Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.4 e�r % TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS January 28, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING, ADDITIONS TO EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES AND CLASSROOM BUILDINGS, AND PARKING; AND PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD; LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM; (#189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND). FROM: Curtis S. Williams,Planning Direc RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: 1. Recommend to the City Council approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in Exhibit "A" (attached), and citing the findings outlined in Exhibit"C"; approval of the site development permit, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in Exhibit "B" (attached); and adoption of the Negative Declaration; OR 2. Recommend approval as above, with modifications to the scope or design of the project, or to the conditions of approval. BACKGROUND On June 27, 1958, the Town of Los Altos Hills City Council approved a conditional use permit for a religious institution and related uses, including related school facilities, at 26790 Arastradero Road, for Congregation Beth Am. The permit was approved subject to approval of a site plan at a later date by the Planning Commission and City Council. At the time, the applicants represented that the Congregation included 275 families, and was expected to grow to a maximum of 500 families, primarily from Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, Palo Alto and the Stanford area. This permit was apparently the Town's first approval of a non-residential use, and was somewhat controversial because of that fact. Some of the minutes and correspondence of Commission and Council meetings from that time are attached for information(Attachment 15). In 1959, a site plan was approved for classroom and administrative buildings, a sanctuary/social hall, and related parking and landscape improvements. The approval was subject to connection to sanitary sewer. The classroom and administrative buildings were constructed in 1960 but the sanctuary was not constructed until 1966. In 1966, there was also a review of the use permit by the City Council when it was found that the buildings were being used for a small private school, and the applicant was directed to cease such use. In 1968, a request for a use permit was made by another private school to locate on the site,but that request was denied as well. Since 1968, the Town records indicate only that miscellaneous remodeling or roofing permits have been obtained for the site. CODE PROVISIONS Section 10-1.703(b) of the Town's Zoning Code permits the location of churches in the R-A (Residential-Agricultural) zone only as a conditional use. Section 10-1.1107(1) of the Code outlines four findings which must be made by the Planning Commission and t 1 Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 ' Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 2 City Council in order to approve a conditional use permit. These findings, as outlined in Exhibit "C" (Attachment 3), include determinations that the site is properly located with respect to the community as a whole; that the site is adequately sized to accommodate the use; that the siteis adequately served by streets and other services; and that the use and structures will not have an adverse impact on neighboring properties. Although a use permit was initially permitted in 1958 for the site, establishing the allowable use, the substantial expansion proposed would require an amendment to that permit. Since the permit numbering system is now changed from 1958 and because there were no conditions attendant to the original permit, staff has assigned a new permit number to the application and suggests treating it essentially as a new use permit. In addition to the requirement for a conditional use permit, a site development permit is needed as the project proposes floor area increases in excess of 1,500 square feet, requiring Planning Commission review per Section 10-2.301(c) of the Site Development Code. Relevant criteria for site development and zoning review include floor area and development area limitations, height, setbacks, parking, siting and visibility, grading, lighting, and landscaping. DISCUSSION The applicant, Congregation Beth Am, proposes to construct a new 7,050 square foot multi-purpose building (classrooms, kitchen and restrooms), 4,250 square feet of classroom and administrative office additions to the two existing classroom wings, 12,330 square feet of patios and walkways, and 45,700 square feet of new parking area (138 new standard parking spaces and 4 handicap spaces)on the existing site. The proposed additions are intended to alleviateexisting classroom overcrowding and to provide ancillary meeting area for the Congregation members. The applicant indicates that no increase in membership is expected as a result of the expansion. The Congregation now includes approximately 1,200 families, and has grown at a rate of about 1 percent per year for the past ten years. Site Description The subject property is approximately 9 acres in size, is located on the south side of Arastradero Road,just west of Fremont Road, and is presently developed with a 16,716 square foot sanctuary and social hall, 6,736 square feet of administrative offices, 6,736 square feet of classrooms, and associated parking and other hardscape. The slope of the site is relatively flat (less than 1.0%) and the site contains numerous trees (mostly pines and eucalyptus). Surrounding uses to the west, east and south are single-family residential. "Research park" office buildings are located to the north, across Arastradero Road, within the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. Access to the site is from Arastradero Road, the only local access to the project site. Arastradero Road at Deer Creek Road and Arastradero Road at Fremont Road are the two closest traffic controlled intersections (un-signalized). Access to the project site is approximately midway between the two intersections. Current access through the site is via a one-way clockwise loop around the buildings. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 3 Floor Area and Development Area Floor area and development area limitations for a religious use are not addressed in the Code differently than for residential uses. Staff has therefore requested that the pertinent worksheets be provided (Attachment 5) to compare allowable development levels with those proposed, summarized as follows: Site Data: Net Lot Area: 9.063 acres Average Slope: 6.2% Lot Unit Factor: 9.063 Allowable Proposed Existing Increase Remaining," Ca0 }.. 54,378 sf 41,462 sf 30,188 sf 11,274 sf 12,916 sf 135,945 sf 132,892 sf 63,588 sf 69,304 sf 3,053 sf As shown, the project complies with the Town's floor area and development area limitations. Staff notes that the floor area numbers include approximately 1,704 square feet of area counted twice, as the interior ceiling height exceeds 17 feet (1,088 square feet in the sanctuary and 616 square feet in the new multi-purpose building). Staff also notes that the development area numbers are somewhat misleading, as the applicants did not include much of the current parking as "existing" due to some of it being gravel or unpaved. About 45,700 square feet of parking area is designated as "new" on the site plan, but in fact probably most of that area is already of a gravel or old asphalt surface, and would generally be counted as development area. Approximately 12,000 square feet of new patios and sidewalks are proposed, mostly around the multi-purpose building. Design and Height The project architect for the new construction is the same firm that designed the existing buildings, and the proposed structures are to be of a design and materials consistent with the existing: single-story with a strong horizontal emphasis, with wood siding and a Class "B" shake roof. The rooflines include long overhangs and are intended to parallel the slope of the hillside and disguise the walls of the buildings. Although only a single-story, the maximum height of the new multi-purpose building is proposed at 27 feet above existing grade, due to the roof pitch and high interior ceiling. Staff suggested to the applicant that the building height could be lowered by reducing the fill below the structure (grading lower into the site) or "stepping" the building. But the applicant has responded that they prefer the proposed design because the combination of the sloping roof and the gentle fill slope replicate the sanctuary layout and because the single level allows enhanced access for handicapped persons. It is also noted that, due to the roofline and fill, only about 10-11 feet of building wall will be visible. Staff suggests that the building height should only be lowered if the Commission determines that such lowering will significantly reduce visual impact from off the site. Story poles have been erected on the site to approximate the outline of the structure. The proposed height of the classroom and administrative additions would be about 17 feet at the maximum to match the existing structures. Due to the location of these .ti ' h Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 4 additions interior to the existing structures, staff did not request story poles be erected, but did direct the applicant to stake the corners of the buildings. Setbacks for the new structures would be well in excess of Town minimum standards, ranging from 65 feet for the additions at the rear to over 120 feet for the multi-purpose building setbacks from neighboring residential lots. The multi-purpose building would be located more than 200 feet from Arastradero Road, further minimizing its visual impact. Traffic and Parking Although the applicants indicate that the proposed construction is not intended to increase membership in the Congregation or visitors to the site, staff requested that a traffic study be presented addressing traffic and parking issues. The applicant has submitted a traffic study prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk, and dated December 4, 1997, which staff believes addresses the relevant traffic and parking concerns-(the study is somewhat lengthy and is not attached, but is available in.the file for review by any member of the Commission or the public). Regarding traffic, the study analyzed the turning movements at the driveway access with Arastradero Road, as well as the intersections of Arastradero Road with Deer Creek Road and with Fremont Road. The analysis was conducted using existing traffic counts plus estimates of project traffic based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) traffic generation rates. The forecasts were made for both the weekday afternoon peak hour (when school lets out) and for weekend late morning, when church services conclude. Generally, the study concludes that the project will not significantly impact any of these intersections, but does indicate that, for the weekday afternoon peak, left turn movements out of the site may be unsafe, given the levels of traffic in the vicinity due to the extensive office park development in adjacent Palo Alto. As a result, the study recommends that no left turns be permitted from the site onto Arastradero Road between 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays, and that a sign be posted at the exit to inform drivers. This restriction is also included as a mitigation measure of the Negative Declaration, and is incorporated as a condition of approval (#8)for the conditional use permit. The site currently contains a total of 174 parking spaces, only 57 of which are paved and striped, however, andmany of which extend to within 15 feet of property lines. The project proposes to demolish 117 unstriped spaces, and to construct 142 new spaces, paved and striped,in their place, but outside of required setbacks. The 57 existing striped spaces would remain, most of which encroach into setbacks, but there is little room to move them farther from the property line due to existing driveways and buildings. The traffic study uses the parking standards of the City of Palo Alto as a guideline for review, as the Town does not have criteria for parking for churches, and assumes a maximum of 750 people on site at one time. According to these standards, 188 spaces would be required for the entire site development, including the proposed new construction. The plans show a total of 199 paved and striped spaces at 8.5' by 16' in size (with a two foot overhang at the parking curb), which is also 'a recommended standard from Palo Alto (but which is smaller than the Town's 10' by 20' requirement for single family residential spaces). In addition, the open field in front of the multi-purpose building can be used to accommodate approximately 30 additional temporary parking spaces, although it is expected that those spaces would rarely be needed. Staff has proposed two conditions in the use permit to address parking. One (#2) would be a standard review clause (one year after construction and every 5 years thereafter) at Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 5 which time the Planning Commission would review the use permit to be sure that no- parking problems have occurred or to make modifications as needed. The second (#6) would be a requirement that, for any event for which over 750 people are expected to attend, the Congregation must provide notice to all adjacent neighbors at least two weeks in advance, and must provide traffic and parking control on the site during the duration of the event. As with all conditional use permits, the Commission could review the use permit at any time if problems arise related to parking or non-compliance with any other conditions of the permit. Drainage Drainage from around the buildings and upper parking areas is proposed to be conveyed in storm drain pipes to the lower site to be discharged into a culvert and thence to the existing drainage channel through private properties to Fremont Road and across Fremont Road to Barron Creek. Runoff from some of the lower parking areas would flow to an existing swale along Arastradero Road and then to the same culvert and drainage channel as the remainder of the site. Due to the extensive amount of new impervious area being added to the property, the Engineering Department requested a full drainage study (Brian Kangas Foulk, dated December 4, 1997) be prepared for the site, and has reviewed and approved the analysis and proposed drainage plan. The neighbor at 26744 Arastradero Road has identified a current drainage problem where an existing 30" culvert opening at the property boundary is frequently clogged and overflows onto the residential lot. The drainage study and a summary review letter (Attachment 11) indicate that the cause of the problem is that the existing culvert opening is covered with plywood and with wire mesh which block debris and clog the pipe. The applicants propose to extend the 30" pipe upstream onto the Congregation Beth Am property and to construct a new headwall, eliminating the current inlet constraint. The Engineering Department has approved the proposal, but has required that the applicant obtain necessary easements to accommodate the flow downstream in the existing channel (condition #17 for the site development permit), and recommends that the conditions of the use permit require Congregation Beth Am to maintain both onsite and offsite (the downstream open channel) drainage facilities to prevent erosion. Such a condition (#7) has been included in Exhibit"A". Grading Site grading is proposed to include 2,300 cubic yards of cut and 2,300 cubic yards of fill, with no import or export of material. Grading is minimal for the additions to the existing building, and the bulk of the cut is for the parking areas (1,450 cubic yards of cut, 600 cubic yards of fill) while most of the fill is for the multi-purpose building (1,600 cubic yards of fill, 500 cubic yards of cut). The fill is to be placed below the multi-purpose building to a maximum depth of 6 feet. As discussed previously in the section on design, the fill depth exceeds the 3 foot maximum recommended in the Town's grading policy. However, in this case, the applicant has tried to approximate a natural grade transition to the front of the building and has used a long sloping roof overhang to carrythe slope through to the structure (similar to the sanctuary building). The applicant has also indicated that lowering the building more into the ground would not readily allow for handicapped access from the structures and patios above. Unless the Commission determines that the visibility of the structure would be significantly reduced by lowering the structure 2-3 feet, staff does not recommend requiring that change. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 6 No retaining walls are proposed for the project. The Engineering Department has included a condition of the site development permit that a final grading and drainage plan be submitted for approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Staff will also inspect the grading and drainage prior to final inspection and require correction of any deficiencies. Trees and Landscaping The project proposes removal of 36 existing trees,primarily in the parking area. Most of these trees are pine, eucalyptus and acacia trees, but a couple of 10" oak trees are shown as well. Theloss of the trees in the parking areas will certainly increase the visibility of the site and of the proposed structures. Extensive screen plantings are proposed (pages L-3 and L-4 of the plans), including 5-gallon native shrubs and many oak.and California pepper trees. Most of the trees would be located in proximity to the parking areas or would be strategically located around the buildings. The Environmental Design Committee has reviewed the plans and has commented that many of the proposed oaks are "holly" oaks (the remainder are live oaks), and has suggested that they be changed to a native oak. Staff has included a condition of approval for the site development permit(#2) requiring that the holly oaks be replaced by a native evergreen species acceptable to the Committee. Outdoor Lighting Lighting for the new buildings and additions is proposed to .be ceiling mounted beneath the roof overhangs and should not therefore be visible from off site. Also, the existing side mounted fluorescent lights on the sides of the classroom and administration wings are to be replaced with ceiling mounted lighting beneath the roof overhangs of those buildings. 