Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.1Item 3.1 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS January 15, 2009 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW 1,400 SQUARE FOOT BARN, A 3,640 SQUARE FOOT RIDING ARENA, A NEW DRIVEWAY ACCESS FROM SUMMERHILL AVENUE AND A 1,700 SQUARE FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND PATIO AREA. LANDS OF VENKATESH; 24388 AMIGOS COURT; #127- 08-ZP-SD. FROM: Cynthia Richardson, Consulting Planner OP— APPROVED BY: Debbie Pedro, Planning Directon�,k RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission do one of the following: Approve the requested Site Development Permit, subject to the recommended conditions in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on the south side of Summerhill Avenue between Amigos Court and Casa Mia Way. Surrounding uses include single-family homes on adjacent parcels with those located on the West side of Summerhill Avenue in Santa Clara County. The property is bisected by a rock lined drainage swale with the new barn and riding arena located on the opposite side of the Swale from the existing home and cottage. Existing development on this 1.748 acre property includes a 5,935 sq. ft. two story main residence, a 792 square foot guest cottage and an existing circular driveway that is located along Amigos Court. The proposed new 1,700 square foot pool and patio will be located in the front yard near the guest cottage. The applicant proposes to construct a new 1,440 square foot bam with a 504 square foot hay loft and construct a new 3,640 square foot riding arena. These improvements will be accessed via a new (second) circular driveway located off Summerhill Avenue. CODE REQUIREMENTS LAHMC Section 10-2.301(c)(9) states that any proposal can be referred to the Planning Commission by the Planning Director. The Zoning and Site Development sections of the Municipal Code are used to evaluate accessory structures including building siting, floor and development area limitations, grading, drainage, height, setbacks, and visibility. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 2 of 10 DISCUSSION Site Data: Net Lot Area: 1.748 acres Average Slope: 9.3% Lot Unit Factor: 1.748 Floor Area and Development Area: Area (sq. jt.) Maximum Existing Development 26,220 16,327 Floor 10,488 6,727 Site and. Architecture Proposed Increase Remaining 26,001 9,674 219 8,671 1,944 1,817 The parcel is located on a gentle hillside with an average slope of 9.3%. The existing improvements on the property include a two-story single family residence and a guest cottage. This parcel maintains mature trees including oaks and redwoods with only one redwood tree being removed for construction of the bam. A drainage swale generally runs north to south on the property, bisecting the improvements. The applicant is requesting approval of a Site Development Permit to construct a 1,440 square foot barn with a 504 square foot hay loft. The highest point of the roof will be 22.5 feet with an added 2.5 foot cupola for a total of 25 feet. One parking space is proposed adjacent to the circular driveway facing Summerhill Avenue. Additionally, a new 3,640 square foot riding arena will be constructed behind the proposed barn and will run along Casa Mia Road. Pursuant to Section 10-1.702.e of the LAHMC, a maximum of three (3) horses are allowed on this property. A new pool and patio will be located in the front of the property near the guest cottage. All modifications to the property meet the setback, height, floor area and development area requirements established in Title 10, Zoning and Site Development, of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. Driveway & Parkine An existing circular driveway accessing off of the property frontage Amigos Court will continue to serve the house and guest cottage with no changes. The barn and arena will be accessed from a second circular driveway located off of Summerhill Avenue. A Traffic Report was prepared by Fehr & Peers dated 9-26-08, (Attachment 2) which evaluates the access onto Summerhill. The report supports this driveway except for two physical concerns outlined in the report. The first is the slope of the proposed driveway. The driveway is designed to maintain the existing grade for a distance of 8 feet from the edge of pavement then the driveway increases to a 12% grade. The Engineering Department has reviewed the Grading and Drainage Plan and has no problem with the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 3 of 10 grade difference. Secondly, the location of a PG&E guy wire is located directly adjacent to the proposed driveway. PG&E has proposed placing two bollards for protection of this wire. Additionally, the applicant has obtained an encroachment permit from Santa Clara County for the construction of this driveway. Summerhill Avenue is half in the County and half in Los Altos Hills with the maintenance being the responsibility of the County. Second Driveway Access for the Barn While there are no specific regulations within the Municipal Code which specifically prohibit multiple accesses to one property, staff has some concern that the effect is that the property maintains two separate uses. Staff discussed the possibility of accessing the proposed bum and arena using the existing driveway through the property with a bridge crossing the existing rock lined swale. The applicant's representative felt that the bridge would create a hardship and did not want to pursue this alternative. While there are no regulations specific to multiple driveway access to a property, each case must be evaluated on its own merits. The Town's Code (Section 10-1.702.1.7) includes limitations for driveway access for second units and requires vehicular access via a common driveway with the primary dwelling to avoid the appearance of two residences on one lot. In this case, the accessory structure is a bum and will not be used as a dwelling unit. Furthermore, if the barn was to be accessed off of the main driveway from Amigos Court, it would be difficult for manure removal and general maintenance of the barn and arena because the structure is on the other side of the rock lined drainage swale. Outdoor Lighting The applicant is proposing lighting under the eves on the front and back of the bam and above the door nearest to Summerhill Avenue (Attachment 8). Additionally paddock lights will be placed above the paddock doors on the barn facing away from Summerhill Avenue and Casa Mia. No lighting is proposed for the arena or swimming pool area. Any future lighting will require planning review. Manure Management Plan The applicant has submitted a Manure Management Plan (Attachment 3). The plan calls for paddocks and arena to be cleaned daily. The waste will be placed in a closed bin and hauled off-site at least once a week. The location of the manure bin has not been determined at this point. Staff has added Condition #12 to require that the location of the bin be reviewed and approved by Planning Staff prior to its placement. Staff will ensure that the bin be located outside of the setbacks and be sufficiently screened. