Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.2Item 3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS April 2, 2009 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A TWO STORY NEW RESIDENCE WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED SECOND UNIT (CABANA) AND SWIMMING POOL; LANDS OF GAVRA; 25631 VINEDO LANE (LOT 1); FILE 4307-08-ZP-SD-GD FROM: Nicole Horvitz, Assistant Planner! APPROVED BY: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director '3>P RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: Approve the requested Site Development Permit for the new residence, cabana and pool, subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment 1. ALTERNATIVE Continue the project and provide the applicant with specific directions for a redesign of the project, including but not limited to one or more of the following options: 1. Increase the setback of the south (front) property line in order to reduce the appearance of bulkiness of the house and to provide greater opportunities for landscape screening in front of the house. 2. Eliminate one of the two driveways to reduce the amount of hardscape within the setback to provide additional area for landscape screening in front of the house. 3. Require an immediate planting/screening plan addressing landscape mitigation along the south (front) property line and require the proposed plantings to be installed prior to issuance of Building Permits. BACKGROUND This property was created as part of a three (3) lot subdivision approved by City Council on March 12, 2008. (File # IS -ND -TM) The subject property is a vacant lot located on the north side of Vinedo Lane. The surrounding uses include single-family homes on adjacent parcels to the north, west, across Vinedo to the south and across Elena to the east. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 2 of 13 CODE REQUIREMENTS As required by Section 10-2.301 (c) of the Municipal Code. This application for a new residence has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review. The Zoning and Site Development sections of the Municipal Code are used to evaluate proposed projects including floor and development area limitations, grading, drainage, height, setbacks, visibility and parking requirements. DISCUSSION Site Data: Gross Lot Area: 1.260 acres Net Lot Area: 1.2 acres Average Slope: 12.5% Lot Unit Factor: 1.136 Floor Area and Development Area: Area (sq ft) Maximum Existing Proposed Increase Remaining Development 16,475* 0 11,670 11,670 4,305 Floor 6,674 0 6,656 6,656 18 (Basement 2,683) *Includes 500 sq. ft. development area bonus per Section 10-1.502.b.6 (Solar Ordinance) Site and Architecture The applicant is requesting approval of a Site Development Permit to construct a 6,674 square foot two story residence with a 2,683 square foot basement, a 385 square foot detached second unit (cabana) and a 608 square foot swimming pool. There is a moderate sloping hillside at the west side of the lot. The average slope of the property is 12.5%. The new residence meets the setback, height, floor area and development area requirements established in Title 10, Zoning and Site Development, of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. The new residence and cabana is located a minimum of 42' from the south (front) property line, 82' from the north (rear) property line, 100' from the east (side) property and 32' from the west (side) property line. The maximum building height on a vertical plane is 27' and the maximum overall height of the building (including chimneys and appurtenances) from the lowest point to the highest point is 35'. The basement level of the new residence has 2,683 square feet of area which includes a bedroom, mechanical room, fitness club, theater, entertainment lounge and wine cellar. The basement is wholly underground except for a portion of the basement for a two (2) car garage on the east side of the residence. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavm 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 3 of 13 The entry level has 3,415 square feet of living space with a foyer, kitchen, family room, dining room, living room, library, guest suite and a two (2) car garage. The upper level of the house has 2,138 square feet of living area which includes a master suite and three bedrooms with baths. Proposed exterior materials consist of cement plaster exterior and concrete roof. Drivewav & Parkin Pursuant to Section 10-1.601 of the Municipal Code, a total of five (5) parking spaces are required because of the second unit. There me two driveways proposed: one driveway accesses a two (2) car garage at grade on the main level and the second driveway accesses a two (2) car basement garage. A fifth outdoor parking space is located at the northeast comer of the house, outside of the setbacks. Outdoor Li¢htin¢ The applicant is proposing twenty (20) shielded lights located on the exterior of the main residence at the doorways (Lighting plan sheets El, E2 and E3). Staff has included condition 9I1 for outdoor lighting, requiring that fixtures be down shielded or frosted glass, low wattage and shall not encroach or reflect on adjacent properties. The applicant has submitted lighting specifications indicating that all proposed fixtures will be shielded, downlights or have frosted glass. Trees & Landscanine The existing landscaping consists of a variety of trees including magnolia, a mix of fruit trees and liquid amber. No trees are proposed to be removed with this application. In order to widen Vinedo Lane for the subdivision improvements and construct a type IIB pathway along the south side of the property line, a row of mature cypress trees were removed. There was also one I I" oak removed in order to construct the driveway access to the remaining (2) lots. This oak tree has been replaced with two (2) 36" box oaks, one on Lot 1 and the other on Lot 3. Pursuant to Section 9-1.607 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code, other trees that were removed for the access easement were replaced with native 5 gallon trees at a 2:1 ratio. A landscape screening and erosion control plan will be required after framing of the new residence. (Condition of approval #3) Furthermore, any landscaping required for screening or erosion control will be required to be planted prior to final inspection. A maintenance deposit to ensure viability of plantings