HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.13.1
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS March 1, 2007
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND
VARIANCE TO ALLOW TWO SURFACE PARKING SPACES AND A TRASH
ENCLOSURE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK; LANDS OF ZANJANI
AND SAFFARI; 24624 SUMMERHILL AVENUE; #90-06-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
FROM: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission:
Approve the requested Conditional Development Permit and Variance, subject to the
recommended conditions and findings of approval in Attachments 1, 2, and 3.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is a .52 acre parcel located on the west side of Summerhill Avenue.
The irregular shaped lot was created in 1951 (ROS Book 35, Page 3, October 3, 1951),
prior to the Town's incorporation in 1956. The property has an average slope of 15.6%
and a LUF of 0.425.
The existing two-story house on the property was constructed in 1952. Although the
Town has no site development or building permits on file for this property, County
records provided by the applicant confirmed that the existing house and driveway were
constructed with a permit. (Attachment 6) Based on the proof of permit for the house and
driveway, the property has a legal nonconforming MDA of 7,576 sq. ft. Additional
development on the property including a swimming pool, wood deck, and concrete patio
me located within the property line setbacks but no permit records were found for these
nonconfonning structures.
The applicant is proposing to remove all of the nonconforming structures on the property
and rebuild the existing house at its current location with 692 sq. ft. of additional floor
area Due to the constraint on the size and shape of the lot, the applicant is seeking
approval of a setback variance to allow two surface puking spaces and a trash enclosure
to encroach within the side yard setback.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
As required by Section 10-1.1104 of the Zoning Code, this application for a new
residence has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. A
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
lands of Zanjani and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 2 of 12
Conditional Development Permit is required any time a proposed project is located on a
property with a Lot Unit Factor (LUF) of 0.50 or less. Pursuant to Section 10-1.1107(3)
of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission, in reviewing a Conditional
Development Permit application, determines whether the proposed development meet the
objectives and standards of the Town by considering evidence in support of four
necessary findings.
In addition, the Zoning and Site Development sections of the Municipal Code are used to
evaluate new residences including building siting, floor and development area limitations,
grading, drainage, height, setbacks, visibility, and parking requirements. The evaluation
of the proposed variance should include many of the same items, concurrently evaluating
the physical site conditions which result in an undue hardship on the property.
Recommended findings for the Conditional Development Permit and Variance are
included in this staff report. (Attachments 42 and 93)
DISCUSSION
Site Data: Gross Lot Area: 0.482 acres
Net Lot Area: 0.482 acres
Average Slope: 15.6%
Lot Unit Factor: 0.425
Floor Area and Development Area:
Legal nonconforming MDA.
Site and Architecture
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Development Permit for a 4,060 sq.
ft. two-story residence with an attached garage. The main level of the new residence has
2,577 sq. ft. of floor area and includes a living room, family room, dining room, kitchen,
breakfast nook, three bedrooms and three bathrooms. The lower floor has 1,483 sq. ft. of
floor area and contains a 2 car garage, an office, a recreation room, two bedrooms and a
bathroom. Proposed exterior materials include painted stucco, vinyl windows, and
concrete file roof.
Maximum
Existing
Total
Existing
with Permit
Existing
w/o Permit
Proposed
Remaining
FDe,elopm,,t
6,350
10,526
7,576`
2,950
7,576
0
4,250
3,368
3,368
--
4,060
190
Legal nonconforming MDA.
Site and Architecture
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Development Permit for a 4,060 sq.
ft. two-story residence with an attached garage. The main level of the new residence has
2,577 sq. ft. of floor area and includes a living room, family room, dining room, kitchen,
breakfast nook, three bedrooms and three bathrooms. The lower floor has 1,483 sq. ft. of
floor area and contains a 2 car garage, an office, a recreation room, two bedrooms and a
bathroom. Proposed exterior materials include painted stucco, vinyl windows, and
concrete file roof.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjani and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 3 of 12
The proposed two-story residence meets the height, floor area, development area and
setbacks requirements established in Title 10, Zoning and Site Development, of the Los
Altos Hills Municipal Code. The maximum building height on a vertical plane is 25' and
the overall building height is 26.5'.
Driveway & Parking
Access to the property is provided by a driveway at the northeastern comer of the lot. The
garage will provide two (2) parking spaces with standard dimensions of 10' x 20'. Due to
the small size of the lot, two (2) outdoor parking spaces are proposed in the side yard
setback and will require a Variance.
Variance
The applicant is requesting a Variance to locate two required 10'W x 20'L outdoor
parking spaces and a 4'W x 9'L trash enclosure area within the side yard setback. In
order to approve the Variance, the Planning Commission must find there are exceptional
or extraordinary physical circumstances on the lot that create a practical hardship for the
applicant to comply with the provisions of the Code.