42" high bollard lights are proposed along the walkways from the multi- purpose building up to the sanctuary. The site currently has many pole standards with lights, approximately 12-15 feet high, along the driveway and in the parking areas, with bright lights which are highly visible from neighboring properties and from Arastradero Road. The applicant proposes to remove 16 of these light poles and fixtures and to replace them with 17 new 12' high poles and lights in similar locations. Three pole lights in the existing northeast parking area would remain. The new lighting, however, would be directed away from neighboring properties with a shield on the house side (type Al fixture on pages E-1 and E-1 of plans), and would all be located out of the setbacks. Some of the lighting specifications are attached to the staff report(Attachment 13). The Environmental Design Committee has reviewed the lighting plans and has expressed concern about the height, wattage and direction of these lights in particular. The Committee suggests that wattage be reduced and that the lights be downlit (which they are). Their comments seem to indicate that the poles are okay in the front parking area, but that perhaps a lower height should be used in other areas. Staff also notes that the proposed lighting for the pole lights is metal halide, which is now specifically prohibited by the Town's site development ordinance (as a "high intensity discharge" light). Staff suggests that the lights which are interior to the site may be appropriate for such intensity, but that the lighting at the perimeter ought to be softer and less impacting. Alternatives may include a different light fixture, a lower pole, a lesser number of perimeter lights, or even replacement of some pole lights with bollard lights, to reduce the lighting effect from off site. Also, as the lights are presently frequently left on for much of the night, Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 7 the lighting plan should establish a system allowing for timers and only keeping security_ lights on throughout the night unless an event is occurring. Staff has included a condition of approval for the site development permit (#6) requiring that the lighting at the perimeter be further reduced,that separate switches be provided for groups of lights, and that the lighting be on timers to minimize unnecessary lighting. The revised lighting would be presented at a site development hearing, with notice to affected neighbors. A condition is also included for the conditional use permit (#5d), requiring that lighting be on separate switches and timers to minimize impacts off site. Noise Noise from events and from kitchen activities has been an occasional complaint of neighbors, particularly those living on Thendara Way, homes which back up to the social hall kitchen. The applicants have retained an acoustical engineer to analyze the noise issue, and he has recommended a sound wall, approximately the height of the roof overhang,to enclose some of the kitchen and delivery noise activities from that direction. A brief report is attached (Attachment 12), and the sound wall details are shown on page A-0 of the plans. Staff has included two noise-related conditions of the conditional use permit. The first (#5c) is that no sound amplification be permitted outdoors, and the second (#5b) would prohibit nighttime social events past the hour of 10:00 p.m. on weeknights and 11:00 p.m. on weekend(Friday and Saturday)nights. Fencing There is currently a solid wooden fence at the rear (south) of the property, which helps shield neighbors from the lights and traffic of the site. There is little fencing, however, along the west side of the property, where much of the parking and traffic impacts are felt. A couple of neighbors have suggested fencing along this boundary to provide further mitigation of noise and light impacts of traffic and parking. Staff suggests that a 6-foot high solid wooden fence be constructed from the southwest corner of the site along the west property line to a point approximately even with the rear of the new buildings, and that from that point to the front property line heavy screen planting be used to help screen parking impacts. If, upon future review of the use permit, an extension of the fence or additional screening appears to be warranted, it could then be required. Staff has included the fencing condition in the conditions of approval for the site development permit (#7), and has also included language (#2) allowing staff to require additional landscape screening within the setback beyond the parking areas prior to final inspection. Other Staff and Committee Reviews The Town Geologist has reviewed the plans and a preliminary geotechnical report, and has recommended standard conditions for geotechnical plan review and field inspections (Attachment 6, dated December 10, 1997) which are included in the conditions of approval. The Fire Department (September 16, 1997 letter, amended 10/22/97) has offered standard conditions of approval regarding driveway width and turnaround, and has approved the plans as proposed (Attachment 7). An additional fire hydrant is required for adequate fire flow, which is shown on the plans to the west side of the multi- purpose building. The Fire Department's conditions are included in Exhibit "B" for the site development permit. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 8 The Pathways Committee has requested a Type IIb pathway be installed within the Arastradero Road right-of-way (Attachment 8, dated September 24, 1997). While Arastradero Road has not been designated by the City Council for pathways on both sides of the street, the path on the opposite side of the street lies within the City of Palo Alto. Staff notes that there is no crosswalk in mid-block to serve this site, and that because of the nature of the use, children or adults may occasionally walk to the church and have need for a pathway. The Committee also recommended obtaining an easement if additional right-of-way is needed to accommodate the pathway. The Committee's recommendation is included in the conditions of approval (#8) for the site development permit(Exhibit"B"). The Environmental Design Committee has commented on landscaping and lighting, as mentioned previously (Attachment 9). The Committee would be involved in further review of the lighting as part of a subsequent site development hearing, as required by the conditions of approval. Conditional Use Permit Pursuant to Section 10-1.703(h) of the Zoning Code, churches may be permitted in the Town with a conditional use permit. Exhibit "C" (Attachment 3) outlines staff's proposed findings to support approval of the conditional use permit for this project. In particular, the use has been established and has been compatible with surrounding uses for 40 years, and measures are proposed to further minimize impacts on residences; the site is adequate in size as the Town's requirements for development area and floor area have been met, and setbacks are substantially greater than those required; access is adequate since Arastradero Road is a major collector roadway on the perimeter of the Town such that no traffic must travel through adjacent neighborhoods; and, with the imposition of conditions to minimize lighting, provide landscape screening, buffer noise, and address drainage concerns, there should be no significant impacts on abutting property. Attachment 1 outlines proposed conditions of approval for the use permit. Staff has suggested that the use permit be reviewed by the Planning Commission one year after final inspection of the multi-purpose building, and every 5 years thereafter. A condition is also included allowing for revocation of the permit in the event conditions are violated. Site Development Permit A site development permit is required for the new construction. Exhibit "B" outlines proposed conditions of approval for the site development permit. Staff has separated these conditions from the use permit conditions because the use will continue long after the construction is complete. The conditions would allow for the additions to the existing buildings to be completed prior to the construction of the new multi-purpose building, but would tie most of the other improvements, including parking, lighting, and landscaping, to the construction of the multi-purpose building. Environmental Review In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff has prepared a Negative Declaration to support the project. Potential significant impacts are identified for drainage, traffic, noise and lighting from the project, and mitigation measures are proposed for each, as discussed in the pertinent sections above. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 9 The mitigation measures are all incorporated into the conditions of approval for either the conditional use permit or the site development permit, or both. CONCLUSION A conditional use permit has existed for this site and use since 1958, but significant changes to the scope of the use have occurred and further expansion is now proposed, requiring a complete review of the use permit. While the design of the buildings and parking improvements are generally consistent with Town codes and guidelines, impacts have been identified related to downstream drainage, outdoor lighting, noise, and traffic. The conditions of approval require that the applicants address all of these issues in ways that staff believes will reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The conditional use permit further includes provisions to require periodic review of the use by the Planning Commission to assure that conditions continue to be met and to allow input by affected neighbors. Staff is available to respond to questions from the Commission or the public. ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit 2. Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval for Site Development Permit 3. Exhibit C: Findings for Approval for Conditional Use Permit 4. Negative Declaration 5. Worksheet#2 6. December 10, 1997 Letter from Cotton, Shires and Associates 7. October 22, 1997 Amended Memo from Fire Department 8. September 24, 1997 Pathways Committee Memo 9. December 26, 1997 Environmental Design Committee Memo 10. Application and Applicant's Findings 11. December 4, 1997 Drainage Letter from Brian Kangas Foulk 12. November 26, 1997 Noise Mitigation Letter from Charles M. Salter Assocs. 13. Lighting Specifications 14. Correspondence from Applicant to Neighbors 15. Excerpts of Minutes and Correspondence from 1958 Use Permit Hearings 16. Plans Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 10 ATTACHMENT L EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-GD-ND 1. This conditional use permit allows the use of the subject property as a religious institution and for related school activities and social functions, subject to the following conditions and according to plans approved by the City Council on , 1998.. Any further expansion or change of the use shall require an amendment to the conditional use permit. Additionally, the Planning Director may, at any time, schedule a review or revocation hearing before the Planning Commission regarding the use permit, if any condition of approval is not being met or if the facility is being used inconsistent with the approved use or in violation of Town development codes. 2. Not later than one year after final inspection of the multi-purpose building, the applicant shall request and the Planning Commission shall then review the use permit at a noticed public hearing, to determine that the use remains in compliance with the conditions of approval. Subsequent to the initial review, subsequent reviews shall occur every five (5)years thereafter. 3. If permittee abandons the use of said real property allowed by this permit for a period of one year, then the abandonment shall constitute a revocation of the use herein granted, and this Use Permit shall become null and void. 4. The size of the Congregation shall be limited to the present 1,200 families plus an allowable growth of 5%, for a total of 1,260 families. The size of the Congregation shall be reported to the Town at each required review. Any increase in excess of that limitation shall require an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. 5. The following rules of operation shall apply to the use permit: a) No commercial activities or retail sales are permitted on the site. b) The hours of use for site activities shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, except as otherwise allowed in writing by the Planning Director. c) No outdoor sound amplification shall be allowed on the site. Noise levels shall be limited to comply with the provisions of Section 5-2.02 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. d) Lighting shall be on separate circuits and on timers, such that only security lighting remains on during night hours,unless an event is in progress. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 11 6. For any site activity for which attendance is expected to exceed 750 persons, the Congregation shall mail notice to all owners of adjacent property at least fourteen days in advance of such event. On-site traffic and parking control shall be provided, at the Congregation's expense, for the duration of any such event, to minimize impacts on Arastradero Road and neighboring properties. 7. Onsite and offsite storm drainage facilities shall be inspected and maintained annually by qualified engineering consultants to Congregation Beth Am, and a report shall be submitted to the Town not later than October 1st of each year describing the findings of the inspection and any remedial measures proposed to assure proper functioning of the drainage system. The report shall include any necessary erosion control measures for the open drainage swale as well as annual cleaning of the system and repairs. All proposed erosion control measures shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to installation. For the purposes of this provision, offsite drainage facilities include the open drainage channel downstream project to Fremont Road. 8. A sign shall beofthe installed atsite the exit of the site prohibiting left turns from the site onto Arastradero Road during the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday. 9. - An approved Fire Department key box and appropriate building keys shall be provided to the Fire Department. 10. The roadway through the site shall be marked as a "Fire Lane" per Fire Department specifications, and parking shall be prohibited on either side of the road. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 12 ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR NEW MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING AND ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-GD-ND A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. Any modifications to the approved plans requires prior approval of the Planning Director or Planning Commission depending upon the scope of the changes. 2. Proposed holly oaks shall be replaced with a native evergreen species acceptable to the Planning Director and Environmental Design Committee. Prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building,the Planning Department shall determine whether additional landscaping is necessary,particularly between the new parking areas and the western property boundary. All landscaping required for screening purposes or for erosion control (as determined by the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building, unless the Planning Director fmds that unusual circumstances, such as weather or site conditions, require that planting be delayed. In those instances, a deposit of an amount equal to the cost of landscape materials and installation,to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, shall be submitted to the Town. Landscaping shall in any event be installed not later than 6 months after final inspection, or the deposit will be forfeited. 3. 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 fmal 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. 4. Materials and colors for the proposed structures shall match the existing buildings on the site. If paint colors are proposed to be changed, colors must be chosen by the applicant and approved by staff in conformance with the Town's adopted color board, and shall exhibit a light reflectivity value of 50 or less. Roofs shall use materials which have a light reflectivity value of 40 or less. All applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the approved color(s) prior to final inspection. 5. Class A or B fire retardant roofmg is required for the new construction. 6. Not later than 60 days after issuance of a building permit for the multi-purpose building, the applicant shall submit a revised outdoor lighting plan for review at a Site Development Hearing. Lighting at the perimeter of the property adjacent to existing residential properties shall be modified to either reduce wattage, reduce the height of light poles, or reduce the number of lights to minimize impacts on Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit , Page 13 those neighbors. All approved lighting must be installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. 7. A 6-foot high wooden fence shall be constructed along the west property boundary from the rear property line to approximately where the new parking area will be constructed. The fence must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 8. A Class IIb pathway shall be constructed within the right-of-way of Arastradero Road, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department,prior to final inspection of the multi-purpose building. If necessary to accommodate the pathway, a pathway easement shall be dedicated parallel to the right-of-way sufficient to provide for the pathway. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed surveyor, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department, and the Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including the approved exhibits, shall be signed by the property owner and notarized and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check for the multi-purpose building. 9. A sign shall be installed at the exit of the site prohibiting left turns from the site onto Arastradero Road during the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday. The design of the sign shall be approved by the Engineering Department and the sign must be installed prior to final inspection of the multi- purpose building. 10. As recommended by William Cotton&Associates in their report dated December 10, 1997,the applicant shall comply with the following: a. The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project-building and grading plans (i.e.., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements, and design parameters for foundations and pavement) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. As part of the plan evaluations, the consultant should consider and address whether structural fill beneath the multi-purpose building should be placed at a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. The consultant shall summarize the results of their plan review in a letter to be submitted to the Town,prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. b. The project geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed) and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and "subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The project geotechnical consultant shall describe the results of inspections and as-built conditions of the project in a letter to be submitted to the Town Engineering Department prior to final inspection. For further details on the above requirements, please reference the letter from William Cotton&Associates dated December 10, 1997. c Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 14 11. The site drainage associated with the proposed development must be designed as surface flow wherever possible to avoid concentration of the runoff. The proposed drainage shall be designed to maintain the existing flow patterns. A final grading and drainage plan shall be required to be submitted and approved by the Town Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Final drainage and grading 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 drainage improvements were installed as shown on the approved plans and in accordance with their recommendations prior to final inspection. 