posted prior to final inspection. An inspection of the landscape to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after the installation. The deposit will be released at that time if the plantings remain viable. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, all oak trees to be retained,particularly any heritage oak trees, shall be fenced at the drip line and if necessary, wood chips shall be spread at least four (4)inches thick within the tree protection fencing. The fencing shall be shown on the plans and consist of a material and structure (6 foot, chain-link) to clearly delineate the drip line and fence posts shall be driven into the ground. The fencing must remain throughout the course of construction and include signage stating, "TREE PROTECTION FENCE—DO NOT MOVE Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 2 of 8 OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM ARBORIST." No storage of equipment, construction staging of materials, vehicles or debris shall be allowed within the drip lines of these trees. Existing perimeter plantings shall also be fenced and retained throughout the entire construction period. 6. All grading shall be minimized within the drip lines of the existing oaks and no fill shall be placed within the driplines of any fenced trees. Pruning of the oak trees for construction shall be the minimum required and staff shall inspect the pruning of the trees prior to building permit issuance. During all grading operations, an arborist of the Town's choosing, shall be on-site to monitor all grading activities around the remaining trees and shall monitor all root pruning and tree preservation activities. 7. For every oak tree being removed, a minimum of three oaks trees of the same species (24 inch box size) shall be planted on the property. Oak trees shall be located so as not to impact neighboring property views and shall be used to screen the new structure where possible. 8. The maximum permitted development area for the property shall be 7,500 square feet. This includes a maximum of up to 5,000 square feet of floor area. 9. All pathways in the setbacks shall not exceed four feet in width. 10. The maximum height of the family room and foyer/living room on the main floor shall not exceed 17 feet in height from the finished floor to the underside of the roof sheeting. 11. The maximum height of the structure on any vertical plane shall be 27 feet as measured from the top of the graded pad to the top of the roofing materials. 12. The property owner shall grant an Open Space Easement to the Town over the heavily wooded hillside areas above the dwelling that exceed a 30% slope (at approximately the 574 foot elevation contour) and include the easterly portion of the property. All existing sheds and structures shall be removed from the easement area and no grading or fill shall be permitted unless necessary to restore the original grade. Native vegetation may be planted within the easement but no irrigation or sprinkler systems are permitted.The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the grant document. The grant document shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building permit. 13. Prior to requesting the final inspection, a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall certify in writing and state that"the location of the new residence, garage,roof eaves,and decks are no less than 30' from the front property line and 30' from the side and rear property lines." The elevation of the new residence shall be similarly certified in writing to state that "the elevation of the new residence and accessory building matches the elevation and location shown on the Site Development plan." The applicant shall submit the stamped and signed letter(s)to the Planning Department prior to requesting a final inspection. Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 3 of 8 14. Prior to requesting the final inspection, a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall certify in writing and state that "the height of the new residence building complies with the 27'-0" maximum structure height, measured as the vertical distance at any point from the bottom of the crawl space or basement ceiling if excavated below natural grade,to the highest part of the structure directly above (including roof materials)." The overall structure height shall be similarly certified in writing and state that "all points of the building (including chimneys and appurtenances)lie within a thirty-five(35')foot horizontal band,measured from the lowest visible natural or finished grade topographical elevation of the structure along the building line and the highest topographical elevation of the roof of the structure."The applicant shall submit the stamped and signed letter(s)to the Planning Department prior to requesting a final inspection. 15. Exterior finish colors of all buildings shall have a light reflectivity value of 50 or less and roof materials shall have a light reflectivity value of 40 or less, per manufacturer specifications. All color samples shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. All applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the approved color(s)prior to final inspection. 16. No fencing is approved with this project. Any new fencing or gates shall require future review and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation. Fences shall not encroach onto or within any easements on the property. 17. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on the plans and as modified by this condition. "Cut sheets"for all light fixtures shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check Exterior light fixtures shall have frosted glass, be down lights or utilize fully shielded fixtures. No lighting may be placed within setbacks except two entry or driveway lights. Any additional outdoor lighting shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to installation. 18. Skylights, if utilized, shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted light (tinted or colored glass, or other material). No lighting shall be placed within skylight wells. 19. Fire retardant roofing (Class A) is required for all new construction. 20. The roof eaves of all structures shall not encroach into the required yard setbacks and the roof eaves shall be shown on the site plans in the set of construction drawings. 21. At time of submittal of plans for building plan check, the applicant shall submit one of the following checklists to demonstrate compliance with the Town's Green Building Ordinance: a. A GreenPoint Rated checklist with the building permit application to indicate that the project will achieve a minimum of fifty (50) points. The checklist shall be completed by a qualified green building professional and shall be attached to the front of the construction plans. The construction plans shall include general notes Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 4 of 8 or individual detail drawings, where feasible, showing the green building measure to be used to attain the required points. b. A LEED for Homes checklist with the building permit application to indicate that the project will achieve a minimum of forty-five (45)points or LEED certification. The checklist shall be completed by a qualified green building professional and shall be attached to the front of the construction plans. The construction plans shall include general notes or individual detail drawings, where feasible, showing the green building measure to be used to attain the required points. 22. Prior to final inspection and occupancy, a qualified green building professional shall provide documentation verifying that the building was constructed in compliance with GreenPoint Rated or LEED® certification. 23. All properties shall pay School District fees to either the Los Altos School District or the Palo Alto Unified School District, as applicable,prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The applicant must take a copy of worksheet #2 to school district offices (both elementary and high school in the Los Altos School District), pay the appropriate fees and provide the Town with a copy of the receipts. 24. The project is subject to the Town's Construction Time Limit Ordinance (Chapter 10, Title VIII of the Municipal Code). The maximum time for completion of the new residence shall be 36 months from the date of Building Permit issuance. Failure to complete the project in the allotted time may result in substantial penalties and fees. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 25. As recommended by Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc., in their Supplemental Geotechnical Peer Review dated March 29, 2016, the applicant shall comply with the following: a. Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluations-The applicant's geotechnical consultant should review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final construction plans(site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations,retaining walls and driveway) to ensure that the plans, specifications and details accurately reflect the consultants' recommendations. The proposed location of the drainage discharge point should be evaluated for potential slope stability and erosion issues. Appropriate design revisions should be recommended as needed. The results of the Geotechnical Plan Review should be summarized by the Project Geotechnical Consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer along with other documentation prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. b. Geotechnical Construction Inspections - 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, Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 5 of 8 site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundation construction and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. 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(granting of occupancy)project approval. 26. Peak discharge at 10800 Magdalena Road, as a result of Site Development Permit 55-16, shall not exceed the existing pre-development peak discharge value of the property. Detention storage must be incorporated into the project to reduce the predicted peak discharge to the pre- development value. Provide the data and peak discharge hydrologic model(s)utilized, as well as, the calculations of the peak discharge value prior and post development. Determine the design peak runoff rate for a 10-year return period storm and provide detention storage design plans to reduce the predicted peak discharge to the pre-development value. All documentation, calculations, and detention storage design (2 plan copies) shall be submitted for review and approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. 27. The Engineer of Record shall observe the installation of the drainage system, construction of the energy dissipators, and completion of the grading activities and state that items havebeen installed and constructed per the approved plans. A stamped and signed letter shall be prepared and submitted to the Town prior to final inspection. 28. Any and all changes to the approved Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted as revisions from the project engineer and shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. 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 except to allow for the construction of the driveway access. 29. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. The applicant should contact PG&E immediately after issuance of building permits to start the application process for undergrounding utilities which can take up to 6-8 months. 30. Two copies of an Erosion and Sediment Control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The contractor and the property owner shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control. The first 100 feet of the driveway shall be rocked during construction and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected from erosion. All areas on the site that have the native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 31. Two copies of a Grading and Construction Operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on Magdalena Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 6 of 8 Road and surrounding roadways, storage of construction materials, placement of sanitary facilities, parking for construction vehicles, clean-up area, 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 GreenWaste Recovery, Inc. for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 32. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and release of occupancy permits and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. 33. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior to final inspection. A sewer hookup permit shall be required by the Town's Public Works Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work proposed within the public right of way prior to start of work. 34. The property owner shall pay a pathway fee of$53.00 per linear foot of the average width of the property prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. 35. The property owner shall submit a copy of the recorded private utility easement and private storm drain easement over Lot 3 of the original subdivision for the benefit of Lot 2 prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 36. This project is located within the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The building construction shall comply with the provisions of California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with CBC 701 A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. 37. An automatic residential fire sprinkler system approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department shall be included in all new one-family dwellings. Three sets of plans prepared by a sprinkler contractor shall be submitted to the Santa Clara County Fire Department (14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032) for review and approval. The sprinklers shall be inspected and approved by the Fire Department,prior to final inspection and occupancy of the new residence. 38. Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 7 of 8 contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 39. Provide an approved Fire Department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1.CFC Section 503. 40. Provide an access driveway with the a paved, all-weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 14 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside,and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1.CFC Section 503. 41. Approved numbers or addresses on all new and existing buildings shall be placed in a position that is plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters and shall be a minimum of 4 inches high and %inches wide. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. 42. All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and the Standard Detail and Specifications SI-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. 43. Gate installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications 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. Gates across the emergency access roadways shall be equipped with an approved access device. If the gates are operated electronically, an approved Knox key switch shall be installed; if operated manually, than 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 edge being exited (CFC Sections 503 and 506). CONDITION NUMBERS 12, 15, 17, 23, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and 35 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the date of the approval (by 5:00 p.m. on September 14,2016). The building permit cannot be issued until the appeal period has lapsed. The applicant may submit construction plans to the Building Department after the appeal period provided the applicant has completed all conditions of approval required prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Lands of ADL 5 LLC 10800 Magdalena Road August 23,2016 Page 8 of 8 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. Upon completion of the construction, a final inspection shall be required to be set with the Planning and Engineering Departments two weeks prior to final building inspection approval. NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until August 23, 2017). 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. ATTACHMENT 2 Kielty Arborist Services LLC Certified Arborist WE#0476A wcovz, P.O. Box 6187 FEB San Mateo, CA 94403 9 2o16 650- 515-9783 TOWN OFos February 11, 2015 111TON�o Aron Developers Attn: Navneet Aron 444 1st Street, Suite C Los Altos, CA 94022 Site: 10800 Magdalena Road, Los Altos Hills, CA Dear Mr. Aron, As requested on Tuesday, February 9, 2016, I visited the above site to inspect and comment on the trees. Three new homes and landscapes are being designed for this site and your concern as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this visit. Method: The significant trees on this site were located on a map provided by you. Each tree was given an identification number. This number was inscribed on a metal foil tag and nailed to the trees at eye level. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). Each tree was assigned a condition rating from 1 to 100 for form and vitality using the following scale; 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of each tree was estimated and the spread was paced off. Lastly, a comments section is provided. 