�F
vaa4:.::,ma�r ✓�
..:Aer
Setback Variance for two o d K
surface parking spaces 00
and trash enclosure I at
O ,
' N
too r>
- ---- - W *T I
1
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjam and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 4 of 12
Due to the topography, irregular shape, and substandard size of the lot, there is a very
limited building area to accommodate the required parking spaces and trash enclosure
outside the setbacks. The surface parking spaces will be located over an existing legal
nonconforming driveway towards the rear of the property and encroach up to 27 feet into
the side setback. The trash enclosure, with convenient access to the mud room at the
northwest comer of the house, is also placed at the rear of the property and encroaches up
to 6.5' within the side yard setback.
Since the two surface parking spaces are located over an existing driveway, it will not
result in new impervious areas which contribute to increased runoff. In addition, the
structures will be separated from neighbors by landscaping and screened from their view.
Given the irregular shape and small size of the lot, the only available remaining area to
locate the parking and trash enclosure is in the front yard east of the new residence.
However, placing the surface parking and trash enclosure in the front yard would result in
additional grading, removal of screen vegetation, and negative visual impacts to the
neighbors by placing the structures in clear view of the street and neighboring properties.
If the Commission decides to approve the variance request, findings for approval
(Attachment 3) should be cited. If the Commission decides to deny the variance request,
staff should be directed to prepare findings for denial and make the appropriate revisions
to the conditions of approval.
Geotechnical Review
The Town's geotechnical consultant reviewed the plans and noted site constraints
including expansive soils and artificial fill materials on the property. The project
consultant has evaluated the proposal and has provided geotechnical design
recommendations that satisfactorily address the geotechnical project design concerns.
Consequently, the Town's geotechnical consultant has prepared conditions of approval
for the project as designed. (COA #'sl3a andl3b)
Outdoor Liehtine
The applicant is proposing seven (7) exterior lights on the new residence and five (5)
louvered step lights on the stairs leading to the front entrance of the house. The wall
mounted light fixtures have frosted glass covers to minimize glaze and to ensure that the
source of the ligating is not directly visible from off-site.
Trees & Landscanine
Existing landscaping on the property includes an orchard in the front yard, several large
redwood trees along Summerhill Avenue, and various trees and shrubs along the south
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjani and Saffari.
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 5 of 12
and west property lines. In addition, a dense hedge located on the adjacent neighbor's
property to the north lines the edge of the driveway and provide screening between the
two homes.
No trees will be removed as part of this site development proposal and all existing
perimeter landscaping will be preserved. A landscape screening plan will be required
after final framing of the proposed residence to ensure that adequate screening is provided
around the property. Furthermore, any landscaping required for screening or erosion
control will be required to be planted prior to final inspection, and a maintenance deposit
to ensure viability of plantings will be collected prior to final inspection.
Grading and Drainage
The project involves minimal grading because most of the new construction will occur
within the existing building pad. Pursuant to Section 10-2.503, Drainage Facilities
Standards, of the Mtuticipal Code, the Engineering Department has reviewed and
determined that the proposed drainage design complies with Town requirements.
Fire Department Review
The Santa Clara County Fire Department is requiring the construction of a standard 14'
wide access driveway.
Committee Review
The Pathways Committee recommends the construction of a Type IIB path along
Summerhill Avenue.
The Environmental Design Committee had no comments.
CEQA STATUS
The project is categorically exempt under Class I of the State CEQA Guidelines
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recommended conditions of approval
2. Findings for approval of the Conditional Development Permit
3. Findings for approval of the Variance
4. Site Map
5. Worksheet#2
6. County Development Record for the Parcel, 1966.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of7anjani and Saflari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 6 of 12
7. Recommendations from Santa Clara County Fire Department dated May 26, 2006
8. Recommendations from Cotton Shires and Associates dated September 26, 2006
9. Recommendations from Environmental Design Committee dated June 21, 2006
10. Recommendations from Pathways Committee dated June 26, 2006
11. Development plans: site, topographic, grading & drainage, floor, elevation, section,
roof, and lighting plans
cc: Jahan Zanjani and Ensieh Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
Los Altos Hills, CA 94024
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjani and Saffan
24624 Summerhill Avenue
Much 1, 2007
Page 7 of 12
ATTACHMENT 1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A
CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE
LANDS OF ZANJANI AND SAFFARL 24624 SUM3,lERHILL AVENUE
File # 90-06-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
A. 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. After completion of rough framing and prior to the time of the pre -
rough framing inspection by the Planning and Engineering
Departments, the applicant shall submit a landscape screening and
erosion control plan for review by the Site Development Committee.
Particular attention shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to
break up the view of the new residence from surrounding properties and
streets. Particular attention shall be paid to landscaping that will help
break up the view of the house from the adjacent properties with the
reduced setbacks. 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.
3. 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.
