HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3.1TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS August 11, 2005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND EXCEPTION TO GRADING POLICY FOR
TENNIS COURT, TENNIS PAVILION, UTILITY BUILDING AND REALIGNED
DRIVEWAY; LANDS OF EVERSHINE; 13310 LA PALOMA ROAD; FILE 449-05-ZP-
SD-GD.
FROM: Leslie Hopper, Project Planner
APPROVED BY: Carl Cahill, Planning Director C, C .
RECOMMENDATION that the Planning Commission:
Approve the requested Site Development Permit, subject to the recommended conditions
of approval in Attachment 1.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is an 11.39 -acre parcel located on the west side of La Paloma Road,
between Golden Hill Court and Alta Tierra Road. The property is one of three contiguous
parcels, totaling 16.95 acres, owned by the applicant. A new 27,526 -sq. -ft., two-story residence
is currently under construction on the site. The majority of surrounding properties are developed
with single-family residences.
Approved by the City Council on November 7, 2002, the new residence includes five bedrooms,
indoor and outdoor swimming pools, and attached garages for six cars. Major issues were
visibility of the new hilltop residence and the extensive grading involved, as well as the large
scale of the project and its potential for business rather than residential use. Visibility was
addressed by sinking the house as much as 27 feet into the site and surrounding it with berms and
landscape screening. The impact of extensive grading was minimized by requiring
approximately 19,000 cubic yards of dirt to be dispersed on site rather than hauled off the
property. A condition of approval requires that all current and future development of the
property be used for purposes of a single-family residence.
The applicants have also submitted an application for a lot line adjustment, which is not under
consideration at this time.
The applicant requests approval of a Site Development Permit for a tennis court, tennis pavilion
and utility building, as well as a realigned driveway that will provide access to all three
contiguous parcels. The tennis court, tennis pavilion and utility building are clustered in the
southeast comer of the property, downhill from the main house. Each component of the project
is described as follows:
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 2 of 13
• Tennis court — Regulation size, double court at 8,784 sq. ft. enclosed by 10 -ft. vinyl
coated chainlink fence with pavilion and six -car parking lot. Lawn area in front of
parking lot is grasscrete and serves as fire truck turnaround for accessory buildings.
• Tennis pavilion — The 630 -sq. -ft. building includes restroom, changing room, shower
and equipment storage. Colors and materials, including slate and copper roof, snatch
main residence.
• Utility building — The 3,634 -sq. -ft. utility building houses the emergency generator and
pumps, and provides storage and work space for maintenance vehicles and equipment.
The low -profile building is tucked into the slope, requiring a grading exception for up to
7.5 feet of cut. Colors and materials, including slate roof, match main residence. A
grass -paved service road provides access to the utility building. Plans include
soundproofing in equipment room and a 6 -ft. high sound wall between the parking lot and
the closest neighbor, Ms. Szekely at 13643 Wildcrest Drive.
• Realigned driveway - Begins at the existing driveway entrance on La Paloma and curves
through the two adjacent parcels, crossing over a natural swale and continuing up the hill.
(The lower portion of the previously approved driveway followed the existing driveway
for Lot 11 rather than crossing the swale.) Construction of the driveway will require a
grading exception for up to 7 feet of fill. A driveway gate is proposed in the northwest
comer of Lot 11. Eight oak trees, none of which are Heritage Oaks, will be removed and
relocated or replaced to accommodate the lower portion of the driveway.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
As required by Section 10-2.301 of the Site Development Code, this application for a new
residence has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. Criteria for
review from the Site Development Code include grading, drainage, building siting, pathways,
landscape screening and outdoor lighting. Zoning Code review encompasses compliance with
floor and development area limitations, height, setbacks and puking requirements.
PROJECT DATA
Subject Parcel:
Gross Lot Area:
11.39 acres
Net Lot Area:
10.96 acres
Average Slope:
25.2%
Lot Unit Factor:
7.39
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 3 of 13
Floor Area and Development Area:
Area (Sq. Ft.) Maximum Proposed
Already
Total % of
Sq. Ft,
Approved
Maximum
Remaining
Development 68,727 23,507
41,184
64,691 94%
+4,036
Floor 38,724 4,264
27,5260
+31,790 82%
+6,934
DISCUSSION
MDA and MFA
Proposed new development area totals 23,507 sq. ft. including 4,264 sq. ft. of floor area (tennis
pavilion is 630 sq. ft and utility building is 3,634 sq. ft.) and 19,243 sq. ft. of paving (10,459 sq.
ft. for driveway, service road and parking areas and 8,784 sq. ft. for tennis court). When
combined with already approved development, total development area for the parcel is 64,691 sq.
ft. (94% of MDA) including total floor area of 31,790 sq. ft. (82% of MFA).
Residential Use
The large scale of the proposed new residence and accessory structures has raised concern
regarding the intended use of the property. When the new residence was being reviewed, the
Chan family provided a written statement that they do not intend to use the home as a place to
conduct business. Condition 1 specifies that all current and future development of the property
must be for purposes of a single-family residence.
To ensure the residential use and character of the proposed additions, staff questioned the need
for a six -car parking lot for the tennis court. In response, the Chan family explained that the six
parking spaces are needed because the tennis court is located a considerable distance from the
main residence and is designed to accommodate as many as four tennis players, plus a tennis
instructor and spectators. Mr. Chan also stated that the 3,634 -sq. -ft. utility building will be used
to house the emergency generator and mechanical equipment, as well as provide storage for
maintenance vehicles and equipment, outdoor fumiture, and space for hobbies. (See written
statements in Attachment 3).
Residential Appearance
Both the tennis pavilion and utility building will have integral colored stucco walls, natural slate
roofs and copper accents to match the main residence. In addition, the low -profile utility
building will have carriage -style wood roll -up doors instead of metal doors, and the same exterior
lighting fixtures that are used for the main residence. These features will contribute to the
building's residential appearance. In addition, Condition 2 requires that landscaping will
adequately screen the utility building from view of the neighbors.
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
A.,,A 11, 2005
Page 4 of 13
Noise Levels
Located 45 feet from the east property line, the utility building opens out towards the Szekely
property at 13643 Wildcrest Drive. Noise generated by activities at the utility building could be
directed over the Szekely property, and might also impact other neighbors. One potential source
of noise is the emergency generator, which will run only during power outages and occasional
testing. Other potential sources of noise include the operation of yard maintenance vehicles and
equipment. The following measures will ensure that noise levels are minimized:
Equipment soundproofing. Condition 10 requires the generator to be enclosed in a
Second Stage noise control enclosure and high-performance duct silencers to be installed
at ventilation openings as proposed by the applicant's noise consultant (Attachment 4).
With these control measures, noise levels from the generator will be approximately 55
dBC. Although that exceeds the Town's limit of 50/40 dBC, it is acceptable because the
generator will operate only during emergencies and for routine testing, which can occur
only during the daytime (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and sunset).
• Sound wall. To minimize potential noise impacts on neighbors, a 6 -ft. high sound wall
will surround the parking area and provide a noise barrier between the utility building and
the closest neighbor.
• Limited hours of operation. Condition 11 specifies that the utility building cannot be
used between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
LiOtine and Landscaping
No lighting will be permitted for the tennis court, as noted on Sheet C-2. No skylights are
proposed for the tennis pavilion or utility building. The proposed lighting for the exterior of the
utility building is shown on the elevations and lighting plan (Sheets A-1 and A-2). Lighting has
been limited to five lights, and fixtures will be downlights to match those on the main house. No
lighting is proposed in the setbacks. No lighting was shown at the driveway entrance. The
driveway gate (approximately 300 feet from La Paloma) includes two lighting fixtures. Specific
lighting fixtures are not proposed at this time. Staff recommends that the number of exterior
lights be approved as submitted, that all lighting fixtures be approved by staff prior to
installation, and that any additional outdoor lighting be reviewed by the Planning Commission
along with the landscape screening plan as noted in Condition 2.