10800 Magdalena Road/2/11/16 (7) Summary: The trees on site are a mix of native oak trees and a few imported species of trees. There has been no maintenance to the trees on the property for an unknown amount of time. The site has recently experienced a few large tree failures. A large number of trees along Magdalena road have been topped for utilities and for a view. Topping trees is never recommended as it leads to watersprout growth. Watersprout growth does not develop proper branch to trunk unions and as a result water sprouts will easily fail in normal weather conditions. The trees along the road are in the utilities easement and are managed by Pg and E. There is a good number of invasive species along Magdalena road consisting of acacia trees and willow trees. The acacia trees should be removed as they will continue to spread onto the property and will pose as a fire danger. The trees along Magdalena road do offer a good amount of screening for the property. If new trees are to be planted in this area they should be Pg and E approved trees for planting underneath utilities. This site has large groves of native oak trees spread throughout the site. Trees that are grown in a grove usually develop poor forms with heavy leans as the trees are fighting for light. The heavy leans are often at a 45 degree lean or more and result in limb failures or whole tree failures. Because of the grove like settings a majority of the trees received poor condition ratings. This site would benefit from a selective removal of trees in the grove and retention of the larger structurally sound trees. All of the oak trees should be pruned to remove dead wood and to lighten heavy lateral leaders. This would significantly reduce the risk of tree failures on the property. There are also a few Monterey pine trees on the property that are dead. Monterey pine trees have been rapidly dying throughout the peninsula from a combination of the drought and bark beetles. The dead pines should be removed as soon as possible as they are a fire danger. This property comprises of 3 APNs: 336-35-006, 336-35-007 and 336-35-008. A small number of the trees on site will need to be removed to facilitate construction of the new proposed homes. The developer has done a good job in placing the 3 homes where tree removal can be kept at a minimum. Only 21 trees are proposed for removal out of the 153 trees on the property. The following tree protection plan will help to insure the future health of the retained trees. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6 foot tall metal chain link type supported my 2 inch metal poles pounded into the ground by no less than 2 feet. The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. 10800 Magdalena Road/2/11/16 (8) Any roots to be cut should be monitored and documented. Large roots or large masses of roots to be cut should be inspected by the site arborist. The site arborist may recommend fertilizing or irrigation if root cutting is significant. Cut all roots clean with a saw or loppers. Roots to be left exposed for a period of time should be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. The site arborist will be on site for the excavation the foundation. Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. The imported trees on this site and any oaks that will be affected by the construction will require irrigation during the warm season months. Some irrigation may be required during the winter months depending on the seasonal rainfall. During the summer months the imported trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. During the fall and winter 1 time a month should suffice. Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. The only time oaks should be irrigated is if their roots are impacted. An inspection of the tree protection fencing may be required. Other inspections will be on an as needed basis. This information should be kept on site at all times. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty David P. Beckham Certified Arborist WE#0476A Certified Arborist WE#10724A Site:16800 Magdalena,Los Altos Hills DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 1 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.9 50% 35/35 Good vigor,poor form,trunk girdled by utility guy wire 2 Buckeye Acelcus glabra 8.2 50% 20/20 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed by#1. 3 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 22 0% 30/5 Dead,decayed 4* Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 20-20 60% 45/40 Good vigor,poor form, codominant at 1 foot with poor crotch. 5 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12.5 50% 30/30 Fair vigor, poor form,heavy lean to the west. 6 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 9.4 50% 25/20 Good vigor,poor form,heavy lean to the north over road. 7 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 24.1 60% 40/35 Fair vigor,fair form 8 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 7.3 45% 15/15 Fair vigor,poor form,leans east over road. 9 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.3 55% 30/20 Fair vigor,fair form,on bank above road. 10 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 6.0-7.4 50% 30/20 Fair vigor,poor-fair form,codominant at base. 11 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 20.8 50% 30/30 Good vigor,fair form, codominant at 2 feet. 12 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.8 55% 30/25 Good vigor,fair form,leans south west 13 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.1 55% 30/25 Good vigor,fair form,leans south west 14 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 12.2 35% 20/35 Good vigor,poor form,leans heavily south west. 15 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 12.4 35% 20/35 Good vigor,poor form,leans heavily south west. 16 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 13.5 55% 30/30 Good vigor,fair form,multi leader at 12 feet. 17 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 24.1 60% 35/40 Fair vigor,fair form,topped in past. 18 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 13.2 60% 35/25 Fair vigor,fair form, upright. 19 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 11.8 35% 20/25 Good vigor,poor form,decay on trunk. 20 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 7.9 50% 20/15 Good vigor,fair form,trimmed for utilitys. 21 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 10.2 45% 30/15 Good vigor,poor form,trimmed for utilities. DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 22 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.3 45% 30/15 Good vigor,poor form,trimmed for utilities. 23 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 13.9 50% 35/35 Good vigor,fair form,topped,rats nest. 24 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.8 50% 35/35 Good vigor,fair form,topped,rats nest. 25 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.5 50% 30/30 Good vigor,fair form,topped in past. 26 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14 35% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. 27 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 12.5 30% 30/25 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. 28 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 7.5x3 30% 35/20 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed,multi leader,leans. 29 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 9.9 30% 35/20 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. 30 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.2 45% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. 31 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.8 45% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form,shares root zone with#30 32 Willow Salix laevigata 26.1 30% 35/30 Good vigor,poor form,decay. 33 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 16.5 50% 40/30 Fair vigor, poor form,trunk bends. 34 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.8 55% 35/30 Good vigor,fair form. 35 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18.2 45% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form,topped at 20 feet. 36 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.1 50% 20/20 Good vigor,poor form,topped. 37 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 9.5 45% 25/25 Good vigor,poor form,topped. 38 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 13.2 50% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form,topped. 39 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 8.8 50% 20/20 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. 