12. 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 between November 1 and April 1 except with prior approval from the City Engineer. No grading shall take place within ten feet of any property line. 13. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. 14. An erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The contractor and the property owner shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES permit relative to grading and erosion/sediment control. The first 100 feet of the driveway shall be rocked during construction and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected from erosion. All areas on the site that have the native soil disturbed shall be protected for erosion control during the rainy season and shall be replanted prior to final inspection. 15. 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 plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on Arastradero Road and surrounding roadways; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; parking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 16. 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 shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 17. The property owner shall obtain private drainage easements from the property owners at 27201 and 27241 Fremont Road and 26744 Arastradero Road and shall submit copies of the recorded documents prior to submittal of plans for building plan check Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 15 18. A Certificate of Compliance is required to be issued by the Town for this • property. The property owner shall submit legal description and plat exhibits prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor for the boundary of the property in addition tothe title history for the property prior to the Town's incorporation in January 1946. The Town shall prepare the Certificate of Compliance. The required exhibits and title history shall be submitted and approved by the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check C. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 19. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background and be a minimum of 4 inches in height. 20. The roadway through the site shall have a minimum width of twenty (20) feet. Vertical clearance shall be a minimum of thirteen feet six inches. Both dimensions shall be maintained. The driveway shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (40,000 pounds) and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. 21. A private on-site fire hydrant shall be provided at a location to be determined by the Fire Department. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 250 feet and the minimum flow hydrant shall be 1000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. (Note: The Fire Department has indicated that the hydrant is to be located near the east driveway alongside the multi-purpose building). The hydrant must be installed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department prior to framing construction. Bulk construction materials may not be delivered to the construction site until installation is completed as stated above. 22. When open gates shall not obstruct any portion of the required access roadway or driveway width. If gates are provided, all locks shall be Fire Department approved, and installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications G-1 23. The roadway through the site shall be marked as a "Fire Lane" per Fire Department specifications. Upon completion of construction, a final inspection shall be set with the Planning Department and Engineering Department at least two weeks prior to final building inspection approval. CONDITION NUMBERS 10a, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18 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. All properties must pay School District fees to either the Los Altos School District or the Palo Alto Unified School District, as applicable, before receiving their building permit from Los Altos Hills. The applicant must take a copy of Worksheet #2 to school district offices (both the elementary and high school offices in the Los Altos School District), pay the appropriate fees and provide the Town with a copy of their receipts. Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 16' NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until January 28, 1999). 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. c Planning Commission: January 28, 1998 Congregation Beth Am: Conditional Use Permit Page 17 ATTACHMENT 3 EXHIBIT "C" FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RENEWAL LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-GD-ND 1. The proposed use or facility is properly located in relation to the community as a whole,land uses, and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; The church has been located on this site for 40 years. Access is to a major through roadway connecting the Town to Palo Alto and to Highway.280, and does not conflict with neighboring residents. The proposed multi-purpose buildings are situated over 120 feet from property lines to retain the openness existing with current neighbors. The church serves community members in Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, and Palo Alto, so it is conveniently located in proximity to all three cities. 2. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, openspaces, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and such other features as may be required by this chapter or will be needed to assure that the proposed use will be reasonably compatible with land uses normally permitted in the surrounding area; The site is over 9 acres in size, and can accommodate the proposed use, buildings, and required parking and remain compatible with residential uses in the surrounding area. In particular, setbacks are proposed far in excess of the minimum required, and measures are proposed to minimize lighting and noise impacts to neighbors. 3. The site for the proposed use will be served by streets and highways of adequate width and pavement to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use; and The site has access directly to Arastradero Road. A traffic study has been prepared by the applicant and indicates that the project and use will not have a significant impact on the road or nearby intersections. The study recommended, however,that left turns from the site to Arastradero be prohibited at weekday peak hours,which is included as a condition of the use permit. 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the abutting property or the permitted use thereof. The project includes several mitigation measures to assure'that abutting property is not adversely impacted. These include construction of a sound wall and other noise and hours of operation limitations; revised lighting to minimize visibility to neighbors; traffic control requirements; and on-site and off-site drainage improvements. The new buildings will provide setbacks from adjacent properties well in excess of minimum setback requirements. TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: LANDS OF CONGREGATION BETH AM #189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT SPONSOR: Congregation Beth Am Steve Bauman,President 26790 Arastradero Road Los Altos Hills,CA 94022 LOCATION OF PROJECT: 26790 Arastradero Road Los Altos Hills,CA APN#175-32-001 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New multi-purpose building,administration and classrooms,hardscape and parking. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND CITY POLICY, AN INITIAL STUDY WAS CONDUC1'EU TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE FOLLOWING PROJECT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. ON THE BASIS OF THE INITIAL STUDY IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFTECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS NOT REQUIRED. X ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE MITIGATION MEASURES DESCRIBED IN THE INITIAL STUDY HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS NOT REQUIRED. NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT AND ALL SUPPORT MATERIAL ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE OFFICE LISthI) ABOVE. THIS NEGATIVE DECLARATION MAY BECOME FINAL UNLESS WRITTEN COMMENTS ARE RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE LISTED ABOVE BY JANUARY 28, 1998. IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL THE APPROPRIATENESS OR ADEQUACY OF THIS DOCUMENT, ADDRESS YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS TO THE TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, AS REFERENCED ABOVE, AND STATE THE FINDING THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT FJ I±CT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND: 1. IDENTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT(S), WHY THEY WOULD OCCUR, AND WHY THEY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT. EXPLAIN THE BASIS FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND SUBMIT ANY SUPPORTING DATA;AND 2 SUGGEST ANY MITIGATION MEASURES WHICH YOU WOULD BELIEVE WOULD REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE Er./.ECT TO AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL. IVY ill/98 Curtis S.Williams,Planning Director Dae TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 1. Congregation Beth Am •' Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 1 INITIAL STUDY CONGREGATION BETH AM Los Altos Hills, CA 26790 Arastradero Road (File#189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND) PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes the construction of a new 7,050 square foot multi-purpose building (classrooms, kitchen and restrooms), 2,112 square feet of administrative offices, 2,112 square feet of classrooms (11,274 square feet total of new buildings), 12,330 square feet of patio/walkways, and 45,700 square feet of new parking (138 new standard spaces and 4 handicap spaces) on the existing Congregation Beth Am site. The proposed additions are intended to alleviate existing classroom overcrowding and would not have a significant impact on membership. According to information provided by the applicant, the membership growth at Congregation Beth Am has been approximately one percent per year for the past ten years. PROJECT LOCATION" The project is located at 26790 Arastradero Road (APN#175-32-001) in the Town of Los Altos Hills. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The subject property is approximately 9 acres in size and is presently developed with a 16,716 square foot sanctuary, 6,736 square feet of administrative offices, 6,736 square feet of classrooms, and associated parking and other hardscape. The slope of the site is relatively flat (less than 10%) and the site contains numerous trees (mostly of pine and eucalyptus species). Surrounding uses to the west, east and south are single-family residential. Several `research park' office buildings are located to the north, across Arastradero Road, in the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. Access to the site is from Arastradero Road, the only local access to the project site. Arastradero/Deer Creek and Arastradero/Fremont are the two closest major intersections (both un-signalized). Both intersections presently operate satisfactorily at Level of Service 'C' or better during the weekday P.M. peak hour and other times, with very little traffic delay as indicated by the applicant's traffic consultant. POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS An Initial Study is a preliminary analysis prepared by the lead agency to determine whether an EIR or Negative Declaration must be prepared and to identify the significant effects to be analyzed in an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15365). The Initial Study for the proposed Congregation Beth Am will serve to focus on effects determined to be potentially significant. In Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND • Page 2 accordance with CEQA Guidelines, the following checklist has been prepared that identifies any environmental effects. The following two sections evaluate impacts of the proposed project. The environmental checklist, approved by the Town and consistent with CEQA Guidelines, was used to focus this study on physical, social, and economic factors that may be further impacted by the proposed project. The checklist indicates whether there would be a `potentially significant impact', `potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated', 'less than significant', or 'no impact' for each specified potential impact. The second section will respond and analyze in detail those impacts identified in the checklist. A brief explanation is required for all answers except 'no impact' answers that are adequately supported. A 'no impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. Referenced information sources utilized for this analysis include the following: 1) Los Altos Hills Zoning Code/General Plan; 2) Site visit; 3) Traffic study prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk, dated December 4, 1997; 4) Noise mitigation letter from Charles M. Salter Associates, dated August 21, 1997; 5) Geotechnical investigation prepared by Lowney Associates, dated September 22, 1997; 6) Responses from Los Altos Hills staff/committees; 7) Santa Clara County Central Fire District; 8) Not applicable to project site; 9) Drainage study prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk, dated December 4, 1997. Congregation Beth Am • Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Project Title: Congregation Beth Am(File#189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND) 2. Lead Agency Name: Town of Los Altos Hills 3. Contact person and phone number: Mr. Curtis Williams,Planning Director (650) 941-7222 4. Project location: 26790 Arastradero Road 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Congregation Beth Am, Steve Bauman,President, 26790 Arastradero Road,Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 6. General plan designation:Religious Institution 7. Zoning: R-A(Residential-Agricultural) 8. Description of project: construction of new multi-purpose building, administrative offices and classrooms, and associated hardscape and parking. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Low-density residential to the west, south and east. Several `research park' office buildings to the north, across Arastradero Road in the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. 10. Other public agencies whose approval may be required: None. a Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: ❑ Land Use and Planning x❑ Transportation/Circulation CI Public Services ❑ Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities and Service Systems ❑x Geologic Problems 0 Energy and Mineral Resources El Aesthetics El Water 0 Hazards ID Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ID Noise 0 Recreation 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. NI I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project.A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on an earlier analysis as described on attached sheets,if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but is must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. c\IAA I ) %4) Signature Date ,1,,4-1:5 s . (J.J 11 s P1a.-,1IV47Iv - Printed Name and Title • Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant L LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or ❑ 0 0 0 zoning?(1) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction 0 0 ❑ El over the project?(8) c) Be incompatible with existing land uses in the ❑ ❑ ❑x 0 vicinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x incompatible land uses)?(2) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community(including a low income 0 0 0 ❑2 or minority community)?(8) IL POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local 0 0 0 0 population projections?(1) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly(e.g.,through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major ❑ 0 ❑ infrastructure)?(1) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ❑ ❑ ❑ El housing?(8) ILL GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Seiche,tsunami,or volcanic hazard?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ CI e) Landslides or mudflows?(5) 0 0 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 6 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading,or fill? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g) Subsidence of land?(5) 0 ❑ ❑ 0 h) Expansive soils? 0 0 0 0 i) Unique geologic or physical features?(5) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ❑ l7 0 ❑ water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 of water movements?(8) f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ❑ 0 tEl ❑ groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ❑ 0 tEl 0 h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 ❑ 0 ❑ i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public ❑ 0 0 0 water supplies? , • Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 7 V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: Potentially Significant 'Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to impact incorporated Impact No impact an existing or projected air quality violation? 0 0 0 0 b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?(2) 0 0 0 0 c) Alter air movements, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? 0 0 0 0 d) Create objectionable odors? ❑ ❑ x❑ ❑ VL TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicular trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby ❑ 0 0 ❑ uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 bicycle racks)?(1) g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts?(8) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑x VILBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,insects,animals,and birds)?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ tEl b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage trees)? ❑ ❑ tEl ❑ c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest,coastal habitat,etc.)?(2) ❑ 0 0 tEl d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ xp e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?(8) 0 0 0 tEl Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 8 VII ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation SIgnificant a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plan? Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact (8) 0 0 0 0 b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? O ❑ ❑x ❑ c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State?(1) ❑ 0 ❑ 0 IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances(including,but not limited to,oil,pesticides,chemicals,or radiation)?(8) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 d) Exposure of people to existing sources. of potential health hazards?(2) ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass,or trees?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ XL PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ 0 0 c) Schools?(8) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ e) Other government services?(6) 0 0 0 CI i Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 9 XILUTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Potentially Would the proposal result in a need for new systems Significant Potentially Unless Less than or supplies, or substantial alterations to the Significant Mitigation Significant following: Impact Incorporated impact No Impact N a) Power or natural gas? ❑ 0 0 b) Communication systems? ❑ 0 0 c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ❑ ❑ N 0 systems? d) Sewer or septic tanks? ❑ 0 0 e) Storm water drainage? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Solid waste disposal? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g) Local or regional water supplies? ❑ ❑ 0 0 XIIL AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ❑ ❑ p ❑ b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ❑ ❑ p ❑ c) Create light or glare? 0 p 0 0 XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. • Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? 0 ❑x 0 0 b) Disturb archaeological resources? 0 N 0 0 c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural 0 0 x❑ 0 values? d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within 0 0 0 OO the potential impact area?(8) XV.RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 • 0 ❑x (6) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 N 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVL MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pre-history? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) ❑ 0 El 0 d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? ❑ 0 0 0 Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 11 Checklist Responses and Environmental Analysis The following section provides responses to those questions in the previous section. Each subsection is annotated with the number, name and letter corresponding to the checklist form. Sources used to complete the Initial Study include the Town's Zoning Code and General Plan, written comments from staff/committees, and technical information provided by the applicant. Please note that as stated in the previous sections, questions responded to with a 'no impact' which are adequately supported (numbers appear in parentheses following the questions, indicating the source utilized for analysis) do not require further explanation. Therefore, only those questions marked other than 'no impact' are discussed below. The roman numbers correspond to those utilized in the checklist. _ I. Land Use and Planning(c) Land Use Incompatibilities The proposed project represents a continuation of existing uses on-site (weekly religious services, administrative offices, school attendance, and community social functions). Surrounding land uses to the east, west and south include low-density single-family residential uses, with `research park' offices to the north across Arastradero Road. The new buildings proposed on-site would not result in an incompatibility with adjacent lands as the uses on-site are proposed to remain the same and would not foster a dramatic increase in congregation membership. According to the applicant, the new buildings would essentially be relieving overcrowding conditions currently experienced on-site. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Some nearby residents have complained of noise levels related to events that are catered. Please refer to the Noise section for a discussion of this potential impact. III. Geologic Problems (a, b, c, f, h) Information for this section was derived from a geotechnical investigation report prepared by Lowney Associates (dated September 22, 1997), consultants to the applicant. Fault Rupture The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no active faults are believed to exist within the project site. Fault rupture is not anticipated.`Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Seismic Ground Shaking Strong ground shaking can be expected at the site during moderate to severe earthquakes in the general region. This is common to virtually all developments in the San Francisco Bay Area. Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 12 Current understanding of earthquake activity indicates that the site will likely be subject to at least one moderate to severe earthquake within 50 years following construction. During such an earthquake the danger of fault offset at the site is slight, but strong shaking of the site is likely to occur. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: IIIa. A geotechnical consultant shall be retained by the applicant to review the final construction plans and specifications. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall submit a letter indicating that the design and specifications are adequate (indicating any recommendations, as necessary), to the Town's geotechnical consultant for approval prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. Seismic Ground Failure—Liquefaction Soil liquefaction results from loss of strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded, fine-graded sands. The sands encountered in on-site borings were well graded, dense to very dense and contained a significant amount of fine-grained material. For these reasons, the potential for liquefaction is low during seismic shaking. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Erosion, Changes in Topography or Unstable Soils Due to the fact that the site is relatively flat, erosion is anticipated to be minimal during the construction phase. In addition, the Town Engineering Department's standards conditions of approval (i.e., no grading during the rainy season) would further reduce any potential for erosion or unstable soils. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than signcant. No mitigation is required Expansive Soils Test boring performed by the applicant's geotechnical consultant found that in the area of the proposed multi-use center and classrooms, soils encountered were generally hard silty and sandy clay with varying sand and gravel content to depths ranging from 6 to 10.5 feet. A Plasticity Index (PI) test performed on this surficial soil resulted in a PI of 29, indicating moderate expansion potential. For future structures to be built in this area, this is considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Mitigation measure IIIa. above would apply. w Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 13 IV. Water(a, b, c, d, f, g, h, i) Information for this section was derived from a drainage report prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk (dated December 4, 1997), consultants to the applicant. Absorption Rates/Drainage The proposed project would increase the amount of impervious area on the site from 63,600 square feet to 132,900 square feet. The increase in impervious area will cause the peak flow rate at Fremont Road to increase by about 6 percent. The calculated change in flow depth at Fremont Road is less than 0.05 feet during the 10-year event. The Engineering Department, in their review of the applicant's drainage study, has indicated that additional analyses will be required to assess the potential impact of the proposed drainage system. This is a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Na. The applicant shall prepare and submit a revised drainage study, which includes analysis of the natural drainage channel (from outlet of 30" cmp to inlet of pipes under Fremont Road) comparing existing flow with proposed flow to determine if any additional erosion control measures are required. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. IVb. The applicant shall provide proof to the Town of their legal right to use the drainage swale, OR acquire such right prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. Flooding The site is located in FEMA Zone 2, which has a mean annual precipitation of 17 inches per year. The existing storm drain culverts at Fremont Road do not have adequate flow capacity for the design 10-year flow. With the proposed development, the flow rate to these culverts will increase by about 6 percent. The resulting increase in depth of flow is less than 0.05 feet. The potential increase in the duration of ponding on Fremont road is less than 4 minutes during the 10-year event. The changes to the depth and duration of ponding are not significant. With the proposed project, there will be at least two feet freeboard to the existing finished floor of the buildings downstream of the site. The extension of the 30-inch diameter storm drain culvert to the site will reduce the potential for clogging at the culvert opening with the existing conditions. This will benefit downstream landowners by reducing the overland flows that would occur when the culvert opening clogs. This impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 14 Groundwater Free groundwater was encountered during drilling at a depth of 18.5 feet. Fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall and other factors not in evidence at the time measurements were made. Due to the relatively small scope of site improvements proposed, impacts related to groundwater quantity and quality are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required V. Air Quality (a, c, d) Proposed site improvements are not anticipated to result in an increase in the congregation membership, which in turn would increase automobile trips to/from the site and air quality impacts associated with cars. Due to the relatively small scale of development proposed, any changes in local climate or creation of objectionable odors is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, this impact is anticipated to be less than significant. VI. Transportation/Circulation (a, b, c, d, e) The following information is provided based on a traffic report prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk (dated December 4, 1997), consultants to the applicant. Vehicular Trips The study performed by BKF evaluated traffic impacts at two adjacent intersections (Arastradero Road/Fremont Road and Arastradero Road/Deer Creek Road). Both intersections presently operate satisfactorily at Level of Service "C" or better, with very little traffic delay. Calculations and analysis performed by BKF indicate that Level of Service levels would not change with addition of the proposed project. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than signcant. Safety Hazards from Design Features Because the existing driveway to the site is located at the middle of a short block of Arastradero Road, between Fremont Road and Deer Creek Road, it is difficult for motorists to turn left onto westbound Arastradero Road during weekday PM peak hours. The weekday PM peak hour volume on westbound Arastradero is approximately 837 vehicles per hour and the average gap between vehicles is only about 4.3 seconds. Based on Table 10-2 of the "Highway Capacity Manual", the minimum gap that would be found acceptable for motorists to make a left turn should be 6.5 seconds. Motorists could encounter severe delays to turn out of the site during the PM peak hour. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measures are recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 15 Via. The applicant shall post a sign at the exit to Arastradero Road indicating that 'No Left Turn' is permitted between the hours of 4-6 PM on weekdays. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to final inspection. Internal Circulation and Parking City of Palo Alto Parking Regulations were utilized due to the fact that the Town has no regulations for non-residential uses. Palo Alto's parking standard for a religious institution is one on-site parking space for each four seats or four persons. The maximum seating number at the existing sanctuary is approximately 450. The number of students who are going to attend educational programs will be approximately 300. Assuming it is possible to have 750 people in the Temple at the same time, a minimum of 188 parking stalls must be provided. The proposed parking supply of 199 paved and approximately 30 unpaved parking spaces is sufficient to meet peak demands. Existing one way circulation for on-site access will remain with some modification at the main entrance. Proper signage shall be installed at the main entrance to minimize confusion for drivers. No striping and signage will be provided for unpaved parking. These impacts are anticipated to be less than sign Jcant. No mitigation is required. VII. Biological Resources (b) There are no designated heritage trees on the project site. Although several trees are proposed for removal in order to accommodate construction, none of these would qualify as a Town Heritage Tree (typically oak species). In addition, the applicant is proposing replacement plantings for those trees proposed for removal. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required VIII. Energy (b) Although the proposed project will utilize nonrenewable resources during the construction phase of development, due to the relatively small scale involved, it is not anticipated that these resources would be used in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required X. Noise (a, b) Increases in Existing Noise Levels Future noise levels are not anticipated to increase over existing noise levels. However, nearby residents have complained in the past about noise generated by use of the assembly hall kitchen (from catering services delivering and loading from vans parked adjacent to the kitchen door). Due to these existing issues, this impact is considered potentially significant. s• Congregation Beth Am Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 17 Maintenance of Public Facilities Due to the nature of the proposed improvements, and the fact that future use of the site will remain unchanged from existing uses, impacts related to maintenance of roadways provided by the Town of Los Altos Hills are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required XII. Utilities and Service Systems (a, b, c, d, e,f, g) Due to the relatively small level of development proposed, impacts to utilities and services are anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation is required XIII. Aesthetics (a, b, c) Aesthetics The proposed buildings will be required to conform to Town standards regarding height and color of building materials. As the local ridgeline acts as a backdrop to the project site and due to extensive existing and proposed landscape screening, impacts related to aesthetics are anticipated to be less than significant.No mitigation is required Light and Glare The majority of the Town of Los Altos Hills has no street lighting, therefore any nighttime lighting provided for the parking lots is likely to be noticeable, even from off-site. This.could affect nearby residences and be noticeable to cars travelling along Arastradero Road. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The applicant proposes to remove existing lighting standards from the parking area and replace them with poles and fixtures better directed away from residential properties. The following mitigation measures arerecommended in order to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Ma. Outdoor lighting shall be directed away from residential properties and adjacent roadways to the greatest extent feasible. All outdoor lighting locations and specifications shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal of plans for building plan check. XIV. Cultural Resources (a, b, c) No data has been provided by the applicant indicating the presence/absence of archaeological resources on the project site. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measure is recommended in order to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance: Congregation Beth Am. Initial Study/Mitigated ND Page 18 XIVa. Should archaeological artifacts or remains be discovered during construction of the project, work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find. Project personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources. Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on forms DPR 422 (archaeological sites) and/or DPR 523 (historic resources). If human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. XV. Recreation (b) Arastradero Road is a primary route through Town and a connector to the City of Palo Alto. Nearby Fremont Road provides access to Town Hall and two schools. Existing pathway use in the vicinity of the site is high (due mostly to lunchtime joggers/walkers from Palo Alto and from the two Los Altos Hills schools) and would be expected to continue at current levels with the proposed development. Due to the extensive Town pathway system, this impact is considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required The Town's Pathways Committee has reviewed the proposed project and has the following recommendation: XVa. Construct II-B path along Arastradero Road. If necessary, acquire additional pathway easement adjacent to road right-of-way. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection. ,, ku 61 iV1U1 ::. - TOWN OF LOS ALTOS RTr LS • r PEANN `IG DEPARTMENT • 26379 Frena:Road•Los Altos Friiils.California' 94022-(41S)94I-7Z'2 •F-4X(4I5)94I-3164 ' • '• WORKSHEET?Z E ESTLNO AND PROPOSED DEVE.QPMai T AREA.AND FLOOR AREA • •=IND[WITS YOUR APPLICATION • 14-tui-1.--ti z U ti41tit..• NALYL C ,vEAnaT%1 Seri{ Ari exu1J�tii Y ALzAJ 2790 AR.AST 2Ab62.0 Rts • LAL. L.AI= 1:37 SUIT SNOr2,C , guyuAIr l fl —,--/ I. DE'VELOPNMNT AREA (SQUARE-;coTAGS=) ExistizgProposed • (Additions cr Decdons) To A. House and Care(front Purl A.) 30,18S + )11274- ....51,114,1_• • B. Decm — C. Driveway and Parte • (Me. r_?I{}0'along r uzc) 10 MO -1--4-5 100 D. Foos and Walkways. 55 $ 300 -1___:_44.- 30 3S 430 E Tennis Court _ F. Pooi and Dem. — C. Accetsory BmZdiag(front Par:B) _ r`o H. Any cthe:coy ge — -- TOTALS 63 5$8 ' �i3o4 1.3Z,8g2 TIII Maxim=Developraenr.Arm Allc�d.NMA.(Tera' Qrcl t g I) 135?945 2. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Ed56=s Propose . • Tom A. Flou.se and Gage (Acditioas o:De.' ions? o ZaarFIoor -3n)1$g • -F 11 Z� 4-11 4-41 C. A as c and Bement - B. A_ccrso dints �' _' . a. 1s;Floor '-- _- _ . • b. ad Flcar =- • c. Alec and Bay- 'j t TOTALS 3o11�8 . +.11)2774- :44,442 ivia. .=.um Floor Azez A%tive= -NSA( = Wcr si) .7.77! """'"'""•4 UJG VfV�L1 l LtS.`-.-:c. "I '.i: • - OA ,. . • , . . • - - • • . _ ."• • • " . . • - • - _ - --5 . . . _ - .• . Fc-R-N-u-k-'v\:F,Nr - b raCOTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS December 10, 1997 L3417A TO: Curtis Williams Planning Director TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 SUBJECT: Supplemental Geotechnical Review RE: Lands of Congregation Beth Am 189-97-ZP-SD-CUP-ND 26790 Arastradero Road At your request, we have completed a supplemental geotechnical review of the proposed project design using: • Geotechnical Investigation (report) prepared by Lowney Associates, dated September 22, 1997; and • Site Development Plan (2 sheets, 20-scale) prepared by prepared by Brian Kangas Foulk, dated August 25, 1997. In addition, we have reviewed pertinent technical documents from our office files. DISCUSSION The applicant-proposes to expand the site facilities with additions to two existing classrooms and construction of a multi-purpose building north of the existing sanctuary. Furthermore,new paved parking spaces will be added by constructing three new parking lots. We have not evaluated drainage aspects of the project and understand that this topic will be addressed by the Town Engineer. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION Based on our review of the referenced report, it appears that the Project Geotechnical Consultant has adequately characterized site conditions and has, in general, recommended satisfactory geotechnical design criteria to mitigate identified site constraints. The referenced Site Development Plan indicates that construction of a fill prism is proposed under the northern portion of the multi-purpose building, with a maximum fill depth of approximately 5 feet. Considering that spread footing foundations are proposed for this building, consideration should be given to placing the underlying structural fill at a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction (i.e., instead of the 90 percent standard presented in the referenced report). In addition, all geotechnical aspects of proposed construction plans should be formally reviewed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant. Consequently, we recommend geotechnical approval of the subject application with the following conditions: Northern California Office Southern California Office 330 Village Lane 5245 Avenida Encinas • Suite A Los Gatos,CA 95030-7218 Carlsbad,CA 92008-4374 (408)354-5542 • Fax(408)354-1852 (760)931-2700 • Fax(760)931-1020 e-mail:losg@csageo.com e-mail:carl@csageo.com - Curtis Williams December 10, 1997 Page 2 L3417A 1. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations and pavement) to ensure that his recommendations have been properly incorporated. As part of the plan evaluations, the consultant should consider and address whether structural fill beneath the multi-purpose building should be placed at a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. The results of the plan review should be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Geotechnical Field Inspection - The geotechnical consultant shall . inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include,but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final (as-built) project approval. This review has been performed to provide technical advice to assist the Town in its discretionary permit decisions. Our services have been limited to review of the documents previously identified, and a visual review of the property. Our opinions and conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. Respectfully submitted, COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT Ted Sayre Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG 1795 &MIL- 24(A/1"2& V,adt% Patrick O. Shires Principal Geotechnical Engineer GE 770 POS:TS:rb COTTON, SHIRES& ASSOCIATES, INC. r 6 FIRE DEPARTMENT SANTA'CLARA'COUNTY CONT,OL MIAMI 10",„ NIP 14700 Winchester Blvd.,Los Gatos,CA 95030-1818 (408)378.4010(phone)•(408)378-9342(fax) BLDG PERMIT NWaEA PUN REYltiW NLJIHER 9 7-2 4 2 4 RLE NWZIEA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS CCt]FJSEC SNEEr •NO. RECLIRELIENT Review of site plan for expansion of current site buildings. Amended 10/22/97: see item #13 below. 1. Rr~view of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with • adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall apply to the Building Department for applicable construction permits. UFC 2. Required Fire Flow: Required fire flow for this project is 2950 GPM at 20 psi Appendix Ul-A residual pressure for 2 hours. The required fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) which are spaced at the required spacing. . NOTE: fire flow assesed on the largest new building (the multipurpose bld), Type V-non rated construction. • • Appendix 3. Final Required Fire Flow: Required fire flow may be reduced up to 50% in BI—A buildings equipped with automatic fire sprinkler systems but, can be no less Section 5 than 1500 GPM. Therefore, the final required fire flow is 1500 GPM at 20 psi. . . residual pressure. This flow shall be taken from any two fire hydrants, on or near the site so long as they are spaced at a maximum spacing of 250 feet. 9Fc 4. Private Fire Hydrant(s) Required: Provide 1 private on-site fire hydrant(s) at903.2 location(s) to be determined by the Fire Department. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 250 feet and the minimum single flow hydrant shall be 1000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. (NOTE: East driveway alongside multi-purpose building) OLSTRICT ?t_a.us SPECS NEW RIACL AS I t7=IPANCY I ccNST.TYPE PSR& IE DATE i PAGE LAH ❑ 0 0 0 ❑ I TI�.E STELNBERG GROUP ' 09/16/97 I 1 „ 3 sEC. .ac.a AREA I COAD DESGWPTTCN 3Y R sidendal Development Ho canscn, Wayne 'Ja1LE OF PRO.;EC; I LOCATION CONGRETATON BETH�M 126:90 Arastradero Rd A California Fre Protect:cn District ser_dng Santa Cara County and the c ommunr;:es of C.tmpbeil, Cupertino. Lis Altos.1..:s Altos iii:s. Los Gatos. Monte Serena.Mcryar ,mill,ora Sara ;u o ' o FIRE DEPAR 401. co 3141-trot �► SANTA CLARA COUNTYcouniot:mumeal <<......, 14700 Winchester Blvd.,Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818 (408)378-4010(phone)•(408)378-9342(fax) BLDG PERMIT AN REVIL�AI Kum 9 7-2 42 4 T�t FILE NuraTnER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS COOEISEC. SHEET NO, REOUIRELENT 903.2 5. Private On Site Fire Service_Mains and Hydrants: Installations shall conform to National Fire Protection Association Standard #24, and Fire Department Standard Details and Sperifiration W-2. Contractor shall obtain plan review and permit from this department prior to beginning any work. 901.3 6. Timing of Required Water Supply Installations: Required Fire Hydrant and Water.Supply installations shall be in place, inspected, tested and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of framing construction. Bulk construction materials may not be delivered to the construction site until installations are completed as stated above.. Clearance for building permits may • be held until installations are completed. 90212 7. Fire Apparatus (Engine) Access Roads Required: Provide access roadways with a paved all weather surface and a,minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius.of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-1. 9oZ4.1 • 8. Emergency Gate/Access Gate Requirements: When open gates shall not obstruct any portion of the required access roadway or driveway width. If 'provided, all locks shall be fire department approved. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications G-1. (NOTE: if gates are to be included in design). UFC 9. Parking Roadways: The tired width of fire access roadways shall not be 9022.4.? Along obstructed in any mariner. Parking shall not be allowed along roadways Jess than 28 feet in !width. Parking will be allowed along one side of the street for roadways 28-35 feet in width. For iroadways equal to or greater than 36 feet parking will be allowed on both sides of the roadway. Roadway widths shall be measured face to face of curb. Parking spaces are based on an 8 ft wide space. INSTAL= P{ANS SP€C3 NEW RMOL AS i Ors."'PAULY; COMET.TYPE i PERMITTEE DATE I PAGE LAH ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ I I • THE STEM(BERG GROUP 09/16/97 I 2 of 3 SEC.:FLOOR AREA I !WAD !DESCRIPTION EY Residential Development Hokanson, Wayne %LAE F peasecr . LOCATION CONGRET ETON BETH 36790 Arastradero Rd. 4 California Fire Prates:ion District serving Santa CaraCounty and the communities of Campbell. Cupertino. Lt.'s Altos. Los Altos Hills.Los Gatos. Monte Sereno,14organ Hill, and Saratoga � 6 FIRE DEPARTMENT �- .�4. SANTA CLARA COUNTY „M„ , fit„„ 14700 Winchester Blvd.,Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818 BLDG PERMIT UMBER comm.!!„71,„ ' (408)378-4010(phone) •(408)378-9342(fax) PL,N HalmM ma; 9 7-242 4 ALE NUMBER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS SHEET NO. RECUIREHENT 014? 10. Fire Lane Marking Required: Provide marking for all roadways within the project. Markings shall be per fire department specifications. Installations shall also conform to Local Government Standards and Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-6. • 9� 11. Erste) partment Key Bax quired: Provide an approved fire department key box and appropriate building keys. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Detail and Specification K-1. (NOTE: If none already exist on site). 12 At time of building permit submittal, the Architect/Designer shall provide allowable area calculations for verification of building code compliance. • 13. Amended comment added 10/22/97: For clarification, there is no need for additional emergency access points leading toward the new multi-purpose building from the existing easterly driveway surrounding the proposed building site. The existing site driveway plus the addition of the mini driveway stub on the west side of the propose building will provide adequate access to the building. 0.-Tra C.T PEAKS SPECS NEW RMIDL AS OCrJPA1X.Y cIInsr.rYPE [peaurrrEE DATE PAGE LAH LJ 0 0 0 ❑ . i I THE S ELNEERG GROUP i 09/16/97 S o R 3 :er 7ALCCR I ARF.A i CAD fcN BY .• Residtial Development Hokarsson, Wayne NAME C. PRC,:Err LaC.T1ON COtirGtETATON BETH AM 126790 Arastradero Rd i C.aii.`omra Fars?:otec:cn .istrc:serving Santa Cara County and the communities of C.:mpbeii, C 1Ddrt:no.i:s Altos, Las Altos pais. Las Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga S' Town of Los Altos Hills $' 9/24/97q ,, • k°'a Planning Commission & Staff • ‘•••).<`.. 13833 Barton Court; Lands :' ; •rt : No .:r�,;1 From: Les Earnest, Pathways request. 2/24/97 Committee Chair 14245 Berry Hill Court; Lands of Sikhs: Subject: 1997 Pathway No request. 6/23/97 k, •recommendations 14260 Berry Hill Court; Lands of Parikh: This is a cumulative listing of all Restore 11-B paths along Berry Hill Court pathway recommendations for 1997, in and along north side of property. alphabetical order by street and number, 9/22/97 with the effective date at the end of 27863 Black Mountain Road; Lands of each item. In cases where a Addison/Marshall: No request. 1/9/97 recommendation for a given address has been revised, two dates are shown but 10560 Blandor Way; Lands of only the final recommendation is listed. Rosenbaum: No request. 1/9/97 Where construction or upgrading of 25505 Bledsoe Court; Lands of paths.to the II-B standard is Vellequette: Restore II-B paths along recommended, it is to include irrigation Moody Road and eastern boundary of at least 5 feet away from path and a property. 5/27/97 non-slip surface on any crossing 25525 Bledsoe Court; Lands of driveways. Where there is "no request" Buchanan: Restore II-B path along the Committee recommends that in lieu Moody Road. 5/27/97 fees be collected where possible. 13410 Burke Road; Lands of Rabbani: No 12025 Adobe Creek Lodge Road; Lands of request. 2/24/97 Le Joie: Restore II-B path along Adobe Creek Lodge Road. Construct II-B path at 14440 DeBell Road; Lands of Shukov: No the toe of the slope in a 20 foot request. 5/27/97 easement adjacent to Moody Road 26280 Elena; Lands of Karimi: No 4/28/97 request. 7/28/97 10460 Albertsworth Lane; Lands of 27320 & 27330 Elena Road; Lands of Arias: No request. 5/27/97 Bonds: No request. 5/27/97 • 26157 Altadena Drive; Lands of Korman: 26350 Esperanza: Lands of Simmons: Move Lowell Lane easement to Property Construct II-B path along Esperanza. boundary and reconstruct native path, 2/24/97 with rock added in marshy zones. 9/22/97 25599 Fernhill Drive; Lands of Joy: Restore native path along West side of 26565 Altamont Road; Lands of Cochran: property. 9/22/97 Restore II-B path along Altamont and Taafe Roads. 7/28/97 11890 Francemont Court; Lands of 26415 Anacapa Drive; Lands of Jansson Harker (Kerns): Acquire pathway . easement on the driveway to the top of Sessions: Restore 11-B path along La & Ssta. 2/24/97 the ridge, then leaving the driveway just Crbefore the entry construct a native path 4 26790 Arastradero Road; Lands of in a 10 foot easement along the North Congregation Beth Am: Construct II-B slope of the ridge at approximately path along Arastradero Road. If constant elevation to a point due North necessary, acquire additional pathway of the proposed deck, then following a easement adjacent to road right-of-way. 10% uphill slope to the West boundary 9/22/97 of the propery. Retain the existing pathway easement from the driveway 12421 Barley Hill Road; Lands of switchback half way up .the hill to the Chambers: No request. 6/23/97 West boundary of the property. Acquire a pathway easement in the Northeast Pt-11 A cH-m,�N. 4 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE EVALUATION C Applicant's Name: 101-,0e166'7 �'4� Address: Z' Reviewed by: " '�' 1 Date: LV2e1 c$ 5t C/7 4r 14- kTa 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 om fixtures , automobile headlights' . Fence materials: color , open/solid . Erosion control Other: ��� ke t'teh Abd 4o ' Evaluation: (Circle required ees and shrubs on plan) Planting Plan q r-- Are species appropriate: Deciduous? Future height(view, solar, drive/path blockage) Fire hazard - Hardiness/frost • Drought tolerance Meet mitigation needs • eraZi ---laovz- m:,(2-kg7/5,ciewc._myt/av: Creeks and drainage: Is-there a conservation easement? Are there sufficient protections in place. Will fences impact wildlife migration? Invasive species should not be planted near a waterway. • Other: Are there obstructions to pathways, including future growth of plants? Are all noise mitigations in place? No construction in road right-of-way. /, , l 1,�- ec.-7�ti/i/1 /_ l'' ��ce/�Ce'� A G�z�j a > C'C��LL�E��<< /r4 /9,/,�C�'��" .�1C"� Z-- Wih9P qwfA It - --.7 /fi;o>2./77,w -7tige (Jo - -� (27 *zi O INJ ' 7)--747yer -7/:19 . /opp,7q- /-7fr27".?-(7? 7-9 • 2210 � z ° �% 7/47 /7* -:)10/01 7a-m2 2126. 0/ -'6 ai - ---/p927/2W) p9a-, - off / '1 ` i ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE NEW RESIDENCE EVALUATION ' // Applicant s Name: ���� Lt k Address: Reviewed by: II th ' Date: Existing Trees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building site. Recommended protection during construction.) • - &a z o,A2} yx,„eld , ./ - 7/ x0i g Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby vegetation. Erosion potential. • 11 grading at least 10' from property line?) Creeks and drainage: (Should a conservation easement be recommended? Sufficient space between house and conservation easement for circulation. Will construction impact wildlife migration (bridges, fences)? Is there a need for removal of invasive species?) Siting: (View impact: ridgeline, across valley, on neighbors. Will driveway impact neighbors' privacy (lights, noise)? Recommended mitigation (height, color, landscape).) * - /40/-, Gd \� � Other Comments: - eg742061-ate4 /1/17/0-0/ 4 35-/ e �� ./7 R 1 1 NC l E4v-i— O TOWN OF LOS ALTOS PTT7,LS 26379 Fremont Road•Los Altos Hills,California 94022•(415)941-7222 •FAX(415)941-3160 PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR PROJECT REVIEW 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: •• Please print or type Sweet Address 26790 Arastradero Rd . ot(s um.er ract or 'arce •op i`um.er ' ease ec ne: ewer Septic Y Assessor's Parcel Number Gross Acreage Net Acreage 175-32-001 9.063 Acres 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New Residence, etc. Additions and new Multi—Purpose Building to Congregation Beth Am 3. PROPERTY OWNER: Name of Legal Owner Congregation Beth Am Mailing Address Lip 26790 Arastradero Rd. 94022 ome 'sone "or ' one • um•er ( ) (650) 493-4661 (650 494-8248 Representative's Name ^Phone FAX Number Cl:int Dodge (408) 257-2372 (408) 257-5870 Mailing Address Lip c/o Congregation Beth Am 26790 Arastradero Rd . 94022 4. FEES AND DEPOSITS: Planner will complete this section. Fees and deposits, payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills, are required to process all Planning applications. Fee Deposit • Real Estate Review: Geologist Zoning: Site Development: �r Receipt R /3,1/6./1 (CSO,(x) 700. E i 7) Filer •'f 1--. ? '_. L�� E et.CO .�v 1 COO,e�<. k j -611 4 �,0 bc() lU• �) Ne-k; 1 a' . �) Cil Date: '��/'Q7 5. SIGNATURE OF OWNER(S) OR AGENT: (Please note: Agent requires letter of authorization from owner) 1, the undersigned owner or authorized agent of the property described above, hereby make an application for the purposes set forth above in accordance with the provisions of the City Ordinances, and I hereby certify that the information given is true and correct and to the best of my knowledge and belief. Jtgnature Date , ,�I/, / r C.l i ;r: C f 1 /. CRA by: Steven Bniiman. President OR Marcel. Soidscher, Adm.in.istrntive Representative Rev.1/3/97 a ` . 1 • latlaFindings. Conditional use permits shall be granted by the City Council only when it is found that: - ' • , ,b Otho 1. The proposed use or facility is propeiiy located i:1 raia on community as a whole,land uses, and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; The adjacency of the additions will facilitate the Administration and Classroom Halls, while the Multi-Purpose Complex's accessibility relates to the community as a whole. • • 2. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and all yards,open spaces,walls and fences,parking,loading,landscaping,be needed to otherd such afeatures ure res as may be required by this chapter or,w ill that the proposed use will be reasonably compatible with the land uses normally permitted in the surrounding area; The site for the proposed uses is adequate to accommodate the • additions to the Administration and Classroom Halls and the new Multi-Purpose Complex along with walkways, patios and communal areas without disrupting the surrounding and existing site. • s and 3. The site for the proposed v�dth will be aveme served ty o carj'yt� quantity highways of adequateP and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use; and The proposed streets and parking comply with occupancy codes and standards. • 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the abutting property or the permitted use thereof. Through the use of sensitive architecture, landscaping, sound barrier, and proper drainage, the abutting properties will not be adversely affected by the proposed use (see Letters Addressing Neighbor's Concerns) . Conditions. Every conditional use permit granted may be subject to such conditions as are deemed necessary to protect e mineral Plan and tublic health, fety and • his chapter. general welfare and secure the objectives of • -7- .,.rmmrirJAT TNSF PFRMTT APPLICATION • I-r1 SCE-h-yl- JN - Brian Kangas boulk Engineers • Surveyors • Planners Pm)*Name December 4, 1997 ' DEC a I99/ Job No. 976030-20 copy Add�ss e Mr. Kazem Ghaffari The Steinberg Group 60 Pierce Avenue San Jose, CA 95110 FOUR PAGES TRANSMITTED VIA FAX TO (408) 295-5928 Subject: Congregation Beth Am Los Altos Hills, California Summary of Off-site Storm Drain Study Dear Mr. Ghaffari: The purpose of this letter is to summarize the results of the Storm Drain Study dated December 4, 1997, as presented to the Town of Los Altos Hills. There is an existing 30-inch diameter storm drain culvert passing through the property located at 26744 ArastraderoRoad (See attached Figure 2). This storm drain culvert conveys the water from the majority of the Congregation Beth Am site and portions of additional properties upstream from the site. The inlet to this culvert is located at the property line between Congregation Beth Am and the property at 26744 Arastradero Road. The inlet to this 30 inch diameter storm drain culvert is currently covered with a piece of plywood over the upper portion of the culvert opening, and wire mesh (similar to chainlink fence) covering the entire culvert opening. These items block debris and are also susceptible to clogging. To prevent clogging of the 30 inch storm drain culvert, we propose to extend the culvert to the west onto Congregation Beth Am's property and install a headwall to collect water directly into the culvert, thus eliminating the inlet constraint that exists under the current condition. With this improvement, the 30 inch storm drain culvert will be able to contain a 100-year storm event without overtopping the drainage swales leading up to the culvert. Therefore, all the water will be contained on Congregation Beth Am's site or within the 30 inch storm drain culvert, reducing the potential for flooding of the 26744 Arastradero Road property. Once the water exits the 30 inch storm drain culvert, it enters into a dirt swale that extends approximately 362 feet to Fremont Road. During a 100-year storm event, water will be contained entirely within this drainage swale at the easterly-most point of the property located at 26744 Arastradero Road. Additionally, during a 100 year storm, water will be kept at a level of at least two feet below the elevation of the existing homes in the vicinity of that swale. Downstream of the 26744 Arastradero Road property, there will be some minor overtopping of the dirt swale during 10 to 100 year storm events. This depth of overtopping would vary from 0 to 9 inches above the edge of the swale. 