Numerous oak trees are sprinkled along the western side of the property and will be protected by
a new open space/conservation easement. Eight oaks (none of which are Heritage Oaks) will be
removed to accommodate the lower portion of the driveway. The trees will be replaced at a ratio
of two to one (Condition 2). The perimeter of the property adjacent to the utility building was
planted several years ago and is already fairly well screened with existing trees and bushes. In
addition, new landscaping will be needed to screen the utility building and sound wall, as well as
the tennis court.
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 5 of 13
Condition 2 requires submittal of a complete landscape plan and erosion control plan for the
property, including the main residence and the new accessory structures. It is recommended that
landscaping consist of at least one-third drought tolerant plantings to minimize runoff and
erosion. The landscape plan must be submitted once the house is framed, and will be forwarded
to the Planning Commission for review. Any planting required for screening or erosion control
will be required to be planted prior to final inspection.
Grading and Drainage
The Engineering Department has reviewed the plans and recommended conditions of approval as
specified in Attachment 5. Up to 7 feet of fill is proposed for construction of the driveway,
which is not consistent with the maximum of 3 feet allowed under the Town's grading policy. In
addition, up to 7.5 feet of cut is proposed for the utility building, whereas the grading policy
allows a maximum cut of 4 feet for accessory buildings. However, the grading policy gives the
Planning Commission discretion to grant exceptions to the grading policy when required by the
specific site. In this case, the grading exception is justified for the driveway because of the steep
slope of the site and because it is the best location for providing access to all three contiguous
parcels. The grading exception is justified for the utility building because the 7.5- ft. cut allows
the building to be unobtrusively tucked into the slope, thereby minimizing its height and
visibility. A copy of the grading policy is attached for reference (Attachment 6).
Proposed grading quantities for the driveway and accessory structures total 3,130 cubic yards of
cut and 23,300 cubic yards of fill. Most of the fill dirt is currently stockpiled on the site of the
tennis court and utility building and will be used for driveway construction. As a result, the
number of truck trips will be minimized.
Storrs drainage will be provided by a new detention system next to the tennis court that will feed
into a 12 -in. pipe that runs down the hill to an energy dissipator on Lot 11. A culvert will run
under the new driveway where it crosses the swale. The final drainage plan will be reviewed by
the Engineering Department per Condition 12.
Sewer and Water
Reciprocal agreements will allow the Chans to connect to a new water main loop on Wildcrest,
and the Goeses to connect to the sewer main on La Paloma by running a sewer lateral across the
Chain's property. Condition 20 requires dedication of a 10-11. private sewer easement on the
Chan's property prior to submittal for building plan check. Purissima Hills Water District has
indicated that the proposed water improvements meet the District's design standards and
specifications (Attachment 7).
Planning Commission
13310I.a Paloma Road
Augur 11, 2005
Page 6 of 13
Fire Deoartment Comments
As indicated in the comments included in Attachment 8, the Santa Clara County Fire Department
is concerned about firetruck access and a turnaround area near the proposed accessory buildings.
The applicants have been working with the Fire Department to address these issues. A probable
solution involves the provision of a grasscrete turnaround in conjunction with the parking area
for the tennis court. The service road, also paved in grasscrete, will be widened to 14 feet if
necessary. Condition 24 requires the submittal of a final fire protection plan for review and
approval by the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to submittal for building plan check.
Access and Open Space/Conservation Easements
Existing easements on the subject parcel include a 10 -foot wide pedestrian/equestrian easement
along the western property line and a conservation easement over the northwest tip of the
property. Proposed new access easements include a 50 ft. right-of-way through Lot 12 where the
driveway provides access to three lots, and a 35 -ft. ingress/egress easement over the portion of
the driveway serving Lot 11 and Lot 6.
A new 10 -ft. pathway easement is proposed along La Paloma and the south property lines of Lot
11 and Lot 6 leading to Atherton Court. The proposed pathway is consistent with the Pathway
Master Plan and has been approved by the Pathway Committee (Attachment 9). Condition 23
requires construction of the new pathways, including a footbridge over the drainage channel
along La Paloma, prior to final inspection of the project.
A new open space/conservation easement will protect most of the oaks on the steep slope along
La Paloma Road.
Environmental Desum Committee
Two sets of comments from the Environmental Design Committee are included in Attachment 10
and are summarized as follows:
• Excavation for utility building. Based on the story poles, it appeared the building
would require a 15 -ft. cut and the Committee asked whether excavation for the utility
building complied with the Town's grading policy. Staff explained that the area is
currently being used to stockpile dirt that was excavated from the site of the residence and
will be used for fill in constructing the driveway. As a result, the story poles are almost
completely buried in the stockpiled dirt. Once the stockpiled dirt is removed from the
site, the utility building will require a 7.5 -ft. cut, which complies with the Town's grading
policy.
• Accent lights for moonlighting effect. Landscape lighting has since been removed from
the plans and is currently not under review. Landscape lighting will be considered at a
later time, when the landscape screening plan is submitted.
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
Augos[II, 2005
Pagel of 13
• Relocation of oak trees. The Committee requested that healthy young oaks removed to
accommodate the driveway be relocated if possible. Condition 2 specifies that the
landscape screening plan include relocation of the oaks or replacement at a two -to -one
ratio. The landscape plan must be submitted after final framing of the house is complete.
• Future vineyard versus orchard. As a suggestion for the future landscape plan, the
Committee recommended consideration of an orchard rather than a vineyard due to
potential impacts of fertilizers and pesticides on water quality. These issues can be
addressed when the landscape plan is submitted and reviewed.
Neighbors' Comments
Letters of support (Attachment 11) have been submitted by adjacent neighbors Ms. Szekely, Mr.
Eger, and Mr. and Mrs. Goese, who are closest to the proposed tennis court and utility building
and have no objections. Other more distant neighbors across La Paloma on Westwind have
discussed the project with staff and indicated their concern about the large scale of the project
and its potential for non-residential use. They have also voiced concern about parking when
large gatherings are held at the main residence. To date, no letters of concern have been
received.
Environmental Review
The project is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(e) accessory
structures for a single-family residence.
SUMMARY
The proposed project is below the allowable floor and development area for the property. The
project is in general compliance with the requirements of the Zoning and Site Development
Codes, with the exception of the Town's grading policy. The proposed pathway is consistent
with the Pathway Master Plan and has been approved by the Pathway Committee. Potential
noise impacts generated by the utility building will be minimized through equipment
soundproofing, construction of a sound wall, and limitations on the hours of use. The closest
neighbors have no objections to the project. Staff recommends approval of the project subject to
the conditions of approval in Attachment 1.
Planning Commission
133101s Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 8 of 13
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recommended conditions of approval
2. Worksheets #1 and #2
3. Three written statements from Edward Chan (one dated June 29, 2005 and two dated July 15,
2005)
4. Ambient noise study dated March 16, 2004 and letter dated July 13, 2005 from Martin
Newson & Associates
5. Engineering review comments dated July 28, 2005
6. Town's Grading Policy
7. Purissima Hills Water District letter dated April 21, 2005
8. Santa Clara County Fire Department comments dated April 4, 2005
9. Pathway Committee Minutes dated April 25, 2005
10. Environmental Design Committee comments dated April 21, 2005 and June 14, 2005
11. Letters of support from adjacent neighbors Ms. Kay Szekely, Mr. Terry Eger, and Mr. and
Mrs. Werner Goese
cc: Wayne Okubo
Evershine III, L.P.
Cupertino, CA 95014
cc: Jim Toby
Project Engineer
Lea & Sung Engineering, Inc.
2495 Industrial Parkway West
Hayward, CA 94545
Scott Krough
Project Manager
KCR Development, Inc.
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Fm to: 650-949-0179
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 9 of 13
ATTACHMENT
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW
TENNIS COURT TENNIS PAVILION UTILITY BUILDING
AND REALIGNED DRIVEWAY
LANDS OF EVERSHINE, 13310 LA PALOMA ROAD
File #49-05-ZP-SD-GD
A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
1. All current and future development at the above-mentioned property must be used
for purposes of a single-family residence.
