Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.13.1 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS April 5, 2007 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR A TWO -LOT SUBDIVISION: LANDS OF RYAN, 14350 MANUELLA ROAD. FILE #181 -06 - IS -ND -TM. FROM: Brian Froelich, AICP, Associate Planner APPROVED BY: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director That the Planning Commission 1. Review, make comments, and forward a recommendation that, based on the Initial Study, the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program in Attachment 3; and 2. Forward a recommendation that the City Council approve the requested Tentative Map, based on the findings in Attachment 2 and subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment 1. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The following discretionary actions by the City Council are required for approval of the subdivision: 1. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program 2. Approval of the Tentative Map The Planning Commission's actions are recommendations to the City Council. TENTATIVE MAP REVIEW In order to approve a subdivision, the Planning Commission must determine that the project is consistent with the General Plan, Subdivision and Zoning Regulations, and that none of the findings for denial can be made, as specified in Section 66474 of the State Subdivision Map Act. Staff has prepared findings for approval of the project (Attachment 2). Comments on the Tentative Map have been received from the Town Geotechnical Consultant, the Town Engineer, Santa Clara County Fire Department, PG&E, the Environmental Design Committee, and the Pathways Committee; and are attached for the Planning Commission's review. Neighboring residents and property owners within 500 feet of the site have been notified of the public hearing. Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 2 of 1 l ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared for the project. The review period for the Negative Declaration will end on April 18, 2007. The Planning Commission may comment on both the Negative Declaration and the Tentative Map. The Negative Declaration must be adopted by the City Council before approving the Tentative Map. In order to recommend adoption, the Commission must find that all potential significant environmental effects are addressed through the proposed mitigation measures. Recommended mitigation measures include geotechnical review of site development plans, site-specific drainage improvements, site-specific erosion and sedimentation control, and observation of State and County requirements for handling archaeological remains and artifacts if found. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a two -lot subdivision on a 2.27 net acre parcel located at the comer of Manuella Road and Alicante Lane. The property is surrounded by residential properties developed with a mix of one and two story dwellings. The site is generally flat with an average 3.5% slope that descends east to west toward Manuella Road. The existing parcel is currently undeveloped. In 1999 the Town approved a demolition permit for all structures on site (pemtit#9979). A Tentative Map for a 2 -lot subdivision was previously approved for this property by the City Council in May 4, 2000 (File 305 -99 -TM -GD -ND). The owner at that time did not file a Final Map and the Tentative Map approval expired. Existing Development Table Proposed Development Table Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 3 of 11 Lot Design and Building Sites Lot 1 is 1.269 net acres with a slope of 3.3%; Lot 2 is 1.001 net acres with a slope of 3.7%. The tentative map shows a 160 -foot diameter building circle on each lot, showing that each contains a viable building site. Sheet 2 of the Tentative Map shows conceptual site design, building footprints, driveways, and drainage installations. This development is conceptual but shows that both lots can be developed to meet Town standards. Utilities Water supply will be provided by Purissima Hills Water District. Both parcels are to be connected to the Los Altos Basin sanitary sewer system. PG&E will provide gas and electric services and SBC Communications will provide telephone service. All utilities are required to be underground. The two joint poles on and adjacent to the site along the northern boundary will be required to be removed and the utilities placed underground. Access Driveway access for Lot 1 will come from Manuella Road and Lot 2 will come from Alicante Lane. Both roads are public. The Santa Clara County Fire Department requires a 14 -foot -wide paved driveway for each dwelling with a maximum slope of 15%. Additional study of the proposed driveways will be undertaken at the time of site development plan review. In accordance with Section 10-2.1202 of the Municipal Code, the Town Engineer is recommending the dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way along the Manuella Road frontage as shown on the Tentative Map. This will provide the minimum required 30 foot half - width for the right-of-way. (Condition of Approval 5) Geotechnical Review The Town's Geotechnical Consultant, Cotton, Shires and Associates has reviewed the proposed Tentative Map and Geologic Investigation (November 6, 1998) provided by the applicant (Wayne Ting Assoc. November, 1998). Cotton, Shires and Associates reported that the Project Geotechnical Consultant has adequately characterized site conditions and recommended appropriate geotechnical design criteria for future residential development on the proposed lots. Cotton, Shires and Associates recommend approval of the Tentative Map with requirements for additional investigation related to future residential development of Lots 1 and 2. (Conditions 1, 2, and 3) Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 4 of I1 Drainage The Town Engineer has required that both lots tie into the Town's storm water system. Connection to the storm water system is subject to a fee set by the Town Engineer. Conditions require that a final grading and drainage plan to be submitted for review prior to approval of the Final Map. All required drainage fees and improvements will be paid or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map (Conditions 6 and 7). Subdivision Committee The Subdivision Committee comprised of Commissioner Harpootlian, the Planning Director, the Town Engineer, and Planning and Engineering staff convened on March 13, 2007 to review and discuss the subdivision proposal. Pursuant to Section 9-1.509 