will be collected prior to final inspection. Staff Report to the Planning Cosmnission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 4 of 13 Drainage Water runoff generated from the new development will be collected and carried to two (2) onsite retention systems and then into a 3" metering pipe to two (2) energy dissipaters located at the east side of the property. Pursuant to Section 10-2.503, Drainage Facilities Standards, of the Municipal Code, the Engineering Department has reviewed and determined that the proposed drainage design complies with Town requirements. The Engineering Department will review and approve the final drainage plan prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Final "as - built" grading and drainage will be inspected by the Engineering Department and any deficiencies will be required to be corrected prior to final inspection. Green Building Ordinance This project is required to comply with the Town's Green Building Ordinance. The new residence is designed to achieve 82 points in Build it Green's GreenPoint Rated program. Fire Department Review The Santa Clara County Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and is requiring a sprinkler system throughout all portions of the new residence. (Attachment 2) Geotechnical Review The Town's geotechnical consultant Cotton, Shires & Associates Inc; has reviewed the soil and foundation report prepared by JF Consulting dated July 11, 2007 and recommends approval of the permit based on conditions 17 a, b & c. (Attachment 3) Committee Review The Pathways Committee recommends the applicant to restore the type IIB pathway prior to final of the new residence. (Condition #26) The Environmental Design and Protection Committee noted that the wattage on the exterior lights were very high (60 to 100 watts). (Attachment 5) Neighbor Comments Staff has received a number of emails between the neighbors and applicant regarding the proposed driveway design, size and visibility of the new house, and trees removed as part of the subdivision improvements. (Attachment 6) Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 5 of 13 Since the story poles were installed for the proposed structures, neighbors have commented that the two story house appears massive and too close to the property line. Unlike most streets where the roadway is aligned with the center of the road right-of- way, the 20' wide Vinedo Lane roadway was constructed entirely within the northern half of the right-of-way. Therefore, even though the new residence and cabana comply with the front setback requirements, the structures appear bulkier and much closer to the setback lines than other homes on the street. In addition, the double driveway design and underground stom water retention system located within the front setback will limit the amount of space available for landscaping to mitigate the visual impact of the house. Pursuant to Section 10-1.505.e (Setback Lines) of the Zoning Code, "the standards set forth in this section for setbacks are minimum standards. The City Council and Planning Commission have the discretion to apply stricter standards to increase setbacks where site specific constraints dictate further limitations.... some examples of site characteristics include, but are not limited to, high site visibility where a greater setback is deemed necessary to reduce the appearance of bulkiness of the structure; and/or proximity to other lots or structures where a greater setback is deemed necessary to promote a variety in setbacks to avoid the appearance of uniform house designs or layouts." As stated in staffs recommendation at the beginning of this report, if the Planning Commission wishes to continue the project and provide the applicant with specific directions for a redesign, one or more of the following options could be considered: 1. Increase the setback of the south (front) property line in order to reduce the appearance of bulkiness of the house and to provide greater opportunities for landscape screening in front of the house. 2. Eliminate one of the two driveways to reduce the amount of hardscape within the setback to provide additional area for landscape screening in front of the house. 3. Require an immediate planting/screening plan addressing landscape mitigation along the south (front) property line and require the proposed plantings to be installed prior to issuance of Building Permits. CEQA STATUS The project is categorically exempt under CEQA per Sections 15303 (a) & (e). ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended Conditions of Approval 2. Recommendations from Santa Clara County Fire Department dated December 10, 2008 3. Recommendations from Cotton, Shires, and Associates dated December 17, 2008 4. Recommendations from the Pathways Committee Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 6 of 13 5. Comments from Environmental Design and Protection Committee dated December 15,2008 6. Email Correspondence Between Neighbors and Applicant 7. Worksheet #2 8. Development plans: Site, Topographic, Grading & Drainage, Floor, Elevation, Section, Roof, Green Point Rated Checklist and Lighting Plans Staff Report to the Planning Cornrnission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 7 of 13 ATTACHMENT RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT SECOND UNIT (CABANA) AND SWIMMING POOL LANDS OF GAVRA, 25631 VINEDO LANE File # 307-08-ZP-SD-GD 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. All existing Blue Gum (E. globulus), Pink Ironbark (E. sideroxylon rosea), River Red Gum (E. camaldulensis), Swamp Gum (E. mdis), Honey Gum (E. melliodora) or Manna Gum (E. viminalis) eucalyptus trees on the property located within 150' of any structures or roadways shall be removed prior to final inspection of the new residence. Removal of eucalyptus trees shall take place between the beginning of August and the end of January to avoid disturbance of nesting birds protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Department of Fish and Game Code Section 3500 et seq, unless a nesting bird survey is first conducted and there is a determination that there are no active nests within the tree. 3. After completion of rough framing or at least six (6) months prior to scheduling a final inspection, the applicant shall submit landscape screening and erosion control plans for review by the Site Development Committee. The application for landscape screening and erosion control shall be accompanied by the applicable fee and deposit. The plans shall be reviewed at a noticed public hearing. Attention shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to break up the view of the new residence from surrounding properties and streets. All landscaping required for screening purposes and for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection of the new residence. 