2. Subsequent to final framing of the new residence, a landscape screening,
landscape lighting, and erosion control plan shall be reviewed by the Planning
Commission. Particular attention shall be given to plantings that will be adequate
to break up the view of the new residence, tennis court and utility building from
surrounding properties and streets. The eight oak trees removed to accommodate
the driveway shall be relocated or replaced at a ratio of two to one. Staff
recommends that one third of proposed plantings be drought tolerant plantings.
All landscaping required for screening purposes or for erosion control (as
determined by the Planning Department and City Engineer) must be installed
prior to final inspection.
3. Prior to beginning any grading operation or demolition, all significant trees are to
be fenced at the drip line. The fencing shall be of a material and structure (chain-
link fencing) 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 and the
construction crew shall pay special attention to the care of the existing trees. No
storage of equipment, vehicles, or debris shall be allowed within the drip lines of
the fenced trees.
4. A landscape maintenance deposit (or certificate of deposit), equal to the cost of
materials and installation for all landscaping required for screening purposes or for
erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer), but not to exceed $5,000.00,
shall be posted prior to final inspection. An inspection of the landscape to ensure
adequate establishment and maintenance shall be made two years after installation.
The deposit will be released at that time if the plantings remain viable.
5. Exterior finish colors shall match the main residence and shall exhibit a light
reflectivity value of 50 or less, per manufacturer specifications. Roof materials shall
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 10. 13
have a light reflectivity value of 40 or less, per manufacturer specifications. White
trim area should be minimized, particularly on large surfaces such as doors,
columns, railings, and trellises. All color samples shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. All
applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the approved color(s)
prior to final inspection.
6. Skylights, if utilized, shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted light. No
lighting may be placed within skylight wells.
7. Fire retardant roofing (Class A) is required for all new construction.
8. Staff shall review and approve exterior lighting fixtures for the utility building and
driveway gate prior to installation.
9. The Planning Commission shall review any additional outdoor lighting with the
landscape screening plan. Lighting fixtures shall generally be shielded downlights.
Exceptions may be permitted in limited locations (entry, garage, etc.) or where the
fixtures would not be visible from off site. Any security lighting shall be limited in
number and directed away from clear view of neighbors, and shielding with shrouds
or louvers is suggested. Lighting shall be low wattage, 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 for two driveway or
entry lights, except where determined to be necessary for safety. No lighting shall
be allowed for the tennis court.
10. The emergency generator shall be enclosed in a second stage noise control
enclosure, and additional high performance silencers will be used on the intake
and discharge ventilation openings. Routine testing of the emergency generator
and associated equipment shall occur only during the daytime, as defined in the
Town's noise ordinance (7:00 a.m. to sunset).
11. To mitigate potential noise impacts, the utility building shall not be used between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. except during emergencies.
B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
12. Two sets of a final grading and drainage plan and storm drain calculations shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to
acceptance of plans for building plan check. The final grading and drainage
plan shall show the proposed private storm drain easement begins at the
common property line of Lot 6 and Lot ll and ends at the street right of way on
La Paloma Road Final grading and drainage shall be inspected by the
Engineering Department and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma ROaJ
August 11, 2005
Page 11 of 13
Engineering Department prior to final inspection. A letter shall be submitted
from the project engineer stating that the site grading and drainage improvements
were installed as shown on the approved plans prior to final inspection.
13. 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 (November 1 to April 1) 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.
14. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground
15. At the time of foundation inspection for the service/utility building and prior to
final inspection, the location and elevation of the building 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 new building, the height of the building
shall be similarly certified as being at the height shown on the approved site
development plan.
16. 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 far
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 entire 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.
17. 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 La Paloma Road and
surrounding roadways, storage of construction materials, placement of sanitary
facilities, parking for construction vehicles, clean-up area, and parking for
construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for
collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos
Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town
and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits.
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 12 of 13
18. 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.
19. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior
to final inspection. A sewer plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer
shall be required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to acceptance ofplans
for building plan check. An encroachment permit shall be required by the Town's
Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right-of-way
prior to commencement ofwork.
20. The property owner shall provide the Town legal descriptions, plat exhibits, and
recorded documents for the private storm drain easement and private sanitary
sewer easement prior to submittal ojplans for building plan check.
21. The property owner shall dedicate a 50' wide public right-of-way to the Town
over the section of driveway that serves 3 properties. The property owner shall
provide a legal description and plat exhibit prepared by a registered civil engineer
or a licensed land surveyor, and the Town shall prepare the dedication document.
The dedication document, including the approved exhibits, shall be signed and
notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to submittal of
plans far building plan check
22. The property owner shall dedicate a 35' wide ingress/egress easement over lots
11, 12 and 6. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits
that are prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor and the
Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including
the approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and
returned to the Town prior to submittal ofplans jar building plan check
23. The pathways along La Paloma and the south property lines of Lot 1 I and Lot 6,
including a footbridge over the drainage channel along La Paloma, shall be
constructed prior to final inspection of the project.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT:
24. A final fire protection plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to submittal 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 at least two weeks prior to final building inspection
approval.
Planning Commission
13310 La Paloma Road
August 11, 2005
Page 13 of 13
CONDITION NUMBERS 5, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 24 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND
SIGNED OFF BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO
ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR PLAN CHECK BY THE
BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until August
11, 2006). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work on items
not requiring a building permit shall be commenced within one year and completed within two
years.
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
LEA & STING ENGINEERING, INC.
CALCULATIONS BY LEA & SUNG ENGINEERING (S10) 8874086
WORKSHEET SI - ORIGINAL LOT 6
CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE, LOT UNIT FACTOR (LUF)
MAXINIUM DEVELOPMENT AREA (MDA). AND MAXIMUM FLOOR.AREA (MFA)
ATTACHMENT,;-.
PROPERTY OWNER(S)
Evershine M L.P.
PROPERTY ADDRESS
13310 La Paloma Road
CALCULATED BY
Guiseue Perez
DATE February 24, 2005
REFERENCEMAP:
2020773PL-1
JOB# 20207/3 CI
1. CALCULATION OF AVERAGE SLOPE
A- NET AREA (An)' 10.96 ACRES B. CONTOUR INTERVAL (q
C. DRAWING SCALE 1'=40'
D. CONTOUR LENGTH WITHIN NET AREA OFLOT (An)
5 FT.
(Pre-existing)
CONTOUR LENGTH
(INCIIESI
7.390
CONTOLR LENGTH
(INCHES)
CONTOUR LENGTH
(INCHES)
68727 SQUARE FEET
CONTOUR LENGTH
(INCHES)
340 3,4
430 25.8
520
610
345 5.5
435 24.1
525
615
350 6.7
440 22.4
530
620
355 125
445 21.1
535
625
360 15.8
450 19.6
540
630
365 19 3
455 13.5
545
635
370 26.8
460 6.6
550
640
375 290
465
555
645
3SO 293
470
560
650
385 35.3
475
565
655
390 364
480
SO
660
395 36.8
485
575
665
400 385
490
S80
670
405 41.5
495
585
675
410 37.1
500
590
680
415 34.3
505
595
685
520 292
1_10
600
690
425 27.5
515
605
695
TOTAL 600.3
CONVERT INCHES TO FEET (MULTIPLY BY MAP SCALE) _ (L) _
E. AVERAGE SLOPE WITHIN NET AREA OF LOT
S= (0,0023) (5.0 Fr) (24012 FT) = 25.2%
(10.96)
2. CALCULATION OF LOT UNIT FACTOR (LVF)
LUF =(An)(1-[0.02143(S-10)7)=
7.390
3. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT AREA (MDA)
MDA=
68727 SQUARE FEET
4. CALCULATION FOR MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA (MFA)
MFA= 38724 SQUARE FEET
If the slope 4less than 10%, the LUF for the lot is equal m the net area.
If the LUF is equal to or less than 50, you wR need a conditional development permit
make an appointment with the Town Planner for further information.