4. Prior to beginning any grading operation, all significant trees are to be
fenced at the drip line. The fencing shall be of a material and structure
(chain-link) to clearly delineate the drip line. Town staff must inspect the
fencing and the trees to be fenced prior to commencement of grading. The
property owner shall call for said inspection at least three days in advance
of the inspection. The fencing must remain throughout the course of
construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be allowed
within the drip lines of these trees. Existing perimeter plantings shall be
fenced and retained throughout the entire construction period.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjani and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page B of 12
5. Prior to requesting the foundation inspection, a registered civil
engineer or licensed land surveyor shall certify in writing and state that
"the location of the new residence and roof eaves are no less than 40'
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 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 foundation inspection.
Prior to requesting the final framing inspection, a registered civil
engineer or licensed land surveyor shall certify in writing and state that
"the height of the new residence 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 based,
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 structure." The applicant shall submit
the stamped and signed letter(s) to the Planning Department prior to
requesting a final framing inspection.
7. Air conditioning units shall be located a minimum of 40' from the front
property line and 30' from the side and rear property lines.
8. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on the approved plans. No lighting
may be placed within setbacks except two entry or driveway lights.
Lighting 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. Any additional outdoor lighting shall be approved by the
Planning Department prior to installation.
9. Fire retardant roofing (Class A or alternate if approved by the Building
Official) is required for all new construction.
10. Skylights, if utilized, shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted
light (tinted or colored glass, or other material). No lighting may be placed
within skylight wells.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjani and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 9 of 12
11. No new fencing or gates are approved. Any new fencing or gates shall
require review and approval by the Planning Department prior to
installation.
12. All properties must pay School District fees to either the Los Altos School
District or the Palo Alto Unified School District, as applicable, before
receiving their building permit from Los Altos Hills. The applicant
must take a copy of Worksheet #2 to school district offices (both the
elementary and high school offices in the Los Altos School District), pay
the appropriate fees and provide the Town with a copy of their receipts.
B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
13. As recommended by Cotton, Shires & Associates, Inc., in their report
dated September 26, 2006, the applicant shall comply with the following:
a. Geotechnical Plan Review — The applicant's geotechnical
consultant should review and approve all geotechnical aspects of
the project building and grading plans (i.e. site preparation and
grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for
foundations, retaining walls and driveway) to ensure that their
recommendations have been properly incorporated. The
Consultant should consider minimum reinforcement of he piers
including four #5 bars, in conformance with prevailing local
standards.
The results of the Geotechnical Plan Review should be
summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and
submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to
acceptance of documents for building permit plan -check.
b. Geotechnical Field Inspection — The geotechnical consultant shall
inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of
the project construction. The inspections should include, but not
necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface
and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for
foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and
concrete.
The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the
project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter
Staff Report to the Planning, Commission
Lauds of Zanjmi and Saffmi
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 10 of 12
and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final
(granting of occupancy) project approval.
For further details on the above geotechnical requirements, please refer to
the letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates, Inc., dated September 26,
2006.
14. 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 dining 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.
15. Final grading and drainage shall be inspected by the Engineering
Department and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Departmem prior to final approval.
16. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed
underground.
17. 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 jtr 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 fust 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 arid shall be replanted prior to final inspection.
18. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be
submitted by the properly 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 Summerhill Avenue and surrounding roadways, storage of
construction materials, placement of sanitary facilities, puking 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
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands ofZmjani and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 11 of 12
Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a
franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town
limits.
19. 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 ofplans for building plan check
20. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed and to be roughened
where the pathway intersects, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior
tofinal inspection.
21. The property owner shall dedicate a 30' wide half -width public right of
way to the Town over Summerhill Avenue. The property owner shall
provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a registered
civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the
dedication document. The dedication document, including the approved
exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned
to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check
22. The property owner shall submit two copies of type a 23 pathway plans
for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to acceptance of
building plan check
23. The property owner shall construct a type 2B pathway along Summerhill
Avenue to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to final inspection.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT:
24. The applicant shall provide an access driveway with a paved all weather
surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 14', vertical clearance of 13'6",
minimum circulating turning radius of 36' outside and 23' inside, and a
maximum slope of 15%.
CONDITION NUMBERS 13a, 17, 18, 19, 21 AND 22 SHALL BE COMPLETED
AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE CITY
ENGINEER PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR
PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Lands of Zanjani and Saffari
24624 Summerhill Avenue
March 1, 2007
Page 12 of 12
Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the date of this
notice. The building permit cannot be issued until the appeal period has lapsed. The
applicant may submit construction plwns to the Building Department after March 23,
2006, provided the applicant has completed all conditions of approval required prior to
acceptance of plans for building plan check.
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 Conditional Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date
(until March 1, 2008). 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
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A
CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE
LANDS OF ZANJANI AND SAFFARL 24624 SUMMERHILL AVENUE
File # 90-06-ZP-SD-CDP-VAR
The site for the proposed development is adequate in size, shape and topography
to accommodate the proposed intensity of development, including all structures,
yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping, walls and fences and other such
features as may be require by this chapter.