4. A landscape maintenance deposit in the amount of $5,000 shall be posted prior to final inspection. An inspection of the landscape to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after the installation. The deposit will be released at that time if the plantings remain viable. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 8 of 13 Prior to beginning any grading operation, all significant trees, particularly the heritage oak 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. 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, cabana roof eaves and swimming pool/spa 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 and cabana 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 and prior to final 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 and cabana 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 ofthe 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 roof of the structure." The applicant shall submit the stamped and signed letter(s) to the Planning Department prior to requesting a final framing inspection and prior to final inspection 8. Standard swimming pool conditions: a. Lights shall be designed so that the source is not visible from off-site. b. Drainage outfall structures shall be constructed and located to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. c. Pool equipment shall be enclosed on all four sides with a roof for noise mitigation and screening. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lauds of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 9 of 13 9. For swimming pools, at least one of the following safety features shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Town Building Official: a. The pool shall be isolated from access to the residence by an enclosure (fencing). b. The pool shall be equipped with an approved safety pool cover. c. The residence shall be equipped with exit alarms on those doors providing direct access to the pool. d. All doors providing direct access from the home to the swimming pool shall be equipped with a self-closing, self -latching device with a release mechanism placed no lower than 54 inches above the floor. 10. All patios, walkways, and landings encroaching within the property line setbacks shall not exceed 4' in width. 11. No new fencing is approved. Any new fencing or gates shall require review and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation. 12. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on sheets El, E2 and E3. There shall be one light per door or two for double doors. No lighting may be placed within setbacks except two entry or driveway lights. Any additional outdoor lighting shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to installation. 13. 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. 14. Fire retardant roofing (Class A) is required for all new construction. 15. At time of submittal of plans for building plan check, the applicant shall submit one of the following checklists to demonstrate compliance with the Town's Green Building Ordinance: A GreenPoint Rated checklist with the building permit application to indicate that the project will achieve a minimum of fifty (50) points. The checklist shall be completed by a qualified green building professional and shall be attached to the front of the construction plans. The construction plans shall include general notes or individual detail drawings, where feasible, showing the green building measure to be used to attain the required points. b. A LEED for Homes checklist with the building permit application to indicate that the project will achieve a minimum of forty-five Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 10 of 13 (45) points or LEED certification. The checklist shall be completed by a qualified green building professional and shall be attached to the front of the construction plans. The construction plans shall include general notes or individual detail drawings, where feasible, showing the green building measure to be used to attain the required points. 16. Prior to final inspection and occupancy, a qualified green building professional shall provide documentation verifying that the building was constructed in compliance with GreenPoint Rated or LEED® certification. 17. All properties shall pay School District fees to either the Los Altos School District or the Palo Alto Unified School District, as applicable, prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The applicant must take a copy of worksheet #2 to school district offices (both elementary and high school in the Los Altos School District), pay the appropriate fees and provide the Town with a copy of the receipts. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 18. As recommended by Cotton, Shires & Associates, hie., in their report dated December 17, 2008, the applicant shall comply with the following: a. Updated CBC Design Criteria — The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall prepare updated 2007 CBC seismic parameters for utilization in design by the project structural engineer prior to acceptance ofplans for building plan check b. 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 evaluate the proposed locations and design of subsurface drainage retention/percolation systems with respect to geotechnical compatibility with other site improvements (including basement sub drain systems). Any appropriate design revisions from a geotechnical perspective shall be recommended. 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 acceptance ofplans for building plan check. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 11 of 13 C. 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 and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final inspection. For further details on the above geotechnical requirements, please refer to the letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates, Inc., dated December 17, 2008. 