NET AREA EXCLUDES CONSERVATION P.ASPMENTS AND PAVED PORTIONS OF ANY P'GRPSS/EGRESSE IWEPT
TOWN USE ONLY ICHECKED BY: JDATE,
24012.0 Fr.
07/28/2005 13:36 5108873019 LEA & SUNG ENG PAGE 02/02
_ TOWN OF WS TOS HILLS
'iep sl�tlna anloiiJCRn� and
CALCULATIONS BY LEA & SUNG ENGINEERING (st9) gwepea
WORKSHEET 92 - LOT 6
EXISTINO AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA
PROPERTYOWN S
E. hineW L.P.
PROPERTY ADDRE55
13310 La Paloma Road
CALCULATED BY
stile Perez
1 DATE Jul 28 2005
REFERENCE MAP:
2020773PLI
JOR4 2020773 CI
1, DRYR .OJMMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
2. FRItw A[ea (SQUARE FOQTAGE)
Appy od
Amp roved
Proposal
TORI
A.
Hoax and Gmage (From Part 2.A)
27526 '
0
27526
B.
Dd...y&Puking
4214
0
4214
158%
(mmwua IW.I., owurlIM
774)
0
IXanDt
C.
Addititmsl Psdcinp/Driva y
0
10459
10459
D.
Walkways/Twracm
5619
0
5619
&
Pool&DcIwg
3653
0
3653
F.
Tmrds Coon
0
8784
8784
O.
Entry Fountain & Paving
172
0
172
H.
Accvamy eoitdings (Prom Part 2.R)
0
4264 '
4264
Totals
4119d
23507
64691
Maximoto Dw01pomt Arm Allowed-MDA(Bmn ccrlmI et 41)
68727 Sq.FI.
2. FRItw A[ea (SQUARE FOQTAGE)
R. Accessary Buildings
Tennis Pavilico 0 630 630
b. Utility Building 0 3634 3634
c. Attic & Bum:mt 0 0 0
Totals 27526 4264 31731f–
Mamma. Floor Arm Allmvod -MFA (from worlwbm al) 38724 Sq. FI.
""• dmotea Floor amu supplied by architect
" b,tl- q .11-1,le MDA=750U.E(ntin),ifLUF:.S, cotMitiond dwalopmmtpermit eppGes
• t>r rm a. "n,,....t.I. uaa–<mn.
Appy od
Propasod
TOW
A. House and Garage
a. 1st Floor
10069 "
0
10069
b. 2nd Floor
15890 "
0
158%
u Attic<F Bmrment2(
774)
0
IXanDt
d. Gmvgo
1567
0
1567
R. Accessary Buildings
Tennis Pavilico 0 630 630
b. Utility Building 0 3634 3634
c. Attic & Bum:mt 0 0 0
Totals 27526 4264 31731f–
Mamma. Floor Arm Allmvod -MFA (from worlwbm al) 38724 Sq. FI.
""• dmotea Floor amu supplied by architect
" b,tl- q .11-1,le MDA=750U.E(ntin),ifLUF:.S, cotMitiond dwalopmmtpermit eppGes
• t>r rm a. "n,,....t.I. uaa–<mn.
ATTACHMENT .j
RECEIVED
JUN 3 0 2005
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
June 29, 2005
Town of Los altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
RE: Evershine Project, 13310 La Paloma Rd. - Tennis Pavilion Panting Spaces
Dear Planning Department
In response to your request, we are sending this letter detailing the rationale to our six (6)
parking spaces at the Tennis Pavilion. Due to the distance from the main house, we will
drive our cars to the court in order to play tennis. Further, we expect to periodically have a
tennis instructor and a couple of guests visit our tennis court. In order to facilitate our
needs, we need the six puking spaces at the Tennis Pavilion. If there are any further
questions, please feel free to contact me at Thanks for your attention to this
matter.
Sincerely,
Edward Chan
July 15, 2005
Town of Los .Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
RE: Evershine Project, — Utility Building
Dear Planning Department:
In response to your request, we are sending this letter detailing the use of our proposed
utility building. We plan to store a small amount of landscaping equipment in the center of
the utility building, but we do not plan to hue a full-time staff for maintenance. Instead, we
plan to contract a landscaping company to maintain the grounds on a need basis. They will
use some of the equipment that is stored in the utility building. But they will most likely
bring their own mowers and equipment. Due to the lack of storage space in the main house,
we will need space to store miscellaneous items. Some examples of the type of items we
plan to store in the storage area of the building are: Christmas and other seasonal
decorations, Pool and outdoor furniture during winter, and other similar items. Further, we
plan to store some hobby and craft making items, such as flower arrangement articles in the
utility building as well. If there are any further questions, please feel free to contact me at
Thanks for Your attention to this matter.
Sincerely, %
Edward Chan
July 15, 2005
Town of Los altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los .altos Hills, CA 94022
RE: Evershine Project, — Design of utility Building
Dear Planning Department:
We believe we hate taken into consideration the design intent of the utility building in
maintaining the architectural and design elements found in a residential building, rather than
a commercial structure. For instance, the sectional roll -up doors will be designed around
wood carriage doors commonly found in this type of architecture and not commercial metal
doors. Furthermore the exterior of the structure will be integral colored plaster matching
the tennis pavilion which is meant to blend in with its natural surroundings. The roof will
also be made of natural slate material and all gutters are planned to be copper, which will
patina into a warm brown tone color. The intended and proposed landscaping is designed to
screen off a majority of the building from neighboring views. If there are any further
questions, please feel free to contact me at Thanks for your attention to this
matter.
Sincerely,
Edward Chan
RECEIVED
JUL 2 5 2005
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
13 July 2005
Mr. Robert Meiklejohn
Hablinski Manion Architecture
Beverly Hills CA 90210
Subject: Evershine III Residence: Emergency Generator
Dear Robert,
Martin Newson & Associates LLC
Consultants in Acoustics
Sana
@ M0
9W03
T,l hune1%d96113
FaJIG F299'13
Further to our receipt of the latest drawings, we provide the following comments. We note that
the Emergency Generator will be housed within a masonry building having 12" thick solid
grouted walls. The generator will be located 35 ft from the property line. The purpose of the
emergency generator is to supply power in the event of power outages (which are typically
infrequent). We note that routine testing of the equipment would only be done during the
daytime.
You will recall that we visited site last year to measure ambient noise levels (see our report dated
16 Much 2004). We noted that the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code states that "machines, tools
or appliances" shall not exceed 50 dB(C) during the daytime period, and 40 dB(C) at night. The
use of C -weighting in environmental noise assessment is highly unusual. It is much more
common to assess noise using the A -weighting network, which approximates the response of the
human ear to noise.
The "emission of sound in the performance of emergency work" is exempted from these limits,
however there is no indication that this exemption extends to cover testing and operation of fixed
equipment such as the emergency generator.
The proximity of the generator's proposed location to the site boundary means that it will be
extremely difficult to achieve the limits set in the Municipal Code. It is proposed to provide the
generator with the higher of the two available stages of noise control enclosures and additional
high-performance silencers will also be used on the intake and discharge ventilation openings.
With these measures, noise levels at the property line will be approximately 55 dBC. This is
largely due to the limitations in attaining a large degree of attenuation of low -frequency noise.
Where dBA is used as the measurement metric, the "A" weighting rolls off low -frequency noise
to mimic the characteristics of the human ear. With the Second Stage enclosure, the use of IAC
type 5 S silencers at the intake and discharge ventilation openings would result in a noise level of
approximately 42 dBA at the property line.
Based on its proposed location, we feel that the use of both a sound -attenuating enclosure plus
high-performance duct silencers for ventilation openings represents a good faith effort by the
team to reduce noise levels at the property line.
ww..re.sonacounin.mm
`i
page 2
We would confirm that based on their current location within the generator room, noise from the
associated pumps will be consistent with the City noise limit at the property line.
We trust that the above is adequate for your current needs.