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 4 of 10 Trees & Landscanin The site is primarily vegetated with grasses and low shrubs with redwood trees and oak trees scattered throughout the property. The proposed barn is partially screened by a row of existing bottle brush shrubs along Summerhill Avenue. One (1) multi -trunk redwood tree is proposed to be removed for placement of the new barn. An arborist report (Deborah Ellis, February 11, 2008, Attachment 4) was submitted and reviewed for evaluation of these trees and tree protection measures. The report only addresses the trees surrounding the Riding Arena, however the condition of approval will relate to all trees in the area of the barn and the arena. To ensure that all significant trees will be protected throughout the construction period, staff has included a condition of approval requiring that the trees within the vicinity of the construction be fenced for protection. In addition, a landscape screening plan will be required after final framing of the proposed barn and swimming pool to ensure adequate screening is provided around the property (condition of approval 2). Grading and Drainage Minimal grading is proposed for this project. The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed grading and drainage plan and concluded that it is in conformance with the Town's grading policy. 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. Fire Department Review The Santa Clara County Fire Department has reviewed the plans and has no conditions. (Attachment 6) Committee Review The Environmental Design and Protection Committee reviewed the project and had no recommendations. (Attachment 5) CEOA STATUS The project is categorically exempt under Class 3 of the State CEQA Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Traffic Study prepared by Fehr & Peers dated September 26, 2008. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 5 of 10 3. Venkatesh Manure Management Plan submitted August 20, 2008. 4. Arborist Report prepared by Deborah Ellis dated February 11, 2008 5. Comments from Environmental Design Committee dated June 20, 2008 6. Recommendations from Santa Clara County Fire Department dated May 22, 2008 7. Worksheet 42 8. Exterior Bam Lighting plan 9. Bam elevations 10. Development plans: site, topographic, grading & drainage plan cc: G. Venkatesh Lauren Del Sarto 24388 Amigos Court LTD Equestrian Ranches Los Altos Hills, CA 94024 56685 Mountain View La Quinta, CA 92253 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 6 of 10 ATTACHMENT RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW BARN RIDING ARENA, NEW DRIVEWAY ACCESS FROM SUMMERHILL AVENUE AND A NEW SWIMMING POOL AND PATIO AREA. LANDS OF VENKATESH, File # 230-08-ZP-SD A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. After completion of rough framing and prior to the time of the pre -rough framing inspection by the Planning and Engineering Departments, the applicant shall submit a landscape screening and erosion control plan for review. The landscape screening and erosion control plan is subject to a public hearing. Attention shall be given to plantings which will be adequate to break up the view of the new bam, parking space, and swimming pool 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 barn. 3. A landscape maintenance deposit in the amount of $5,000 shall be posted prior to final inspection. An inspection of the landscape to ensure adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after the installation. The deposit will be released at that time if the plantings remain viable. 4. Prior to beginning any grading operation, all significant trees, particularly the redwood trees around the perimeter of the barn and arena, 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 fence must remain throughout the course of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be allowed within the drip lines of these trees. All tree protection measures as discussed in the Arborist Report prepared by Deborah Ellis dated February 11.2008 shall be met. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 7 of 10 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. No new fencing is proposed. Any new fencing or gates shall require review and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation. 8. Outdoor lighting is approved as shown on the Exterior Bam Lighting Plan. The proposed lighting shall be shielded downlights and shall not encroach or reflect on adjacent properties, and the source of lighting should not be directly visible from off the site. No lighting may be placed within setbacks except two entry or driveway lights. Any additional outdoor lighting not shown on this plan shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to installation. 9. Blocking of the trail along Summerhill Avenue shall not be allowed at any time during the construction process. 10. Fire retardant roofing (Class A) is required for all new construction. 11. The maximum number of horses allowed on this property is 3. At no time shall there be any additional horses kept on this property. 12. Disposal of manure shall be in a manner which will insure that no offensive or unsanitary conditions will develop. The manure management plan dated August 20, 2008 shall be followed. Location of the manure bin shall be located outside of the setbacks and screened. A location plan shall Staff Repon to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 8 of 10 be prepared and reviewed and approved by Planning Staff prior to final inspection. B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 13. Peak discharge at 24388 Amigos Court, as a result of Site Development Permit 127-08, 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 models) 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 detention storage design improvements were installed as shown on the approved plans and in accordance with their recommendations. 14. Any, and all, changes to the approved grading and drainage plan shall be submitted as revisions from the project engineer and shall first be approved by the Town Engineering Department. No grading shall take place 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. 15. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. The applicant should contact PG&E immediately after issuance of building permit to start the application process for in dergrounding utilities which can take up to 6-8 months." 16. At the time of foundation inspection for the barn and pool and prior to final inspection, the location and elevation of the barn and pool shall be certified in writing by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor as being in/at the approved location and elevation shown on the approved Site Development plan. At the time of framing inspection for the barn, the height of the building shall be similarly certified as being at the height shown on the approved Site Development plan. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Caurt January 15, 2009 Page 9 of 10 17. Two copies of an erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans 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 shad] 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. 18. 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 Summerhill Avenue and surrounding roadways, storage of construction materials, placement of sanitary facilities, parking for construction vehicles, clean-up area, and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Green Waste Recovery, Inc. for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 19. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and release of occupancy permits and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance ofplamfor buildingplan check 20. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed and to be roughened where the pathway intersects, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to final inspection. 21. 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 submittal of plans for building plan check. An encroachment permit shall be required by the Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department for all work proposed within the public right of way prior to start work. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Venkatesh 24388 Amigos Court January 15, 2009 Page 10 of 10 22. The property owner shall restore the existing pathway to a type 2B pathway along Summerhill Avenue to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. CONDITION NUMBERS 4, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 21 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. 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 February 6, 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 January 15, 2010). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one yew and completed within two years. Attachment 2 fp FEHR & PEERS 10.PN5)O0.1.V IOX [OXSYliLM15 MEMORANDUM Date: September 26, 2008 To: John Chau, Town of Los Altos Hills Brian Froelich, Town of Los Altos Hills From: Frank Aochi� Subject: Venkstesh— Summerhill A venue Access SJ07-930 As requested, I reviewed the Venkatesh site located on the southwest corner of Casa Mia and Summerhill Avenue in regards to the proposed driveway access onto Summerhill. 1 also reviewed the applicant's site plans that were provided by you. I checked our reference library and could not find anything that would support denying the applicant this access. The proposed location of the two driveways provides sufficient sight distance to see any vehicle approaching from either side. A driver could see at least 500 feet up Summerhill Road on their right and the Stop signs at Amigos Court creates gaps in the traffic coming from their left. Casa Mia is approximately 25 feet from one of the driveways and there is nothing in between to obstruct the driver's view of each other if they happen to approach at the same time. We checked the turning radius entering and exiting the proposed driveways with a vehicle pulling a single axle trailer since the applicant is proposing to use this site for horses. As suspected the vehicle would have to encroach into the opposing lane on Summerhill when making aright turn into and out of the driveways. Widening the driveways would reduce the amount of encroachment. Assuming the number of trips a. vehicle with a trailer will need to make is very low, we believe this will just amount to a minor inconvenience and not a major problem. As noted earlier, the driver will be able to see an approaching vehicle at least 500 feet away. We did discover a couple of physical barriers that were not clearly shown on the site plans. The elevation difference between the site and Summerhill Avenue will require a sloped driveway. The site plan did not show the proposed percent of slope or a profile that would illustrate the slope of the driveway. If the driveway is too steep a vehicle could bottom out on Summerhill causing some damage to the road surface. The other physical barrier is the location of the utility pole guy wire and anchor. Their location was not shown on the site plans therefore the location of the proposed driveway in relation to it is not known. Based on our estimate of the location of the driveway, it appears the guy wire and anchor will need to move. If the guy wire is too close to the driveway, it could affect the vehicle's turning maneuver. In short, except for the two correctable items we were not able to find any violations or conflicts with any existing design standards that would prohibit the applicant from building the proposed access to Summerhill Avenue. 76D West Sarna Clara Street, A675, San Jwe CA 95113 (408) 278-1700 Fu (40B) 2781717 i w,v.iehrandpeers.com Attachment 3 RECEIVE[ AUG 26 2008 TOWN Of LOS ALTOS HILLS Venkatesh Manure Management Plan 24388 Amigos Court Los Altos Hills, CA Following is our manure management plan based on recommendations from the County's Department of Environmental Health: 1. Stalls, paddocks and arena will be cleaned daily. No manure will be left on the ground for more than a day. 2. Waste will be placed in bin to be off hauled on a regular basis (at least weekly). Bin to be provided by professional manure removal company operated by Ed Begun. 