19. Peak discharge at 25631 Vinedo Lane, as a result of Site Development Permit 307-08, shall not exceed the existing pre -development peak discharge value of the property. Detention storage must be incorporated into the project to reduce the predicted peak discharge to the pre - development value. Provide the data and peak discharge hydrologic model(s) utilized, as well as, the calculations of the peak discharge value prior and post development. Determine the design peak runoff rate for a 10 -year return period storm and provide detention storage design plans to reduce the predicted peak discharge to the pre -development value. All documentation, calculations, and detention storage design (2 plan copies) shall be submitted for review and approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Prior to final inspection, a letter shall be submitted from the project engineer stating that the site grading and storm drainage detention system were constructed as shown on the approved plans and in accordance with their recommendations. 20. Any, and all, changes to the approved grading and drainage plan shall be submitted as revisions from the project engineer and shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (October 15 to April 15) except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line except to allow for the construction of the driveway access. 21. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. The applicant should contact PG&E immediately after Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vmedo lane April 2, 2009 Page 12 of 13 issuance of building permit to start the application process for undergrounding utilities which can take up to 6-8 months. 22. Two copies of an erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The contractor and the property owner shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control. The first 100 feet of the driveway shall be rocked during construction and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected from erosion. All areas on the site that have the native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 23. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on Vinedo Lane and Elena Road, storage of construction materials, placement of sanitary facilities, parking for construction vehicles, clean-up area, and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the GreenWaste Recovery, Inc. for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 24. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and release of occupancy permits and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 25. 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 to final inspection. 26. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior to final inspection. A sewer hook up permit shall be required by the Town's Public Works Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check An encroachment permit shall be required for all work proposed within the public right of way prior to start work. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Gavra 25631 Vinedo Lane April 2, 2009 Page 13 of 13 27. The property owners shall remove or place the temporary purple irrigation pipe underground prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 28. The property owners shall restore the type 2B pathway along Vinedo Lane to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 29. An automatic residential fire sprinkler system approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department shall be included in all portions of the building. Three sets of plans prepared by a sprinkler contractor shall be submitted to the Santa Clara County Fire Department (14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032) for review and approval. The sprinklers shall be inspected and approved by the Fire Department, prior to final inspection and occupancy of the new residence. 30. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position m to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background. CONDITION NUMBERS 17, 18 a & b, 19, 22, 23, 24, 26 and 27 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. Project approval may be appealed if done so in writing within 22 days of the date of this notice. The building permit cannot be issued until the appeal period has lapsed. The applicant may submit construction plans to the Building Department after April 24, 2009 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 Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until April 2, 2010). All required building permits must be obtained within that yew and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two years. Attachment 2 d�PecpG FIRE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED r Po�T� SANTA CLARA COUNTY DEC 12 2(18 '� 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 kA.., (408) 378-4010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax) • vJww.Sccd.org han oum Arcnxn� WN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS AyenV PUN REVIEW NUMBER 08 3465 BLDG PERMrt NUMBER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS FILE NUMBER COOE5EC. SHEET NO. REOUIREMENT 'Proposed 10,420 square foot two-story single -family residence with basement and attached garages. Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits. 1 Wildland-Urban Interface: This project is located within the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The building construction shall comply with the provisions of California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. Check with the Planning Department for related landscape plan requirements. CFC SIUx. 2 Required Fire Flow: The fire flow for this project is 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual Append8 ix B ressure. The adjusted fire flow is available from area water mains and fire ydrant(s) which are spaced at the required spacing. CFC Sec. 3 Fire Sprinklers Required: Approved automatic sprinklers are required in all new 903.2, as and existing modified buildings when gross floor area exceeds 3,600 square feet or adopted that are 3 or more stories in height. An automatic sprinkler shall be provided in all and new structures located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface area.Exception: amended by LAHMC Any non-habitable accessory structures to single family residences that have gross floor area of 500 square feet or less. A State of California licensed (C-16) CM PUNS SPECS NEW RMOL AS OCCUPANCY CON5r. TYPE A,PIb.N.