Yours Sincerely,
artin Newson &�Asssociaattess LLC
03-086
pmj/ emsl im 3/ 15a elm
125 KVA
�1 EMERGENCY GENERATOR
--- - -- - - - 1 (W/STAGE 11 ENCLOSURE)
AR INTAKE
LOWER
SILENG=R
FIRE PUMP'
-. -AIR INTAKE
VENTS
255 F, DOOR SWING
(TYFOR ')
DOMESTIC PUMP
AIR DISCHARGE
\ ' VENTS
/
I
T SILENCER
AIR EiHAJST \\\
LOUVER \
I
voarH
aer.rc-
Cale wo/ea
o.a. g
NIKO S
Hrxow:orEEos
06/162005 EVER INE 111
ALi.O
Ev,—o.
gElerWS Eµ�i
2780Sk 'kD,w,S.-..
camSCALE:
UPDATED GENERATOR LAYOUT
Tomive, Glilomia W505
nois3ann rnx nol55o-ten
(W/STAGE H ENCL SURE)
SK_1
1/f=1'-0"
RECEIVED
JUL 2 b 2005
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
16 March 2004
Mr. Robert Meiklejohn
William Hablinski Architecture
Beverly Hills CA 90210
Subject: Evershine III Residence
Ambient Noise Survey
Dear Robert,
Martin Newson & Associates LLC
Consoltanu.n Ao.1,11
30.T mpsrJr^ pnul�az-0
e lei
ca9mru
ruA,nnw, m e9 esm
r�zm oao s'. o
Martin Newson & Associates, LLC, attended site on Friday March 12 2004 in order to measure
ambient noise levels at the site of the Evershine III Residence in Los Altos Hills, CA.
Noise monitoring equipment was set up close to the north-eastem comer of the site boundary,
approximately 4.5' above ground level. Manual measurements were made at this location, as
well as at the following locations indicated on the attached Figure 1.
1) At the site boundary
2) At the location of the outdoor swimming pool
3) At the location of the eastern fagade of the building
4) At the future location of condensing units to the east of the property.
Acoustical issues of concern include noise from the condensing units received at both the
property line and at the residence and noise from the emergency generator.
Ambient Noise Conditions
Unattended A -weighted single figure measurements of the ambient noise level were made
continuously from 14:25 on Friday 12 March 2004 until 18:30 on Saturday 13 March 2004. Data
was logged every five minutes during this period. In addition, attended frequency spectrum
measurements were made between 14:25 and 16:30 on Friday 12 March 2004 at the locations
shown on the attached Figure 1. An additional frequency spectrum measurement was made for
comparison at the monitoring location on Sunday 14 March 2004 at 11:45.
The measured noise spectra at the site boundary are consistent with those measured adjacent to
the monitoring equipment, indicating that noise levels measured at the monitoring position could
be considered representative of the ambient noise level at the property line. It was not considered
Page I
appropriate to leave the monitoring equipment at the property line due to potential noise
disturbance from wildlife in the trees and brush at this location.
On Friday 12 March, construction noise from a site on nearby Fremont Road was clearly audible
until 16:00 although it was not possible to view this activity due to intervening trees. Frequency
spectrum measurements were made during pauses in construction activity in order that this
temporary noise source should not affect the measurements. The measured noise spectrum from
Sunday 14 March is comparable to those measured in the same location on Friday 12 March.
This suggests that the spectra measured on Friday 12 March are representative of the ambient
noise level on site and were unaffected by construction noise.
Construction noise from the Evershine Residence was largely inaudible at the monitoring
location and at the site boundary and condensing unit locations, due to screening from the
intervening landscape. Construction activities on site were light, with no significantly noisy
equipment in use during our visit. Measurements at the Residence itself were made after work
on site had ceased.
Birdsong and distant traffic noise were noted to dominate the noise climate on site. Occasional
vehicle movements were noted on Wildcrest Drive, adjacent to the site boundary, and there was
some water noise from sprinklers at the property to the north of the site. On Sunday 14 March,
music was audible from this property. Measurements made at the swimming pool and fagade
were dominated by distant traffic noise audible from the west, thought to be the nearby 280
Freeway. Aircraft overflew the site on a number of occasions, and a single distant train
movement was noted during the attended measurements.
Measurement Summary
Full measurement results are appended to this report. A summary of the lowest ambient noise
levels measured at the monitoring location is given below. This summary has been divided into
two time periods, consistent with those used in the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. Please note
that the Code refers to "sunset'. For the purposes of this assessment, "sunset' has been assumed
to be at 18:00.
Time Period
Lowest L, s mw. measured
Time measured
07:00-18:00
32
14:35
18:00-07:00
33
05:05
Table 1: Summary of lowest ambient noise levels, 5 minute samples.
Page 2
It appears from these results that the quietest ambient noise level occurred during the daytime
rather than, as is more commonly seen, at night, and that there is no significant fluctuation in the
noise level between the day and night time periods. The ambient noise levels measured were
very low, and largely unaffected by human activity.
Design Criteria
Property Line
The Los Altos Hills Municipal Code states that "machines, tools or appliances" shall not exceed
50 dB(C) during the daytime period, and 40 dB(C) at night. The use of C -weighting in
environmental noise assessment is highly unusual. It is more common to assess noise using the
A -weighting network, which approximates the response of the human ear to noise.
Sound level meters can measure in either A or C weighting, but cannot measure both
simultaneously. Our measurements were made using the A -weighting network, as it is
anticipated that noise data supplied by equipment manufacturers will use this more common
weighting. If spectral noise data is available from the manufacturers, it will be possible to apply
the C -weighting for comparison with the Municipal Code.
The "emission of sound in the performance of emergency work" is exempted from these limits,
however there is no indication that this exemption extends to cover testing and operation of fixed
equipment such as the emergency generator. "Generators" are mentioned in the definition of
"machines, tools and appliances". It is therefore presumed that the generator, as well as the
condensing units and other mechanical equipment, will be subject to the limits given above. It
may be worth reviewing with the City if the generator operation and testing would be covered by
the limit set in the Municipal Code. The proximity of the generator's proposed location to the
site boundary means that it may be difficult to achieve the limits set in the Municipal Code.
Residence and External Areas
We understand that no design criterion has so far been set to assess noise from mechanical
equipment affecting the residence itself.
The parameter most commonly used to assess the ambient noise level on site is LAgo. This is a
statistical measure, giving the noise level exceeded for 90% of the measurement period, which
has been shown to be a good measure of the steady background noise level. The smallest change
in noise levels perceptible to the human ear is approximately 3 — 5 dB, except under laboratory
conditions. As decibels add logarithmically, a 3 dB increase in noise levels would occur if the
mechanical equipment were to generate a level equivalent to the existing ambient noise level at
the property facade.
Page 3
The lowest LAw measured on site was 32 dB(A). Therefore if the combined equipment were to
generate a level of 32 dB(A) at the residence, the total noise level would be 35 dB(A), which
would be unlikely to be perceptible above the existing background noise level.
However, tonal or intermittent noise is considered subjectively more disturbing than a continuous
noise. As the condensing units may be expected to operate intermittently throughout the day and
night, we suggest that a 5 dB "penalty" should be applied to noise from this source. Therefore
the combined noise from all equipment should not generate more than 27 dB(A) at occupied
outdoor areas such as the loggia and swimming pool.
A noise level of NC 25 has previously been set for mechanical noise within the residence itself.
This is approximately 30 dB(A). Allowing for 10-15 dB(A) through an open window, noise
from mechanical equipment at the fagade could be as high as 40-45 dB(A) before it would be
above the internal noise limit. Therefore, achieving 27 dB(A) at the building fagade to protect
external areas would by default ensure that internal noise limits were not exceeded.
Although the condensing units are located downhill from the Residence, observations on site
suggested that they may still be visible from the second floor loggia, and that the intervening
landscape will not provide effective acoustical screening to this location. We recommend that a
noise barrier should be installed to break the line of sight from the Residence to these units. This
barrier should be solid and continuous with no breaks, holes or openings. No solid structure
should be located on the far side of the units, as this could reflect noise towards the Residence.
Conclusion
This report presents the results of the noise survey carried out on site, and recommends
acoustical design criteria for mechanical equipment. Analysis of equipment noise levels will
follow in due course.
We trust that this information meets your current needs, but please contact us if you have any
questions.