40 Italian stone pine Pinus pinea 9.1 45% 20/20 Good vigor,fair form,suppressed. 41 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18.7 40% 30/35 Poor vigor,fair form,in decline. 42 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12 45% 30/25 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed. 43 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.9-18.4 55% 35/35 Good vigor,fair form,topped. 44 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.6 55% 35/35 Good vigor,fair form,topped. 45 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.3 45% 35/30 Poor vigor,fair form,in decline. DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 46 Bailey acacia Acacia baileyana 22.3 20% 15/30 Good vigor,poor form,decayed. 47 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.4 50% 30/25 Good vigor,fair form,trimmed for utilities. 48 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.2-17.7 55% 30/35 Good vigor,fair form,trimmed for utilities. 49 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 21.8 55% 30/35 Good vigor,fair form,trimmed for utilities. 50 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 13.4 60% 30/30 Good vigor,fair form,poor crotch at 5 feet. 51 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.8 40% 30/20 Poor vigor,poor form,in decline. 52 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 13.9 40% 30/20 Poor vigor,poor form,in decline. 53 California pepper Schinus mo//e 15©base 20% 15-Oct Poor vigor,poor form,decayed. 54 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.7 45% 35/25 Fair vigor,poor form,cavity at 5 feet. 55 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18.8 50% 35/35 Poor to fair vigor,poor form, multi leader. 56 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 10.9 45% 20/20 Good vigor,poor form, bleeding on trunk. 57 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 10.9 50% 15/20 Good vigor,poor form,side trimmed. 58 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 25.8 70% 40/40 Good vigor,fair form,heavy to the east. 59 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 29.5 60% 40/40 Good vigor,fair form,heavy to the east. 60 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 27.6 75% 45/50 Good vigor,good form,heavy lateral limbs. 61 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 24.5 70% 45/40 Good vigor,fair form, 18.9-21.5- 62 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18.9 55% 45/45 Good vigor, poor form, multi leader at base. 63 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15,2-15.0 50% 40/30 Fair vigor poor form,codominant at 3 feet. 64 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 9.9-11.0 50% 35/35 Fair vigor,poor form,multi leader at base. 65 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.1-10.3 45% 30/25 Fair vigor,poor form,codominant at 4 feet. 66 Buckeye Aesculus glabra 10.1 45% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form, leans east. 67 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 24 45% 35/35 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 68 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 25 50% 40/35 Good vigor,poor form, bleeding on trunk. 69 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 18 10% 40/30 Poor vigor,poor form,nearly dead. 70 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 24 0% 30/30 Dead. 71 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12.9 55% 35/25 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed. 72 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 20.1 10% 35/35 Poor vigor,poor form,nearly dead,bark beetles. 73 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 28.4 70% 35/50 Fair vigor,fair form,on property line. 74 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12.9-11.1 55% 30/30 Fair vigor,poor-fair form,codominant at base. 75 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.9-10.9 40% 30/20 Poor vigor,poor form,codominant at base. 76 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 22.8 50% 40/35 Fair vigor,poor-fair form,codominant at 3 feet. 77 Pittosporum Pittosporum undulatum 15.4 50% 35/35 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed. 78 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 40@base 55% 45/55 Farir vigor,poor form,multi leader at 3 feet. 79 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 9.8 45% 35/25 Fair vigor, poor form,suppressed. 80 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.2 50% 45/35 Fair vigor,fair form, 81 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12.2 50% 35/35 Fair vigor,poor form, leans east. 82 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 16.1 50% 35/35 Fair vigor,poor form, leans east. 83 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.5 50% 55/40 Fair vigor,poor form,leans east. 84 Bay Laurel Umbellularia californica 8.7 45% 30/15 Good vigor,poor form,suppressed. 85 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.8 45% 35/25 Poor vigor,fair form,suppressed. 86 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.2 50% 35/30 Good vigor,fair form,suppressed. 87 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17 50% 45/35 Good vigor,poor form,leans east. 88 Valley oak Quercus lobate 29.2 65% 50/60 Good vigor,fair form,heavy lateral limbs. 89 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.9 50% 40/35 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed by#90. DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 90 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 21.9 55% 40/40 Fair vigor,poor form,leans east. 91 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 27.9 35% 40/45 Good vigor,poor form,heavy to the south. 92 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 21.5 55% 45/45 Good vigor,fair form. 93 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.3 50% 40/40 Good vigor,fair form,leans south. 94 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.8 40% 30/30 Fair vigor,poor form,leans south horizontal. 95 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 23.2 60% 45/45 Good vigor,fair form. 96 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 23.1 50% 50/30 Fair vigor,fair form,heavy decay on central leader at 3 feet. 97 Buckeye Aesculus glabra 8.8 50% 30/15 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed. 98 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18-10 20% 35/20 Poor vigor,poor form,nearly dead. 99 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 23.1 45% 35/35 Poor vigor,poor form,spreading canopy. 100 Valley oak Quercus lobata 15.3-18.0 50% 45/40 Fair vigor,fair form, codominant at base. 101 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 25.4 55% 45/50 Fair vigor,fair form, codominant at 8 feet. 102 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 31.3 50% 50/45 Poor-fair vigor,poor form,decay at 4 feet. 103 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15-16 45% 40/35 Poor vigor,poor form,codominant at 1 foot. 104 Pittosporum Pittosporum undulatum 8.3 55% 30/25 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed. 105 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.3 45% 35/30 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed. 106 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 27.7 50% 40/40 Good vigor,poor form,poor crotch at 5 feet. 107 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12.2 40% 35/25 Poor vigor,poor form,leans north. 108 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 28 55% 75/35 Fair vigor,fair form,leans south. 109 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 20.4 55% 50/35 Fair vigor,fair form,slight lean. 110 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.2 50% 40/20 Fair vigor,fair form,slight lean,suppressed. 111 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 25.8 55% ' 50/40 Fair vigor,fair form,in slight decline. DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 112 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 25@o base 0% 35/25 Dead. 113 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 11.6 0% 5-Oct Dead. 114 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 33.9 60% 45/35 Fair vigor,fair form,heavy lateral limbs. 115 Valley oak Quercus lobata 31.5 60% 45/40 Fair vigor,fair form. 116 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.6 50% 35/'25 Fair vigor,fair form,decay on leaders. 117 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18.2 50% 35/35 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed,heavy leaders. 118 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.9 50% 35/30 Fair vigor,poor form,codominant at 10 feet. 119 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.3 40% 30/30 Fair vigor,poor form, leans north. 