The new two-story residence on this .52 acre parcel has been designed to fit
within the floor area, development area, building height limits, and site
topography. The new construction does not change the existing intensity of
development but rather reduce up to 2,950 sq. ft. of excessive development area
by removing the nonconforming pool and pool deck, wood deck, concrete patio
and portions of the driveway. Due to the constraints of the substandard lot size, a
variance is requested to accommodate two required parking spaces and a small
trash enclosure in the side yard setback.
2. The size and design of the proposed structures create a proper balance, unity
and harmonious appearance in relation to the size, shape and topography of the
site and in relation to the surrounding neighborhood
The new residence is designed to create a proper balance and harmony with the
surrounding neighborhood. The house will be rebuilt at the same location and the
majority of the addition will occur at the rear of the house and will not be visible
from the street. The applicant is proposing to remove all un -permitted structures
installed by the previous owner and reduce the excessive development area to
comply with the MDA for the property. The removal of nonconforming structures
within the setback will result in additional open space between the homes and
enhance the rural character of the site and the neighborhood.
The rural character of the site has been preserved as much as feasible by
minimizing vegetation and tree removal, excessive and unsightly grading and
alteration of natural land forms.
No existing trees we proposed to be removed. A landscape screening plan is
required to ensure that existing trees and shrubs will be supplemented by new
landscaping to adequately screen the new residence, soften its visual impact, and
preserve the rural character of the site. There will be minimal grading because the
new construction will occur within the existing building pad on the property.
Page I oft
4. The proposed development is in compliance with all regulations and polices set
forth in the Site Development Ordinance.
The proposed residence is in compliance with all regulations and policies set forth
in the Site Development Ordinance. However, due to the small size of the lot, two
required 10'W x 20'L parking spaces and portions of a 4'W x 9'L trash enclosure
area will encroach within the side yard setback and require a variance.
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE
TO ALLOW TWO PARKING SPACES AND A TRASH ENCLOSURE
TO ENCROACH WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK
LANDS OF ZANJANI AND SAFFARL 24624 SUMMERHILL AVENUE
File # 90-06-ZP-SD-VAR-CDP
Because of exceptional and estraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict
application of the provisions of this Title is found to deprive such property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classification.
Due to the topography, irregular shape, and substandard size of the lot, there is a
very limited building area to accommodate the two 10' x 20' outdoor parking
spaces and the 4' x 9' trash enclosure outside the setbacks. The width of the
building site on this irregular shaped lot tapers from 84' to 35', considerably less
than the width of most one acre properties. Therefore, the strict application of
setback requirements would deprive the owners of privileges enjoyed by the
previous owner and by other properties in the vicinity.
2. Upon the granting of the variance, the intent and purpose of the applicable
sections of the Zoning Ordinance will still be served and the recipient of the
variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding
property owners.
The granting of the variance would serve the intent and purpose of the Zoning
ordinance because the applicant is substantially reducing the existing
nonconformity on the property. The encroachment of the parking spaces and trash
enclosure into the setback is necessary to accommodate the proposed development
on the unusually small lot. The two surface parking spaces are located over an
existing driveway so it will not result in new impervious areas and increased
runoff. In addition, the surface parking will provide a total of four (4) parking
spaces on the property as required by the Municipal Code.
The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate
vicinity and within the same zoning district.
The granting of the setback variance will not adversely impact any neighbors
because the parking spaces and trash enclosure will be separated from neighbors by
landscaping and screened from their view.
Page I of
4. The variance will not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly
authorized by the Zoning District regulations governing the parcel ofproperty.
The proposed parking and trash enclosure areas are uses that are consistent with the
residential zoning designation of the property and would be compatible with
existing land uses in the surrounding areas.
Page 2 of 2
ATTAOM q
al
¢
Q
a
•^,
O
h
Y
o
_
IL
f
N
I
IL
Q
N
W
A a
U) o
--
-
�
{6
'o
O
m
J
i F
C
rvwEa'iav� u+_�
y
-
7
J
3J-NOW
l3-_-S
ATTACHMENT 5
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
263N F�mrA Rma-Ls Aaoe Hilla, CA 91022 -(650P41 -7222 -FAX (650P41-3160
WORKSHEET #2
EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA
TM IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME JAHAN ZANJANI
PROPERTY ADDRESS 246245UMMERHILLAVENUE
CALcutnTEDBY PH A550CIATE5 JDATE 05/01/06
1.
DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
Existing
Proposed
Total
A-
House and Garage (from Part 2. A)
3,368
692
4,060
B.
Decking
1,202
(1,202)
0
C.
Driveway and Parking
3,303
(503)
2,800 ✓
(Measured 100' along centerline)
D.
Patios and Wallcways
1,082
(498)
584
E.
Tennis Court
0
F.
Pool and Decking
1,571
(1,571)
0
G.
Accessory Buildings (from Part B)
0
0 67`(
H.
Any other coverage covered porch
132
132
TOTALS
10,526
(2,950)
7,576
6Z,
Maadmmn Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1)
6--,e0' ✓
Existing
Proposed
Total
2.
FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
-
A.
House and Garage
a. 1st Floor
1,932
645
2,577 '
b. 2nd Floor
C. Attic and Basement
958
47
1,005
d. Garage
478
0
478 1 -
B.
Accessory Buildings
a. 1 at Floor
0
b. 2nd Floor
0
C. Attic and Basement
0
TOTALS
3,368
692
4,060
Maximun Floor Area Allowed - MFA (from Worksheet #1)
,yso
✓
WN USE ONLY CHECKED BY
DATE
_
+'
LAND VALUE COMPUTATIONS
A.P.N.
• rf+
UNIT VALUE
FRONT IT. VALUE
EITE vuuE
Fu
LAND A TRIBUTES
--
ON wroTx(nTKTIVET
DFRx (EFEE011E)
16iL4@UARE FT. (U9ALE)
oA 90UANf I, (ACTUAL))
105 ACRES
Im RPRESfl1)ATIVf
Mp
Y6
I. IRRWUUR
NO
Y4
in CULDEMC
Mp
{E5
1W NON.TNRU ST
X0YES
1l0 CORNER
ND
Y5
TOTAL PROPERTY SUMMARY
AL1 ALLEY
ND
YES
KEECSMFM YEAR
IS
lE
IIY UTJUTT UNDERGROUND
XO
VES
NFRA S A
CUMSfJITTM
a
YES ,
YMTMOAY YEARIla
IIA GpiNALS
NO
YFS
NO...
Im STREET LIGWS
NO
TOE
116 '"MEET
ISMO VALVE
1]
ll] RNXIMU
IAXES]RR
XO
ITIED
Y6
s
EUYSM 0Y
]m 30WMC COMFDRMIR
XO
Y6
M{EOPSALF
)IS EOMKIACTMLI
WMGTED SALE PRKf
pp VIM
NO
Ym
LMTFp MIF PPoC[
in T1folm WEN 1
3
!
MAMIROATAINDCATDR
Im iMPM iLDX 1
i
3
133 DIST.TDPM.SM. 1
3
1
TOTAL PROPERTY
IZA uNOSWIM 1
z
3
taro MOPFRtt VU W'
la xmNESTE WEST USE
LAxD YALLE
m
IMPROYEMENi VAWE
I CAI6'
13] ACNµ UEF
pt
PERSONAL PROD' VALU[
TOPOGRAPHY
lzl LOX EVFM,
NMN
In DELMORE
.........................................................
...........................
... ......................
........................................................
.... ... ...........
...........................................................
........................................................
.. . . .....
.. .. .......
• • . • • • • .....
.............
... .......
I
... ......
.... ... .. ...
:: ::
.. ... ..
.. I.......
........•...
.. .. ..
..... ......
• ... ..
•
.. ... ...
• .. ..
. ..
..... •...
. .. ... ..
~`..... .. .....
:.
... .....
.. .....
.... ....... .. ....
...... .........
............ .............
.... ............... .... .. ................
.... ... ....... .... .. ........
_ • • • • . • . •
8 1t15..... 8*}�... ....... .. .... ..............
>J ....... .. .....
.......... ...... ....
. ...... .... j�._��... .....:::.::.::..
....... 1:.. ....... '.: .. ......
.. �... ..
..•. ........... ..... ..
�-.� ... .... �...'................
:.::I:::: { :1 .: ' .)\::::............
... ... r \.•
�.�/T
�.• _ .:... .:'l .",J(.....
CJS II ...... .. .... ....:,
Q • �c I...... ....'�.
.I1 Y
���� i.... �... .I: �.....
!N i`'i. 1.^:1
._�.L•_J i .. .. .. .. ....
'
....... L`/... .. ... .... .. ....
.......... ........:: . :::: ...:.:
:.. ...... ..... .... ...... .. .... ...
... ..... ....... ....... .. .... ..
.... ..... ...
... .... ...
..
....
....... .......
...
.. ......
... .. .......
......... ...
• • • .
.. .. ...
......... ...
......
.. ... ...
..........
1..........
`. .. ....
...
Q, �F •:..
a)\.
1 _ ..
..
{ ..
:.1. ....:: '
..1{ .......
�� �\ �, 35Z
LEVEL
1•
NILLY
3
GOIF
y
MM
A
01...
3
NEIGHBORHOOD
in CCCUPIfD Xp
Y6
TREND
lll TREND Z 3
3
IY tiv SERVICEIT El 1 3
3
IN TURATE ) 3
1
Im PLMNWG 1 3
]
1)s Room DEMAIT l z
)
IN REEIDEMULTIREA EE
TICE
IA SINGLETAMILY ND
YFS
19S
Im
TOTAL PROPERTY
ILO 4RGXI]FRURAL ARMti. 1 E
!
111 UWISOFFORMITY L 3
)
1A3 LOT UTT...ON 1 z
3
mi IMPROVEMENT 1 Z19
)
1N TEMPDRARYVALUE
YFS
145 SELECT ONE
PMIIAL COMPL Rf
1
OFt FA..WIXl.