Yours Sincerely,
(((��� � son & Associates, LLC
Roj/ vmbine Residence 3hpB
Page 4
EVERSHINE III RESIDENCE
MEASURED AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS AT MONITORING POSITION
Time
Measured LAvs
14:25
41
14:30
38
14:35
41
14:40
40
14:45
38
14:50
40
14:55
38
15:00
37
15:05
39
15:10
43
15:15
39
15:20
42
15:25
43
15:30
40
15:35
40
15:40
43
15:45
43
15:50
38
15:55
36
16:00
36
16:05
36
16:10
36
16:15
37
16:20
36
16:25
36
16:30
36
16:35
35
16:40
35
16:45
36
16:50
36
16:55
37
17:00
36
17:05
37
17:10
37
Page 5
Time
Measured LA90
17:15
37
17:20
36
17:25
37
17:30
37
17:35
36
17:40
38
17:45
39
17:50
39
17:55
40
18:00
41
18:05
38
18:10
38
18:15
39
18:20
38
18:25
38
18:30
38
18:35
38
18:40
38
18:45
38
18:50
38
18:55
39
19:00
38
19:05
39
19:10
39
19:15
37
19:20
37
19:25
38
19:30
38
19:35
38
19:40
39
19:45
38
19:50
38
19:55
39
20:00
40
20:05
40
20:10
39
20:15
40
20:20
40
Page 6
Time
Measured LAyo
20:25
40
20:30
40
20:35
41
2040
41
2045
41
2050
40
20:55
40
21:00
40
21:05
40
21:10
40
21:15
41
21:20
41
21:25
40
21:30
41
2135
41
21:40
40
21:45
39
21:50
39
21:55
38
21:00
37
21:05
38
21:10
37
21:15
37
21:20
37
21:25
37
21:30
37
21:35
40
21:40
40
21:45
41
21:50
41
21:55
41
22:00
40
21:05
40
22:10
40
22:15
40
22:20
40
22:25
41
22:30
41
Page 7
Time
Measured L,
22:35
38
22:40
38
22:45
38
22:50
38
22:55
37
23:00
38
23:05
38
23:10
37
23:15
37
23:20
38
23:25
38
23:30
36
23:35
35
23:40
36
23:45
36
23:50
36
23:55
37
00:00
36
00:05
37
00:10
37
00:15
36
00:20
36
00:25
36
00:30
36
00:35
36
00:40
36
00:45
36
00:50
36
00:55
36
01:00
35
01:05
35
01:10
35
01:15
34
01:20
34
01:25
34
01:30
34
01:35
35
01:40
34
Page 8
Time
Measured Lpgp
01:45
35
01:50
35
01:55
36
02:00
38
0205
35
02:10
35
02:15
34
02:20
34
02:25
35
02:30
35
02:35
35
02:40
34
02:45
34
02:50
34
02:55
36
03:00
36
03:05
35
03:10
36
03:15
36
03:20
36
03:25
36
03:30
36
03:35
35
03:40
35
03:45
35
03:50
36
03:55
36
04:00
36
04:05
36
04:10
35
04:15
34
04:20
35
04:25
35
04:30
35
04:35
34
04:40
36
04:45
35
04:50
35
Page 9
Time
Measured L,
04:55
35
05:00
34
05:05
33
05:10
33
05:15
34
05:20
33
05:25
34
05:30
34
05:35
34
05:40
35
05:45
35
05:50
35
05:55
35
05:00
35
05:05
34
05:10
35
05:15
36
05:20
35
05:25
35
05:30
35
05:35
36
05:40
36
05:45
36
05:50
36
05:55
36
06:00
37
06:05
35
06:10
34
06:15
33
06:20
33
06:25
34
06:30
33
06:35
34
06:40
34
06:45
34
06:50
35
06:55
35
07:00
35
Page 10
Time
Measured Lmo
07:05
37
07:10
37
07:15
37
07:20
37
07:25
37
07:30
39
07:35
39
07:40
40
07:45
41
07:50
40
07:55
39
08:00
38
08:05
39
08:10
40
08:15
40
08:20
40
08:25
42
08:30
43
08:35
43
08:40
40
08:45
41
08:50
40
08:55
40
09:00
41
09:05
40
09:10
39
09:15
40
09:20
39
09:25
40
09:30
39
09:35
39
09:40
39
09:45
38
09:50
39
09:55
40
10:00
37
10:05
37
10:10
37
Page 11
Time
Measured LA"
10:15
37
10:20
37
10:25
37
10:30
39
10:35
37
10:40
36
10:45
36
10:50
36
10:55
36
11:00
35
11:05
36
11:10
36
11:15
35
11:20
34
11:25
34
11:30
36
11:35
35
11:40
35
11:45
34
11:50
34
11:55
35
12:00
35
12:05
34
12:10
35
12:15
36
12:20
34
12:25
34
12:30
34
12:35
35
12:40
34
12:45
34
12:50
33
12:55
33
13:00
33
13:05
34
13:10
35
13:15
35
13:20
34
Page 12
Time
Measured L"o
13:25
34
13:30
35
13:35
35
13:40
34
13:45
34
13:50
34
13:55
33
14:00
34
14:05
34
14:10
34
14:15
33
14:20
33
14:25
34
14:30
33
14:35
32
14:40
33
14:45
32
14:50
35
14:55
34
15:00
33
15:05
34
15:10
34
15:15
34
15:20
36
15:25
36
15:30
36
15:35
37
15:40
37
15:45
36
15:50
35
15:55
35
16:00
36
16:05
35
16:10
37
16:15
36
16:20
35
16:25
35
16:30
35
Page 13
Time
Measured LA90
16:35
35
16:40
35
16:45
35
16:50
34
16:55
36
17:00
36
17:05
36
17:10
35
17:15
36
17:20
35
17:25
36
17:30
35
17:35
35
17:40
36
17:45
36
17:50
36
17:55
36
18:00
37
18:05
37
18:10
37
18:15
38
18:20
37
18:25
37
Page 14
EVERSHINE III RESIDENCE
MEASURED NOISE SPECTRA
Page 15
OCTAVE BAND NOISE LEVEL, dB L90
Location
Time
63
125
250
500
1 1000
2000
4000
8000
dB(A)
Monitor
14:35
56
48
38
31
31
27
21
15
38
14:45
54
47
38
31
30
25
17
15
37
15:30
56
48
36
33
26
23
21
18
37
Sun
11:45
54
50
37
36
31
24
18
15
39
Property Line
14:55
57
47
38
32
26
24
22
21
37
15:00
54
45
36
31
25
24
22
21
35
Condensing
15:55
53
47
37
30
30
23
16
15
36
Units
16:00
53
46
38
3130
21
17
15
36
Swimming
16:05
51
45
36
29
30
22
13
13
35
Pool
16:10
51
45
38
30
27
21
13
14
35
Facade
16:15
51
45
35
31
32
22
13
14
36
Page 15
ATTACHMENT 5
July 28, 2005
TO: Leslie Hopper, Project Planner
FROM: John Chau, Assistant Engineer
RE: Evershine Residence
13310 La Paloma Road
File#49-05-ZP-SD
Accessory Structure, Tennis Court, Service Road
At your request, the Engineering Department has completed its review of the subject
property's site development plan using:
Site Development and Preliminary Grading and Utility Plans prepared by Lea &
Sung Engineering, Inc. dated July 22, 2005 and received July 25, 2005.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Based on our review of the referenced plans, it appears that the project engineer has
generally not met all the requirements of the Engineering Department. The applicant
understands that the proposed grading is not in conformance with the Town grading
policy and is requesting that the project be considered in its current state. The project
does not conform to the grading policy as follows:
• Up to 7' of fill is proposed for the construction of the new driveway. The Town
grading policy allows 3' high maximum fill.
Consequently if the project is approved, we recommend the following conditions of
approval:
1. Two sets of a final grading and drainage plan and storm drain calculations shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to
acceptance of plans for building plan check The final grading and drainage
plan shall show the proposed private storm drain easement begins at the
common property line of Lot 6 and Lot II and ends at the street right of way on
La Palantir Road Final grading and drainage shall be inspected by the
Engineering Department and any deficiencies corrected to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department prior to final inspection. A letter shall be submitted
from the project engineer stating that the site grading and drainage improvements
were installed as shown on the approved plans prior to final inspection.
2. 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 (November 1 to April 1) 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.
3. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground.