— DATE PAGE ® ❑ N ❑ ❑ R-3 V -B STOTLER DESIGN GROUP 12/10/2008 1 2 LAH OP SE0.6LOOR ANFA LOAD OESCNIt""N BY 2story +bsmt 10420 sf I Residential Development Harding, Doug NAMEOFPROJECI LOCATION SFR - GAVRA 25631 Vinedo Ln Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Serving Sunta Clam County and the Communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Lae Altos Hills, LOS Gotos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hall, and Samtogo FIRE DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY 14700 Winchester Bbd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 (408) 378-4010 ° (408) 378-9342 (fax) ° w .socfd.org A9—y PLAN REAEW NUMBER 06 3465 X. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS BUaB PERFRE NUMBER FRE NUMBER =MEC. I SHEET I "0.1 REQUIREMENT C SEC. Protection Contractor shall submit plans, calculations, a completed permit ication and appropriate fees to this department for review and approval prior =einnine their work. ises Identification, Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all Ind existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their ant plan review and inspection delays, the above noted Developmental Conditions shall be addressed as "notes" on all pending and future plan sls and any referenced diagrams to be reproduced onto the future plan 4H ® ❑ N ❑ ❑1_. R-3 I V -B I STOTLER DESIGN GROUP 1 12/10/2008 1 2 OF 2 tory +bsmt 10420sf Residential Development Harding, Doug SFR -GAVRA 25631 Vinedo Ln Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Seming Sonet Clam County and the tommunitles of Campbell, CUOnm,m, Los Altos, Los Alms Hllls, Iw Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Samm n 0 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS TO: Debbie Pedro Planning Department TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 SUBjeCT: Geotechnicai Peer Review RE: Garva, New Residence 307-OB-ZP-SD-GD 25631 Vinedo Lane Attachment 3 December 17, 2008 L0368 RECEIVED DEC 1 8 2D08 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS At your request, we have completed a geotechnical peer review of the subject application for the proposed new residence using: Geotechnical Investigation (report) prepared by JF Consulting, Inc., dated July 11, 2007; Architectural Plans (12 sheets, various scales) prepared by Stotler Design Group, dated November 6,2007; and Civil Plans (4 sheets, various scales) prepared by NNR Engineering, dated November 25, 2008. In addition, we have reviewed pertinent technical documents from our office files, including a previous subdivision plan including the subject property in 2007 (LO227), and completed a recent site inspection. DISCUSSION Based on our review of the referenced plans, the applicant proposes to construct a new single family residence on one of three newly subdivided lots. At the time of our recent site inspection, the lot was covered- in grass, and there was a new asphalt driveway. Access to the property is via the new private driveway off of Vinedo Lane. Northern California Office 330 Village Lane Los Gatos, CA 95030.818 (408) 3545542 • Fax (909) 3541852 e-mail. losgamsooettonshires.com www.cottonshires.com Cemral California office 6417Dogtow Road San Andress, CA 95249-9640 (209)1364252 • Ea. (209)736-1212 e-mail. cononsli esCistarband.net Debbie Pedro Page 2 SITE CONDITIONS December 17, 2008 L0368 The subject property is characterized by gentle to steep (5 to 35 percent inclination) southeast -facing hillside topography. Previous grading activities at the site have resulted in a relatively level cut/fill pad in the west -central portion of the site. There is a small steep (35 to 50 percent inclination) graded slope along the western edge of the property. A steep to very steep (30 to 75 percent inclinations) fill slope is located on the downslope side of the old building pad. A shallow natural drainage swale runs through the site from the northwest to the southeast, and is partially disrupted by the existing fill materials. The majority of the nmoff at the site is captured by this swale and directed to the southeast. According to the Town Geologic Map, the subject property is underlain, at depth, by weathered greenstone bedrock of the Franciscan Complex. According to exploratory borings presented in the referenced investigation, bedrock materials are locally overlain by up to 10 feet of colluvium near the northern property boundary. To the west no fill was encountered, and colluvium extends to a depth of 3.5 feet. The three borings excavated at this site encountered bedrock at depth. According to the Town Geotechnical Hazards Map, the site lies within an "A" zone. The nearest traces of the potentially active Monta Vista, Altamont, and Berrocal faults are mapped approximately 450 feet northwest, 675 feet southwest, and 2,250 feet southwest, respectively, of the subject property. Additionally, the active San Andreas fault is located approximately 3.1 miles southwest of the site. Site development is constrained by anticipated strong seismic ground shaking, settlement or compression of undocumented fill materials, and potentially expansive fill and colluvium. The Project Geotechnical Consultant has previously conducted an investigation of the subject property and provided geotechnical design recommendations that generally appear appropriate for identified site conditions. We concur with the consultant's recommendation that the undocumented fill materials be removed and replaced with properly keyed and benched engineered fill. We also concur with the consultant's recommendation to support all future residences on a reinforced pier and grade beam foundations. We note that the seismic design parameters were taken from the 1997 UBC. Updated 2007 California Building Code (CBC) seismic design parameters should be prepared. The design of project drainage systems should be evaluated from a geotechnical perspective by JF Consulting. We do not have basic geotechnical objections to the proposed layout of site improvements. Documentation to COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Debbie Pedro Page 3 December 17, 2008 L0368 address the following Items 1 and 2 should be submitted to the Town along with other documents for building permit plan -check. UQdated CBC Design criteria - The applicant's geotechnical consultant should prepare updated 2007 CBC seismic parameters for utilization in design by the Project Structural Engineer. 