3
ROARO ACpDX
3
CTNER
1AG ARMISAL DRE
H] CLOLOYET No.
AS LAND VALUE
U9 IYG VAWE
ISO IIT. Vllue ROtiRe
U] BASE LOT .UF
MSE LOT PENCE"
BUILDING SCALE I '40 . CALCULATIONS
�-•. 2N/n�T-i .si.�M�'P'Ll / / Q 1/F zo xuLnrLERW,. -
TACT W
MALLS I CRUMcf I M.WS. 1 CS I ESIPLMdx.
A I MMA.
1 Ei.TEIUDR
- --%FWCAAAN
G
MOOR
Elh
nat" F¢TDRFS
FIDOR IMLLE . N 1R6 5T. O.T. M1O. iIItlSM
PAD mala,
IS
.1
FAIR
A.Smom
ilYmO "AREA
FTGL
1!
145RLHROGIf
YMMC EYNELE
Ll
15
IRILM ROSYSWUE
6X0 YLY.
15
CpdN xGT
NO InsmeR
TOAr.T5
MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES
N
cExrRN.opuA
RS xisRppXF
D
ITEM ADX qi 00F L Mf SIZE
URITNST RY11)
GK.IDWGTE
NO YFR
LVGG
IR
GGCE CARTNIS
UCT.-WAL
1a
CA I. __
MOTINME
W
Y
AKF AAPm
5L
STEEL
COST DATA SUMMARY
53
.pPEL xo.
A 1 FOUNDATION
APPRAISER AND
DATE
I
COST FACTORS
WRCAETE YKm
KER
RCT.
ARG Vfllr cost Wsi JUW COSTI COST MRli.OST ;NY
51 I
COST LEVY WE rK
FlRBT FLOOq
ss
DGLITT CLARE
SECOND FLOOR
s5
AREA FOR MOO.
now PROOF
THIRD FLOOR
51
"-XON T.
GARAGE
sR
xxT FLWRT.
Z5 GARAGE
PORa111
59
END FLOOR FACTOR
ooOA w..
GOV. PATIO
I I
I
AS
... FLOORAY
m0 SAWALL'
PATIO
a
SRS FLOP' FACTOR
ATTACNW
FIREPLACE
I I
I
Y
ATTR AM
DUR
HEATI NG" A/c
6l
ATTK FACIDR
WW WG
FLATIIORN
M
FlxaxeYn.AY
UATOVER
IAOEHjION
R
BNRx RSM'). iACipR
GI1gRT
EXTRA HITCH.
66
SPOKISITT.AM
EXTRA PLUM&
RT
WRK.CIT.FASTW
-
yI
6 ..INDOWS
ATTIC
65
WOITIDNAG
D.K MOMM,
R$MT.
61
ADDITION FACTOR
CCRT. ST.
POOL
10
DARACEAG
SLIDE NOM.
HILL CONSTr,
71
G.EFAITDR
LAi Tic
ARM.
n
P...TOTA COST
T A IS
-
n
1 COvdm PATIOCOST
$UD). C
1 11
uKOVCRED PATIO FACT
I 1 BUILT-INS-
176
1 NR-CWOITIORWSL
O ME
I NORMNL0000
17
EXTGRITCNAWSi
INCRd FA
I KLLKO.
)S
diRA PLB6. Lp5R
RDW
1 1171BUILDING
PERMIT ACTIVITY
1711
FLATIRON ARG
e ETP
PEAMTW
DATE
CONTRACTOR OESCNFlIOR- OF NDRR
'AMWRT
Y
I FLATWDA COST
OYER
RI
MISLWST
MISSILE OVER
A
POOL COST
6m1ROKKOVA
Y
MIILSNf LONFTR. CDi1
NOP -10 R X 0
M
RIOF.OIRSO
15
G.GSEYPOSN
N
..........._
SR
RFYXRKS
..
%
FIRE'DEPARTMENT Ear =€
SANTA CLARA COUNTY JUN 0 2
14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95037pj,8"r 1 nest TRS HILLS '"^m• �^^'
14U6I 5/6-4V1V a I4U6l J/b>J4G VI t • wws Ju UIS Imematicnelly Aca ea
A—
P.REVIEW NUMBEX06 1.174
SLOG PERMR NWBER
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS F,,, NNMaER
COOESEC. 511EE1
t7Fc
Appendix
It FA
UFC
902.2.4.1
REONREMENi
of site plan for a proposed 692 square foot addition to an existing 3368
foot single family residence with an att
ached garage.
Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and
water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be
construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with
adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make
application to, and re
ceive from, the Building Departmental] applicable
construction permits.
Fire Flow: The fire flow for this project is 1750 gpm at 20 psiresidual
The required fire flow is available from area water mains an
d fire
I which are spaced at the required spacing.