4. At the time of foundation inspection for the service/utility building and prior to
final inspection, the location and elevation of the building 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 new building, the height of the building
shall be similarly certified as being at the height shown on the approved Site
Development plan.
5. 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 entire 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.
6. 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 La Paloma Road and
surrounding roadways, storage of construction materials, placement of sanitary
facilities, parking for construction vehicles, clean-up area, and parking for
construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for
collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos
Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town
and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits.
7. 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.
8. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior
to final inspection. A sewer plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer
shall be required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to acceptance of plans
for building plan check An encroachment permit shall be required by the Town's
Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right of way
prior to start work.
9. The property owner shall provide the Town legal descriptions, plat exhibits, and
recorded documents for the private storm drain easement and private sanitary
sewer easement prior to submittal ofplans for building plan check
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions concerning this letter.
LOSALTOS HILLS
1�^
CALIFORNIA
Code Sections:
GRADING POLICY ATTACHMENT iii
Section 10-2.7020 of the Site Development Ordinance states that: "The amount of
grading, excavation, or fill shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate proposed
structures, unless grading is proposed to lower the profile of buildings." Section 10-
2.703(a) requires: "Type 11 foundations — step -on -contour, daylight, pole foundations, or
a combination thereof — shall be used on building sites with natural slopes in excess of
fourteen percent (14%)."
Intent
The purpose of this policy is to outline desired criteria for grading which assure that
construction retains the existing contours and basic landform of the site to the greatest
extent feasible. It is also intended that the policy provide guidance for "stepping"
structures down sloped hillsides, and emphasizes cut to lower the profile of structures
over fill or foundation walls, which tend to raise the profile of the structure. While
balanced cut and fill is desirable to minimize import or export of soil, to or from a site, it
is recognized that the Town's policies and the guidelines below may encourage export as
cut is generally preferred over fill.
These policies are intended to be used by staff in evaluation and malting
recommendations to the Planning Commission and/or City Council regarding site
development applications, and as guidance for applicants. Individual sites may dictate a
need to deviate from the criteria, to the extent permitted by the Planning Commission
and/or City Council.
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills
California 94022
650/941-7222
Fax 650/941-3160
Policy Re: Grading
page 2
Policies:
1. Cuts and fills in excess of the following levels generally will be considered
excessive and contrary to Town ordinances and policies to grade only to the
minimum extent necessary to accommodate structures and to site structures
consistent with slope contours, i.e., "step down" the hill*:
Cut Fill
House 8'** 3'
Accessory Bldg. 4' 3'
Tennis Court 6' 3'
Pool 4'*** 3'
Driveways 4' 3'
Other (decks, yards) 4' 3'
* Combined depths of cut plus fill for development other than the main
residence should be limited to 6 feet, except that for tennis courts cut
plus fill may be permitted up to a maximum of 8 feet.
** Excludes basements meeting Code definition.
*** Excludes excavation for pool.
2. The height of the lowest finished floor(s) of a structure should generally not
be set in excess of three (3) feet above the existing grade, to assure that
structures step with the slope.
3. Driveway cut may be increased up to a maximum of eight feet (8') for the
portion of the driveway or backup area which is adjacent to a garage that
has been lowered with a similar amount of cut.
4. Cut and/or fill for drainage shall be limited consistent with the guidelines set
forth above for each type of structure, but shall be the minimum grading
needed for drainage purposes, as determined by the City Engineer.
Annroved by City Council: April 2, 1997
26375 Fremont 1 3 Tel (650) 948-1217
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Fax (650) 948-0961
Purissima Hills
Water District
April 21, 2005
Ms. Leslie Hopper, Planner
Town of Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
Dear Ms. Hopper:
Subject: Lands of Evershine III -13310 La Paloma Road
The Utility Plan depicting the combination of a 12 -inch and 8 -inch ductile iron
pipe (DIP) water line from La Paloma Road to Wildcrest Drive as shown on the
Improvement Plans of Lands of Evershine III meets the District's design standards and
specifications. The 20 -foot wide water main easement also shown is adequate for our
needs to maintain these water lines.
Please let me know if you need anything further.
Incerely
Y'
P ck alter
General Manager
PDW:Iex
cc: Guiselle Perez, Lea & Sung Engineering, Inc.
Service To The Hi2Ls Since 1955
CODEJSEC. SHEET
UFC
App
IIIAendix
UFC
903.2
UFC
902.2.4.1
FIRE DEPARTMENT
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818
(408) 378 4010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax) • w sccfd.org
PLANREVIEWNUMBER 05 0886
BLDG PERMIT NUMBER A -I TACHME vT 2
LONrNOLNUMBER
FILENUMBER 49-05-ZP-SD-GD
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS
NO.[ REQUIREMENT
ew of site plan for two new accessory structures and a service road. RECEIVED
APR 0 2005
(,J `_i(�II1•t,�L TOWNOFlA3ALTOStIILLS
DO NOT REMOVE
ew of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and
!r supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be
trued as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with
)ted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make
ication to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable
truction permits.
aired Fire Flow: The fire flow for this project is 1000 gpm at 20 psi residual
sure. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire
'ant(s) which are not spaced at the required spacing.
ed Access to Water Supply _(Hydrants): Portions of the structure(s) are
than 150 feet of travel distance from the centerline of the roadway
ing public fire hydrants. Provide an on-site fire hydrant OR, provide an
ed fire sprinkler system throughout all portions of the building.
drawings or notes to reflect compliance with this requirement.
varatus (Engine)Access Driveway Required: Provide an access driveway
Laved all weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 14 feet,
clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet
and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall
1 to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet D-1.
road shall be 14 feet wide. Revise drawing to comply.
CNy PLANS SPECS NEW RMU ASOCCUPANCY
CONBT. TYPE
APoIImnlHame
DRTE
PAGE
LAH ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
HABLINSKI + MANION
4/4/2005
1
OF—2
SEGFLOOR
MFA
LOGO
DESCRIPTOR
BY
Residential Development
Rucker, Ryan
NAME OF PROJECTLOLATUN
LANDS OF EVERSHINE I1I
13310 La Paloma Rd
Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District
Bening Santa Clam County and the communities a) Campbell, Cupe.nno, Los Altos,
Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Serena, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga
:ODEJSEC.
C
,pendvc
A
SNEE!
FIRE DEPARTMENT PLANREYIEWNUMBER 05 0886
SANTA CLARA COUNTY BLDG PEROT HUMBER
14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818
(408) 378-4010 • (408) 378-9342 (fax) • www.sccfd.org CONIINIL NUMBER
FlIENUMBEM 49-05-ZP-SD-GD
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS
NO.I REGMIREMEM
r that turning radiuses into the parking lot and onto the service road comply
standard specification D-1.
aoartment (Engine) Driveway Tum -around Required, Provide an
red fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of
outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department
rd Details and Specifications D-1.
e turn around at service building. Revise drawings to comply.
Clry PLANE SPECS NEW RMOL AS
O S`ACY
CONST. TYPE
Appll.M.
DAIS
PAGE
1H ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
HABLINSKI + MANION
4/4/2005
2 2
DP
aFLOON
AREA
LOAp
DEBCRIRION
BY
Residential Development
Rucker, Ryan
AME OP PROJECTLOCATION
LANDS OF EVERSHINE 11I
13310 La Paloma Rd
Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District
Serving Santa Clam County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos,
Los Altos Hills, Los Gotos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga
/ 9rNW14 0t1r/ZriTT�E 11111/4,t rE S - ��/ z5, 2 00
iii. 2634 Esperanza Drive (lands of Jones). (The address was incorrectly noted on CHMENT
the agenda.) The Committee determined that the path continues logically on the
Jones property. It was noted that this residence will now have paths on three sides.
The Committee agreed a 2B path should be constructed within the 10 foot easement
on the back side over the public utility easement.
Nancy E moved, Anna B. seconded. 9-0
rv. 13310 La Paloma. The Committee agreed to the status quo - the 2B path along
La Paloma should be restored and continued as a natural path to the property on
Atherton Court.