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code, neighbors within 500 feet of the property were notified of the hearing. A summary of the discussion at the Subdivision Committee meeting is provided on the fact sheet and hearing report (Attachments 7 and 8). The issues discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting are as follow: 1. A neighbor, William Downey, Debell Road, commented that his property and backyard have views across the subject property and he is concerned about the loss of view from the future development on the adjacent property. Staff notes the following in response to the preceding comments: Mr. Downey, the applicant's representatives, and staff met at the site on March 19, 2007. It appeared that Mr. Downey's view concern is for the area over the rear or eastern half of Lot 1. The applicant noted the neighbors concerns and indicated that they intend propose a single story design in this area to help preserve the neighbor's view. This issue can be more accurately addressed at the Site Development stage of a proposal for Lot 1 when the Site Development permit is proposed for a new residence. Environmental Design Committee The committee reported that both lots are devoid of existing screening and that both lots will likely require substantial screening when developed. Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 5 of l l Pathwav Committee The Pathway Committee recommends construction of a Type II -B path along Manuella Road and Alicante Lane in the right-of-way. The path will span the entire road frontage of both lots and be separated from the road by a minimum of five feet. (Condition 11) Open Space Committee The Open Space Committee had no comments on the proposed subdivision. The site contains no creeks, slopes over 30%, or areas marked as Open Space Preserve or Open Space Conservation Area on the Land Use Diagram. Based on the Initial Study, staff has concluded that the proposed subdivision, as mitigated, will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Negative Declaration identifies specific mitigation measures and establishes a Mitigation Monitoring Program to address the potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study. Staff has also concluded that, as documented in the recommended findings of approval, the proposed subdivision is in compliance with the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance, and would allow development to occur that meets the provisions of the Zoning and Site Development Ordinances. 1. Recommended Conditions of Approval 2. Recommended Findings for Subdivision Approval 3. Initial Study, Negative Declaration & Mitigation Monitoring Program 4. Cotton, Shires and Associates report, December 7, 2006 5. Santa Clara County Fire Department comments, October 19, 2006 6. PG&E letter, October 12, 2006 7. Subdivision Committee hearing fact sheet, March 13, 2007 8. Subdivision Committee hearing report, March 13, 2007 9. Environmental Design Committee comments, October 12, 2006 10. Pathways Committee minutes, October, 2006 11. Tentative Map plan set (Commission only) cc: Eric Peterson Pacific Peninsula Architecture 718 Oak Grove Avenue Mcnlo Park, CA 94025 Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 6 of 11 ATTACFIMENT I RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR THE TENTATIVE MAP -TWO LOT SUBDMSION OF A 2.27 -ACRE PARCEL LANDS OF RYAN, 14350 MANUELLA ROAD FILE #132 -06 -IS -ND -TM -GD GEOTECHNICAUEARTHWORK 1. Updated Geotechnical Investigation — The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect the site and update the previous geotechnical investigation in order to address any changes in site conditions or in prevailing standards of professional practice. Any supplemental investigation warranted for specific proposed improvements shall be completed. This updated report shall include, but not be limited to the following items: • Appropriate UBC seismic design parameters, including seismic coefficients (Na, Nv, Ca, Cv), shall be calculated and provided. This updated report shall be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to acceptance of documents for building permit plan -check on individual lots. 2. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall 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 shall verify that the latest adopted Uniform Building Code seismic and geotechnical design parameters have been utilized in project design calculations. The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Geotechnical Plan Review - The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of project construction. The inspections shall 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. Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 7 of I1 The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final (granting of occupancy) project approval. LAND AND EASEMENT DEDICATION 4. The applicant shall relocate or abandon existing public utility easements and grant new public utility easements where needed to all utility companies for utility construction and maintenance, including but not limited to: SBC Telephone Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Comcast Cable Television, and Purissima Hills Water District. The dedications shall all be completed in conjunction with Final Map approval, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5. The applicant shall dedicate right-of-way on Manuella Road to the Town of Los Altos Hills to create a 30' wide half -street right of way as measured from the existing centerline as shown on the tentative map. The dedication shall be irrevocable and the road right-of-way shall be located to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. IMPROVEMENTS 6. A grading and drainage plan which includes an erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer as part of the subdivision improvement plans. This plan shall conform to all standards adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills and shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES Permit relative to grading and sediment erosion control including but not limited to: a) restricting grading during the moratorium from October 15 to April 15 except with prior written approval from the Town Engineer; b) protecting all finished graded slopes from erosion using such techniques m hillside benching, erosion control matting and/or hydroseeding; c) protecting downstream storm drainage inlets from sedimentation; d) appropriate use of sediment rolls to retain sediment on the project site; e) any other suitable measures outlined in the ABAG Manual of Standards. 