3. Location of bin is to be determined (based on maneuverability) 4. Bin has permanent cover 5. As bin is enclosed, no surface water contamination will occur 6. Organic fly predators (small wasps that eat fly larvae) will be distributed monthly 7. Fly spray system (using natural flower serum) will be installed in barn. 8. Additional fly traps will be used in exterior areas if needed Thank you. Lauren Del Sarto Brenda Venkatesh Project Manager Owner Department of Environmental Health — Santa Clara County Hazardous Materials Compliance Division A ... O Solid Waste Program 1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300, San Jose, CA 95112 co�xiv ov axrx cuan 408-918-3400, Fax 408-280-6479 DEH Advisory Elements of a Manure Management Plan When a Manure Management Plan (MMP or Plan) is required, it shall be reviewed/approved by the Department of Environmental Health (DEH) Solid Waste Program. Each Plan shall be site specific and tailored to minimize health hazards or nuisances from fly breeding, vermin harborage/propagation or offensive odors. This Plan should focus on methods of physical, biological and chemical control of flies, vermin and odor. It shall include, but not be limited to, the following elements: 1. Pens and/or stalls should be cleaned at least every two (2) days. 2. Remove stored or stockpiled manure at a frequency to break the fly cycle (at least weekly). 3. Applicant should specify an alternative method for handling manure during wet weather times of the year when equipment access may be impaired (e.g. tarping piles during heavy storm events). 4. Manure may be spread and disked (describe how done and what equipment would be used) at acceptable frequencies (at least weekly) as an alternative to removal as long as agronomic rates are met. 5. When disking is not possible (e.g. during wet weather or equipment/personnel breakdown) the manure must be removed from the site at least weekly from the time animals deposit material. 6. The spreading and disking operation should be rotated around the property and not occur consecutively in the same place (to avoid ground saturation) and is prohibited in riding arenas. 7. Material may be composted using approved methods that maintain proper aerobic conditions (requires Solid Waste Program notification and possible permitting). 8. If hazardous health or nuisance conditions arise from the proposed manure handling methods, other measures will be needed to mitigate the violations. 9. Describe measures that will be taken in the event of equipment and/or personnel breakdown (e.g. where will backup equipment be obtained and which personnel will remove/spread/disk/compost the manure weekly) 10. Surface water intrusion should be prevented from entering pen, stall, storage/stockpile, and/or spreading/disking areas. In general, manure management shall be designed to prevent surface water contamination. 11. Submit a scale site plan showing all (on the property and within 100 feet of property line) structures, pens, stalls, corrals, arenas, roads, wells, drainage channels, ponds, lakes, and watercourses (streams, creeks, rivers etc.) and an indication of slope and direction of drainage. 12. Describe all fly and vermin control measures to be employed (pesticides, traps, fly screening, etc.) 13. DEH Vector Control approval of the MMP may be required. 14. Non -point Source Pollution Prevention Control (NPSPPC) should be consulted for wastewater run-off concerns/control. 15. County Department of Agriculture (Pesticide & Animal Control Divisions) approval may be required. Attachment 4 Deborah Ellis, Ids Consulting Arborlst & Horticulturist S,n i , nncz 1954 ARBORIST REPORT Equestrian Arena 24388 Amigos Court, Los Altos Hills, California Prepared for: Lauren Del Saito LTD Equestrian Ranches, Inc. 16275 Monterey Road, Suite P Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Prepared by: Deborah Ellis, MS. Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Registered Consulting Arborist #305, American Society of Consulting Arborists 13111d Certified Master Arborist WE -04578. Intemationd Society of Arbonculture Certified Rofessional Horticulturist #30022. Amencon Society for Horticultural Science FEBRUARY 11, 2008 ©Copyright Deborah Ellis, 2008, ihis report may be reproduced In whole or in .It by only the client and the client's oulhorized representotives end only for use Mth the subject project and/or ri. All other reproduction requires the expressed mitten or ve,bdl consent of Deborah Ellis prior to repmductian. no Pox 3714, Sorntege. CA 95070. Phone 6 tax: Emoll: decohCrupacbell. net. Web site: heli, 11ww"a—ch.coM Deborah Ellis, MS+!¢��jr Consulting Arborlst & Horticulturist F ,Smah unm 19`84 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................2 AdditionalRecommendations.._ ....... ........ .................... .......................... _.................. _................................. 3 SUPPORTINGINFORMATION...........................................................................................................................5 Purpose& Use of Report............................................ ... _................ ......................._----------------------- 5 Methodology ............... _..... _.. Observations ..................... _.... Site & Vegetation Conditions Tree Table ................. Limits of Assignment IM Cover photo: Subject oak trees #1 through 5, left to right, from the North. All photos in this report taken by D. Ellis on Februory 6, 2008. PO Box 3714, 5010toga, CA 95070. Phone & Fax: 408-725-1357. Email: decah@pacbell,net. Web site: http://www.decoh,com/ TREE MAP Md�CiA k'& Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturis Chain link once PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. Phone & Pax: 408-725-1357. Emad. dacah@pacbell net. Web site: http://wwwdecoh. com/ ood Tri^ & ' Number - (wpJ Proposed � ®1 Arena 1 (approximate location) ' :Slope down ' I 0 ' (TYp ) ` j Closest 4®® ®2 redwood 5* 3 .................e } Slope down t (Typ ) PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. Phone & Pax: 408-725-1357. Emad. dacah@pacbell net. Web site: http://wwwdecoh. com/ Deborah Ellis, MS consulting Arborist & Hoi ticulturlst 6 Senace.nxe 119884 SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS Please refer to the Tree Mao on the previous page, which shows the numbers and locations of the five oak frees on site that are discussed in this report. Table I (Tree Informafionj on pages 7 and 8_ provides basic information about these trees. There are five existing oaks of concern, which will be impacted to at least some extent by the proposed arena construction. Trees til through /4 are coast live oaks (an evergreen native oak species), and tree f5 is a valley oak (a native deciduous oak species). It should be possible to keep trees N2 through 5 without any significant damage to them, if the equestrian arena is constructed as was described to me and my recommended tree protection distances are respected. oak i1 (11 inch trunk diameter) would