981 Ridder Park Drive,Suite 100 • San Jose,CA 95131-2305 • (408)436-7500 • FAX(408)436-1194 1 ` Brian Kangas Faulk Engineers • Surveyors • Planners Mr. Kazem Ghaffari The Steinberg Group December 4, 1997 Page 2 Once the water reaches the headwall on the west side of Fremont Road, water is conveyed under the road via one 12-inch and one 15-inch diameter culvert. These culverts outfall into Barron Creek on the east side of the road. During a three-year storm event or greater, there is ponding around the opening of this headwall. Water will pond up to a maximum height of four inches above the headwall, and then it will release over the top of Fremont Road and into Barron Creek. The ponding around the headwall on the west side of Fremont Road does not present potential problems for the homes located upstream of that location. In conclusion, the proposed improvements to Congregation Beth Am will increase the height of the water level within the dirt swale by approximately 0.05 feet. Additionally, the duration of ponding at the headwall located at the west side of Fremont Road will increase by less than four minutes during the 10-year storm event. The changes to the depth and duration of ponding are not significant. The extension of the 30-inch diameter storm drain culvert from 26744 Arastradero Road on to Congregation Beth Am's property will reduce the potential for clogging at the culvert opening compared with the existing condition. This will benefit the downsteam landowners by reducing the potential for overland flows that would occur if the culvert opening were to clog. Very truly yours, BRIAN KANGAS FOULK SeV Scott R. Schork, P.E. Project Manager SRS:bh K:\DESIGN 1\976030\WP\GHAFFARI3 ÷ -, . NORTH :.--) Q 2 GRAPHIC SCALE 50 0 25 50 100 200 • soP° 0 (-IN FEET ) �p►5'( 1 inch = 50 ft 4�" - ______-->-- a -- -. - . „,...-- . t -/ .VVV_ ^g `if . ..,....-- I . ./ , - - . -- .0.17---!, ..--' f PROPOSED 30" STORM DRAIN CULVERT EXTENSION AND �. '•� (4 _ HEADWALL INSTALLATION . ---> • ,, Section Number 1419._ i„ , 01111PP. f f ��SO: P ' 4 1 I "i:� DL 30' da .... • s • ), 15:// i Ailhe, -, 41/ 40 0)°.° Ala -44114. iikt 1C-' .., ,44,40000,11d. 11111Kilra fl-- / / 7 iMope° 0 ,, irr I P .,...w , ,, 4k, , /47 .\ i. \ , ,--i, \ \ A141104 i \ \ \\i ( ,- Z ) \\ \ i L---Virs 1 i o� 2 , e � 4,/I / • "1 • •� f X0,4. �( �y' 1-1 0 li 03 o ,1 o . ` 13 r o _•••• `t" $ o //// � -:' li . m /section .40110,‘ „ , Number 1057 e2,0119 // • Section iajasy / 11 / Number 1096.0 / J Section .. / Number 1130 O \ft'. .0°' Section Number 1162.2 t 6 Section 0 Number 1196.1 411, -• .,-IP • / Section •0•i`� �% Number 1249.2 1 O• + y Section ' y Number 1300.3 • \":" FLOW LINE °sr Section STORM DRAIN Number 1333.1 ISION AND ALL echo ON Section O TOP OF BANK S ys'~ Section Number 1380.7 • Number 1419.2 ,p: IP , • • FIGURE 2 STORM DRAINAGE FACILI Irani Wpm kik wmare . Surnme • Mueurs 2_ Z_, •rn 1- • V.?� �-�...... . :'^'til+.'.....y>�.':�. :.y>a:-^'::..,..s a'te. '�= ."��' � C'# a .rles M Salter Associ s Inc �'� ` f DEC. r� 1991 y Ybr, • r++ L 7 - S TV'Y4 y'd�}'ti' ' Proj. Name Proj.# Fle# Copy To: Addressee Consultants 26 November, 1997 in Acoustics &AudioNisual System Design Robert T. Steinberg, AIA 130 Sutter Street The Steinberg Group San Francisco 60 Pierce Avenue California 94104 San CA 95110 Tell4 :4155397 0442 Jose, Fax:415 397 0454 cmsalter@cmsalter.com www.cmsalter.com Subject: Congregation Beth Am, Los Altos Hills Noise Mitigation for Service Area CSA Project No. 97-333 Charles M Salter,PE Dear Rob: David R Schwind,FAES Anthony P Nash.PE This letter outlines noise mitigation measures for the service area near the Eva Duesler assembly hall kitchen at Congregation Beth Am in Los Altos Hills. We John C Freytag,PE understand that the major issue is noise from caterers delivering and loading Alan TRosen from vans parked adjacent to the kitchen door. Additional noise issues include garbage pickup and gardeners' leaf blowers. Thomas A Schindler.PE Harold S Goldberg,PE Catering Activities Rachel V Murray,PE Kenneth W Graven.PE During a meeting at the project site on Wednesday, August 20th, 1997 -- Timothy M Der attended by Kazem Ghaffari of the Steinberg Group, Vincent Lattanzio of Robert B Skye Carducci Landscape Architects, Philip Sanders of Charles M. Salter Eric L Broadhurst,PE Associates, and Marcyl Seidscher of Congregation Beth Am -- we discussed Philip N Sanders options for reducing noise transmission from catering and other activities at Claudia Kraehe Congregation Beth Am to neighboring residences. Thomas J Corbett Michael D Toy.PE The first option discussed was a masonry sound barrier wall along the Marion G Miles Congregation Beth Am property line. In order to be effective, such a barrier >lison M De Jung must break the straight line path between the noise sources and the receivers (receivers include second story windows on neighboring houses). Because of Cristina L Miyar _uiie stAt:talork the topography of the site, a sound barrier wall would have to be 15 feet tall or more to be effective. For this reason, we recommend an approach that joss A Jerozal contains noise closer to its source. .:anon R Duty Marva D Noordzee This approach involves a combination of modifying the service area to BrendaRsee encourage a change in caterer traffic patterns, and installing a fence to _.roe C Cwt:s r ` Robert T. Steinberg, AIA 26 November, 1997 Page 2 provide visual and acoustical screening for the service area. Carducci Landscape Architects has prepared a sketch showing the proposed location of the fence and modifications to the service area. Following are specific recommendations for fence construction and operational details to reduce noise transfer to neighbors: • Figure 1, attached, is a detail for constructing a wooden fence for use as an outdoor noise barrier. • The fence should be high enough to interrupt the straight line path between the service area and neighboring residences. Based on the elevation contours shown on the site plan dated August 1, 1997, a fence the height of the eaves on the existing building will achieve this. This-can be verified using story poles before construction begins. • Caterers should be instructed to park their vehicles within the modified, partially enclosed service area and to conduct all delivery and loading activities from that location. Garbage Pickup Noise transfer to some neighbors from garbage pickup may be somewhat reduced by the proposed service area enclosure, although the height of the garbage trucks and the need to move the dumpster away from its normal storage location in order to unload it limit the noise reduction that can be achieved practically. Leaf Blowers Noise from leaf blowers can be significantly reduced by changing from gas powered blowers to electric blowers. We understand that this transition is already under way. Please call if you have questions. Sincerely, CHARLES M. SALTER ASSOCIATES, INC. Philip N. Sanders Principal Consultant PNS/bh encl. Charles M Salter Associates Inc • a„tc... ;t,__! _an ",. ... ..•,a_,o4 „ 3•'_ 5 • , • • . 1 | \ / | | | /\ ~~--4 % 4 CEDAR | | / \ OR EQUIVALENT ) ` 8' [iC G' LONG ' 3Y� • | | | | | | | | | 2 X 4 CEDAR OR EQUIVALENT 8' LONG • HEIGHT VARIES 1 X G OR 1 X 8 N� CEDAR OR N� EQUIVALENT • 1 X 6 REDWOOD. SINK 1" INTO MOUND TO SEAL OFF NOISE 2" MAXIMUM GAP • BETWEEN MOUND AND 1 X VERTICAL BOARDS 7Vi � MOUND - 2 X 6 CEDAR | ET I OR EQUIVALENT CAPPING, 8' LONG BOARD ON BOARD CONSTRUCTION .=• EXTERIOR Xl [ R|OR JO| S[ BARRIER | GR[ 1 Charles M Salter Associates Inc • iNr-L +wLE NT 13 •COI E COOPER PREUIT ENGINEERS 999 Saratoga Avenue San Jose,California 95.129 (408)996-9577 August 26, 1997 Mr. Kazem Ghaffari The Steinberg Group 60 Pierce Ave. San Jose, CA 95110 Subject: Congregation Beth AM, Outdoor Lighting CPE project No. 97032 Dear Kazem: • In respond to neighbor's concerns for new outdoor lighting, we have considered the following . options in our design to minimize the light penetration to the adjacent neighbor's properties: 1. Provide fixtures with shorter poles. 2. Provide houseside shield on the fixtures closer to the propertylife:.:; . • 3. Prcvide fixture with-lower wattage lamp. 4. Provide fixtures with type III (forward throw)-distribution. . 5. Disconnect and remove all existing pole mounted flood lights. 6. Replace existing pole mounted flood lic,hts on the south site parking with new Bollards. 7. Provide minimum acceptable foot-candle._ Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any questions concerning this subject. Sincerely Cooper Preuit Engineers Ayk5i.ee4. Bijan Pour Principal il .l5•.f . . • ECEI E� 1,997 . /\TTLI APPLICATION x - ,,� taMt� t 1.s Sitrlighting system where clean _ _ rw .�YZ xi4. Lnms§• ' ¢i • x ' fknyiIttline, crisp appearance is ..,1•!;.,77-.-.'t,* t � y �i •1,;.-:' f �,i , atrAg1.1.--4--.3.•''..0'.[•-'. -..-,...,••1,-,f kti y s tir rr.' 1 y3 y i, 1 ...',,••.,",••!...,:..,. `,i • .0 ‘IIt• in ,, t ... t}, , 3 ,�„� `, TRUCTION FEATURES z SONS �.t is. -. q _,-,.,,....•:,;-:,..„,-. .-:_........, ' One •piece die cast aluminum ,s„,,,,,,;‘s,' ,? F ' " _ .r t�QusinQ— F ",!', `,F • - Itousina with tight radius edges.Door is , 3 ,P c.l•it aluminum with concealed '.--..1.,,,,,,,,,-..,•/,!„-,:, -:"..-...-:‘,„;,:' '"1, r -.,,t...,•,-,._' :,- AIS And captive door screws.Stand- • ' ., ° Tung • es clear tempered glass lens is • s '$ "� fiat clips and sealant }s .': �u�xt�vith retaining p , ;; � C � • • :t , �untinuous EPDM gasket seals s , rt ; ' .r :,..%•;•;::`-':::' +ne;apoc` to housing. Optional TR pns '` `` `led plastic lens in SEll is available r "` =j," •,, ` �y r 'ter 4,;'''1113tIC I Zilyc;tlt`o nate vandal guard option avail- 3 , able for flat lens units. _ 0ptic�l Assemblies-Specular _ , �podif aluminum reflectors provide mopes 1 Ill, V-Square, V-Round and • _ ;g v�l�f Throw in SEI;types I I I,V-SQ,&. • . =T in ;`Ell & III. The Forward Throw • ,- r •.eflec:�•r in SE!!!is 90°rotatable.Reflec .- :ors a,xt.mounted to housing with lock , '•x p :h- - • ,, iI`ws for easy access to ballast ._;--;,*..;,,,--.!....„:1;,-,ft ; , �v `,.-:-','•=•'---41 ' y1 ''•••-1 ,••,-• s2 , T $ S t ;'.-05ii ng ` tk t 4 �. � am -1' S _ Vlens. - •‘';;‘,., e ti ` c � .'''''i..'-‘ e • f' SK- . df _ 7 J - kL nF'r Lampl°lder—Enclosed glazed por- i t '' ;, � h s�k-" ► ;,»gul socket with spring loaded, 4,- ¢ � r^ ,I �� £ x , r ' x '" t ., r> ‘f idated center contact and rein- d " 5 •; " �. r -} .,,,,,-,...:•,l,•,..„-.,.:;.•,,..-.:,,,,-,-, / h ..1 lc \;'amp grip screw shell.High Pres- r -''xy a t` a /�' s ,,,,,,...4.5:2._. \ium sockets are pulse-rated. ....;1;-.5'...'••••• •'.1.,'•;.,-•.,'"-,;=:-: cf—~` 5 ` � a ; - , I� ' i1 ,r ' • tat Ballast—Starting rated to ° x r. = 1nte9allasts for Metal Halide lamps 3 I., 1 are ,\sostant wattage autotransformer F. .,,p, zzallasts for High Pressure Sodium . l� �,,z;tant wattage autotransformer x lZ ,; yp� ,;ing an electronic starter with _tnl.,�; rated to -40°F. All ballasts are • } •-ti,1• ,•.1wer factor. Wattages of 100 . :sins ',1�. r s • mounting Arms—For SEll & SEIII are " • \411/16"x10"long extruded alumi- .• ctlpplied with (4)'/e rod and nuts, nunsk•.:,',.-•-'..'.--':• •`.•..-...'.- - ;or r.„y field assembly of luminaire to c010. \lounting arm for SEI is 2"x 5" x . 6-. `,t; extruded aluminum with '/a" • y . rnot1' ng bolts. • _ r Fir—Baked-on enamel paint finish. _ ,,; - S color. - . - III ... - IIIII•-T- /• Lr- — .H 1572:: , ty _ Effective Projected Area_:t.9 �LD1NG . . - :1 1 I:i l t c-. I-IYv 4 (`J- ST�UCTI�\ { � r Y S y e$ tati� a'° je�''r{�: '1 t" r'! t n *..tY�e2 'p a} F -::.. ^ '--":".4.:f1::* � t' s ,', f :. )t'e,z t� ''v t�~ �;�t �� f• ��5�T d f 'ir 1. SJ t} S+ r ,�,a�� �.. _. y ; ti, r 7, l- Xa"j'�.,` FSA i iw., v �i2 - rty}'t � i S a ,,,,. 4. h 'Y.'„} ., a ,r,' t tr :S,''''''Ki I '•,. r ( v ,' 4"4 y ,.� S ♦ a _ `'I `''' ', ! A' bb r a 1 r tt"s'�'�' ,;",;!.:1;?,:,-,:if, aS *` : 17 4 I -t3...%, 'r S. t ' n. a;.b a r i• a{r . +- ♦ e. t r„?..4',,,,,,,-;.::,--"--1111':a `fF• S S i';'_':- ' •'t t p A t r. t ^n r v. • t S t� e {fr”�.. � r '' T ^ �r t ,'67.0 ✓ ),r• r m= .t '{ g S 1$.. r- ,t a } 1r E t f r , t '. x a t { '-• ` r -t !`1 !r yr.. -..s ; •' 5 1.1.--.,-;..rF , VP' t. {�, `" w Y, i I e.f "t> rGG G ,;i _ t a?„�, x h�,°. ... F -..:,.-,.. p, „_ ,.. , . ._ . . ,,.. . .-5.-7.-.,,,,:n.;,,,3,-,.::••••::•-4-1,-.. ,4:4.• P=".!-•':•`,1:."-.--2,';,,,,z! ifs 9--::,,i--;,--2.: f t ,a�� t .f ,`. t 0 t.)' .-i } 1 I.A�: ,,. '' --t'' •) l '+d { r ' • _ } .n. + :','•._-..,''-:•:••• 1 <` ? f zy .SEATTLET ' t'" ;-} f` SEATTLE'IF t` SEATTL•E�III �{ !'' , • VOU\T1\G ......- • .: _ . 4 : - ---- .,,.ice, l c— o--- • 1 ---- .,� o- _- Inti..��.p,. J ui(i«s f tG(1 4. SEI SEII, Ill • Poles SQS 10'-35' SQA 10'-30' • Refer to Pole Section of catalog. Poly Vandal Guard •.J SPAULDING Itf' c�- 1 fl FIN- • SDECIALFTRES/BE\EFITS ' . , _ _. ,,„ �: ,,,i,„.„........,...„....,....., Ir. C�e ' 1 F!'° ��y, , c i,t i, �,} { 7rr q<e 1,;' •;•.:....*::, tl .. SEATTLE ?•`.,1",,k,1?..:..".,:' '...A.,:77` .t F'' i < t .44.-.....`':4,1,47 •: • �y ' { i` ; rpt S t 'rt,"--0,. ", ,aft ♦ la - t k • LAMP ACCESS �, -'� ` 'y a`••••01.,..)2.•-•-••'; *"-:?;?:::, �- BALLAST/MOU{�LTING,ACCESS{ '.:; ',,'-,1'-'-',- ;....'.:1..,-1.'.....-'` t , -o >� } y -'a .ra ,..„,..-,,„5,.- X1.7 r f r -.r s t t" :t .. r f tr yam.{ }t . I r } ttti9y ♦ '� F... ., ^. -r` J: 7dtr' ,a5'+TIGHT.RADIUS EDGES,1.1',67.-;.,....,'"7',Yr j..:.....'1.'.1;',1Z, . -.-.:7.'3",•!t•-•••'. ..":'; . - t x C.;. K ir;;. !v' b�" l< •ZS .' tF ',4f>t ♦.`., GC , L ;• t e. F „j ' ` °+ t.:41--;" '.a r�'+ 1 .! { -.,.,.;:':,',';‘,.?:::.,:1-4;.;;;;-, rf.. .f ro !r f . t '' REFLECTOR `. Y� ?:. ";'.SPECULAR" :•CONCEALED SECUREII ' :'� ` •ANODIZED' • • HINGES. TO HOUSING'`_ ; t •�'' ALUMINUM• � , � _ �� , ::REFLECTORS •r ' ....-1;."1111E---..,:,.':•••_•,.•:,- , `� CONTINUOUS ,i' '�.''-"�� .,,:NEOPRENE:. , :{, GASKET';- "f_ J` CAPTIVE, t '_ DOOR' : , ' . SCREWS ' SEATTLE II . LAMP ACCESS BALLAST/MOUNTING ACCESS • • TIGHT RADIUS EDGES • k :�-{ • ;`?t{;. , • ,c. =REFLECTOR . 1 �,`'•,, ,• . .SECURED -. 1 ____„( •, 1,w' `�_' ' , SPECULAR r, �• TO HOUSING r: 4.2'. ..;CONCEALED :y- ,..�k ,, s7.; ;ANODIZED.,,, _� ' r y ` a s^ ':. 4'r r HINGES` _, ;:. '-ALCJIAINUM '- ' • ,;,' ' l• j ;h{ - REFLECTORS �': • ,`zi. x :';,:*.i... ST { f Zr`,M. ,„f; : '' ..,7 ff� �r .. e...., 1F • 4 -•'.t..... L � f f J • • • ,'. r 7 '- ' ;CONTINUOUS. ......',....-4:-.,.;..;;;;;;. " r; CAPTIVE t ;NEOPRENE ` ;; f :9-.P....,-":'; ;DOOR '` { ,, �� GASKET` '. r t.SCREWS:; - ti • t r _+!.' • t.i .. ''`Y.'SEATT.LE II! CAMP ACCESS , BALLAST/MOUNT1NGA,CCESS ":":.-..:FIGHT RADIUS EDGES } 6r�... :;.,-;"--4',.•":••.::.'M1 CONCEALED s/ ``1- -<<-i,�1 CONTINUOUS �` SPECULAR HINGES REFLECTOR "•``'' - EPDM SECURED ;: GASKET''' }' ` ALOM NZ - TO HOUSING : `- • !A' REFLECTORS ,. • 'S CAPTIVE • : ti "` DOOR {. ` '4,....i.•-•!...-,• SPAULD NG [ J U Llna., 0.700 INDALUX M•!dcast Type: t PRODUCT DATA SHEET` , . .:,. . ,e, . • Vonda Bollard . 36000 37000 Series Series Features: Solid Top Luminous Top • 1. Cast aluminum top (choice of solid top,36000 Series, 814"Dia.—).-1 or luminous top with uplight,37000 Series) is secured (22.25 cm) tt with screws to lens guard. Removable for relamping. �� 12 2. Lamp(by others) up to 150W HPS, 100W MH/MV for ,r.- 36000 Series, and up to 70W HPS/MH for 37000 [41s..-- Series. Lamp to be medium base E-17 or ED-17, 2 diffuse coated. ® 3. Relamping screws (tamper resistant available). 14 4. Clear acrylic lens, '/a"(.31 cm)wall (polycarbonate 1available). Gasketed for weathertight,bugtight < operation. � ._ f 5. Ballast is-20°F/-30°C(MH)or-40°F/C(HPS) 0 starting. Ballast is mounted on removable carriage. oo 6. Four internal steel tie rods secure cast lens guard and — N`o ` top directly to base ring(#8). Q6 `o E 7. Extruded aluminum body,:160" (.4 cm)wall thickness. Il O1 8. Cast aluminum base ring internally welded to extruded o aluminum body.i . t'o C7 N 9. Four 3/8"dia. recessed mounting screws clamp *8 bollard to anchor bolt base for strong,rigid installation o.- without handhole (extra vandal resistance available). 75 a c 10. Cast aluminum anchor bolt base. (____I 11. Tempered glass heat and U.V.shield(37000 Series © only). 12. Polycarbonate uplight lens(37000 Series only)sealed 0----"' to cast aluminum top in flush, nonremovable 0.---N 11 assembly.The luminous top 37000 Series offers a choice of above-ground-level effects with two uplighting distributions: ° 1. A concentrated throw of vertical uplight (CUL),to dramatically illuminate overhanging foliage. ICIN, 0 0 ° 2. A broader, more diffuse throw of ambient uplight ro--� �, (AUL),to illuminate nearby faces and detail. °." '87.1 �; :a: :oa ..a.'. 13. Specular aluminum, dual reflector optical system.cc, stem..-oq°':a. 'a.°:• °:4'•.-o Provides broad light distribution and low glare '2' a. a.•o"'inf. 4:" " ' 6o:.a° appearance, choice of symmetric or asymmetric light 14. Cast aluminum ylens guard.Three post design standard,six post design available. Finish: All units are architecturally finished with a 15. Decorative accent band (optional) secured in flush, premium abrasion and fade resistant polyester10 powder coating. See ordering information on non removable assembly. See ordering information reverse side for color selection. for color selection. Labels Wet Location 16. Four galvanized steel anchor bolts, '/z"dia. by 12" • UL, CSA (30.5 cm) long furnished with mounting hardware. n RICHARD BLOCK CONGREGATION 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD (415) 493-4661 RABBI BETH AM LOS ALTOS HILLS, CA 94022 FAX(415) 494-8248 KENNETH I. CARR RABBI July 2, 1997 SIDNEYAKSELRAD RABBI EMERITUS KAY GREENWALD CANTOR Dear Neighbor, DAVID UNTERMAN As with any vibrant organization, our congregation has grown and our needs have CANTOR EMERITUS changed in the 40 years that we have been in Los Altos Hills. We have been considering RABBI LAURA NOVAK WINER several options to accommodate these various needs,and this year our membership voted DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION to pursue a moderate modernization plan that we expect to sustain us for many years to come. • USA'ANGER PROGRAM COORDINATOR Please join us on Thursday evening,July 24 at 7:30 PM for coffee and dessert, and to MARCYL SEIDSCHER discuss the plan we will be submitting to the Town of Los Altos Hills. While any DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION construction project affects those in close proximity in the short term,we are striving to make the impact minimal,if any, over the long term. In fact,we anticipate this project • will provide major improvements in noise level, traffic, and landscaping. Specifically,our plans call for a change in the traffic flow, so that many(perhaps most) cars will no longer have to circle the perimeter of the property,near neighboring residences,for all access to Beth Am buildings and parking lots. We will continue to hold our most highly attended religious services, on the High Holy Days, at the Flint Center. The one new building in our plan is placed at the center of our property,far from our neighbors' property lines and below the sight lines of the neighbors'views. Finally, a substantial portion of the plan involves improved landscaping to soften current views from nearby homes. Our modernization plan does not anticipate significant growth in the size of our congregation;rather,it aims to serve the educational and programmatic needs of the current membership. We are not expanding our largest buildings, the sanctuary or the social hall. Our objective is to increase the amount of flexible space we have,to offer more varied programs for the people who currently participate. Please let us know if you can attend the coffee by calling the temple office at 493-466L If you will be unable to attend,we would be happy to arrange for another time to share our plans with you in person and to hear your comments. We look forward to your comments and questions. • Sincerely, A 'OP, Steve Bauman 'c Rud'I an President Chairman,Facilities Steering Committee / Sign In Sheet for Neighbors' Meeting t July 241997 Name Address/Phone No. a .: -, .