Ginger S. moved, Bob S. seconded. 9-0
v. 26550 Anacapa Drive. The Committee agreed this is the only place on Anacapa
where a path could go. It has a pretty view. The 2B path should be separated by 3
to 5 feet from the road surface.
Bob S. moved, Nancy E. seconded. 9-0
vi. 13241 Burke Road. Because there is no easement on Burke, the Committee
agreed to a 2B roadside path along East Sunset and to take a pathway easement to
Burke.
Nancy E. moved, Bob S. seconded. 8-0, 1 abstain.
vii. 11860 Francemont. The Committee agreed to accept an impact fee ($42 per
foot measured diagonally.)
Ginger S. moved, Bob S. seconded. 9-0
viii. 26535 Altamont (lands of Jayco) A decision on this property was handled at
the previous meeting. See minutes.
ix. 12861 Alta Tierra. A second review of this property was agreed to so the
Committee could reconsider whether an in lieu fee is appropriate. (This action, if
taken, would reverse a previous decision.)
Ginger moved, Nancy E. seconded. 9-0
x. 26101 Maurer Lane. The Committee there should be a 2B path, separated 3 to 5
feet from the edge of the road on La Paloma.
Nancy E. moved, Nick D. seconded. 9-0
D. Update of Master Pathway Plan Roadside Pathways.
Ginger S. will bring a proposal to the May meeting and an estimated time for
completion of this task. The role of the Ad Hoc Committee will be spelled out. Les
E. will prepare a new list of roads needing clarification as to their public and/or
private status.
E. Report from Capital Improvement Sub -Committees
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE
LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE EVALUATION ATTACHMENT 10
Applicant's Name:
Address:
Reviewed by: �elra Date: 4-- -�,i —
- i7
S G --"J H
Mitigation needed
Visibility from off site: from distance (directions), from nearby
neighbors (directions) (include need for screening for privacy).
Noise: from pump/pool _, air conditioner , sport court _
Lights: from fixtures , automobile headlights
Fence materials: color , open/solid Erosion control
Other.
Planting Plan Evaluation: (Circle required trees and shrubs on plan)
Are species appropriate: Deciduous?
Future height (view, solar, drive/path blockage)
Fire hazard
Hardiness/frost
Drought tolerance
I Meet mitigation needs
74x S is42+{ �aBR ¢ a t� c� t C 0�2_ 0. �sr G1C TT�q,- • &eg 4%u3
IE.0-ems 0.1+3.0 Lei' l,-e—Pa)EC' 4-e— "C—qp
' Creeks and drainage: Is there a edriservation easement?
+ �Iu Are there sufficient protections in place?
Will fences impact wildlife migration.
Invasive species should not be planted near a waterway.
V�w`�(''�_,A
Other: Are there obstructions to pathways, including future growth of plants?
Are all noise mitigations in place? �(.(
No construction in road right-of-way.
tit,
CS NuC Ltb�wz:! -L� 4e-, T- 4 :%
h� -n�tJusr. ,�G,✓s�ia-ane
JUN 1 5 2005
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE
SUBDIVISION EVALUATION �`V.1,;vrLL'3,.t"+"I IES
ATTACHMENT 10
Applicant's Name: >- V E A -S i/ N&
Address: 133 10 1-11- PALOM 4 p,O A -D _ bo T' g F11 & 1L
Reviewed by: I u Eo , �t6 i M _ Date:
P+�
06114-1QS
Existing Trees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building
site.)
9 RI�6C� ¢c toc-Al �fLL ,2 E 12E
s� �it< rte` QLaP1s� ((oC+�-� +,z -Ti''(
PR o l + (Nfh^i7Ko�� SCO- -F F-Ec,-rte I dq
(�pJ�ETrE S+►�hLs. v✓K SUGta�►'sTE� O dF To P6�S16ILiT1
Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby. vegetation. Erosion potential. All
grading at least 10' from property line?) �.
N-fTrft 6j= V1IJF-YA-t-�1 OR-u-v9'€Z
IF PINEY E,Q`^IR-E-7, on1LY
u P>=STIs-1TFa -rb PT--= vor-- tJT
Po LLllT1 o , N N s � •/ori -1E — i Fl� U 3e r- P- f-- g .
Creeks and drainage: (Should a conservation easement be recommended? Will
construction impact wildlife migration (bridges, fences)?
j (jr♦ F NVT(6 L -a ctc ✓� P/r ✓ z s �� ti �i�I
u{/a- N
Other Comments:
H3 ` _
JUL-19-2005 15:14 RERSHItE
I
7Wy 19, ZOOS
4088637333 P.02/02
ATTACHMENT
RECEIVED
JUL 2 1 2005
W ledge Hopper TOWN Of LOS ALTOS HILLS
P)au tnol glom
Teem oMm'Aloe Hula
26379Fnms I8d.
LABAboaHtUe,CA 960:2
Re: Lode of Bvsifhioa m (13310 Le Pekmn)
DsarLetlir
Pd or 17tobay sed I haw reviewed Ote mduwame building and the rad Isellptmea!
..Ler 133161A palamr in devil.
Wsdwwnad iL>bylovwtg:
8mld *mativids sed Gown
Ladsme One (mdudin0 mewing edaxim)
- Somd * eoorouatim ad merwiils (ineWding calors)
�Me t
>
We rsae1, a bywha to ye&* solutiom &a d)evlwe our adheres mgudb% sem that
woo eawitivrto os WMrL madded 1wuLape screeaina edetdon P MOY Md eam
WNW
Titadm4 L have so abiomons to the reviso 91oa ** will be Proeeoted to the Tatra of
Los Albs Hills and provide our full MWIS on thio project.
�. Sadcdy
Las Altos Hiss, CA 94022
TUirIL P.02
TOTAL P.02
JLL-01-2005 0654 EVERSHINE 4088537333 P.02/02
RECEIVED
ACHMEHj (I
Iutr 1.2005 JUL 1 3 2005
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
To: EverabiseGroup
Re: Mummeoea BWWfat — Ls Pakmta Residence
It is my undetatmdint That the buLkhag will have a stoom
wnerior with tile roofing material, hie also mY andersnodiag
that the exterior color will be an earth tone, as will the waft
memdal to blend in with the surroundings. I have no information
on the cola of the top metal tolling does, however it would
be prafamMe if they and other aim were not white.
During conversation regarding duo building. I had bem told there
were no windows on the south Side, however. it Win -1 there are
two windows and four doom.
I am willing to lend my approval to these pians if
1. the buildiog material nkat blmd wilt the antoumBaM
2. the sma exposed to Wildereti (hive is landscaped to that
tho building is stressed Rose view when approaching tlb
Gayle and Swirly meidescm
/Kay C. Smlrol�,
I.a Albs Hills, CA 91022
TOTAL P.02
F, TERRY EGER ATTACHMENT (I
RECEIVED
JUL 1 3 2005
July 5, 2005 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Planning Department
Town of Los Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Dear Los Altos Hills Planning Department
Fred Chan of Evershine III L.P. had previously brought to my attention his application to
the Los Altos Hills Planning Department regarding the realignment of the driveway and `
the auxiliary structures that are being proposed for 13310 La Paloma Road in Los Altos
Hills. As a direct neighbor, I ant appreciative !hat Fred has brought this to my attention
well in advance of the hearing, so that I had the time to discuss this matter with him prior
to the planning commission hearing. I have no objections to the improvements that are
being proposed under this application.
Sincerely,
F. T2erry 2gle
TOTRL P.02
Myrna & Werner Goese
Planning Department
Town of Los Hills
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Re: Chan Residence- 13310 La Paloma Rd. Los Altos Hills
ATTACHMENT p
RECEIVED
JUL 1 3 2005
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
July 7, 2005
Dear Los Altos Hills Planning Department:
We have had the opportunity to review the realignment of the driveway and
the auxiliary structures that are being proposed for 13310 La Paloma Road
residence.
Evershine III L.P. has invited us to visit the property and view their progress.
We have been very pleased with the owner's attention to noise, dust and
keeping their site well organized and clean.
As their direct neighbor, we have no objections to the improvements that are
being proposed and wish that this letter serve as our full support of their
proposed application.
Sincerely,
'Myrna & Wer
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022