be most impacted: the root collar (junction of trunk and roots) of this tree is currently 18 inches from an existing 12 to 18 inch high concrete block retaining wall. If grading for the proposed arena extends to the edge of this wall, then this would be much less than the recommended minimum distance of 3xDBHi, which is 4 feet far this tree. The retaining wall however, may reduce the size and number of roots within the proposed grading area for the arena, which is at a lower elevation. Whatever the case, we will have to wait and see how much roof damage this tree incurs for arena grading. It will of course, be possible to reduce root damage by hand excavating along the retaining wall to the depth of the excavation for arena grading, prior to that grading , cleanly cutting any roots that extend into the grading area. I recommend that I be on site when this work is done to observe, assist and determine -rf the tree should be removed after such work, or if any remedial care is necessary far the tree. I do not think it is worthwhile moving the arena farther from the tree. Instead, I think 4 would be more reasonable to remove the tree il necessary and plant another oak tree as a replacement, farther from the arena. I also do not think R would be reasonable to alter the arena subgrade preparation and final surfacing in order to try to reduce damage to this tree. The tree will require a moderate amount of branch pruning in order to provide necessary overhead clearance for the arena /see photo 4, page 6). r 3 to 5 X DBH is a reasonable "rule of thumb" absolute minimum distance any excavation should be from the inmk of a tree on one side of the tree (Smiley, Fraedrich, & Hendrickson 2002. Barlett Tree Research Laboratories). DBH is "diameter at breast height", or 4.5 feet above the ground. I have found that for the urban trees (have worked with, it tends to correlate reasonably well with the Zone of Rapid Toper, which is the zone in which the large buttress (main support roots) rapidly decrease in diameter with increasing distance from the trunk. This zone is usually one to three meters from the trunk, but it varies depending upon tree species, age and soil and other environmental conditions. Using the 3x DBH guideline, an excavation should be no closer than 4.5 feet from the trunk of an 18-4nch DBH tree. This distance is a guideline only, and should be Increased for trees with heavy canopies, decay, structural problems, multiple -side excavations. etc. The 3X DBH may be more of an aid in preserving tree stability and not necessarily long-term free health, as the roots beyond the zone of rapid taper form an extensive network of long, rope -like roots one to two inches in diameter. These woody perennial roots are referred to as transport roots because they function primarily to transport water and minerals. Few large lateral roots are found beyond 10 feet of the trunk, in most situations. 5X DBH is the "preferred" minimum distance which should be strived for however. because even a few feet may make a big difference in tree survival! PO Box 3714, Saratoga, 6A 95070. Phone & Fe 408-725-1357. Email: decalb@paebell. net. Web site: http://www decah con/ plg, 2 of 12 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist& Horticulturist Serznrc eixe 1984 All of the other trees should be fine If the nearest excavation will be kept the minimum Tree Protection Distance specified in the Tree Table (see "Construction Recommendations' column). Remember however, that there will probably be some over -excavation required beyond the actual edge of the arena. I would anticipate at least 12 inches. Add this distance to the Tree Protection Distances in order to obtain the actual Tree Protection Distance necessary. None of the tree protection distances I have recommended are greater than 4 feet. In addition to root loss, trees #2 through #5 should require only a small amount of pruning to provide necessary overhead clearance for the arena. The coast redwood trees (Sequoia sempervirens) adjacent to the arena area should be protected as well. The largest redwood and the one that would probably be impacted the most by proposed construction, is shown as "The Closest Redwood" on the Tree Mao on page 1, and is labeled in photo #6, page 10. The nearest excavation to this tree should be nocioser than 6.5 feet. All other redwoods as well, should have their minimum 3xDBH excavation distance respected, and the entire grove of trees should be fence off from construction as with the five oaks. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS 11 In general, try to keep improvements (and any additional over excavation or work area beyond the Improvement) as for from tree trunks as possible. 3xDBH should be considered the _ minimum distance from any disturbance to the tree hunk on one side of the trunk. If there will be disturbances on multiple sides of the trunk, then 5xDBFl or greater should be used. 2) 1 should review any revised plans, Including grading, utility, construction details and landscaping. These plans were not reviewed for this project, and these additional improvements can impact trees. 3) Continue to work with me as you refine your plans. 4) Follow the separately attached Tree Protection Specifications for this project to the greatest extent possible, before site demo and during and after construction. 5) General Tree Maintenance: a All of the subject trees are located on a slope and have some soil covering their root collar and/or lower trunk Clear soil carefully from this area. Maintain this area "high, dry and visible". Retaining devices will be necessary in the long term- on the upslope side of the trees. The retaining device can be something as simple as 2 x 6 to 2 x 12 inch redwood lumber attached to'/. inch rebar pounded into the soil and attached to the lumber with pipe clamps. Retaining devices should not require excavations that damage tree roots or root collars. Devices should be located at least 12 inches from the trunk if possible. b Do no unnecessary priming, fertilization or other tree work Pre -construction pruning should be limited to the absolute minimum required for construction clearance. Additional instructions for pruning are included in the Tree Protection specification. In general, trees should be pruned as little as possible. The most Important post -construction pruning for this project will be the removal of large dead, cracked or hanging branches over target areas such as the arena) in the future, as these relatively small trees grow larger. I can advise you more about pruning when the project 6 completed. PO Box 3714, Saratoga. G7 95070. Phare & Fox: 408-725-1357. Email: decah@pacbell. net. Web site: hTti, //www.decah coin/ o[ Ib Deborah Ellis, MS Con suldng Arborist& Horticulturis I certify that the information contained in this report is correct to the best of my knowledge, and that this report was prepared in good faith. Thank you for the opportunity to provide service again. Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, rDe6orah EMs Deborah Ellis, MS. Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Certified Professional Honicultunst #30022 ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #305 I.S.A. Board Certified Master Arbodsi WE -457B Enclosure: Tree Protection Specifications for 24388 Amigos Cf. D. Ellis, February 11, 2008 Photo #f2. Ook 7#1 from the south. PO Bax 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. Phone d Fac: 408-725-1357. Email: decah ftocbell net. Web site'. htfp://w Aecah com/ Vag=_ 4 of 10 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Snndce•inm 1984 SUPPORTING INFORMATION PURPOSE & USE OF REPORT This survey and report was required by the Town of Los Altos Hills as a part of The building permit process for this project. Theup rpose of this survey & report is to identify and describe the existing trees that are close to and could be impacted by proposed arena construction - - tree size and condition, and suitability for preservation. The audience for this report is the property owner, UP Equestrian (project designers, project contractors, and Town of Los Altos Hills authorities concerned with tree preservation and tree removal. The gocif of this report is to preserve existing frees on site that are in good condition, we good species for the area and will fit in well with the proposed new use of the site. METHODOLOGY I evaluated the subject ordinance trees for their structural condition (stability) and general health (vigor) by visual assessment from the ground on February 6, 2008. Tree characteristics such as form, weight distribution, foliage color and density, wounds and indicators of decay were noted. Surrounding site conditions were also observed. Evaluation procedures were taken from: Guide for Plant Appraisal. 9th edition, 2000, authored by the Council of Tree and Landscape • Appraisers (CTLAj and published by the International Society of Arboricufture (ISA). - cies Classification and Group Assignment published by the Western Chapter of the iona IntematI Society of Arboriculture (WCISA). 1992. • Tree Hazard Evaluation Form taken from Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas, 2nd Ed., Matheny & Clark, International Society of Arboriculture, 1994. The above three references serve as industry professional standards for tree and landscape evaluations. I measured the trunk diameter of each of the subject trees with a diameter tape at both 4 feet above the ground (Town of Los Altos Hills requirement), and also 4.5 feet (DBH), which is also used for tree protection distance and many other tree -related calculations. (The DBH measurement is not included in the Tree Table. but I have used it to estimate construction impacts to trees). Trunk diameters were rounded to the nearest inch. I estimated the tree's height and canopy spread and recorded additional notes for trees when sign'rficant. Tree Condition (structure and vigor) was evaluated. Condition considered in combination with the current or proposed use of the site yields the Tree Preservation Suitability rating. All of the subject trees were photographed with a digital camera. Some of these photos are included in this report, but all photos are available from me by email if requested. PO Box 3714, 5aroto9q CA 95070. Phone & `ox: 408-725-1357. Emoil: deaah@pacbell. net. Web site: hiTp://www.decah cpm/ Deborah Ellis, MS consulting Arborist & Horticulturls OBSERVATIONS SITE & VEGETATION CONDITIONS The project site is a mostly level grassy (weedy grasses) field between short slopes. Exposure for the frees varies from full to partly shaded, depending upon proximity to existing buildings and to other trees. This flat area and the slopes around it appear to be purposely graded, perhaps for a building pad. Otherwise, the property sloped gently downward to the North. There is a drainage/intermittent creek to the west of the arena site, and a grove of planted coast redwood trees planted near the creek. I evaluated and reported on at least some of the redwoods on this site several years ago; it the owners are interested they may contact me fa the reports I prepared for the previous owner, Lulu Tang. The five subject oaks were probably not planted, but are of natural growth - most likely seedlings from ocoms. These trees are not irrigated or otherwise disturbed, which is good. The trees also have not been pruned (or they have been pruned very little) which is also generally good (because most frees in this area are unnecessarily and/or over -pruned). Other vegetation immediately around the frees is mainly grassy annual weeds that are common in this area. The neighbor's property to the south has some non-native, planted pine trees not too far away from oaks B2 and & PO Box 3714, Saratoga, GA 95070. Phone & Fax: 408-725-1357. Email: decah@pacbell.net. Web site: h"iPI/www decoh tom/ Photo #3 and 4, Tree #1. #3 left hoto: whole tree from the southwest. #4 richt hoto: red upper line shows probable extent of canopy pruning necessary to provide adequate Clearance over arena. Pace 6 of 10 Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist Sendu .nnrc 1984 APPENDIX TABLE #1 TREE INFORMATION Underlined terms are explained after end the Table on the next page. - Condition Rating. Trees are rated for condition on a scale of zero to 100 with zero being a dead tree and 100 being the most perfect tree imaginable (which rarely exists). using this scale. 100 = excellent. 80 = good, 60 = fair, 40 = poor, and 20 = unacceptable. There are Iwo components of tree condition- Vigor and Structure. Each of these components is rated separately and then considered relative to the tree species and present use of the site to obtain the Preservation SuitaL-Mr, 4at,ig li.e. Is this tree worth teeping. PG Gori 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. Phone & Fox: 408-725-1357 E 1. d hep b II rst W b sta: http.//www hx,ah com/ Sclentific, Sii 'CONDITION Expected I1 Preservation Construction Tree & Trunk Hx Construction suitabilityRecommendations Notes It Common D Win i Vigo structure -Impact. Name Prefaned In nmum Included bark between distancetoexcava5on 4 feet, but instead can main scaffold. do excavation at edge fork; should of concrete block do retaining wall 18 subordination' irwhes from root ronin on collar, under my ono of the; supervision and should sistance. Icon1 then integrate Quercus ake the final arena agrifolia, 11.1. 