120 Deodar cedar Cedrus deodara 19.7 60% 55/30 Good vigor,fair form, leans east. 121 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.3 45% 30/45 Good vigor,poor form,heavy lean to the north. 122 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 17.9 55% 40/30 Good vigor,fair form, codominant at 12 feet. 123 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 20.1 60% 40/35 Fair vigor,fair form,codominant at 12 feet. 124 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15.9 55% 40/35 Fair vigor,fair form,heavy to the south. 125 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 10.1 40% 30/30 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed. 126 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 12.4 45% 30/30 Fair vigor, poor form,suppressed. 127 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 20.4 60% 45/40 Fair vigor,fair form. 128 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 30.1 25% 35/40 Poor vigor,poor form,decay at base. 129 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 25 45% 60/35 Poor vigor,poor form,codominant at 20 feet. 130 Bay Laurel Umbellularia californica 11.7 40% 30/30 Good vigor,poor form,damaged by failed oak tree. 131 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15-12 50% 40/35 Good vigor,fair form,codominant at base. 132 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 14.4 55% 30/25 Good vigor,fair-poor form, multi leader at 15 feet. Good vigor,poor form,leans south,damaged tree from nearby failed 133 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.4 40% 30/30 tree. DBH Tree# Species Botanical Name (inches) Condition Ht./Spread Comments/Recommendations 134 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 16.5-19.1 45% 30/40 Good vigor,poor form,leans north. 135 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 18.5 50% 30/40 Good vigor,poro form,leans south. 136 Valley oak Quercus lobata 20.5 70% 30/35 Good vigor,fair form,heavy lateral limbs. 137 Valley oak Quercus lobata 18.5 75% 40/35 Good vigor,fair form, heavy lateral limbs. 138 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 16.2 50% 35/30 Poor vigor,fair form,bleeding on trunk. 139 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 16.5-25 40% 35/45 Fair vigor,poor form,split at base. 140 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 11.5 0% 20/30 Dead,failed tree. 141 Monterey pine Pinus radiata 12.1 40% 40/30 Fair vigor, poor form,bend in trunk. 142 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 21.9 50% 35/30 Good vigor,fair form,heavy lateral limbs. 143 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 38 50% 40/40 Fair vigor,poor form,codominant at 2 feet. 144 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 23.7 55% 45/35 Good vigor,fair form. 145 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 20@base 30% 20/20 Poor vigor,poor form,decayed. 146 Buckeye Aesculus glabra 10.1 60% 20/20 Good vigor,fair form,codominant at base. 147 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 19.6 45% 30/20 Good vigor,poor form,leans west. 148 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.2-10 20% 30/30 Fair vigor, poor form,decayed. 149 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 40@base 40% 30/20 Good vigor,poor form,topped. 150 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 15@base 45% 30/20 Good vigor,poor form,topped. Kielty Arborist Services LLC Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650-515-9783 May 26, 2016 RECEOVIE Aron Developers TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HLLS Attn: Navneet Aron 444 1st Street, Suite C Los Altos, CA 94022 Site: 10800 Magdalena Road (Lot 2), Los Altos Hills, CA Dear Mr. Aron, As requested on Wednesday, May 25, 2016, I visited the above site to inspect and comment on trees proposed for removal to facilitate the construction of the home on lot#2. Also impacts to the retained trees will be discussed. The architect has done a great job in configuring the design in order to remove the least amount of trees as possible, and to have the least amount of impact as possible. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the tree was not climbed for this inspection. The tree in question were located on a map provided by you. The tree was then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). The trees was given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the tree was measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. 10800 Magdalena Lot#2- 5/26/16 (2) Below are coast live oaks proposed to be removed in. order to facilitate construction on lot #2: ► '4.-* 4: '• #54- Coast live oak(Quercus agr�folia) s!' ^ ►'�`.' p, Diameter-17.7-Coast live oak tree #54 is in .. -': -`"m• located in the footprint of the proposed �; driveway. This tree was given a poor condition •` rating of 45. A large cavity at the height of 5 "` feet is located on the trunk of this tree. The `.•°• cavity has a significant amount of decay. This x. , cavity likely occurred from a past failure of a ``1 ,,s codominant leader. The extensive decay makes this tree a hazard and the tree is recommended ; . - for removal regardless of construction activity. "Kt' • :''....°-,- The remaining leaders are weakened from the •, La a. large amount of decay. Height/Spread=35/25 rShowing large decay pocket from failed - •i.'• leader s ,.; - ''.•,..17, • #131-Coast live oak(Quercus agrfolia) Diameter-15.0-12.0- •; t 4i` Coast live oak tree#131 is located in the footprint of the .� _ . - proposed home on lot#2. This tree has a dead leader and has a r A9 ,A,': declining canopy. The dead leader has started the decay ,'# � 4' process and can fail without warning. The declining canopy e ;. mayindicate root rot issues. This tree was originally given a ,`1, • r l �• g Y condition rating of 50, but after further investigation the tree "*: _ #'I now has a lowered condition rating of 40, making it a poor tree. "` . • , Height/Spread=40/35 0; ';' r`l, + 'M *4 Showing dead leader •Y J 4 A -,,f, .4P � , � I f i 0 10800 Magdalena Lot#2- 5/26/16 (3) ' x: , .,,.�. #133-Coast live oak(Quercus agrfolia) > 3�. A ' ' Diameter-19.4-Coast live oak#133 is located in the footprint of the proposed home on lot#2. ;, '� k This tree leans at a 45 degree angle to the south +j" • s and has been damaged bya nearbyfailed tree. ,� 1 This tree was given a condition rating of 40 .•Ille 4" .. making it a poor tree. Large leaders have failed on this tree in the past and have open the tree to decay. Because of this trees poor form r its structural integrity is compromised. This _. Ct.: ' tree is a hazard to the property and should be ,w removed. Height/Spread=30/30 . Showing heavy lean and areas of past failures with decay. • �' 3`' . y ': 44 ' `444''' 3 .- #134-Coast live oak(Quercus agr,folia) 1-, saw . Diameter-16.5&19.1- Coast live oak#134 is • I' in the footprint of the proposed home on lot#2. '`` ' - This tree lean at more than a 45 degree angle. ,,i, The tree is codominant at 3 feet with decay at 3 h` 'r_ feet. This tree because of the combination of T' ' !': ' 'P' ` ' - decay and the lean is not suitable for y - .- ` • E.. . .- preservation as it is a hazard to the property. - • -; This tree was given a condition rating of 45 • .s 44 ''-' ' ''' * making it a poor tree. Height/Spread=30/40 , Showing heavy lean of tree #134 k)liiii 11'. R Yc 10800 Magdalena Lot#2- 5/26/16 (4) z #135-Coast live oak(Quercus ' �- . alitt:`'," agnfolia) Diameter-18.5- Coast live ., # oak#135 is in the footprint of the proposed home on lot#2. This tree A.k. . ..4 ', .- WI .-%‘a 1 1 1••.e • has a dead top, with a large amount of decay at 5 feet from a failed . leader. The tree also has a heavy va ' ' f r lean to the south. This tree should be .. ' �. ,_- ;. �, , removed as it is a hazard to the ;e 4; :- ;- it , , ;,, ..4r'` ' property. Also this tree is to be 4 ;�.. •�'" . removed to facilitate the proposed f : • ':t-:; = '' •=� construction. This tree was ,f - ` ` , f.• ; originally given a condition rating of x • - 50, but after further investigation the y f• '� = AT . .. vi condition rating is lowered to 40 • Showing dead top making it a poor tree. Showing decay HHeight/Sprea4=30/40 The above oak trees are the only oak trees proposed to be removed to facilitate the proposed construction of lot#2. There is a high number of remaining oak trees left on the property. All of the oak trees proposed to be removed are poor trees. The architect has designed the new home in a way with the least amount of trees possible being removed. All of the proposed trees to be removed are poor trees with significant defects. Remaining trees proposed for removal to facilitate the construction of lot#2c A #130-Bay tree (Umbellularia cal+fornica) Diameter- . '- -Ire 11.7-Bay tree #130 is in the footprint of the proposed ...