(-. " i / (i 71,,,,,,,,, (a, (A(-I ile(o. ._ F 1r 2.-.6 e l` /- I 1 tic 7 1 4 s ) a Lu ,g,i.z.:dgz---e...- /Z4-e-- Z.477.9 �z� AZ<<s l72 M L k.. 02')-,-- 6 ( i--c z. - il d ear % C A 76700 Arue let-d\z go (0(- • RICHARDA BLOCK CONGREGATION 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD (415) 493-4661 RABBI BETH AM LOS ALTOS HILLS, CA 94022 FAX(415) 494-8248 KENNETH I. CARR RABBI SIDNEY AKSELRAD August 20, 1997 RABBI EMERITUS DAVID UM-ERMAN Dear Beth Am Neighbor: CANTOR KAY GREENWALD On July 24, 1997 the Facilities Committee held a meeting to brief CANTOR Beth Am neighbors about plans to modernize the campus and identify neighborhood concerns to address in the design process. BBI LAURA NOVADN Owners of five neighboring properties attended the meeting.OF EDUCATION g g LISA LANGER Attached to this letter is a summary of the issues raised at the PROGRAM COORDINATOR meeting and the status of our efforts to address them. Some issues MARCYLSEIDSCHER are engineering and architectural in nature and will be studied as DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION part of the design process. Other issues are more operational and will be addressed by Beth Am administrative staff. We will keep you informed about the status of our project and meet with you to review the design recommendations regarding drainage, noise, screening, landscaping and lighting when the technical studies are complete. Our goal is to submit preliminary plans to Los Altos Hills by the end of August or early September. When the technical studies are complete the initial submittals will be modified to incorporate appropriate changes. If you have issues or ideas you want to discuss with us in the meantime, please call me at 650/854-7626. You may also contact Marcyl Seidscher, Director of Administration, at 650/493-4661. Sincerely Ric Rudman Facilities Committee Chairperson cc: Beth Am Board of Directors Los Altos Hills Congregants BETH AM FACILITY MODERNIZATION PROJECT STATUS OF NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES AUGUST, 1997 Beth Am Administrative and Operational Issues 1. School buses leave motors running when they pick-up and deliver students, creating a problem with noise and fumes. STATUS: Bus operators were notified to park buses in the lower west lot near Arastradero and to turn off bus motors. Staff will convey these instructions to bus operators when making transportation arrangements. 2. Noise from leaf blowers is an ongoing problem. STATUS: A new landscape contractor is retained effective September 15, 1997. The new contractor is aware of the leaf blower concern and will either rake and sweep areas close to the property line or use low volume leaf blowers. 3. The culverts on Beth Am's property clog with debris in the rainy season causing water to back-up on neighboring property. STATUS: A long-term solution will be included in the facility modernization project. In the interim, maintenance staff are instructed to keep the culvert on Beth Am property clear of debris and to check drainage periodically during the rainy season. 4. Catering noise and vehicle noise in the kitchen area is an on-going problem. STATUS: Written "House Rules" are attached to every facility contract and include restrictions on music, noise, moving catering equipment as well as instructions to keep the kitchen door closed at all times. We will try to better enforce these restrictions with caterers and tell on-site staff to monitor the situation. In reality, it is difficult to tell a band to quiet down in the middle of a wedding or life cycle event. As noted above, "architectural" solutions to this problem as well as garbage dumpster noise will be evaluated in the remodelling plan. 5. Music and noise from a once-a-year outdoor summer party is annoying. STATUS: The party is an annual event for our congregants from the former Soviet Union. We are exploring ways to address this concern but have not yet reached a solution. 1 Engineering/Design Issues Related to the Facility Modernization Program 1. With more of the Beth Am property paved for parking, there could be increased runoff on adjacent properties. Is there a way to channel water directly into the City storm sewer? STATUS: This concern was referred to the civil engineer for review and recommendations. 2. Noise from Beth Am "life cycle" events and catering activities is a concern of several neighbors. Can an eight foot sound wall be constructed to attenuate the noise and provide visual screening? STATUS: This concern was referred to an acoustical engineer for review and recommendations. 3. The back of the gardening shed is unsightly. STATUS: The location, appearance and screening of the shed will be addressed in the revised site plan. 4. The existing and future impact of lights from the Beth Am campus (security, vehicle and parking lot) is a concern of several neighbors. STATUS: These concerns will be considered in the development of the site lighting and landscaping plan. • • 2 Jean-Louis Pellegrin 13439 Mandoli Drive Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 (415) 948-6148 August 25, 1997 Ric Rudman Facilities Committee Chairman Congregation Beth Am Los Altos Hills. Dear Sir, This is to thank you for your letter of August 20, keeping the neighbors informed about your modernization project. Since you have been kind enough and very considerate to poll the neighborhood about various issues having to do with the quality of our life in this area of town, allow me to comment on two or three points. Over thirty three years, I have never been annoyed by the music, and in fact I regret not having yet heard Misha this year! The blowers: Yes, two blowers at a time, and for almost an hour each week, it is a bit too much. The lights: Yes, it is a little too bright and they stay "on" until 3 or 4 in the morning. Security issues were different years ago and the present lighting was not designed for that purpose. Hopefully the new system will use a lower elevation lighting concealed by shrubbery, and also perhaps some proximity lighting. Having addressed these issues early in the project I trust that your modernization will be very successful and I thank you again for your informative letter. Sincerely, 1 t RICHARD A.BLOCK CONGREGATION 26790 ARASTRADERO ROAD (650) 493-4661 RABBI BETH AM LOS ALTOS HILLS, CA 94022 FAX(650) 494-8248 KENNETH I. CARR RABBI December 11, 1997 SIDNEY AKSELRAD RABBI EMERITUS KAY GREENWALD CANTOR Dear Beth Am Neighbor: DAVID UNTERMAN CANTOR EMERITUS In September we last wrote to you updating Beth Am's facilities ABB!LAURA NOVAK WINER modernization plans. At that time we summarized the issues and concerns DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION raised by those attending our meeting with neighbors in July 1997. In that letter, we addressed a number of operational issues around noise and traffic. USA LANGER We also indicated that we would study several engineering and architectural PROGRAM COORDINATOR issues and update you with the proposed modifications. Attached you will find MARCYLSEIDSCHER an updated summary of the status of these issues along with a description of DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION the modifications we have made to the plans. The intent of our process has been to involve you, our neighbors, early to identify and resolve any issues. As we look forward to the planning approval process by the Town of Los Altos Hills, we hope we are addressing your critical concerns. The Town Planning Department staff is currently reviewing the plans. We anticipate that the Planning Commission's public review of this project will occur at its meeting that is currently scheduled for January 14th. You should receive official notice of the date and time from the City soon. We welcome your inputs and ask that if you have comments or questions that you please contact one of us at your earliest. convenience. Sincerely, Q � I (3u ____ Ric Rudman Jim Heeger Facilities Committee Chair Facilities Committee Co-Chair • cc: Beth Am Board of Directors Congregants from Los Altos Hills a BETH AM FACILITY MODERNIZATION PROJECT STATUS OF NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES/CONCERNS Updated as of December, 1997 Beth Am Administrative and Operational Issues 1. School buses leave motors running when they pick-up and deliver students, creating a problem with noise and fumes. STATUS: Bus operators have been notified to park buses in the lower west lot near Arastradero and to turn off bus motors. Staff will convey these instructions to bus operators when making transportation arrangements. 2. Noise from leaf blowers is an ongoing problem. STATUS: A new landscape contractor was retained effective September 15, 1997. The new contractor is aware of the leaf blower concern and either rakes and sweeps areas close to the property line or uses low volume leaf blowers. 3. The culverts on Beth Am's property clog with debris in the rainy season causing water to back-up on neighboring property. STATUS: Maintenance staff are instructed to keep the culvert on Beth Am property clear of debris and will check drainage periodically during the rainy season. See#1 below also. 4. Catering noise and vehicle noise in the kitchen area is an on-going problem. STATUS: Written "House Rules" are attached to every facility contract and include restrictions on music, noise, moving catering equipment as well as instructions to keep the kitchen door closed at all times. We have been working to better enforce these restrictions with caterers and have had on-site staff monitor the situation. See further discussion in "engineering/design" solutions below. 5. Music and noise from a once-a-year outdoor summer party is annoying. STATUS: The party is an annual event for our congregants from the former Soviet Union. We will work with the organizers of this event to reduce the noise. BETH AM FACILITY MODERNIZATION PROJECT STATUS OF NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES/CONCERNS Updated as of December, 1997 Engineering/Design Issues Related to the Facility Modernization Program 1. With more of the Beth Am property paved for parking, there could be increased runoff on adjacent properties. Is there a way to channel water directly into the City storm sewer? STATUS: As part of its preliminary review, the Town of Los Altos Hills requested a drainage study to be completed by a qualified engineering firm. The results of this study indicated insignificant changes to total runoff as a result of the site modifications. However, a separate issue was identified. To avoid spillover to the adjacent property, the existing 30-inch culvert needs to be extended back onto the Beth Am property with a new headwall. This modification eliminates the inlet constraint that currently exists. 2. Noise from Beth Am "life cycle" events and catering activities is a concern of several neighbors. Can an eight-foot sound wall be constructed to attenuate the noise and provide visual screening? STATUS: An acoustical consultant was engaged to study noise mitigation in the area of the kitchen/social hall. The study found that given the topography of the site, a wall at the property line would have to be 15 feet or more in height to effectively reduce noise at the property line. The consultant recommends mitigating the noise closer to the source by reconfiguring the catering truck area and erecting a sound wall to partially enclose the area. Catering activities would be contained behind the wall and noise would be reduced. A landscape architect was also retained to propose additional visual screening to screen car headlights and create more separation for neighbors. The landscape plan is designed to meet the Town's recent requirements for setbacks and screening. The plan calls for additional tree/shrub materials along the property line to screen out low-level views up to 10'to 15' height above the grade. The new shrubs will be fast growing, dense evergreens that create a "green" screen wall and reduce the low-level light from car headlights. It should also be noted that the redesign of the parking lots dramatically reduces the number of cars that must travel the perimeter of the property. The majority of parking spaces will be reached from the main entrance and do not require circling the site. 3. The back of the gardening shed is unsightly. STATUS: The "green" screen wall will shield the gardening shed from the neighbors' sight. Two additional large California Peppers (fast-growing 40' evergreen trees) will shield the view of the new sound wall and shed at the catering area. 4. The existing and future impact of lights from the Beth Am campus (security, vehicle and parking lot) is a concern of several neighbors. STATUS: Lighting plans have been designed to minimize view from neighboring properties. Again these plans have been designed to satisfy more recent Town requirements. The previously discussed landscape screening should further mitigate the lighting impact. ,fUV 11 I 1: •L,..) l- ,UI �` .pp��' i �; -- 1 ,=•;\ of Niap CARL] VCC, FrOJ.# LAND sCArs ARCH! TRCTS Fie# �'"" COPY To ' 0 VO Addressee 1___________ November 17, 1997 The Steinberg Group Kazem Ghafari 60 Plerca Ave. San Jose, CA 94510 Re: Beth Am Temple, Punchlist Comment 3) How much screening do we have to do with trees on the backside of thecapro Will it reduce the lights of the rs driving around the property? Will we be shieldi�n behind the kit garden shed? g the back of theehen? Response: We have provided screen planting of tree/shrub material along the property line fence to screen level views up to about a 10'-15'height above grade. The shrubs are fast growing, dense evergreen plants that create a green screen wall. The screen planting will reduce the low level light from the headlights on cars. Two native evergreen trees (California Peppers) are planted In front of the acoustical screen wall for the kitchen area, including the garden shed. The garden shed Is to be screened by the acoustical screen wall and the pepper trees, a fast growing evergreen tree to 40' height and spread with a weeping willow like form. .RDUCCI & ASSOCIATES, INC_ 1331 COLUMBUS AVE. SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133 (413) 674-0990 (41�)FAX - 6:4-0999 kNDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • IRRIGATION DESIGN - PT e \-\;T.-., --- ATTACHMENT 15 EXCERPTS OF MINUTES AND CORRESPONDENCE FROM 1958 USE PERMIT HEARINGS . . gril".411""A"6"6"1"64"."11141.4111921 sr • . • -1p. vS. r -2- `. ACTION: 41, • • . �V• That the City Council of the Town of Loa ±Lltos Hills approve tb) granting of the variance of the Congregation Beth rV- B _F: ' to porr.±it the use of this parcel of land for religious purpoAc,3 •,,i th •` ra the stipulation that all developm nt; detailed use plane of thispar-be aby .,:. . approved this Planning Commission and the Town Council nna that a general policy of such development be established before -;o;,_ sideration of said plans , this policy to be cy ''' Commission and Council before any construction occurs on the ''' . site being approved . she • MOTION: Sherlock SECOND : Treat ; • Mr. Gardner Bullis stated that the notion was too restrictive ant: '.�,i :;~f' - unfair, and would permit the Council to rostrict the applicant ';; ;/_o- : z. Ceoding pending the Council 's establishment ,f a policy. Councilman Sherlock stated that it is not the Council 's intent to hold the applicant back, but that the Council 's action regardingol- icy should not be hurried . Ho stated further that the plans of •;he /::- Congregation would set the policy. ✓' ' •, .r. The Mayor stated that in this case , where there is no eatnblished policy, the Council has to have certain control. Mr. - Gerald D. Marcus r% '' nresenting the Gongrogntior. Beth , srat„d ;;O that. he understood the intant , and that he folt that the motion was :':, in good faith. lS The question was moved. ':P:. ROLL' Cf.I,7,: AYES: Council -=t Councilmen Treat , Sherlock, T"ny.,x• r„wle •iy ' • • NOES: councilmen Bledsoe , Clayton . N ABSENT: - None ,.'67,3'..!-' Councilman Rl,�ris,,e Stated that ho did not urstion thr, c;n• ,.•,.. i`.5`J 4'• the group , but that if the Town is sincere lin its desirg t, faith of ons - ar:lly residential community, n '` this action is the '` • and that the Council will find it difficult , in the fut.urt breakdown, other non-conforming uses and t difficult to require amortization of other non-conforming uses now existing in the: Town. y.�. . r Nn Tho yor stated that no other business was to be taken up at this �s MEETING .,DJ'%C'RNED. 8. 34 F. N. to :F meeting. s r. NEXT ,tDJOURNiD MEETING: :,' h'onday, Juno 30� '7. ,. ) r ly �8 at , .45 F. M. at tilt, .-... Town Hall , 26379 West (lremont :ivanuo , Loc '%'.7 ' Altos Bills. �• • fonpectft:lly IIubmittud, °`:, • • , 7 , ,. CLAYTON Js NITH • Y':.,;. . ,. • f - / . '''� may,1 . /}{. _ + ra - ' • f t.• J fi /!a� F . fC �1 r .a v car '• ' ,+1= 1, 4. 1 f; eM t , , ,,, • iriances. s . it) - Congregation BethAm - (V-25-58) . Use of land for religious purposes. i_ " Chairman Williams read the application for the use perrj.t; re- questing the use of 9.06 acres of the Martha ilerele property, `'` located in the vicinity of West Fremont Avenue and Arastradero ••••••-.4..,-/' Road, for religious purposes. *,'! . • _ Two of the adjoining property owners, Mr. Leonard Burkart and ,1 Mr. William Paulin, signed as having no opposition to the grant- 1,z ing of this variance. k;'_.'j Letter, dated April 170, 1958, and signed by James Zischke, `• " ?�, President of the Los Altos Hills Association, requested that "No exception be granted to the present zoning law. " -.' IV • ,j Memorandum from Nestor Barrett, Planning Consultant, was com- a, .; mented on, and copies were given to the Commissioners for _ . •' perusal. Mr. Jerry Marcus , past President of the Board of Directors of Si the Congregation Beth Am, Mr. James Dumond, and Mr. Goodwin �j, Steinberg appeared to represent the Congregation Beth Am. ' " %: • Mr. Steinberg, architect , is a resident of Los Altos Hills.: • "j Mr. Marcus stated that about two hundred seventy-five (275) families make up the membership, and they are residents of . ' ' ` II Woodside , Menlo Park, Palo Alto, •:3tanford, Los Altos, and Los '' 'r Altos Hills . He stated that if the variance was granted, the ' .1 • 1 buildings and landscaping would be in keeping with the surround- r,. _, ing area. "' ,,: , Questions were asked by members of the Planning Commission and ^^Y- were answered by Mr. Marcus as follows : i Q. 