>,vuaratus (Engine)Access Driveway Required: Provide an access driveway
a paved all weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 14 feet,
:al clearance of 13 feet 6 inches. Installations shall conform to Fire
rtment Standard Details an
d Specifications sheet D-1.
CMy PIANS SPECS
NEW WJOL AS
Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District
Seruing Sana Clom County and th�o .
�e Seenq Mo
CCCINANCY
CONST. TYPE
AppllmnVWn
OPTE
PAGE
LAH ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
RH ASSOCIATES
5/26/21706
1 of 1
SEChLOOX
P11Fd
TARO
OESLflIPTN]N
RY
Residential Development
Rucker, Ryan
NLME OF PROJECT
LOCLTMIX
SFR
24624 Summerhill Av
PHIIII. and�$ambLos Altoa,
Los Altos Hllls, Los Gatos, .4on 9O
M
COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
TO: Debbie Pedro
Assistant Planner
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
SUBJECT: Geotechnical Peer Review
RE: Zanjani, Addition/New Residence
90-06-ZP-SD CDP
24624 Summerhill Avenue
AHAMMM
September 26, 2006
L0226
At your request, we have completed a geotechnical peer review of the subject
permit application for the proposed construction using:
Soil and Foundation Investigation (report), prepared by American
Soil Testing, Inc., dated July 27, 2006;
Architectural Plans (7 sheets, various scales), prepared by RH
Associates, dated August 2006; and
Drainage Plan (1 sheet, 10 -scale), prepared by Nelsen Engineering,
dated February 2004.
In addition, we have reviewed pertinent technical documents from our office
files and completed a recent site inspection.
DISCUSSION
We understand that the applicant proposes to construct additions onto the
existing residence and complete various remodeling. We were not provided with
estimated earthwork quantities, but it does not appear that significant grading will be
required to accommodate the proposed additions. Access to the property is via a private
driveway extending off of Summerhill Avenue in the northeastern comer of the site.
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is located on an east -facing hillside on the flank of a natural northwest -
trending spur ridge. The natural slope is gently to moderately inclined, with an average
inclination of approximately 10 percent, locally as high as 30 percent. Existing artificial
fill underlies portions of the existing residence and surrounding yard. However, the full
extent and depth of fill materials are difficult to ascertain as the only subsurface data
provided by the Project Geotechnical Consultant was loacated west of the existing
residence and outside of the proposed building envelope. Drainage at the site is
characterized by sheet flow toward the east, ultimately intercepted by storm drainage
facilities along Surnmerhill Avenue.
Northern California Office
330 Village Lane
lus Gatos, G 9503U7218
(408) 354-5542 • Fax (108) 354-1852
e-mail: losgatos@cottonsldres.corn
www.cottonshires.com
Central californ;a Office
64171)09tcw Road
San Mdreas, CA 95299-9640
(209) 7364252 • Fax (209) 7361212
e-mail: cottooshiresgstarband.net
Debbie Pedro September 26, 2006
L0226
Page 2
The subject property is underlain by sedimentary materials of the Santa Clara
Formation at an unknown depth. Exploratory borings logs provided in the referenced
geotechnical investigation do not identify bedrock materials up to the maximum boring
depth of 12 feet. In our recent site visit, we noted that the existing driveway showed
some signs of minor downslope movement of fill materials, especially near the garage
area. We did not note any signs of groundwater seepage or significant slope instability
on the site.
The site is located approximately 2,100, 3,150, and 4,500 feet northeast of the
potentially active Monta Vista, Altamont, and Berrocal faults, respectively.
Additionally, the site is located approximately 4.2 miles northeast of the active San
Andreas fault.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION
Proposed site development is constrained by anticipated strong seismic ground
shaking, minor creep of existing artificial fill materials, and moderately expansive
surficial materials. The Project Geotechnical Consultant has conducted a recent
investigation and provided geotechnical recommendations that, in general, appear
appropriate for identified site geotechnical constraints. We do not have geotechnical
objections to the proposed layout of site improvements. For conformance with
prevailing local standards, we recommend that the Project Geotechnical Consultant
consider use of minimum pier reinforcement including four vertical #5 bus in a cage.
We recommend that the following conditions be attached to the building permit
application.
1. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's Geotechnical
Consultant should review and approve all geotechnical aspects of
the project building and grading plans (i.e., site preparation and
grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for
foundations) to ensure that their recommendations have been
properly incorporated. The following items should be specifically
considered by the consultant:
As mentioned above, the Consultant should consider
minimum reinforcement of the piers including four #5
bus, in conformance with prevailing local standards.
The results of the plan review should be summarized by the
geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town
Engineer for review prior to issuance of building permits.
2. Geotechnical Field Inspection - The Geotechnical Consultant
should inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical
aspects of the project construction. The inspections should
include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and
grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and
excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the
placement of steel and concrete.
COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Debbie Pedro September 26, 2006
Page 3 L0226
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.