-%'-. home on lot#2. This tree was given a condition rating .i. - • •, � of 40 making it a poor tree. A nearby failed oak tree has '' • : " _ damaged this tree, as a large oak limb has failed on top A •• _ degree angle of this tree. This tree leans at a 45 as a , . t result of being heavily suppressed by the surrounding ` _ forest. The tree should be removed as it is not suitable ,l • 4 :' for preservation. Height/Spread=30/30 : . Showing heavy lean and failed oak limb in canopy 4 � ". 4' 10800 Magdalena Lot#2- 5/26/16 (5) #132-Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) Diameter- , 14.4- Monterey pine tree #132 has poor form as the • tree is codominant at 15 feet. This tree is slowly declining as no supplemental irrigation has been supplied to this tree. Monterey pine trees have been 6- slowly declining throughout the Bay Area as they et i16;.-1.- usually usually succumb to bark beetles as a result of drought lk ` stress. These trees also have a short life span at • ''`'.-'°'• around 60 years. It is recommended that this tree be l :,4 removed as the tree has a high fire danger. Height/Spread=30/25 a Showing poor form of pine tree#132 Impacts to the surrounding trees from the proposed construction: Coast live oaks#55 and#58 are all in close proximity e to the proposed asphalt driveway. Below are the ''`,= _ e distances for each tree from the proposed driveway: = 414 #55- 6 feet ' y #58- 8 feet ler �• _ - sa . .+ v * 1114 , - White stake represents location of proposed . 4 driveway y , . r. f r The proposed driveway is to be an asphalt driveway. Excavation should be kept at a minimum for this driveway near these tree in order to reduce potential impacts. Excavation must be done by hand in order to expose the roots in this area when working underneath the dripline of these trees. The site arborist must be on site when this work is to take place near these trees, in order to document, inspect and to offer mitigation measures. Large roots over 2 inches in diameter to be cut must first be inspected by the site arborist. If possible roots will be bridged over, or asphalt poured over the roots, in order to not cut any roots. Impacts to these tree will be minor as asphalt driveways tend to require minimal excavation. 10800 Magdalena Lot#2- 5/26/16 (6) Coast live oak trees #121-123 are also in close proximity to the proposed driveway. The proposed driveway in this area will require a retaining wall near these trees. Below are the distances for each tree from the proposed retaining wall. #121-3 feet #122-12 feet #123-12 feet The proposed retaining wall near these trees is necessary to facilitate the construction of the driveway. Before making the cut for the retaining wall, a trench must be dug by hand in combination with an air spade near these trees, in the same location as the retaining wall. The trench must be a dug to a depth of 2 feet, while leaving all roots intact. At this time the site arborist will be on site to inspect, document,and to offer mitigation measures. The exposed roots will then be cleanly cut using a hand saw or loppers. This will reduce unnecessary root loss as using heavy machinery would likely rip roots and have the roots splinter back farther than necessary. If remaining roots are to be left exposed, they should be wrapped with burlap and kept moist in order to not have the roots dry out and die. Tree #121 must be heavily pruned in order to reduce heavy end weight, before the retaining wall work is to take place. Pruning shall not exceed 25%of the total foliage. This tree has a heavy lean over the proposed driveway/retaining wall. Once this tree has been pruned a cable shall be installed to the closest most structurally sound tree in order to offer extra support for the heavy lean. The pruning of this tree should take place every 3 years in order to keep the weight off of the heavy lateral limbs. Impacts to this tree will be minimal if the above steps are taken. Impacts to trees #122 and #123 are expected to be minor to nonexistent as the proposed work is a good distance away. Coast live oak#125 is 6 feet from the proposed home. Before excavation is to take place for the proposed homes foundation, a trench must be dug using hand tools in combination with an airspade in the same location as the foundation to the foundations depth. All roots will remain intact during the digging of the trench. At this time the site arborist will be on site in order to document, inspect and offer mitigation measures. If rooting is heavy in this area the foundation near this tree should be redesigned to a pier and grade beam foundation in order to save as many roots as possible. Roots will be cleanly cut were needed. Impacts from the proposed work near this tree are expected to be minor if the above steps are taken. The existing driveway will be removed. When removing the driveway near protected trees, hand tools are only to be used. This will ensure unnecessary root injury does not take place. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty David P. Beckham Certified Arborist WE#0476A Certified Arborist WE#10724A Supporting Photos: " R ' Ste`. -1' 414tviiiiiior y . am 1 • •{ i :•;t•- 1 • ••;','• ..4,"01.4_,xi% ip :, . j Yv1§ 5t A' 1 S� t , a r `+. v, < ; ,a-.t,. • - i tom t. 8 10111 , A #• *,.g, w 4 t YR' 413 � r a 1AI .. icrir .. , ,4 NIX;A.,,,,,‘ iiii'Vi_.4 •AC 4j7:;:jill"qr---IIT::7:: . 1. __-- ..0 _ -111E-Z., -,.. 4i : . Decayed area on Coast live oak tree #54 .. %lg. .• • ., 21_- • 4 ' ... ., ., PA . , *. i . • . . * : `a 1 ,w • , it 4.-41'14 . ..., ..... - . / . .. /L. idrip, , ,„.'. 'A •'- ..` !PaNIL-4.4 - * .. 1! tto •e#t „ 1 'i 4.711:191' 7466 '44' , 411,•111e-. 04 44N. 4 4 . .JIL.,of.' . . •..., 1 / t • . ... ,,,,. ,. , • 1r oti* iv ' • 1.•IV, . I , ' lit-It, -, ' '1 •• • g . 11.,,i ' kV *o -..."at- , •-.- v 44 ,i- / `,. - ,'. _... • itil' No . . „. . .._ .. - , rimy ••' S.• .4,- 4 4. `71kr' 4 411 Pro ••• 4 4 0, ivx• , -. i„.. Ir.!'..... e• 4t*It( ,;... " tire • _ 41 A . I * "•, 41.4.-, _ . / .e, 4 1 -- 0.• 10 1 01111111.„,,10 4 -.. . • ., .. ,_...„, -0 iT70 Nip 7 Pr ' di it .# / re ' •• e ' "° tlc',`•.4, • f t :41t -4t .. 4,, - .. -, . t ,..% 1, 4, r:44p iii ,..- • i .• 'N. i• i .... NO 1.,.. •E 7P 4 tif 'c b . 41 i 17 . ot. 440 ......( P'Ilit e , tg.......-N ., 4 .. ..; gi ...4± t it if •, , 0 11144 *"' ..-4 < to ifteolow , 4 ,y,' 44•4! k ) itilt I r ti , ,---- A 4 . Dead leader on Coast live oak #131 • • b�, • , k. V s �1 .,� .7 Y,r 44 4 a .;• +. igglItt .. :sem ,;! - „�, *ea.. r � :t•- .i...51 ,;:ilk„ �' y .• „lit;.. •. .. T =• - -, IJV• _ h -C.'Fbas r . .VI' .• 4r Y e. M Y. • `. , f j . , ilirN OP i . Showing heavy lean and decay from past failures on Coast live oak tree #133 ` �y, t �• ~. r ~ � ••��� • • `• t ' , •% til• •! � }: • M �► "L .+,t w 44014 SV..' yy kW. ., 10, . ! 1 , `/ y y N.• bv `!;t js' Showing heavy lean of Coast live oak tree #134 ` Showing dead top on 1 r Coast live oak tree #135 f a V Ill v *It - .f- . . — • 'f.. ..r a_. X + 4iiks1/4 Y = ♦ 4 V v, • • , '� r G *c..':, V . •* y ;. +1s 4e—' ` '> r -.#: 4 • lit C y yea // �, 4 ` ZZ r ;a sir h Showing decay on Coast live oak tree #135 , • , . ...1. .,;..-- .., h N‘1/4... sot,. .. ,,, , ,,,,,..,,,,- ... r. ,,,....tr, ... , -, ,.... _ . . ,, , ,,, 1.time.... - ..d. • . , • • vt,„:•4 - • . ‘ 1 , , ,4„ - -., • .- l -,i, ......t , I.. •,_ -14 . • , . •••-- . s".-....„ , •-. . , . • ?IP -iit`r4f,"- ,I 1, .. .__ * r . : ,".1,.,411, li,A. -••14• 4 . , - , , ,"All•._•• • _lee. ' ''• . .• ..‘ 4,444 Nta \-P, "'-. ..."'..*'''. '" '''. Mir P- li L ,,,._ , . ,,',-- ,•,,, - : • "'s 96. .•. - '. ' At'''.- (8.....IP --111".. .•"',' -4 Mr• 4, ,,. , ..,.A „.... ,.....iiiik. • 1.•• . '1? , ‘ ., - Tr c . . r . ..- ,. *1 -S4.4.- ' . - ,. 1,. ,, 1 . , ........, i . , , ., .........._. / ..„.01‘1111 ..• . ...:ti„,, ......... •k,..A.4.. # • N..,,,:todif, - • ''IV ' g .*.,- .... . 'IP -,'- • _ % f bill'i• ,. A •...m.lori..,.....,ts. .4 e.' • • .. • .• \V • '4-. .." •'.... ..."- * - , . •••. ., ...• . - ‘.... 's• . ,.:. °,. P P • . -.......„ ..„. 4 A 1. 4....relk4 ' 3 ,. ' t • ...- -. ‘ _ 1 . , , i -A-- 4 _' • A: ••• y.. • , -, , L of 4 "7- '• . • libb :.. -4.imp' •-' • b:Ii ; ...... .. v ,.-..i, `4•7,ii•l--tr' _ •.,,;*1. •,,„,.t. 111,11 ' , „, •,..,. • . ),.„ ,.•1 ; II IV* $4...' P'' i 40.1 • •'' •'... 1 A31,14-..,„- ,1 14...„ s.14 le 1,44.-11 0- % , 4. • ..1$4•.1'. ' '-11114 Y.:NI :41:011•114 - ‘!,. .-1.)*, Pif f ;:-..." • Kt •Ir '.. . • .'' • .'. r No , • ....4„ti• .40,•*. •- '44...lit 4*•• - '. ' i • '....) '.I r ..r• 4 ':• .I. • . . •f. - b • - •\ tbto ' b - .. ' •;,;, -., '-- ' i 4 '' ,.