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) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The consultant should evaluate the proposed locations and design of subsurface drainage retention/percolation systems with respect to geotechnical compatibility with other site improvements (including basement subdrain systems). Any appropriate design revisions from a geotechnical perspective should be recommended. The results of the CBC update and geotechnical plan review should be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer along with documents for building permit plan -check. 3. 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 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 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 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Debbie Pedro Page 4 December 17, 2008 L0368 opinions and conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in heu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. TS:DTS:JS:kd Respectfully submitted, COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT Ted Sayre Principal EngL+eering Geologist CEG 1795 David T. Schrier Principal Geotechnical Engineer GE 2334 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Attachment 4 and insure that there be no mailbox or other obstacle on the IIB roadside path. XX seconded. Vote was 6 in favor, 3 opposed, 0 abstentions. ii. 25631 Vinedo lane (Lands of Gavra). This property was reviewed by the PWC at the time of subdivision The review tonight is for Parcel l of the subdivision, which is adjacent to Vinedo Lane. The property owner Ovlr. Gavra) and Eran lchen were present and reported that the Town required a 10 -foot easement along Vinedo to allow for meandering around the mature cypress trees near the road edge. The trees were subsequently removed, apparently without approval of the City Council. Chris Vargas moved that the roadside pathway easement along the road at 25631 Vinedo Lane be diminished to five feet and that the homeowners restore the pathway to IIB standards at the end of construction. No plants or mailboxes are permitted in the pathway right-of-way. Anna Brunzell seconded. Vote was unanimously in favor. City Councilman Breene Kerr requested that the PWC ask the Planning Commission why the trees were allowed to be cut dowm iii. 11267 Magdalena Road Rands of Singh). This property was reviewed at the time of subdivision into two lots. The review tonight is for Parcell, which is adjacent to Magdalena Road, across from Hooper Lane. A large swale nuns through the lot parallel to Magdalena and flows through a culvert under the private road on the east side of the lot. An existing path in poor shape runs along Magdalena It is not known whether the existing path is in the road right-of-way or on the parcel; it is not shown on the applicants site plan maps. The owners have no plans to remove the trees close to Madgalena. Courtenay Corrigan moved that the homeowner be asked to restore the roadside path to IIB status at the end of construction and not to place mailboxes or other obstructions in the pathway. Courtenay further moved that the Town assure that the pathway easement along Magdalena is recorded for this property. Bob Stutz seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. 9 iv. 28080 Story Hill Lane (Lands of Tai) This property is incorrectly shown as 28030 Story Hill on the Town parcel maps. The reason for review is a new residence. Bob Owe$ was present representing the owner. The lot is near the end of Story Hill, a cul-de-sac serving seven properties. The road is curving, and has steep roadsides with mature landscape screening in many spots. Pathways exist on the opposite side of Story Hill on a few properties close to Page Mill. There is no direct access to Arastradero Preserve from this parcel; the lot is backed by Palo Alto homes. There are no off-road pathways exiting this part of Story Hill. Courtenay Corrigan moved that the Town request a pathway in -lieu fee from the owners of 28080 Story Hill Lane. Anna Brunzell seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. v. 26395 Ravensbury Road Rands of Koon¢). The reason for pathway review is renovation of the residence. Mr. Koong was present. The lot is at the comer of Ravensbury and La Toyonits. La Toyonita is a private road, part of which is accessible to pedestrians only. Some maps showing the Master Path Plan indicate the intent to put a pathway on Toyonita and other maps do not. A pathway along Toyonita would allow pedestrians to short cut a section of Ravenshury, which is narrow and heavily used by both vehicles and pedestrians. Ann Duwe moved that the Town ask the owners of 26380 Ravensbury Road for a pathways easement along the frontage of La Toyonita conferring public access in this private road, and to request both an easement and a IIB pathway on the frontage on Ravensbury. Anna Brunzell seconded. The vote was unanimously in favor. A 10440 Albertsworth Lane (lands of Trembois). The reason for pathway review is construction of a new residence. The property is at the comer of Albertsworth and Magdalena. Albertsworth is a cul-de-sac serving more than eight properties. Because it is a wide street that can easily provide sufficient mom for pedestrians and horses, the PWC decided a path not required here. This property is rather steep along the Magdalena U Attachment 5 Environmental Design and Protection Committee New Residence/Remodel Evaluation RE';EIVED DEC i 5 ?006 Reviewed by: 1.L1S �}A S { n(4.� Date 1.3 a Applicant TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HUB Name W jLI p Address�2'�Li GueP� P�I:G�Qfh urt �Q S�0v t�f u�Cl Ilv�'l.v Su v �r r d��,ra Existing Vegetation: ` Signit'icant issues/co ents: p I (cam �i, N -c- /f1 I �•..�.,,:tis1 � 4i lA;_ e-lt ' l,�-i,l.c �-cl.�.c_z � /, i1 <`�. ,� Attachment 6 Nicole Horvitz From: Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 2:05 PM To: Nicole Horvitz Subject: Re: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr.- Trees that need to be restored at Lot #1 Nicole I will request as you suggested to have the 10-12 Italian Cypress Trees replaced that were cut down They were 30 feet tall and you can see them in the presentation that Richard Chui made at the City Council Meeting where then Mayor Craig Jones indicated that it doesn't make sense to cut down 30 feet hight trees to make a pathway that no one will use. He said to keep the trees 1 am not sure of the total count- there were 12 trees but I think 2 needed to be cut due to a driveway entrance. I want those trees restored and to be required as part of the final permit approval, Let me know what I need to do to ensure that happens Brian -told me he would ensure that that it was included, but since he is gone, I assume it now in your hands. I have pictures of the trees from a view from my front lawn. I tried to register them with the city. Debbie Pedro, told me to have them dated and notarized, which I did. Regards Craig Miller Due I need to copy my attorney?? ---- Original Message ---- From: "Nicole Horvitz" <nhorvitz@losaltoshills.ca.gov> 3/24/2009 Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:26:49 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: RE: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Hello All, I am the project planner for lot 1 along Vinedo, David Keyon (dkeyonna,losaltoshills.ca.gov ext. 227) is the planner for the other two lots, and you may contact him for those. The story poles were erected for lot 1, the new residence because it is going to be noticed this Friday the 20th for the April 2nd Planning Commission meeting. I am happy to answer any questions or show you the plans regarding the proposed residence on lot 1, please give me a call or email to make sure I will be in the office during the time you wish to come in. I am in the process of writing the Staff report to the Commission and I ask that any comments that you may have you submit them to me by Monday the 23rd because I will be out of the office the 25 -27th, so I can included them in the report. You can email them or drop them off at Town Hall. Thank you all so much. Nicole Nicole Horvitz Assistant Planner Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 650.941.7222 -Phone 650.941.3160 -Fax To all Nicole Horvitz' he planning person from LAH assigned toiotjll of the project 3/24/2009 Page 1 of 6 Nicole Horvitz From: Steven Wang Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 4:25 AM To: Nicole Horvitz Subject: Re: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr To review the plans, do we need an appointment? Another issue is that since the subdivision, the developer put in an offensive large surface purple water pipe adjacent to my property. I have complained about it to a number of people but have not got any response. The last I heard from John Chau is that the developer was going to do something about it. Thus whom should I address this to? -- Original Message From: Nicole Horvitr Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 200912:54 PM Subject: RE: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Steven, please see responses in red Nicole Hi Nicloe, I live on Vinedo road adjacent to the lot. A couple of questions: 1. Do you have plans for the houses that the neighbors can review? The plans are available at Town Hall 2. Are you the person responsible for lot 3 as well. They are building a story pole on that lot as well. As I mentioned previously, David Keyon is the planner for the remaining 2lots. 3. How long are the story pole structure up after the hearing? Story poles need to stay in place until the appeal period is over, 22 days after the Planning Commission meeting. 4. What is the reason that landscaping screening plan is to be submitted after framing? Isn't it a bit late to help plant the screening so that the trees can grow to provide maximum coverage. The screening plan is required after the house is framed so the neighbors can see the actual house and have an input for the most efficient screening. Nicole Horvitz Assistant Planner Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 650.941.7222 -Phone 650.941.3160 -Fax 3/24/2009 Nicole Horvitz From: Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 6:09 PM To: Nicole Horvitz Cc: Subject: Re: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr If you go to the real estate company Campi.com then land then Los Altos Hills You will see the layout of the homes and the styles Patty Trayer sent an email - 4-5 months ago Wiling us This will show the topo of the 3 lots and the driveways there are no entrances/driveway off Elena Nicole also has the plans at the city Regards -- Original Message From: "Nicole Horvitz" <nhorvitz@losaltoshills.ca.gov> Geri, What plans are you talking about? The tentative map? 3/24/2009 Page 1 of 8 Nicole Horvitz From: Monica Giacomini [ Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 4:03 PM To: ' ; Nicole Horvitz Cc: Subject: RE: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Thanks for everyone's input thus far. I have a question for anyone. I thought entrance to all three houses was specifically requested to be and agreed upon, to be from Elena. I am looking at Lot #1 and it appears by the pink low taped -off area in front of the house and detached garage(?) that the driveway feeds onto Vinedo, or am I looking at that the wrong way? The house is very close to the street and flat and wide which makes it look like a block or a wall. It is hard for me imagine that there is an acre of land there to accodomatethat big of a structure.... Monica Giacomini From: Steve Johnson[mailto: Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 7:02 AM To:'John P. Trayer; 'Nicole Horvitz' Subject: RE: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. One of my biggest concerns is that the mature Oaks as well as other fully grown tree's were removed which offered screening that would have been adequate for even my house at the top of Vinedo at 25981. Why were moratorium trees allowed to be removed? The story poles are very obvious even from my house. Is the mature Oaks going to be replaced with "mature" Oaks that will be sufficient to screen homes that will be at the 27' height limit? Steve Johnson From: John P.