22x25 80 60 Mader ecision to save or clearance t coast live 9.5move this tree and pruning into oak rescribe any is. medial work ecessary If the tree is aved. The lowest ree branches (1, 4 nd 4 inches in iameter) will have to I e removed to provide dequate arena learance.referred minimum Go-dominantistance crotch to excavation feat Slight removelearance proning member or live 89 22x18 80 60probably a few dooak 2coast ranches less than 2 subordination nches in diameter) pruningill be necessary forrena dearance. - Condition Rating. Trees are rated for condition on a scale of zero to 100 with zero being a dead tree and 100 being the most perfect tree imaginable (which rarely exists). using this scale. 100 = excellent. 80 = good, 60 = fair, 40 = poor, and 20 = unacceptable. There are Iwo components of tree condition- Vigor and Structure. Each of these components is rated separately and then considered relative to the tree species and present use of the site to obtain the Preservation SuitaL-Mr, 4at,ig li.e. Is this tree worth teeping. PG Gori 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. Phone & Fox: 408-725-1357 E 1. d hep b II rst W b sta: http.//www hx,ah com/ Deborah Ellis, MS Consulting Arborlst B,Horticulturist 41w, Senare.vrue 1984 UNDERLINED TERMS DEFINED: I ) Co -dominant refers to two leaders, branches or trunks that arae at the same point on a tree and are about the same diameter. This is an undesirable structural defect that is a weak point in the tree. Co -dominant stems typically lack the overlapping tissue present in a branch or trunk collar, which may be why trees with this defect split so easily. It is best that branches or trunks originate with space between them, or If they arise at the some point that they be of different sizes. Co -dominant leaders can often be corrected (one leader removed) when trees are young. When trees are older it a often better to subdue the smaller or more undesirable member by thinning the terminal % of the foliage by 259 to slow its growth and ultimate size relative to the other member. 2) Included bark is bark sandwiched between adjacent branches, a branch and the trunk, or two or more trunks, often appearing as a seam. 4r contrast, a normal attachment will have a ridge of bark protruding upwards and a continuous wood connection between adjacent members. As branches or trunks with included bark grow, they expand in diameter, squeezing the bark along the seam. This may kill some portion of the included bark. When this occurs, a wound response is initiated. As a consequence, cracks can be generated, leading to breakage. Such defects can often be PO Box 3714, Saratoga. CA 95070. Phone & Fax: 403-725-1357. Email: decohftocbell.net. Web site: http://www decoh com/ Page 8 of 10 Sc/enffr 'CONDITION Tree & Trunk Size Preservation Construction # ' Common - (Hx Win Vigo StracNre Construction impact suitabfli fifty Rerrommentlations. Notes- Name R) Preferred minimum Co -dominant' distance to excavation -crotch Meet Wdllprobabiy high, narrow- J wastlive oa k 12.4 40x20 80 60 Low? Fair/Good not need any remove one clearance pruning, member or do subordination) pruning. Preferred minimum V -crotch with distance to excavation included bark'. coast live 4feet Slight removes 4 oak(branches 14.8 40x30 70 60 Low? Fair7Good clearence Pruning one member 3, 4 and 1 or do inches in diameter) subordination' V411 be necessary for pruning. arena clearance. Prefertetl minimum A previous j distance W excavation third bunk 4feet Should not was Quercus need any clearance removed, 5 volley, 2. 74 40x30 80 50 Low? Fair PN°meg' probablyth valley oak h Tire last Year. This to be' ump ut lea. UNDERLINED TERMS DEFINED: I ) Co -dominant refers to two leaders, branches or trunks that arae at the same point on a tree and are about the same diameter. This is an undesirable structural defect that is a weak point in the tree. Co -dominant stems typically lack the overlapping tissue present in a branch or trunk collar, which may be why trees with this defect split so easily. It is best that branches or trunks originate with space between them, or If they arise at the some point that they be of different sizes. Co -dominant leaders can often be corrected (one leader removed) when trees are young. When trees are older it a often better to subdue the smaller or more undesirable member by thinning the terminal % of the foliage by 259 to slow its growth and ultimate size relative to the other member. 2) Included bark is bark sandwiched between adjacent branches, a branch and the trunk, or two or more trunks, often appearing as a seam. 4r contrast, a normal attachment will have a ridge of bark protruding upwards and a continuous wood connection between adjacent members. As branches or trunks with included bark grow, they expand in diameter, squeezing the bark along the seam. This may kill some portion of the included bark. When this occurs, a wound response is initiated. As a consequence, cracks can be generated, leading to breakage. Such defects can often be PO Box 3714, Saratoga. CA 95070. Phone & Fax: 403-725-1357. Email: decohftocbell.net. Web site: http://www decoh com/ Page 8 of 10 Deborah Eilis, MS Consulting Arborist& HoIticutt-net Sendce elnw 1984 completely removed when a tree is young (e.g. the offending members equal or less than 2 inches in diameter). Older, larger cuts (such as 6 inches in diameter or more) could cause decay to spread into the remaining member, which Is undesirable. in these cases it may be best to thin one member (usually the smaller member) by 257. to slow its growth and ultimate s'¢e. 31 Scaffold branch: a primary structural branch arcing from the trunk of a tree. Usually the largest and often the lowest branches of the tree. 4) Stump sprout trees are the result of a Iree trunk being cut down to a short stump close to the ground. K the free survives, it sends out many small shoots (suckers) from around the cut stump. Some of these suckers may survive and grow to become significant trunks. These trunks are spaced very close together and usually have included bark between them, which reduces the strength of their union. Such trunks are prone to failure. Stump sprout trees can be very structurally unsound. particularly as they become large and old. There is often a great deal of decay associated with the mother stump, which can also reduce mechanical stability. 