7. The on-site and off-site drainage improvement shall be designed as surface flow whenever possible to avoid concentration of runoff. The proposed drainage shall be designed to maintain the existing flow patterns. The applicant shall design and construct all subdivision drainage improvements as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. All required drainage improvements shall be constructed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. 8. Both lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public water system to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Purissima Hills Water District. Services shall be installed to the property lines or be bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. An encroachment permit shall be required to be issued by the Public Works Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 8 of 11 Department for all work proposed within the public right of way. Any necessary fees shall be paid prior to the recordation of the Final Map. 9. All existing and proposed utilities located within the subdivision that serve the subdivision shall be placed underground, in accordance with Subdivision Ordinance, Sec. 9-1.1105 (two joint poles along northern property boundary). Cable television, gas, electric, and telephone services, to the property lines are included in this requirement. Plans for the location of all such utilities are to be included in the improvement plans for the subdivision. Improvements shall be installed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. 10. Both lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public sanitary sewer system. An encroachment permit must be obtained from the Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right of way. Services shall be installed to the property lines or bonded for prior to the recordation of the Final Map. 11. A Type IIB pathway shall be constructed along Manuella Road and Alicante Lane. The path shall be separated from the edge of pavement by five feet minimum, and to meander around trees and power pole as necessary. Improvements shall be bonded for or constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map. 12. A grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the subdivider for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to issuance of any permits for subdivision improvements. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian safety on Manuella Road and Alicante Lane; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; puking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 13. Improvement plans for the subdivision shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to commencement of improvement work. These plans shall conform to all standards adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills. 14. All subdivision conditions of approval and subdivision improvements shall be constructed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of any site development or building permits. 15. Any, and all, wells on the property shall be shown on the Improvement Plans, shall be properly registered with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), and shall be abandoned, capped in accordance with the SCV WD standards. Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 9 of 11 PLANNING AND ZONING 16. Payment of park and recreation dedication fees and all other applicable fees shall be required prior to recordation of the Final Map. The park and recreation dedication fees shall be provided in accordance with sections 9.1.1403 and 9.1.1404 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. 17. The applicant shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by construction of the subdivision improvements to pathways, private driveways and public and private roadways prior to final acceptance of the subdivision by the Town. The applicant shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to recordation of the Final Map. 18. Prior to beginning any grading or construction operations, all significant trees shall be fenced at the dripline; and shall be of material and structure to clearly delineate that dripline. Town staff must inspect the fencing and trees to be fenced prior to starting grading or construction. The fence must remain in place throughout the course of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be allowed within the driplines. All large and heritage trees shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible. Any proposed removal of heritage trees is subject to public hearing. 19. Upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced by human skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site may be made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the County Coroners Office and the Planning Director, as may be necessary during the construction of the subdivision improvements or individual lot development. 20. The addresses for the two parcels shall be assigned and approved by the Town as required by the Santa Clara County Fire Department and in accordance with Town policies. 21. The new residences on Lots 1 & 2 shown on the Tentative Map Conceptual Development Plan are conceptual only, and no approval of any residence is indicated by approval of the Tentative Map. Site development applications for the new residences shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. FIRE DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS 22. Driveway access to each parcel shall be installed prior to commencement of any construction on that lot. Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 10 of 11 23. Plans for new residences shall be reviewed and approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department at the time of site development permit application. Conditions that may be applied at that time include, but are not limited to, providing an acceptable water supply based on the size of the new residences, providing an emergency vehicle turnaround, placement of property address signs that are clearly visible from the right-of-way, and providing an approved access system if the lots are fenced and gated. Planning Commission Lands of Ryan April 5, 2007 Page 11 of 11 ATTACHMENT 2 RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR THE TWO LOT SUBDIVISION OF A 2.27 -ACRE PARCEL LANDS OF RYAN, 14350 MANUELLA ROAD FILE #132 -06 -IS -ND -TM -GD 1. The subdivision as proposed would create two lots: Lot 1 would be 1.27 acres in size, with a Lot Unit Factor of 1.27; Lot 2 would be 1.00acres in size, with a Lot Unit Factor of 1.00. Each parcel would provide a viable building site. In this and all other respects, the lots conform to the Los Altos Hills Subdivision Ordinance. 