•"...4%, .• I . . t. ,,.. . ... 1 f.1 3. t •" I, . --... r , ,iii VII -,• ?... *I . \ le' \ , 1," ----• ' y-... ",. / , . . ...•- t., r '„ ri • , - -,fri.A.;_t'I /ON. : I -.,... :•.46,..t....„,t420_,-- vy\y - , , . •, • . .' - A • ' '7',' .e1.- it .rAr A.Allt" • .041 to, c• .Ji . 1:-. .....e_,„ ___, , • .:,i,' ‘ f 4- It. - • • •i 4.,.1" .. i ,.. s n •- , Ilk Showing heavy lean and failed limb in canopy of Bay tree#130 t, , s, .4,,:y1:i . • r 44116 "* p1 .i P 0 •'M .. f IV L • •.. . v vp. I. , ms` s ^ se , ` . y„ Ni illikt'l. -* irir f , +► ` - 40°1:1; - : f a7' v w eh •koNs R 0 1 �Zy'T+ S f i + ilkipp , 4, 'se _ji , .. _ , i.} e ? ,. 1 f .,r.l� — it sro7 �P. il, �y` a`• A •tom •. `- 1 Showing poor form of Monterey pine tree #132 x 1 ) v tij tfigi,. �'` fie- _ M' '-V4'. I' ' 4; ♦ e '#Iid! ..�i • . . - ,4 .' - a ' r a ' q _:.. _ ` f : -r?, . notiripik, IF ith...,-.:.'ff. VII it ` ,}ter;11 I-3 . , ire. T* ,..- -14, I ril 46 - - t •• 11 4* .41 , . a A r " - . ' 4% - - i ,; a , N. •• - , is .-. , ,k rf ,Ska:NS CI .0 Sa • -, '......I. v ,..,..--7__../ ..___ moz-0 • ___.• -- _ _ 11131.310 AM/Da MU . -----__ - _ 11101.1 NM minx, omormiess moo•MAN,. •1, . ..., _ ' • • "Wu.'oi.1.',30) VA W ITV 111•11100 semi op ,,-'---..? - - ----... . _ -7-----/c, 11.01/0/0111:011011.1110.01013 1 t vI.•••.....".--'''" -., C/i, WV DM 0111131441 MIL.WM 413 ._. ..) ... c....), r2/04 NA WOO MOWN NOW:111111.111.00 1110A•III •-•-... ---""--..__ 1•44 1 -" t• -- . -- ".•_/ / n ‘• Ak•.1 T.% __________ .___...._ _.. . . . ft-L.10 lot 111. .._ • ---m----........, _ \ - area049 - • - f - T--A.`.'- , . Otrollte to tar -dal III --*--, • -•" - t•- V.1.111.01 on " -1re1 VI Co • • . POO. 111.100 37.•VV. .10 LOY 0111311 3111 r•MO 1 CO '''''''.... CM' . si_iiizz.w 111.1m.a..24 ••WI fled/1600506:1101 Oe.11p, - . •••••• "WM/ /' '`."7.11 Ca 111.111131011.1 GO. ->7,••••;„ ._.„ ' .• . 124/ •-•__ -."111 . -.. . . - xy. • VIIIIMIAM 7. iLt.' '..- .,,.1.'.. r,' ..",.4 ', --Qt.. .t...ILWISsztot-1.--z..... _ 136efforava 10 - - 0.336.13 Erna 1/rel anuON 411 NON 1.03.6011% 7-1, -.4-. n , t, ',/' 4.4 I ---73•4'-*---.1 ...r. 1 ' / ' 1 . l' - _ WOWS 11•01 31.13 501/00.6/100 01403.0,61. 1,11,41.014 • . Oc".. M. 7 aki losurrO m lainto 1._./' 301111/101/•MI:• • • --/..'...., 1 pf/ I:ce' Ore ...• - • . C.;- i • 33sW4WHAI °""°;;1411%??6,L34P2A Eft 0•11.• i -..., .,..,‘ • •• ; ,•• . c=-5-i Ii • ,__ ____, \ ., Te.6.anzi• L. ' vorks "t4 .1 ' / fillta"-, a-...-!--- '.---- \,,,/ -0111.0.11130111.0•13=VS 1 V VT • ' - •.4r. ,f• 114 ''' , ''•-? t • • ' ''••• •ThNIMI1ream '". 0.1.31.11111.111d . ....se .f...T MOO.1..1110d ., .i, •- ' l' ,-9 '61111000'Ott •111411.111-1110,01 7-. - •••••••••......... _ 47-••••••••••-4 ••11.s34.1,_a,...._\/ r. Ono,0 VII AO 04141V0d111.1 MAW,..16131 11'11/.610 - -•-•-•......... ----.._ . '''s. 4,- , 1.1, (4,....p• -.41111, .... ▪ 1,•• .„, . , - t--t 031.01000.N1 COMM 011331V ONNA•3'•••110363.0 AM, .11 • I.4WL . SO VONVOCIN-IMMO 03•16,01.30 TV*C).1311V•Ot S/13111 11„..., /1011:1C,l193100-31.1.3 V.10 SAS 0/5.•113011/5••r=SO r". .„, '1.•.‹,., ._ _•:••'-' • . •,....: - 13c - ____ C 1 . •••• i , ilasigw.--,- i .',- , .1.1-„,• v Tea . i / .1110/6 0111011."WO•00111rIeltlet0 713,316',3 VITILP,A1103 I ''...1/4„,:, . ,.••••,-,,t. , - ,.. illia L..ii;"iiiliara0 . ...r ,i 4....,... •••1:1 0.1Alrlinriter.161313 6.210/071116:00 MU 61.1 STATiV•6111 NI , ti .... ys,,n N'n.k, ... • .,a Niz / ' le, Al SII 30.11V0S11110.0.4111V 4000101110)•01•9 IMMO:Morel ,,...„,„‹. •••••."..-...,,,e,ti• " ,i.e., -116-1:1100101 01115 GOV.3,100 oorne um : - .... •••/ ••• • .......Ne.,,,kit ,,__ ‹:-•, ' ee,--- f . . - ... \ 7 . -..',' , i"..• 2. •-_. - 01333;11.711161/31. t - . • • • et - . ,-,-',*'.,--1• --4,'," -.._. e ,ity,va .- 4\•. '`--- - . -:.;._ ‘'..• v- _• `I's.- . ,-‘94-.._ N'it.tril> - • _ '4 --41 tviV37,Ko'rr.t2717•1-1=7.1"-S:loW.12<R> -!... g \sa..- - •••N... - ,, ......___.--.. ' '"' Etr -- -- __„____,_ ib/ ;',4„,,, • '1,'••• 170.1630....Non 7.Atil 0310.33 1/4"-• --•''' k ' ,,,,,,.:.4$ '' --v• orZij .A\ %-N',L-tit..._(4_,_,....1 - ---. •••• .. 4 4 ilAi. --, \ ,...n.t...01)01 esn rs,003 issurri-C NO TV/SIN . ss rer-no.n.sr savvervas 10nue 0 tos,tad rt./or.t(1)4 \\.7's ' rs,. ,.\!:,,,, • \ • --si . ... •1•43.•• ••••••••14.44.",..1-44 irL............r. ...., -1- -- I / '1.•Vlibb,____,-wolt ' 2..1 10dranrie INNS.Mon tor 136.01 vet,n(N)yrs.. Ill '• _ „ -.... ,.e•,,,,- \„,7-... -it.4v-,,.. .,0 ---,--0.' •A_,....,=_. .". ------ar,-„:,_.__ ,__ __,.___ .4,-, .zit....1-.' / ..•,., 7."7,v, 1 , • ... 0011.11ra 1.0561.11.1 101"IMO 7.4•0.1 0 al Tf101,CI)I....,1:10,,SI muss.0 I.tOsoo0..11-01€, ..*47a0 ••,': ....•''' .e, ' ',3'''C'•.'4%. -, •.N‘ i (•••) cm iv Orr 3.1...NA 041.433 OW 0,cons.In,.0,yszNyzes NA,OVI If CI'S rf 1,11 V.':(3)in ratwvos sononor•-;.. • • _. 7."1,"•,:.•*-•,,I.,•.. 1 2,.. t...rs CM..OIC-406)0.,rOrto,O31/7 01.'0,3./..ssts31(1.)nriren • \\s ".\7 \ • • \ a t> =De sl•=‘,•[*:1 *• • • '4 = LI-0 in.,n q-,,,....-1...-s•7,-,.04 3.1.01.03,-.4k, ottrelo,1 VenOrn Mar Vara riVr 3....1 160S tlin To1610-v.- 4* .\\-. \ '- \ : 's•.,.. Ntr,4- -4"'"'"' .... ii..!••'- ''''':,, -. 4 0 r.,, •.-3 3.13143 NO 3 116130 3.rarea 1,01.0.0n0"I'Vrts.71 00.r..11<4,it Q . ..:-.',...-- ..... r g/iII,.....0SSI....N..a..D...,.•0cEEn 4g7>X).'•••i• 1.2N"161'M0.3'.06IOW'n1te.r'0 C'IOvu1nrPtOZIsW3s1oU0c\.s1eV0NaV03.a101.r1.eraoslO0aeltLn.r6sO.rV-r10 .0e.ftt3.M1n030.1'00 TPS-rsaOoCnnsilr•,ovw.iMS"1n irOo.VsstTLeT'S1aM.Z•Nr1lHm1i0OI.-,10l110/ee 4*'4Cn.•)Y •1I\1'4I..;•'',..'-1"..\• ,\‘„.V...."\,„,..•,•1..•1,(3,.31.0•S' :./02•1•3:1\e..1•1'.,••0..' •-,••'tt.s r,e\'r'•e ','",.•-1- - N. .is• •••‘-•s....ior.t- -'......• - -.•.•-......-„., .,. s,q-,-l-A.,\_.•.__ci,1,, •....•c.•,•,..,,,-•-.A• .. I.II.NA-C'--'-r'ee1.17.-1-•. n .O,„. r, s.1• ,c ' . ••,._.....• .‘.. ..• _ 1. .,•, ..---...•.•t 6 N Mle 0 5 Irl.11000 erU0 10000'4 .-3 00 1001e • \ • - •, 160 123.NO rr00 3. ram.0.110.1 00 Ml s N \ •• \ - - . - .3 - 14503140oMsrz0.306S ' \\ \ •• " _ . . e . ie 0 Nw0001001030 010Y50 00.4310 1 s \ 4. - ' .•.. '..n.... •-.-:-.-..s ....".•s..'.,•t ..".•..-... .•.•,1 ...1.,.' aoll " 4 ' _ W . . . . - / 0 es•NO.40•3s0Nces643sorrn10VASCIon •70/S,0 .- O 'cn_ ' 21403013 C, / 2 " : s 4), . , . / C "Ir V 1 01 . 6 ' . - _ ....'..-., ,• .•. ..... 4,.,.,.,.••. '.• .•„. / (j) , '' •••' 16t•-•••••••-, II/1! 63-014)11 10.0,.... ea --. . f • .- .... les 61.re ottSvez ret ION 00 We larf4 SC•11 IOW 10.110,1,..tp.. . • _ 111,11; 50 1000010/1 N soon orni.MINI 131.11•03 A NO TOP. . • -' 'N.••••.".' *' ,,S",7 1,-\ ' •/ .4. . - .. : q? / cl voismi NNW,/,,s, • \ slis 4 0- ,,,,,,,.-,..:,a MUMS NAIL3*01:.7=1.1t12.011 TOON 1,' Cu 11113.11-4131 00 i in . f_s• to)et \ .. • • z4- 0?1011"' eIri '' - ' , . „„, ,2•014. ;= . 3:ZS =tcs 4 . .. .11 . 14rG v.0 AMNOW.CU woman ulii • . 33 • •-._111 I 01-0 Mille II IN13.3 3311-0.010 SWOON Si, %AZ -' • / 2111 Wool tr..111 ir Mane roe Omar.cse aceoleer..z- I az .0 C-S tes e 10.0 n't MAO.Sr*MAX NO Mt. . 01 X 0 \ ' . ,. . s • / 'lb pwo.....s Cr Calm,'0'urn re.,uvwdis aw•moo 0 grow.nre'MM.sonde,."norm.001.Olo MONO ‘ • .. , \ \-', . N '.' '''''' ,, litig NI farmo KV..10.1/0.01_.•torrn.MAO.vrourrs LA 010 0001.00 tz•..en Grum ern 10.03 oe sn - • ... • re0•11 OM Aro orras 3,rwora Woad neva••rol<1. I i PI •VT1 alr.0 NO-1.1.1A11(1.1 1.110..131111.1 A.., , ... '\ 63 =ON 1.0.ilt kVA Ornanste 1.11.11111,Ork.Ivo•I•oa • \ ••1.--'- • _ 10N 1.11.(10-400)0..5 041011/041len 100040*Do Tram 4-•-./A 'eil s, - i -- _ 0C-0 1.33Ne r0.rvira..13.0 NI 5301M110 i •!'• '.'.. .61 UP ortegc'cr'orresJ69174'n'tionr Alt.nrirll1,11,,6'1,13 \ \ _• ..... ....- - - • ,.„, ..Nosson Worm Norms 10000s it et-s ear 1falf h0 NY ,.. ._-.'•t .r.'"I'N.' !,. ., ..1%,,. 103t).4,scram Zen WS.Nres0 neva Lue-NO 00 T.. iii \ -- . .. •.4,,. 1....... NIV2.1C1 Pal OIS - • c... , , • ci ----------- -.... ss `-' 4 t -^... 411/AATTACHMENT 3 ement urbantreemanagInc. 8/1/16 Aron Developers Attn: Navneet Aron 444 1st Street, Suite C Los Altos, CA 94022 Site: 10800 Magdalena Road (Lot 2), Los Altos Hills, CA Re: Tree Removal Request To Whom It May Concern: Assignment It was my assignment to inspect five Coast Live Oak trees (Quercus agrifolia#54, 131, 133, 134, 135) on site and comment as to their status. Summary All five of these trees have serious structural faults that render them hazardous and undesirable. All five trees should be removed and replaced. ►{. - Discussion t This site appears to be long abandoned and maintenance has been deferred, if it was ever done (see image to right). The trees here ,,:; •.a.t are in the same condition as everything else. They were not maintained and have been allowed to fall into disarray as has the • ""`'' property in general. Currently the five trees that I observed are some of the worst on - site and all five need to be removed. Tree#54 has a trunk diameter of 17.5", stands approximately 30'tall and 25' wide. This tree had a large codominant limb failure many years ago that left a giant wound on the main trunk. This limb failure caused a significant amount of decay in the main trunk that currently renders the trunk unstable. The remaining large leader is highly prone to failure. This tree is hazardous and needs to be removed and replaced. t-- • 11Page t650+321+0202 I f408+399+8063 I po box 971 los gatos ca 95031 I urbantreemanagement.com contractors licence#755989 I certfied arborist WC ISA#623 I certified tree risk assessor#1399 Tree#131 has a trunk diameters of 12" & 15", stands approximately 38' v r tall and 35' wide. This tree has a large dead leader in the center of the r" trunk that has rotted into the main trunk (see image to right). From the ..