5) Subordination pruning: the removal, typically of the upright or end portion of a parent branch or trunk, to slow growth rate, so other portions of the tree grow faster. Subordination pruning which shortens a branch or competing leader to a lower, lateral branch can be used to reduce branch weight, change branch orientation, alter growth rate to improve the size of a pruned branch d relative to the trunk or parent branch. Phato #5. Oaks #2 to 5 from the North, I¢TT To rigor- PO Box 3714, Saratc ja, �A 95070. Phone & Fax: 408-725-1357. P—I Web site. http://www.decah.com// P,:. -, of I% Deborah Ellis, MS Consulfing Arborist 8 Horticutturls LIMITS OF ASSIGNMENT t SerV.ce einm 1984 1) 1 certify that I have no financial Interest in the property or project that is the subject of this report. 2) 1 have not reviewed any project, but Lauren Del Soria explained tome that the preferred ground treatment for the arena base is 8 inches of native sol that is ripped and compacted )I assume to 90.95%), 4 inches of base rock sealed with asphalt, and 3 inches of sand. 3) The measures noted within this report are designed to assist in the protection and preservation of the trees mentioned herein, should some or at of those trees remain, and to help in their short and long term health and longevity. This is not however, a guarantee that any of these trees may not suddenly or eventually decline, fail, or die, for whatever reason. Because a t shy' significant portion of a tree's roots are usually' for beyond its dnollne, even trees that are well protected during construction often decline, fail or die. Because there may be hidden defects within the root system, trunk or branches of trees, if Is possible that trees #. with no obvious defects can be subject to - failurewithoutwarning. The current state of arboricultural science does not guarantee the accurate detection and prediction of tree defects and the risks associated with trees. There will always be some level of risk associated with trees, particularly large trees. It is impossible to guarantee the safety of any tree. Photo #6. Coast live oak #4 valley oak #5 and the closest redwood to the proposed arena site. From the Northeast, left to right. ri lin : the area antler the total branch spread of the tree, all around the tree. Although free roots may extend out 2 to 3 times the radus of the dripline, a great concentration of active roots is often In the soil directly beneath this area. PO Zox 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. Phone d Fax: 408-725-135 Email: decah@paabell.net. Web site: http://www.decah.mm/ Pore )0 of 10 "-" . vo�e u Attachment 5 Environmental L_sign and Protection Committee ECIC pl iU of 2066 Landscape/Hardscape Evaluation {�1 } 1"' "F { QS ALFF3$ HI Reviewed by: Dat®,dl Applicant Name Address Mitigation: Planting�,Pqlan: Flltr. DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 (408) 378-0010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax), u ,sccfd.org DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS CODMEC. I SHEET CFO sec. 508.3, per Appendix B REONREMENr Attachment 6 mm„droroly A�..mnea A9a^�Y PIAN REVIEW NUMBER 08 1471 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER MLENNMBER 127-08-ZP-SD review of proposed new 1,944 square foot barn with attic, a 3,150 square foot and a pool with open air patio. w of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site is and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine Hance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the ;ant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building rtment all applicable construction permits. red Fire Flow: The fire flow for this project is 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual ire. The adjusted fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) are spaced at the required spacing. No fire department conditions or requirements 11 PINS SPECS NEW RMOL RS OCCUPANCY OONCT. TYPE Appllmn,Nan Mn PAGE ll V -B W. JEFFREY HEID ASLA 5/22/2008 1 of 1 LAH ® ❑ ® ❑ ❑ etCJro OR ARI LonD DsstRiPrloN � Ferguson, Bill Residential Development BARN, ARENA, NAME OF PNOJECT LOCATN)H SFR - VENKATESH 24388 Amiigos Ct Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Serving Santa Clam County and the nl rSeretno, MorCampbell, n Hill, and Steno, Laos Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, 4a May 16 08 04:16p W. Jt 'rey Heid (408) 26-6085 Attaehment7 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills, California 94022 • (650) 941-7222 • FAX (650) 941-3160 WORKSHEET #2 EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA • TURN 1N WITH YOUR APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS 2 CALCULATED BY yy�� 1. DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUAREFGOTAGE) A. House and Garage (from Part 3. A) B. Decking C. Driveway and Parking (Measured 100' along centerline) D. Patios and Walkways E. Tennis Court Existing Proposed Total (AdditiurrwDeleuons) 593's 69*7 ,'A •SI F. Pooland Decking X700 1700 G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B) 742 792 H. Any other coverage VAIKII Io '# I *tt�lk S I <o TOTALS 14 13 27 n,.k-IfS I M 26,t n l Maximum Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1) 210 220 2. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE Existing Proposed Total (SQUAREFOOTAGE) TOTALS ltai327 9,110 3. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) A. House and Garage a. 1st Floor b. 2nd Floor c. Attic and Basement d. Garage B. Accessory Buildings a. 1st Floor b. 2nd Floor c. Attic and Basement TOTALSCo 727 Existing Proposed Total (AddiGonslDeletions) �9 1'15 1 &c c) 14 9 (a O '79Z Maximum Floor Area Allowed - MFA (firm Worksheet #1) 1-31-75 I boC7 9�0 TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY DATE P.- annma Pan. 1 of 1 m_-_ _c. — Venkatesh Proposed Exterior Barn Lighting A. Quartz Bullet Lights under eaves on front and back of barn. Also above door on Summerhill side of barn. B. Lightolier Paddock Lights above paddock doors on side of barn facing arena (away from Summerhill and Casa Mia) Attachment 8 O C Attachment 9 W IL IL a N 19 Z LZ Ir V C� J Wr Cot OW -Z49 Fol 2 0 4 ZOO � 111111. 1;11 111�`�111111 II�;I � Igo � 1i� y �il !• 1111111 111''1'llll 1� 11111 11 1 1 aly1� 11 IM1 1111 �1 1 y � Ij�jl 1 ; 1 IY 1 11;1 1 1 1 .1'111 aits1 1 V C� J Wr Cot OW -Z49 Fol 2 0 4 ZOO 7 `\ scoop apm pu'3 3 d a Q QQgga � 3 Q ti Q3q o 0 mV 0 9I m4 3 7 `\ scoop apm pu'3 3 -3m' H S.nda.BZn Q m4 3 -3m' aax aax aax A A G H S.nda.BZn m4 N aaa ass �A a N aaa aao aaa `a ryr aax aax aax A A G Womina Barn #2 This barn may have oD"nal features... call for details