2. The proposed subdivision would create two lots that would meet the General Plan guidelines for land with an average slope between 10 and 30 percent, and in all other respects will be consistent with the General Plan. 3. Access to the proposed lots will be provided from Manuella Road and Alicante Lane, both public roads. Adequate services including water, gas and electric, telephone, fire protection and police protection are available to serve the subdivision as described in the staff report and the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. Future development on the two parcels will require connection of each parcel to the Los Altos Basin Sewer System. 4. All lots as proposed on the Tentative Map are physically suitable for the proposed future development. The Town Geotechnical Consultant has indicated that stated concerns can be addressed by adherence to the Project Geotechnical Report and conditions of approval for the project. It has been determined that each of the proposed lots contains a suitable building site, and that the proposed density is consistent with the General Plan. 5. All potentially significant environmental effects can be reduced to a level of insignificance as mitigated in the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or to substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. The Town Engineer has reviewed the project and has determined that the design of the subdivision and the improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. ATTACHMENT 3 Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos hills, CA 94022 INITIAL STUDY In accordance with the policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, this document, combined with the attached supporting data, constitutes the initial study on the subject project. This initial study provides the basis for the determination of whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If it is determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental impact report will be prepared which focuses on the areas of concern identified by this initial study. If it is determined that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, it is eligible for a Negative Declaration. If it is determined that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, however, the significant effects of the project have been reduced to a less -than -significant level because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed in by the project applicant, then the project would be eligible for a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 1. Project Title: 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Initial Study prepared by: 4. Project Location: Lands of Ryan Subdivision (2 Lot) (File # 181-06-19- ND- TM) Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, Califomia 94022 Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director (650) 941-7222 Brian Froelich, AICP, Associate Planner 14350 Manuella Road, Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 APN#175-34-004 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Barbara Ryan 789 Encina Grande Drive Palo Alto, CA 94306 6. General Plan Designation: R (v -l) -Residential low to very low density 7. Zoning: R -A (Residential -Agricultural) 8. Description of Project Proposed two lot subdivision of 2.27 net acres to create two new single family residential properties. Lot 1: 1.269 acres; Lot 2: 1.001 acres (net acreage after right-of-way dedication). The existing parcel is undeveloped Access to Lot I will be from Manuella Road and Lot 2 from Alicante Lane. Both lots will have sanitary sewer line service. Water service will be provided by Purissima Hills Water District. All existing and new power and utility lines within the subdivision will be placed underground. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project is located at the northeast comer Manuella Road and Alicante Lane. Surrounding land uses include one and two story single family residence with minimum lot size of I acre. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Santa Clara County Fire Department ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources U Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology /Soils ❑ Hazards @ Hazardous 0 Hydrology I Water Quality ❑ Land Use I Planning Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population I Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance This Initial study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Information and conclusions in the Initial Study are based upon staff research and the Town's General Plan and Municipal Code. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE ❑ DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a 0 significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effmt(s) on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been ❑ addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or " potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately ❑ in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature�Date: Much 29 2007 Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director Initial Study Checklist Potentially Less Th. Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impart Incorporation Impart L AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, L) Ll not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and El historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual Ll L3Llcharacter or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Sources: Conclusion: Aesthetic impacts are expected to be minimal when new residences me built on non. 1,2,5,20 hillside lots with slopes less than 10%,. At the time of any proposed development, the projects will be evaluated on its aesthetic impacts such as structure height, size, setbacks, grading, fencing, nee preservation, landscaping and general design. Furthermore, the Town has established standards for screening and lighting and all new residential dwelling projects and their associated landscaping and lighting plans we reviewed at noticed public hearings. The Town also has adopted standards regulated view and sunlight obstructions. Los Altos Hills General Plan notes "important vistas" and "historic sites" in the Open Space Element of the General Plan. None of these resources listed in the General Plan will be negatively impacted by the proposal. H. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept of Conservation as an optional model in use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Ll El Ll Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, Ll LJ Llor a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to thein location or nature, ❑LJ Llz Ll could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use? Sources: 8 Conclusion: The proposed subdivision will have no foreseeable impact on Agricultural Resources. The site is not being used as agricultural land. HI. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute El ❑ ❑ z substantially in an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable ❑ Ll LJI'7f IJ federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors in substantial Ll D u 10 pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial u Ll LJ z number of people? Sources: 9 Conclusion: Santa Clara County is currently a non -attainment basin for ozone thresholds but achieves an attainment level for carbon monoxide emissions. The net increase of one developable property does not constitute a "considerable cumulative impact'. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified a5 a candidate, sensitive, or special status Ll LJ Llspecies 21 in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited in, Ll Li J 10 marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory U Ll L3 0 wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances Ll L3 Ll protecting biological resources, such as a tree I preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Ll LJ LJ Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Conclusion: There are no riparian areas on the site and no existing heritage oak trees. There is no Sources: anticipated significant impact to native animal, plants, water ways, or vegetation on the site. 1,6,10 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 significance of a historical resource as defined '15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ ❑ significance of ao archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those La Ll L)interred outside of formal cemeteries? IMPACT: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will have no foreseeable impact on Cultural Resources as defined in Title 14; Chapter 3; Article 5; Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act The site does not contain a listed historical building and no known archeological resources exist on the subject property. However, if any artifacts or human remains are discovered during any future grading or construction onsite, work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find per the mi igation measure described below. MITIGATION: Sources: Conditions of project approval require that upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site 3,5,16,19 as evidenced by human skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site may be made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State ❑ ❑ ❑ Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including Ll Ll L3liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of Ll ❑ ❑ topsoil?. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result 0 ❑ of the project, and potentially result in on- or off- ❑ ❑ site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 0 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), ❑ ❑ ❑ creating substantial risks in life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water LJ Ll Lldisposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? IMPACT: Sources: According to the geotechnical investigations prepared by Wayne Ting dated November 6, 1998, 12, 17, 18 potential geological hazards on the property includes seismic ground shaking and liquefaction. Based on the preliminary site fault exploration program, the Project Engineering Geologist has concluded that the low risk of fault trace rupture is negligible. MITIGATION: Proposed residential development will be subject to additional, more design specific geotechnical evaluation as follows: 1. Updated Geotechnical Investigation — The Project Geotechnical Consultant should inspect the site and update the previous geotechnical investigation in order to address any changes in site conditions or in prevailing standards of professional practice. Any supplemental investigation warranted for specific proposed improvements should be completed. This updated report should include, but not be limited to the following items: • Appropriate UBC seismic design parameters, including seismic coefficients (Na, Nv, Ca, Cv), should be calculated and provided. This updated report should be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to acceptance of documents for building permit Ian-check on individual lots. VIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset LJ ❑ LJ accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste ❑ ❑ ❑ within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use ❑ ❑ ❑ airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑ Q airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard ❑ ❑ for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere ❑ ❑ ❑ with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized ❑ ❑ ❑ areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Sources: Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development does not produce a 13 hazard or hazardous waste and will have no foreseeable impact related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The site is not located in an identified location according to CA Government Code 65962.5. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste Ll Ll El requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table Ll L] Ll level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or Off -Site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially El El Ll the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned ❑ ❑ ❑ stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ z g) Place housing within a 100-yezr flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Li Ll LiBoundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area 0 structures which would impede or redirect flood ❑ ❑ ❑ flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of Q loss, injury or death involving flooding, including ❑ ❑ ❑ flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ IMPACT: Sources: 2, I1, 14 The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will have no immitigable impact on Hydrology and Water Quality as defined above. Both parcels naturally drain in an east to west direction. The Conceptual plans show that a retention pond will be incorporated in the drainage design for Lot 2. MITIGATION: The Town Engineer will require a final, detailed drainage improvement plan to be submitted for review prior to approval of the Final Map and will require the future drainage installations to tie into the Town's storm water system. Surface runoff will increase due to increased impervious surface onsite but the proposed drainage improvements will mitigate storm water runoff offsite to a less than significant level. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the ❑ ❑ ❑ general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or natural community conservation plan? Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not physically Sources: 415,6 divide a community. The project complies with the Los Altos Hills General Plan and Subdivision Code. The project is not located in an area denoted as Open Space Conservation Area on the General Plan Map. X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ mineral resource that would be of value to the El region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated ❑ ❑ ❑ on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Sources: Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not result in a 5,6,17,18 loss of mineral resources. The project is not located in an area known for valued minerals. XI. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of prions to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ❑ ❑ ❑ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use L] Ll Llairport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or Ll❑ ❑ working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Sources: 6 Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will have no increased, permanent negative impact on noise standards. Interim construction external noise levels associated with subdivision improvements and future site development will periodically exceed 6OdB(A) but can be held to less than significant by adherence to Town standards for hours of construction. Once development is complete, a minimal increase in the existing noise level that is typical of residential uses will occur. No significant noise impacts are anticipated. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new L3 Ll homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Sources: Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a 2,3 significant impact on population or housing. XHL PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities, the cons Wetton of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ I-7f r7f Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Sources: Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a 1,2,3 foreseeable impact on any public service or facility. XIV. RECREATION -- Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other ❑ ❑ ❑ �Jf Q recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a Sources: 1,2,3 foreseeable impact on recreation facilities. The Town's Parks and Recreation Department will collect an in lieu fee prior to recordation of the Final Map. XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAMC — Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial Ll LlLlincrease in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county ❑ ❑ ❑ congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a ❑ ❑ ❑ change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ ❑ intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ ❑ R1 programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Sources: Conclusion: The subdivision will allow one additional new dwelling and thereby generate an 112,3,5 additional 10-12 vehicle trips per day. The minor increase in traffic is not anticipated to create traffic congestion on existing local roadways. The property owner is required in dedicate a 30-foot half-street right-of-way over Manuella Road to meet Town standards. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑ applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of ❑ ❑ ❑ existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing Ll ❑ ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available in serve ❑ ❑ ❑ ✓❑ the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 project that it has adequate capacity in serve the project's projected demand in addition in the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted L) ❑ ❑ capacity m accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ❑ Li ❑ regulations related to solid waste? Conclusion: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a Sources: foreseeable impact on utility and service systems. Water supply will be provided by Purissima Hills 1,2,3,15 Water District Both parcels will be connected to the sanitary sewer system. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 levels, threaten ro eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects L3 L3 ❑ which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Sources: 1- Conclusion: The proposed project, as mitigated, will not result in a negative impact to the Zp environment, wildlife, plant or historical resource. The project does not have any foreseeable cumulative or unmitigated impacts as defined in this Initial Study. MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS: 1. Supplemental geotechnical investigation reports shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town's geotechnical consultant at the time of site development review for the new residences with emphasis on foundation and other structural designs. The Town Geologist shall also review and approve the subdivision improvement plans prior to issuance of any building permits for construction of the improvements. 2. The on-site and off-site drainage improvement shall be designed as surface flow whenever possible to avoid concentration of runoff. The proposed drainage shall be designed to maintain the existing flow patterns. The applicant shall design and construct all subdivision drainage improvements as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. All required drainage improvements shall be constructed or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. 3. If any archaeological artifacts or human remains are discovered during grading or construction, work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find. Project personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources. Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on form DPR 422 (Archaeological Site) and/or form DPR 523 (Historic Resources). If human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. Responsible Must Be Mitisation Measure Department Completed BY: Done 1. Geotechnical Reports Engineering Site Development Review (Supplemental) Town Geologist 2. Drainage Improvement Plan Engineering Site Development Review 3. Archaeological Findings Planning Ongoing Source List: 1. Field Inspection 2. Project Plans 3. Planner's Knowledge of the Area 4. Los Altos Hills Land Use and Zoning Map 5. Los Altos Hills General Plan 6. Los Altos Hills Municipal Code 7. Assessor's Maps, Office of County Assessor, Santa Clara County, 2005-2006 8. State Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 9. BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines: Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans, December 1999 10. State Department Fish and Games Natural Diversity Database Map 11. Santa Clara Valley Water District Map 12. Geotechnical and Seismic Hazard Zones Map of Los Altos Hills, Cotton Shires and Associates, Dec -2004 13. DTSC Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites List, California Environmental Protection Agency 14. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Los Altos Hills, January 2, 1980 15. Sanitary Sewer Map, Town of Los Altos Hills Engineering Department 16. Santa Clara County Municipal Code Chapter B Indian Burial Grounds (Title B Division B-6) 17. Wayne Ting Geotechnical Investigation, November 6, 1998 18. Cotton & Shires Assoc. Peer Review Letter December 7, 2006 19. CEQA Guidelines, 2007 20. Google Earth Exhibit List: 1. Project plans COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS TO: Brian Froelich Planner TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 SUBJECT: Geologic and Geotechnical Peer Review RE: Ryan, Two -Lot Subdivision 181.0615 -ND -TM 14350 Manuella Road Dear Mr. Froelich: ATTACHMENT 4 December 7, 2006 L0256 At your request, we have completed a geologic and geotechnical peer review of the subject permit application for the proposed two -lot subdivision using. Geotechnical Investigation (report), prepared by Wayne Ting and Associates, Inc., dated November 6, 1998, and Subdivision Plans (4 sheets, various scales), prepared by Giuliani and Kull, Inc., dated September 13, 2006. In addition, we have completed a recent site inspection and reviewed pertinent technical maps and reports from our office files, including an old file on the same property for a different applicant (Barth, 305 -99 -TM -GD -ND). This file contains the above referenced investigation and an older set of subdivision plans which have now been modified. DISCUSSION Our review of the referenced documents indicates that the applicant is proposing to subdivide the subject property (approximately 23 acres) into two lots for single- N.d—cal .0f 330 Vi 1.p L.0 tss Galls, CA95030.n13 (403) 35f -i562 •Pax (NB) 354.1332 e-nuil:loe5emrteokoneiaes.r® www.cottonshires.com Ceo4al CilUomia O®a 6flf neatmm Rosa S.nnndieW [A9 629 9-9 6 40 (2M) ]36-1232 • Pu (2s4) x+'6-1212 o-meiL mttoneFSxsDsh,bend.nat Brian Froelich December 7, 2006 Paget L0256 family residential development. At the time of our recent site visit, the previouisly existing structure on site had been removed and the site was undeveloped. The subject property is generally characterized by a very gentle slope with an average inclination of approximately 5 percent to the west. Drainage is generally characterized by sheet flow to the west toward Manuella Road. According to exploratory borings performed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant, the site is underlain by silty clay with sand and gravel (alluvium) to a depth of at least 20 feet. Previously identified fill materials were not noted during our recent site visit, but may have been incorporated into surfidal materials during recent site stripping and demolition operations. A mapped trace of the potentially active Monta Vista fault is located approximately 1 mile southwest of the site, placing the site within the 1997 UBC near. source zone. The active San Andreas fault zone is located approximately 4.2 miles southwest of the site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION Proposed site development is constrained by anticipated very strong seismic ground shaking and moderately to highly expansive surffdal materials. Based on our review of the referenced investigation, it appears that the Project Geotechnical Consultant has adequately characterized site conditions and recommended appropriate geotechnical design criteria for future residential development on the proposed lots. However, the 1998 investigation should be updated and include additional information in the supplemental geotechnical report First, the consultant should provide UBC seismic design criteria appropriate for the subject property. We recommend that the following Item 1 be addressed prior to acceptance of documents for building permit plan -check on individual lots: Uvdated Geotechnical Investigation - The Project Geotechnical Consultant should inspect the site and update the previous geotechnical investigation in order to address any changes in site conditions or in prevailing standards of professional practice. Any supplemental investigation warranted for specific proposed improvements should be completed. This updated report should include, but not be limited to the following items: Appropriate UBC seismic design parameters, COTTON, SHIRES & ASSoCIATEs, INC. Brian Froelich Page 3 December 7, 2006 L0256 including seismic coefficients (Na, Nv, Ca, Cv), should be calculated and provided. This updated report should be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to acceptance of documents for building permit plan -check on individual lots. 2. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans (Le., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations, retaining walls and driveway) to ensure that their recommendation have been properly incorporated. The consultant shall verify that the latest adopted Uniform Building Code seismic and geotechnical design parameters have been utilized in project design calculations. The results of the plan review should be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Geotechnical Plan Review - The geotechnical consultant should inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of 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 and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final (granting of occupancy) project approval. LIMITATIONS Thts geotechnical 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 COTTON, SMILES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Brian Froelich Page 4 December 7, 2006 L0256 and practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. TS:DTS:JS:kd Respectfully submitted, COTTON, SHMES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT Ted Sayre Associate Engineering Geologist CEG 1795 David T. Schrier Associate Geotechnical Engineer GE 2334 COTTON; SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. FIRE DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 (408) 378-4010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax) • w .sccfd.org DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS COOESEG I '.M 1 N0.1 REO. lJwr ATTACHMENT 5 PIANnEV NNYBEH 06 2680 ELDO PEN Nu"M Ruw... 181 -06 -IS - of two lot subdivision. This is not a developmental site review. fire department conditions or requirements. qlE PIdNS SPE6 NEW PMDL 0.S M'd1PANCY CONST. TTPE NpPlbnMun DATE PJ`GE LAH ❑ ❑ ❑ 13 11GIULIANI & KULL 10/19/2006 1 OF—L se.'La.N 4NE4 LOAD -MORIPr1ON EY Residential Development Rucker, Ryan HANE OF PPOJECr LOCITON SUBDIVISION 14350 Manuella Rd Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Sermng Las Altos Hills IDs Gatos, Monte Sereno, M.,an Hill, aandd &.toga s Altos, InPacific Gas and Electric Gomparry° October 12, 2006 Eric Peterson Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 RE: Tentative Maps and Plans (Dated September 2006) 14350 Manuella Rd., Los Altos Hills PG&E file: Y06 -MR -51 Dear Mr. Peterson: ATTACHMENT 6 Land Seruicas 111 Almada. Boulevard, Am. 814 San Joss, CA 95115 RECEIVED OCT 13 2006 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Thank you for the opportunity to review the Tentative Maps and Plans on the above referenced property. PG&E has no objection to the plans. PG&E owns and operates a variety of gas and electric facilities which may be located within the proposed project boundaries. Project proponents should coordinate with PG&E early in the development of their project plans to promote the safe and reliable maintenance and operation of existing utility facilities. Any proposed development plans should provide for unrestricted utility access and prevent interference with PG&E easements. Activities which may impact our facilities include, but are not limited to, permanent/temporary changes in grade over or under our facilities, construction of structures within or adjacent to PG&E's easements, and planting of certain types of vegetation over, under, or adjacent to our facilities. The installation of new gas and electric facilities and/or the relocation of existing PG&E facilities will be performed in accordance with common law or Rules and Tariffs as authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission. Please contact me at (408)282-7401 or DQTI@)PGE.com if you have any questions regarding our comments. Sincerely/, /'1 / — DWTran L d Technician ATTACHMENT 7 Town Of Los Altos Hills March 13, 2007 Subdivision Committee Hearing Fact Sheet Project Description: Two Lot Subdivision File Number: 181 -06 -IS -ND -TM Site Address: 14350 Manuella Road Owner(s): Barbara Ryan Staff Planner: Brian Froelich, AICP, Associate Planner Site Data 1.27 Net Lot Area: 2.27 acres Average Slope: 3.5% Lot Unit Factor: 2.27 1 3.3 1.37 1.27 1.269 19,035 7,614 2 3.7 1.13 1.00 1.001 15,015 6,006 Extsung Site• 3.5 2.5 2.27 2.27 •Exisdne site data is calculated prior to proposed right-of-way dedications Grading: None proposed. Sewer/Septic: Sewer connection to Los Altos Basin (both lots). Environmental Design Committee Comments: Both lots may require additional screening when developed. Pathway Committee Comments: Construct II -B path along the Manuella Road frontage, separated by 5 feet from roadway; to meander around obstacles as necessary. Fire Department Comments: No conditions or requirements at this time. Geotechnical Comments: Recommends approval with conditions. Utility Company Comments: None Town Of Los Altos Hills Subdivision Committee Hearing Fact Sheet ATTACHMENT 8 March 13, 2007 Environmental Design Committee Comments: The committee representative commented that the site will need a lot of landscape screening in connection with development. The representative noted that Mr. Downey may want to seek a View Easement from the applicant. Neighbor Comments: A neighbor, William Downey, Debell Road, commented that his property and backyard have views across the subject property and he is concerned about view loss from the eventual build out. Project Issues: No grading is to take place during the grading moratorium. Conditions of Approval: None added. /13 /o Date 2 /8/ "OIXI7i ATTACHMENT C) Environmental Design and Protection Committee Subdivision Evaluation Applicant /_ Date Name J/ �� Address_4eg / %�� Reviewed Grading: Creeks, drainage, easements: Existing Vegetation: Significant issues/comments: ATTACHMENT /(] C. Cars Obstructing Pathway near Pinewood School. Chris Vargas reports many cars lined up on the pathway on Fremont Road next to Pinewood School as parents drop off their children in the mo rdng. These cars obstruct the pathway for pedestrians and are destroying the pathway. He suggests a barrier to keep cars off the path at this location The general problem of cars parked on pathways was discussed. Members reported frequently seeing cars puked in pathways. It was suggested that the PWC write an item for the town newsletter and create a bumper sticker (e.g., "Paths are not for parking') to help address the problem. Placing "No Parking" signs along pathways was also suggested. D. The following property was reviewed for on -road pathway recommendations: 1. 14350 Manuella Road (Lands of Ryan). The reason for pathway review is a two -lot subdivision. One lot is on Manuella Road and the other lot is at the comer of Manuella Road and Alicante lane. Because Manuella is a two-sided road, there was agreement that that both lots should provide a IIB pathway long Manuella Road. There was vigorous discussion about whether a 1113 path was also needed along Alicante, a cul-desac that does not provide access for an off-road pathway. It was not known whether Alicante is a public or private road; there was not a consensus as to how many lots are on Alicante. There was not a consensus as to whether LAH Town ordinances specifically require a roadside pathway on all cul-de-sacs with eight or more lots. Anna Bnmzell moved that the PWC recommend IIB path be constructed along Manuella Road and along Alicante Lane. The vote was 6 in favor, 3 abstentions, and 1 opposed. DWWC Min_102306.dm