LIMITATIONS
This peer review has been performed to provide technical advice to assist the
Town with discretionary permit decisions. Our services have been limited to review of
the documents previously identified, and a visual review of the property. Our opinions
and conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles and
practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in beu of all other warranties,
either expressed or implied.
DTS:TS:JS:kd
Respectfully submitted,
COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
Associate Engineering Geologist
�yICEE\G�1'795, fin/ _ -
David T. Schrier
Associate Geotechnical Engineer
GE 2334
COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC.
�DITI0N iv `TA -(j(
New Residence Evaluation
Environmental Design and Protection Committee
Applicants name and address:
ATTACHMENTq
Date: 6—Z -4 -OG
7-4-624 sumnevl7t,l( &e_
Reviewed by: P � , SA� Z�'t , (LO bbi'✓ NU�(,t
Site:
6t -
Grading:
Creeks, drainage, easements:
Existing vegetation:
Significant issues/comments:
ATTACHMENT o
No PWC meeting in July, 2006
PWC Meeting June, 26, 2006
�I. 24624 Summerhill Avenue (Lands of Zan"ani . e reason for pathway �-
rewew is rem e ; e omeowners were present and addressed the committee.
This is a restricted lot (about one half acre) with a wide (approximately 8-10 feet), tarmac -lined drainage ditch adjacent
to the roadway. Four or five large redwood trees and a number of mature shrubs are growing on the homeowners side of
the drainage ditch. It is not known whether Santa Clara County or the Town of Los Altos Hills owns the drainage ditch. It
is not known whether the road right-of-way extends for 30 feet or 50 feet from the center of the roadway. The Town
apparently has requested and been given pathways from the county in the past. It was suggested that the ditch could be
replaced with a 1 -foot diameter pipe and covered over as was done for the several other properties on the street,
including the adjacent property. The roadside path could then be located on the filled-in area beside the road.
An alternative would be to leave the open ditch, trim back the trees and shrubs and run the pathway on the side of the
ditch closer to the home. Pros and cons of potential pathway locations were discussed. Anna Brunzell moved that a IIB
path be required on 24624 Summerhill Avenue, the final location of which is to be determined by the LAH Town Engineer,
Henry Louie. Bill Silver seconded; the motion passed unanimously.
ii. 13241 Burke Road (Lands of Mohazzabi). The property owner, Mr. Bruce
Mohazzabi requested that the PWC review their recommendation made June 27, 2005. At that time, the PWC
recommended that a IIB pathway be constructed on this property along West Sunset. The reason for original pathway
review and recommendation was new construction.
The lot is at the corner of Burke Road and West Sunset Drive. The property drops off steeply from the edge of W. Sunset
Road, a private road that curves uphill beside and behind the property. The recommendation of the PWC on June 27,
2005 was that a IIB pathway was required along W. Sunset. No path was required on the property along Burke. Mr.
Mohazzabi said that he had been told at the June 2005 meeting that the pathway would not need to be 5 -feet wide along
its entire length. Mr. Mohazzabi recently met with Town engineer staff and was told that the recommended IIB path must
be 5 feet wide along its full length. Because this will require construction of a substantial retaining wall, Mr. Mohazzabi is
appealing to the PWC to construct a 3 -foot wide path, which would require a smaller retaining wall.
The pros and cons of a 3 -foot versus a 5 -foot pathway and the issue of public access to private roads were discussed. Bill
Silver moved that Town Engineer, Henry Louie visit the lands of Mohazzabi at 13241 Burke Road with the property owner
and determine how high retaining walls would have to be to construct 3 -foot wide and 5 -foot wide pathways along W.
Sunset. Mr. Louis is requested to prepare a drawing and present it to the Pathway Committee.
The vote was 5 for, 2 against, and 1 abstention.
iii. 28020 Laura Court (Lands of Yang). The reason for pathway review is
construction of a new construction/remodel. The lot is at the end of a cul-de-sac that already has an existing pathway on
the lot opposite 28020 Laura Court. Nancy Ginzton moved that because no off-road paths are served by the Laura Court
cul de sac and an on -road path exists on the opposite side of the cul-de-sac, no on -road pathway be required at 28020
Laura Court and that the Town collect an in -lieu fee. Anna Brunzell seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
iv. 12669 La Cresta (Lands of Sutardja). The reason for pathway review is
construction of a new construction/remodel. A IIB path already exists on the opposite side of the La Cresta. Anna
Brunzell moved that no on -road pathway be required at 12869 La Cresta and the Town collect an in lieu fee from the
property owners because no off-road paths exist on this property and an on -road path exists on the opposite side of La
Cresta. Courtenay Corrigan seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
v. 24855 Prospect Avenue (Lands of Jones). The reason for pathway review
is construction of a new house. Courtenay Corrigan moved that no on -road pathway be required at 24855 Prospect
Avenue and the Town collect an in lieu fee from the property owners because no off-road paths exist on this property and
an on -road path exists on the opposite side of Prospect. Sue Welch seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
B. At the request of the City Council the following properties were
3