'Would there be any dwellings? A. No. . - Q. What percentage of members live in Los Altos Hills? ` A. One third (1/3) live in Los Altos, Los Altos Hills , and mg Stanford. >• Mr. Marcus stated that there is no neighborhood concentra- `' tion. He was asked to submit a breakdown of the percentage of parishioners living in Los Altos Hills. ; 4-24-58 ;: al y.W. .. ' ". . •• ., , �.• •� ' • r • ; :F. go - 0,0 * 0Z • r'a,'•<.�.7ti:: . „•a. .c•, %dq.•°'.• ''"``,.;� P�It�.h•.:.•'.�i•�'"r 5 ra:::'''+ti-• :rk L�.' •yT'4ygt.4:-<,M► y, Q. Would ,there be related activities, •other than church ser-vices and Sun ao h co1 '; A. No. Church and Sunday School activities only. Q. Could a lesser amount of land be used? Commissioner ^ ; , Sherlock stated that due to the fact that Churches are • exempt from paying taxes, that a minumum of land should be -° used. He also requested that more specific plans be pre- . sented. A. The Congregation Beth .'.m does not wish to purchase more f, land than is necessary. The fact that the proposed site is situated at the edge of the Town, there would be a min- t., '• imum of expense relative to maintainence of roads. , ;.' . Relative to thepotential congregation, Mr. Marcus —� • Marcus , . stated `."i; :L _� that a limit had been established of five hundred (500) . `; families ' ..-: Q. How will the growth be controlled? A. A new Congregation will be established. 1 • Q. How long is the option taken by the Congregation? N- _ A. Mr, Dumond stated that the option would run until June 1, 1958. ti. What time are services usually held? .;re there any outdoor services held? 1 A. Services are held Friday evenings from 8 to 10 P. M. and ✓ ' s." Sunday mornings. No outdoor services are held. ,, far. "'` Q� Will there large gatherings at the services? Reference was :,, made to cars , parking, etc. J • J .' yl A. As in ::cst ("lurches , the attendance is usually less than the membe:-.srip. During special holidays there is larger g'ii.: - attendencc;. ! Q. Are there tc he any activities such as picnics or social �' - ; il '1,:;':-!... A. No The• a.t:•vities will be confined to Friday evening . {, services , followed by a social hour, and Sunday morning J A services. ` f`Y ,.7`.4 Commissioner Dawson pointed that under the existing Zoning ``` •1 Ordinance , the n is strictly residential and agricultural. ., ,' The granting of such a variance would place an additional tax + _ burden on the residents of the Town, due' to the fact that churdhq � ,: es are tax exempt . He stated that the Commission should con- y, • sider how many people in the immediate community would benefit '_ ' from this establishment. �/ould serve residents in the immediate .y. ';:i:.,.,7.,-'-'•;. •4 area? -�.: '°. RECOMMENDATION:".TION zc . That the variance application of the Congregation Beth .`.m :s (V-25-58) be referred to the Planning Committee for study, :. '':,,, to be reported on at the meeting of the Planning Commission :.,.5 't : on May 1st, 1958 . . :,4•.-24-58 c. i ,7 'y;�`,.iy)i;r,- - • i. ''y`yf " /.,,,,,,K..l k. .1.,,w ),.Y‘1 '• D; it t. a ,1:',T.,.1! . ✓ t. t. ;;, , -1..1.,,:,,, c• • ir. !y {r r•- • 9! '• .• ;'-......*,•••=-,:r' ?r,� .' R' ,Ir. i h ,f . :1' r. -4- ' .1.. �.". MOTION: uist , Mellq :FCOND: Dawson, VOTE: =J,. Passed unanimousl ;, Commissioner Spain sugg, stcd than an extension of the option be applied for, due to this being a that it may take lor:ge: than usual variances. �elsongheastat and .r • that it would be wise �, : a Sion before any attitudesefor oor againste sarelestablishedof an ,�en Chairman Williams asked for comments or questions from the floor- sr s yf x Yk• Mr. rt Paul B. Hunters, an adjoining property owner, stated that he „;_,v had no objections to the. establishment of a church, but that h t .-;•••:,.A.,-,... would ob 'ect to an noises He •-. presented a letter stating cer- R4 , . ain con:it-ions w is e would like the Planning Commission to ;• consider before granting the variance, i--... It was Mr. Hunter's opinion that the Town should maintain its ..k=-;:->' k": rural atmosphere, and ''�•� ,� the taxes .will become higherd out that if churches are alloyred, i Mrs. Constance Hunter asked about activities to be :l� „. comparison to the activities ,of the Jewish Communitpermitted in Hr. Marcus explained that the establishment would be strictl• y Tor religious worship Mrs. Hunter mentioned that the architectural plans called for a •tm structure of three1 (3) stories high. ; .�.; ' _r Mr. t.:. Marcus explained that the architecture would be in keeping ',;•:-; Cyt } rte: with the rural area, and that a portion of the structure wulY� x be higher, but � '`' g it would not be three s' ' M- ;''`Y (3) stories high. ,i Mr. ChristensentTr`• fir regarding k e incxpressed the same sentiment as Mr. Hunter ` r.tiZt;Y•,_ p g' the Town , `,., a rural residential community. �`��` . Miss Caroline Christensen stated that the community should be Y !.- kept residential, J.r ` Mr. William Paulin stated that he is in favor of churches, and : -;: ei: f that there is a need for them. He and his wife have no oi` r4u; :'�,_ l ,. jection the granting of this variance. ZUV, ` Mr. Francis Duveneck stated that he did not live in the , r.1 :r. . but that a cr�;r,:h ebe `�; 6 3 an a very desireable neighbor, area, • . "Y==s ti�4 Y • • • l • n (• •:5 M1 t •,, • :r r s :t, fad�V,:• ? t. d f •t. ' . i5: „tii�Nri ,: H fn .i.�..Y-y� - 7 9.;k'•• c,\pyy .5 �„ `,; r '�•`= S,•"-'t�:�w b,r_ytY'h:l`�}•ay. �,Y ^" . '1'f "' R.�: t*.[' �1'y S `: -;'ik•ti:• .,f, -. ., - ,; {�.�• .c Y :�• ii •4'� Ji2 �•L• +- , thrth C '., `}; . ,.;.• •< 3 , .!r5 .*f4,54-, ..µ� ; :::�.? iS; :::• conG�EGation • ;;: .‘i ., tavinq a. mantoel OavenpoRC -7011 RABBIBeth AM 430 coasts avenue :.- ' palo alto, califoania May 9, 1958 ;= iii. Mrs. Hall Williams, Chairwoman • = '. Los Altos Hills Planning Commission :_,_ Los Altos Town Hall ,. 26379 West Fremont Los Altos Hills, California Lear Mrs. Williams: • Vii ::� 1.: 3,.•.-7- This is to supplement the request for a use variance for the - �=`„.: ; �>`•'• Martha Merle property width Congregation Beth Am wishes to acquire. , -;I- • We have filed with Paul Salsen, City Clerk, proposed site , • development and utilization plans as suggested by some members of the :`;;` Planning Commission. Accompanying these plans -is a brief explanatory •: =_- letter by Mr. Goodwin B. Steinberg of Los Altos Hills, who has acted as architectural advisor to our Congregation since its inception in 1955• - .':' You will note from the materiel submitted by Mr. Steinberg that _ a breakdown of the present membership of the Congregation has been indi- cated. Although the membership of the residents of Los Altos Hills in our Congregation is relatively small, a very -significant portion of our membership lives in the general area covered by South Palo .,lto, Los Altos, Stanford University and Los Altos Hills. Moreover, study of popu- 'w4' lation trends indicates a general movement of population of our members and potential members west of •El Camino and to the west and south of the Stanford campus.. It is our.belief that in the years that lie ahead, the Werle property-will .become even more centrally located for our pur- _i'.' poses than it Is now. • f' We appreciated the opportunity to review the minutes of the - meeting of the Planning Commission held on rpril 19. • There are one or two points that I would like to clarifyso that our position in reference '' ` to the questions reported is not misunderstood. , With reference to the activities which would be conducted on ti' the Congregational site, you may be assured that this is exclusively a • religious organization and, consequently, theprimary activities would / ,! • consist of the conduct of religious services and of the religious school. .; , . The major Religious Service of a Liberal Congregation such as 'k4:- ours takes place on Friday evening, which commences our Sabbath. This -' • `` service normally occurs between the hours of 8:00 and 10:00 P.M. Occasionally : : '” a Sabbath Morningservice is conducted in observance of special religious i...- occasions. .C, `�'... K•is • • .j. �"1•a r�Ta � ' :r;." ... i•.;. . .i ...• • . . • ;••.. j ;i • ,i.:,.`.i.•..• ..{ {t1 'i, Jil ; • .;. ��1 .,*;.:•• a•; . ' • • ` Yy;.' aLf �; .,:':1i; f4S;a .: •1. 3-y;, e' ^ ap .' . * '2. jv7g. 4 :4:ii .t- k i'. •L. t, ..i• y,.... .f '"... ..Ali:; .e. �t .. L L..g,5 T i i " i. i,,q ,+,r T,r.at. . �:1�N.. ., 4.1 ••1. •:�. .:?�..��.% ..� :1��. �y: •r,e...�•. t ..a;'.•.{.� +.t�'>• h• .+.� y�4i� : .-}4F qi �jjt�••4nk.��•i�yiX, RFnyi•�% ° ': '.. ? t - ,v • I ' .f'!' w` lb r„ + �A'r:1.41!��'T+.fc �[a� •!'+� i' : ..env(..v►n.►IDeefet;;ll; •:i;•: conc1EcatIon . . �. :�' yE. ii vine a. manOeL Raven oat 2-ion !:,:::5.. :11,:;74,—. RABBI 13;eth AM p ... 't.;, uo Goaes avenue • ;fs pals alto, ca Icoania f t.•'.• Page Two During the month of September we observe the High Holy Days -- New Year and the Day of Atonement. Above-all other days of the year ' these occasions would be the spiritual focus for the capacity turnout of congregants (similar to Easter in the Christian tradition) . On four k" or five holiday occasions in the Hebrew Calendar year we observe such - • �,,:. days with religious services; these include the Festivals of Passover, ::;. • }':,'. Tabernacles and Pentecost. V' At least once during the year, in ooservance of the beautiful int: : harvest season festival of Succoth, an outdoor Thanksgiving service in a .,, .- patio or courtyard of the Sanctuary would be celebrated. Needless to add, ;=' this service would be an occasion for reverence and communal prayer. ;.k t,' : . 4 •` The question has been. raised concerning the proposed use of a ••�.; Temple site for picnics. You were correctly informed that we do not con- 0,. template the use of our religious facilities and grounds for such purposes. 1 ' I believe that we did point out that there are the usual inte- ;:t grated activities of a religious institution. These would include our Religious School, our meetings of the membership, Board of Directors and -:.0 related .:ommittees, such as Religious Practices, kelisious School, etc. : .? y As a gen;:ral rule the traffic for these meetings is small and in no way would differ from such activities of the typical suburban Church or . � . Synagogue. `` I would like to restate again that Congregation Beth Am is ex- �:` clusively a,. religious institut_.on as distinguished from a Community Center :;`•''s.' whose primary purpose, of course, would be in the recreational and group .'-'?, work fields. We recognize that our request raises for you and your fellow- : members -- and ultimately the City Council of Los Altos Hills -- the policy =1-.v question of whether you will permit churches within your city limits. This " ` • is, naturally, a policy matter for you to determine and we make no comment .,k~`=+, upon it. 'Tr However, should you adopt the policy which will permit churches to '•=t.. function in Los Altos Hills, may I on behalf of our Congregation respectfully _' submit three points for consideration in granting our request and application: 1. The site we have chosen is on the periphery of the City limits and will involve practically no added traffic burden upon the city streets; 4.- ' .'�' ,• 2. The site selected is large enough and the development plans ° ;- .� we contemplate are of a type so that the natural beauty of the surrounding area would not be disturbed and in fact should be enhanced. '` "'� 4 r .,�• L,. , ,►td :•i! Ii t. . a.1Avo il:J `c •"1 J 'i i ��,�•��`��'1 7. ,i . • • .- of . ... ' ♦. • r _ :' _ ,'.:.�.4•: • 1 '. •:. 1;.:#....• -*1.YrJ. .,1f' Yyy'•- t: r. ,�:yy4�:t'o,•„ ty, y'.{•.7,�;.: .t� .� ii1 Z^.r.•'�._t'+�4 rt S�".,^`"Y•�'' .S,wr,ti yw•r'•�r'-i'41,•. � iii hw •a 4 v AiiF.7ra ..` 41,'� • 1 4t:;;c.i.4,w ritt i' rff y✓ 11 .vfw..i�n?nt;.x..1,1.vcA.9", " # y1 it •IZ " ;; /. ' AFi�`•NAY• • .14' ; ',.1', 4 ;i. a T!•:a . . • :tf'� ,{^, congieQation -,:w:4, :.1 "' IKIving a.mandel (EJI) i 2rYdavenpoic 2 3011 >.. [r r - 430 conest avenue 4• ,.0 4, palo alto, callcoi nia • ft j e:. ' Page Three : F 3. The site is sufficiently removed from the heart of your com- P : raunity so that the existence of the structure would have no affect upon v... the rural residential character of Los Altos Hills. '','; fy' In closing, we would like to assure you and the residents sur- •,,.:r. :x` rounding the Werle property that we, just as you, wish to see the natural °" beauty of the Hills area preserved. It is this feeling that has moved `• us to select this site and prompted the membership to approve the selection -... unanimously. In this spirit we would be more than willing to accept 'e.:42;.. reasonable restrictions with respect to the proposed site development and ..i.4'.. architecture/ design of the buildings. __, 1 it Very sincer t, T C .:•'", X.'• Gerald D. Marcus �w { ✓7... '.• GDM cm:cfn "' ...t!4 :lit 4•+ • i-...c.:::?:' . :f tt ,a';e:1s44 t• cf'i ,Fj.h:j:t. r • r'' d tier,^. r -•, i"i:I ,• . F: •tet,., :4{• 1r•Ii _,1r.::a'�^• ',. ••a.:.• .•y�, yjr _.. •L, J.. +1 .",,.ti l''_N r,^.:. ,...,. 1.`t•,_.. •�tt(1a., r r P' ) y ..�. Y� .i. j\��,:r •rte r i.:1L1-Yre >S.i,. •4�'•r •.A�, i�j7': -1Ft .�M:',.J:r J. :+'f.,A.' Ir,1Y1•.�'�r.• �•:r�'•t',''f rJ F '.f• Lfi�� Lt.. ..1� ,�'�1j�y{.�MM .!' ..�,� Ir • •fl r!'•. .. r(`'i ., .i • -. l 1' • v F1-.7��y}t .. ) !'t l!J., '. r �r '�.1'°-^•�� .�Yk ,;‘,41,r.it•\f;•rryr J ;. '.ice•�� ..7:,;,-.2,‘;:4.,-).. { 0.:' '�`.•: ,,��tF• � .�. . • -..r .. , e ,. i r Jf i n. , .'4• .. • .•t . .:�Lt t ). �`R,,j•. 1.•• 1 •'.!.. a Yeslag s/a/es ally Co# REAL ESTATE • Sales • Development . 4848 EL CAMINO REAL • TELEPHONE YORKSHIRE 7.5746 • LOS ALTOS, CALIFORNIA ).?:,:;5:1,.. .;r�`%Y. May 15, l59 :l A'r.S �'`i' :... 11 It1: re t_r. Proctor i'4elyuist Chairman, Pinning t i:o-..•�issinn MAY 1..i I ' "` :=^' • TOi•:n Hall r = :.os ;altos .:ills, •..:al.ifornia • TOM-1 OF LES ALTOS HMS _ i`-_` Je r .'r. Melauist: :- 'r '"".� Pursuant to veer 51., . °:it1•`:� 'Ii enr telephone conversation today, Pursuant .' -. we ..0... _ :f _ adjacent rer '4!r:-. t .i. .t are " .:Ltlr(' the o 'ir cin cur firm, a5 _d jaC r.ro. t j' o.nt_rs, ,jX .: �.. to the olah Lairs' Commission with res!•.c::t to its arr'ro:ral of the architec– '1y" i.- ±It- tural plans and traffic pattern to be es ahlished by Ccri'reg::tion ..eth are the owners of the 12 acre: property to the rear of t.'c - e , -t_, ,:e.--, .--:4.•,- Conn eF_.tion and are in the process o: •:eielorin_ the . crorerty into one 1%.77,!,-;:%4 acre residential sites. The,rear line of the OcmL'rer'atinn -roherty •:' ?'s ': '.lies on a co^.son . ..stir lire v,ith three of the ho .e .sites in our :.evelopr.hent. !r>• '• 91. 1' The Co'--or. ..ane runs a .istince of an: roxi.••�_teiy 400 feet. ��t� R • The present t. c pattern i •dieter a perimeter road which will .,, ria t to the 400' line previously mentioned. .,1„:�,�a' run a c�r1 ..:is area wi1.1. not � *r..=:.ice %ti>•• only be used as a ceri:stt_r• tr_ffic road but :s a c`Art.-r.fr area as well; r • s `; ,••••:'',, 4:4 :t v', In view of t�:•.Se =motors, it is+r:i;r"�• e:in:, tL iL t h.� r`0rt f^-g tion > 1ti - should construct it fence of i eTr ^er1i. ^:i i.l12 e in Yt eT)1.^.r^ �:ltl? the T c ri:- 1I !"1'- 4'- k6 F: L'''' anancy r ti?e`use. ':_?e eadliehts from car ',i2.-1- into the ,-• j; 72 r ;id ..s Oc ti:e ari•)O1flLny homeowners, tn=F?t.h°'r with the closeness Of '} "i Wt" the school U�.i diri,'s is certainly not conducive to p . r ? �+t,o;: , :1t�GCr �1V1. � and— '1 , 15� •.a• `�riv-.r_ ore i:ould '"r ect in Los ,'altos -ills. The ::se of s'-r.:obery alone `,) ;;r•"`y' -" 1hih is ne 4. enough, Since shr ,rbbery not or.1 f.-!s time to grow, but may yI `e�..rrt neither be permanent nor adequate and`_t Jim easily removable. 1t is our feeling tai..: n fence should be Of _ .. _. ..e :l:a1 it- :ci:c:' .is aJObe or �'i' used brick in k:•e in= with the use. , 4 r,; ` The school buildings are only 55 feet from adjacent property lines ''ti? ` : ! ' and theroad comes up to the 'r:.::e rt' line. It _s rteri: :rs repetitious - .ri ,i;:';` nevertheless important ,i the al er+ or •:.,ig-?,t-•.. . but to 'Oil:t .. :t ....� almost certain PI•C .abl_.lty 7.ti;„> �fx of ih!:ialr:.7eit of one's ::r i:'.ic •:.'_ti a= of the accoutrements of outdoor {'�t,�f'•c` f s! *� ,4s.'- living, ratios, pools, b.:rbe ue areas, only a :.'.r feet from to perimeter - ;1 O wish theinw-y tYt--W ur firm does not Planning Commission to W way ;= '`;. interpret this letter as an objection to the use .:f :c •ro:.rt; by a '• •!;' :•. rel_F;io1:S institution. Cn the contra.';, we are in co•• • '_et e :accord with y �U ' l- s.• c this forwhich ani.':;:-t• file noble .irit!r:::L pur: o�� behind t::'s ende vor. and Congre– w,k; ' y:A4 Fation •.,et'i on stands. e would :,.leo like, at this ti.•::e, to Publicly ;a .. . express our approval a".; nei;rhbors, of the building plans of the Congre– ,--4.4� "� l L*1.1�.�{i.1 gatlon and our ast:laetic appreciation of the b::ildings and their har— -•"s.-,n;;,,:k ronious blending with the surrounding areas. , .`e-eA: ,-.71'.‘,.:..t 'i't4e,:.,,,ter:J� • . .. • ,„1*,,,_: s .� , I ' - i,y * . 1 , r K.i n . ` .. ky- l.'•. - ,''. r v • • . i,,!- ._,-- ., R i r 6!` ' t y' :. ''• % a' LM .•. ' .. _ • til/ Y M •.. s r ' " .iJ 'e-,::-.*.--... jv. . .•..,. l•• o e-: i;,t! t 1i ••' - .. . ,i . 2r . ..tdv. - ` t . . t. ,..'. , . . r . _41 ,'tX -t' . ,�� •.' , - .. , .y ift. a 0 'A • P Y June i8, 19.59 1'3 1..c.-- lcrPM Q Mr. George Pedersen t5 �; . Asstt Director of Sanitation JUN 1959 County.of Santa Clara Health Dept. 2220 Moorpark Avenue San Jose 28, California TOVlti OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 1. Re: Congregation Beth Am `" g . -i _ Vit' Dear Mr. Pedersen: '. i was greatly pleased to receive your letter of June 15th as it clarified the misunderstanding -'.. if between our offices, which evidently occur,ed at the time Mr. Gould presented our revised moi.:- plan to you. h' • `' Your information that the classroom buildings will be used daily by approximate 200 studentsof high school and college age is entirely incorrect. We will not be accomodating 250 students >.`' x. of any age daily for seven days a week. 'vr "Youtb_Holl" will be used for occasional small_ meetings, etc. but will not be a recreational center for young , .j; • Our attendance for daily miscellaneous meetings will average approximately in any sense of the word. day .1londay through Thursday for about two hours a day, g 50 people per The inform,7fion on Temple Emenu-al's services & meetings, which I quoted to you in my letter �v, of July 2, 1958, was based on a membership of 505 families. Congregation Beth Am was .�••_k~ formed approximately •. ~ t; four years ago and has a present membership of 206 families. It will ': undoubtedly be several years before we attain our ultimate membership of 500 families and_ ''a. te ,`_`r have the attendance at Friday night services and Sunday School that Temple Emanu-El now `ter enjoys. By way of comparison, I might point out that our Friday night services at this ..t..'l time are attended by only 50 or 60 people of our 206 families, while Temple Emanu-El has -1,- approximately 150 people in attendance. am very sorry that this misunderstanding has arisen and has caused both of our offices so much • inconvenience. I believe, however, that the foregoing information will correct this mis- understanding and will enable you to abide by your initial recommendations. ...,-�: ,t. Very truly yours, 1., to Goodwin G. Steinberg, A. 1.A. - c . , GBS/re :., ; ';(V is y yi `+la,'`y �'' •'f.. .f X