• decay up, the Oak leans severely due to density of the surrounding trees. ,'•`' ^.:!-; Due to the trunk rot and the lean this tree could fail along the trunk. This ":: , ;•- Oak needs to be removed and replaced. } r / .4 4 C ; .'' r? .� 7"i Trees#133 &#134 have trunk i b t.- �. ' x yy , diameters of 16.5"/19" and . 18.5" respectively. These trees t syr. are approximately 30'tall and • wide. Tree#134 has a ,6, codominant leader and at 3' ` above grade. The combination :, --4 --.."1%-v-41‘- of the codominant leaders r r (which has a high propensity for . 3, failure) and the severe lean �; ,"' 4 make this tree unstable and a candidate for removal and replacement. Tree#135 has a trunk diameter of 18.5", stands approximately 30'tall `'• and 40' wide. This tree has suffered limb failures in the past due to lack k.' ,..a of care and there is significant trunk rot (at 5' above grade) and a dead ' . i top. Additionally, this tree has such a severe lean that it renders it --'- unstable and another candidate for removal and replacement. 4 Please contact me should you have any further questions. _ :- Respectfully, , *< 4 `, 701_, // i Michael P. Young 21 it '� • '. ....... „.' -a-4•4,,..,, •.�.1 .. *.� ` .'';,'vn a .':,t,,,,,,,?" w f r I. • rP C , `� s, x,!17 i� 1 A ^ 4 * * • ' % •Iii. ''.•• f ii.:-W.:::''''' , r / ' ..0,..„, _. .4v.--f • .- •174, 111 r � i ,••-- t ;•' •�+ i4r b r,` Wy . • i. .. -t7 ,‹, .„,- ,...,., . • .. . • .. ... . , -g ..--- ' . ,... .„.„4,.... ., . . '.,., •• —..1. • Rr cry ;a • t rti f- •1a ,,,— . -4.1"° lt it •, ,,r. ..(4.., • . 1..... .h.......,,,., 41..., • , • '44 ,,,• ' P : •"j . 1' 1 -1 i ••••- 4"'S gip.: •\ •r 1. ry� - ,, • D - '✓. �. /- - _ - j, a? ,=[ � •mac `'�l _ 1 z -4 i ti . i �t 1_. fAlt —• 2:. IV". , - ••;„ --1 4. ..0.. i jet**. tr 1 .0111r.4* —1,* ,.. , lor ..,4, ,:111,1010 :: w,14 i4, �: fir - •` / ' �'; .^��• / • •1 r " 'Y. • .. , - • )•%.,,' kt •./, •Y �: fir . !game t r,,v , . .,,, i .4 .r-IP 4. r i � ileb ' r .,y , • It . Wit: ,, - XLI ., l; •� rOosaah i ..F - aim ' ' 141k i . k ,iii Y. d 74 r fillfriAlle di leo • 1 -# , a 4 1 Atirx".. •4. Ae Or 1 1 �� - art V4 !tom'• ` " ' 1 ` ' l •-• • `• ' • • .' ' • 44 ( i # e r o fir,. . .._ 4 _- I44 ! i lre't ' 0.! •40. "; v. i IliteT7 . / - ,t- X ? a /C" 1• ' .. � (P.j 1` t i t 9, w j f • s ♦ray, , ''4 .* f `�' 4- �f' I } F� 4 - • A. ":14 h.....0.. i'AT j - 3: 'rt'P' :� R.. 'n if ••4''.i.'• ' etc ` • } it r ...^+! c -,6.,-;',1,-,-,p '1 ••fir.►. ! i �•sY • 4 I • 'I. i„Ri �. > ,•.••:i,DiN.0 _1!� `� 'i \ '� ,P- t . ! ` * .r f r M � �+ �*. ••••• •t, ',�'' . el'` .. 4 l if •' 7 xa. r `. "'''se .t,. . ,,T1� !�+'C��1•:•.. y, r -r \J rA t.* 7------1 - , ,T:y---- • i ♦ „ t.. I. • 4. :y r'vi itis vire t/. ' .n1• y I of j. tr � 4.y •41 wr. ' ��i • j' <f —•., ,' - �r f '� '4 � r .4.."..,• = tr • �- .1. .. t a ti 'r ..Y.- Ak'3 Lt NWY ...' .`\' 1t� \, teak , .344.%),:'t S4 a r e '- ;_,," • .. ..•fi.•. - -• ITh r_ ' �� � . • P• �; • '� far r � ! • • 1 affwKti :.i'*Y ` I . .1 . . , , •••• ' • • 4 t, r. ,a\ 't'Irk , ... �. -.1 . •� -`• s"t r ;., s, - , r r • f } - . . r i 4 - s- . i . 1•.".... a r'C , •-.W • .•1 i, -T.✓ 1 +a-c. c Y t . /J , ' ' $` I• 'M ' r . .. it ? .Y ,f• •1 .T ., Yy " r ' `�•• ..�rJ "tea y r J. ••err , •'iekt .1,'� n'� " i :t •♦ w 1, , t• r i * '. ' ' • .,.... ... • A i*„ 1-,1, '' . t, ti p .", • , 4 . .--4,0 !..,A44.4.: ,„.„1, ,..!.7*. i +► r �, r tom• �• $-4,1 Irl -rA� . ii; 4A�' f I �r r� 4► .} • .fit. i - ,...k. 'A *.'n‘,.%,144,7 .; V-66. .1, . ;a.m.:' Si :: 11411hr S ♦ A �, ., ` t • j a L . 9 s` -. S_ mptrC c 7 t . . 4r• 1 • "', 011: . . ., .4), • 1,41* . fit „ilk 4_, ....ii...- elt..... ! ..,",_ /.?.. . .1 ' � , I �. 4. * - _ --�1. " _. ~.,` i• } r . ---`. .tit` ` 4.-N. • ,.., ')' , .I . . . fte- .-*1 -• '0 . • ' , ♦�. >• • `1 1 lam' a \It qt • y}'es. -t T .T,..4 -rte • .• _ - r i ; 7, - ��Ot Town Of Los Altos Hills ATTAC 4, 6T 4 Fast Track Hearing Report Project Description: New residence File Number: 66-16-ZP-SD-GD Site Address: 10888 Magdalena Road Owner(s): Edward Samuels Staff Planner: Steve Padovan, Consultant Planner Attendance: Suzanne Avila- Planning Director Steve Padovan - Consultant Planner Ed Smith - Environmental Design and Protection Committee Nancy Couperus - Environmental Design and Protection Committee Kjell Karlsson- Environmental Design and Protection Committee Navneet Aron—Representative of Property Owner Robert Dowling—Representative of Property Owner Jerry Crowley—24747 Olive Tree Lane Kitty Jau— 11020 Magdalena Road Environmental Design Committee Comments: General comments regarding protection of oak trees and the removal of two trees in the previous plan. Current design has only one tree being removed with an alternative driveway design that may preserve the tree. Pathways Committee Comments: Not present. Previously recommended payment of pathway in-lieu fee. Neighbor Comments: Mr. Crowley stated his support for the project and asked about connection to the public sewer through the subject property. Project Issues: The new residence meets all the minimum code requirements. All but one of the large amount of oak trees on the site will be preserved and substantial landscape screening will be provided to reduce future visual impacts and increase privacy to adjacent properties. Conditions of Approval: • Standard conditions of approval with modifications were recommended and approved. Planning Director Approval: File#66-16-ZP-SD-GD (Lands of Samuels)has been approved by Fast-Track Review on June 14, 2016, subject to the attached conditions. / / Suzanne Avila, AICP, Planning Director Date Project plans are available for review at the Town of Los Altos Hills Planning Department, 26379 Fremont Road. Phone for information: (650) 941-7222. Town Of Los Altos Hills June 21, 2016 Fast Track Hearing Report Project Description: New residence File Number: 50-16-ZP-SD-GD Site Address: 10880 Magdalena Road Owner(s): Edward Samuels/ADL 5 LLC Staff Planner: Steve Padovan, Consultant Planner Attendance: Suzanne Avila-Planning Director Steve Padovan-Consultant Planner Ed Smith-Environmental Design and Protection Committee Pat Ley-Environmental Design and Protection Committee Robert Dowling—Representative of Property Owner Betty Reed— 10779 Magdalena Road Jim Reed— 10779 Magdalena Road Environmental Design Committee Comments: Provided comments on the protection of oak trees, the dedication of an open space easement on the upper slopes of the lot and the coordination of development between the three lots. Open Space Committee Comments: Not present. Previously recommended that owner grant an open space easement over slopes exceeding 30%. Pathways Committee Comments:Not present. Previously recommended payment of pathway in-lieu fee. Neighbor Comments: Mr. and Mrs. Reed asked about the drainage improvements for the new residence and stated concerns with existing stormwater runoff that flows down Magdalena Road and drains onto their property. Staff explained that the new residence would have less impervious surface areas and that Public Works will be contacted regarding the stormwater runoff. Project Issues: The new residence meets all the minimum code requirements.No oak trees will be removed as development is occurring on the site of the existing home and an open space easement will be recorded on the upper slopes. Also,landscape screening will be provided to reduce future visual impacts and increase privacy to adjacent properties. Conditions of Approval: • Standard conditions of approval with modifications were recommended and approved. Planning Director Approval: File#50-16-ZP-SD-GD(Lands of Samuels/ADL 5 LLC)has been approved by Fast-Track Review on June 21, 2016,subject to the attached conditions. / / Suzanne Avila,AICP, Planning Director Date Project plans are available for review at the Town of Los Altos Hills Planning Department,26379 Fremont Road. Phone for information: (650)941-7222.