`Frayer [mailto: _✓ Sent: Thursday, NIrch 19, 2009 6:35 AM - r"' To: Nicole Horvitz 3/24/2009 Page I of 9 Nicole Horvitz From: Geri Macomber [geri@macombers.00mj Sent:. Thursday, March 19, 2009 4:11 PM To: Nicole Horvitz; Steve Johnson; John P. Trayer Cc: stevenwang@wmcastnet; BarretoPTA@aol.com; kabergh@yahoo.00m; Cameron@tum-n- burn.com; gchanm@gmail.wm; kevin@redback.com; monica@giamminis.com; vince@ptsi.wm; d gualtieri; kjmail@sbcglobal.net; Mandels2@aol.com; RKMcF@aol.com; awrrale@stanfordalumni.org; Ilse wang; hswongx@sbcglobal.net; GThablt@aol.com; rkess@sbcglobal.net karenl@sbcglobal.net florashirzad@yahw.wm; swtt@mammbers.wm; Ptrayer@aol.com; cr5miller@comcast.net; David Keyon Subject: Re: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Nicole- I have a question about the driveway(s) for Lot 1. It looks like there are two staked out now and the plans were for one only. Thanks - Geri From: Nicole Horvitz Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 7:50 AM To: Steve Johnson ; John P. Traver Subject: RE: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Steve, What lot were the heritage oaks on? I am only reviewing Lot 1, the one closest to Vinedo Lane; David Keyon is reviewing the other two. If the trees were on the other two lots, please contact David. (dkeyon(20osaltoshi11s.ca.gov) Nicole Nicole Horvitz Assistant Planner Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 650.941.7222 -Phone 650.941.3160 -Fax From: Steve Johnson[mailto: Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 7:02 AM 3/24/2009 Page 1 of 3 Nicole Horvitz From: Isaac Agam [ Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:51 PM Cc: Subject: Re: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr o Dear Patricia, Both the town and myself are correct. There is no conflict between the two e-mails. My e-mail below I explained the possible confusion regarding a circular drivewau, not the two driveways, and that "The artist rendering shows a walkway in front of the house of Lot -1 which might seems to some like a driveway, but it's not". Nowhere did I say, as you suggested, that the driveway leading to the garages is a walkway. Where do you see that? There is no plan for circular driveway. However, as Nicole explained, there is a plan for two driveways. One for the main level garage and one for the lower level garage. Sincerely, Isaac Agam wrote: Isaac, since there seems to be some confusion, please refer to Nicole's email to Geri, below. In your plans that were submitted to the town, there are two driveways to lot #1 One to the basement garage and one to the garage at grade. So who is correct the town or you? Feel free to explain. Per the voted upon Subdivision plans, there were to be 2 driveways total for all 3 homes. This is because you had to come onto Vinedo Lane so you could subdivide the property Into 3. Otherwise if you had just divided it into two you could have used your correct address and street Elena Road. Unfortunately the town allowed this, against everyone of Vinedo Lane owners wishes. A second driveway to Lot #1 in no ways the same as a walkway Isaac This would put the number at 3. The traffic study was for 2 driveways. Again, 2 more than our road owners wanted. I thought I would cc: these emails to the Planning Commission and the Mayor so they can understand the history and dynamics of this project. Patty Trayer Vinedo Lane Resident and Road Owner 3/24/2009 Page 2 of 3 From: Nicole Horvitz Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 4:20 PM To: Geri Macomber ; Steve Johnson ; John P. Traver Subject: RE: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Geri, What plans are you talking about? The tentative map? The plans submitted for the new residence have two driveways. One to the basement garage and one to the garage at grade. Nicole Nicole Horvitz Assistant Planner Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 650.941.7222 -Phone 650.941.3160 -Fax In a message dated 3/20/2009 4:54:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, writes: Hello Isaac, The pink tape outlining in the front of the house looks like a driveway entrance, not a walkway, very confusing. Also, why go through the trouble to put in the pathways there just to then put a driveway or entrance through them? Seems counterprodutive.... Thanks, Monica Giacomini From: Isaac Agam fmailto• Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 2:51 PM To: cr5miller(o)comcast.net 3/24/2009 Stotler; Geri Macomber; Steve Johnson; John P. Trayer; Eran Cohen; Eli Gavra - Pacbell Subject: Re: Construction Plans for the 3 Lots on Vinedo Lane @ Elena Dr. Hi Craig and the others, Please note that there is no circular driveway on any of the lots. The artist rendering shows a walkway in front of the house of Lot -1 which might seems to some like a driveway, but it's not. FYI. Isaac Agam wrote: Nicole there was an artist drawing on the Campi Realty Web Site a few months back with a layout showing the front of the home and 2 entrance to the Lot #1 with a circular driveway I thought the home curb appeal (colors scheme, etc) were concept. I assumed, now incorrectly) that the house location and driveways were approved. Regards Craig Miller 3/24/2009 Page 3 of 3 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Attachment 7 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills, California 94022 - (650) 941-7222 • FAX (650) 941-31(AN 2 9 2009 WORKSHEET #2 MOF LOS ALTOS HILLS EXISTING �S6TM DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR L • YOUR APPLICATTON - PROPERTY PROPERTY ADRR)V3o0 - - — 25631 Vinedo Lane, Los Altos Hills, Ca (CALCULATED BY SCOTTSTOTLER 0 11670 (DATE November26 2008 Existing Proposed Total 1. DEVELOPMENT AREA Existing (to be Proposed Total (SQUARE FOOTAGE) removed) (Additiona/Deletiau) A. House and Garage (from Part 3. A.) 0 6271 6271 B. Porch (Non -MFA) 0 0 0 C. Driveway and Puking 174 e. Garage 0 454 (Measured 100' along centerline) 0 2950 2950 D. Patios/Walkways/Terraces/Lightwells 0 1156 1156 E. Cabana 0 0 0 F. Pool and Decking 0 608 608 G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B) 0 385 385 H. Any other coverage (A/C Pads) 0 37 37 TOTALS 0 11407 11407 I L-975-+ S61ar � Maximum Development Area Allowed -MDA (from Worksheet #1) Lj- 2. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE Existing Proposed Total (SQUARE FOOTAGE) TOTALS 0 11670 11670 3. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total A. House and Garage(Additions/Deletions) a. IstFloor 0 3415 3415 b. 2nd Floor 0 2138 2138 c. Attic and Basement (Non -MFA) 0 3764 3764 d. Attic and Basement (WA) 0 174 174 e. Garage 0 454 454 f. Porch (MFA) 0 90 90 B. Accessory Buildings a. IatFloor 0 385 385 b. 2nd Floor 0 0 0 c. Attic and Basement0 0 \ 0 TOTALS 0 6656 6656 Maximum Floor Area Allowed - MFA from Worksheet #1 6674 TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY DATE Rev. 3/20/02 Page I of I Town of Los Altos Hills