HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 Town of Los Altos Hills August 26, 1998
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND
DETACHED GARAGE; LANDS OF BOWERS; 25518 HIDDEN SPRINGS
COURT; File#18-98-ZP-SD-GD.
FROM: Susan Stevenson, Planner
APPROVED BY: Curtis S. Williams, Planning Direc i
RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission:
Approve the requested Site Development Permit, subject to the attached conditions of
approval.
BACKGROUND
On June 10, 1998,the Planning Commission reviewed this project and continued the item
for redesign, specifically directing the applicant to evaluate ways to better step the house
with the slope, protect existing trees, and to minimize grading. The Commission's
minutes are attached, as is the staff report from that meeting, which includes further
background information.
DISCUSSION
Site Data:
Net Lot Area: 1.11
Average Slope: 13.7%
Lot Unit Factor 1.02
Floor Area and Development Area:
Area Max. Prop. Exist. Incrs. Remaining
Devel. 13,885 9,627 0 9,627 4,258
Floor 5,931 5,907 0 5,907 24
The proposed floor area and development area have not been modified from the previous
application.
Commission Issues
The Commission directed the applicant to redesign the house to: 1) better step with the
slope; 2) protect the trees and minimize impact on the neighbors; and 3) minimize
grading. It was also suggested that the applicant evaluate shifting the building to better
fit the site contours.
The applicant's designer has submitted a letter(attached) outlining the following changes
to the proposed design:
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 2
1. The residence has been rotated easterly to better reflect the contours and to protect
the trees to the south.
2. Grading around the house has been reduced by adding another "garden wall" and
pulling the second retaining wall at the west closer to the residence.
3. The basement has been relocated to be completely below only one floor elevation
of the house (previously crossed floors, resulting in up to 16 foot deep basement
cuts).
4. The Master Suite wing has been dropped an additional foot and the roof profile
lowered so that the roof steps down the hill more.
5. A conceptual study has been provided with the plans showing how the structure
would sit if rotated parallel to the contours, demonstrating that there would likely
be little impact on grading quantities.
Stepping with Slope
The floor levels of the proposed structure step well down the slope, from a 386.0 level to
a 381.7 level to a 379.7 level, such that the lowest level finished floor is generally not
more than 1-2 feet above existing grade. The previous plan had similar stepping of the
floor levels, but due the shifting of the residence to the southeast, the differential above
finished grade at the lowest level has been reduced from 2-4 feet to 0-2 feet. This
minimizes the exposed wall and structure height from downhill.
The roofline of the proposed structure has been modified to provide a couple of
additional steps in the lower portion of the house, particularly above the master suite.
This results in about a 5 foot drop in the roofline as shown on page 6 of the architect's
plans (compared to about a 6.3 foot drop in the floor levels). The previous plan dropped
the roofline about 3.5 feet over that same span.
Trees and Neighbors
The shifting of the building to the east will provide greater protection for the trees to the
south, which were a concern of the neighbors to that side (Vellequette). The impact on
the neighbors downhill to the southeast would be a few feet of increased setback and a
roofline about 1.5 feet lower at the downhill end of the house.
Grading
The revisions would reduce the extent of grading, the total grading quantities, and the
maximum depth of cut for the project. The area to be graded would be reduced by about
10-20% due to the rotation of the house and the greater reliance on retaining walls. This
would be most pronounced at the south end in the vicinity of the trees, which could not
have been retained with the previous grading plan.
The total quantities of grading are now proposed at 2,200 cubic yards of cut and 250
cubic yards of fill, a net export of 1,950 cubic yards of earth. The previous version of the
project included 2,500 cubic yards of cut and a net export of 2,300 cubic yards. The
revisions reduce the total export by about 15%.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 3
The maximum cut at the basement is now about 12 feet below the floor level above,
whereas the previous plan had up to 16 feet of cut below the floor at the upper level.
The retaining walls proposed uphill of the house (increased from one wall to two) would
be a maximum of two feet (upper wall) and four feet (lower wall) in height. Given their
location at the rear of the house, the walls should not be visible from off-site.
Alignment with Contours
The applicant has provided a conceptual analysis of realigning the house more along the
contours, at approximately 90 degrees to the original proposal (between numbered pages
1 and 2 of designer's plans). Based on the applicant's analysis, grading quantities would
likely be very similar to the current proposal. Staff believes the grading quantities could
probably be reduced with further modifications, but agrees that there would still be
considerable grading required to fit into this site. Of greater importance is that the
repositioned house likely would have an adverse impact on neighbors, as the trees to the
south could not be readily protected and the massing of the full width of the house would
then face the downhill neighbors to the southeast.
The minor shifting of the house on the revised site plan has resulted in enhanced
protection of the trees and reduces the extent and quantity of grading by about 15%. The
export of 1,950 cubic yards is not inconsistent with approved grading on similar sites in
the Town.
Staff is available to answer any questions that the Commission or community may have.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended conditions of approval;
2. August 4, 1998 Letter from Glenn Cahoon;
3. June 10, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes;
4. June 10, 1998 Planning Commission Staff Report;
5. Development plans.
cc: Mr. Derek Bowers Stan Gamble Glenn Cahoon
1502 Harrison Court 247 North 3rd St. 296 Kansas Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94087 San Jose, CA 95112 Fremont, CA 94539
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 4
ATTACHMENT 1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND DETACHED GARAGE
LANDS OF BOWERS, 25518 HIDDEN SPRINGS COURT
FILE#18-98-ZP-SD-GD
A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
1. The exterior exit from the basement should be designed to meet the
minimum exit requirements as stated in the UBC. Plans shall be reviewed
and approved by the Planning Director prior to acceptance of plans for
building plan check. Any further modifications; to the approved plans
requires prior approval of the Planning Director or Planning Commission
depending upon the scope of the changes.
2. Subsequent to final framing of the residence, a landscape screening and
erosion control plan shall be reviewed by the Site Development
Committee. Special attention should be given to planting along the
northeast and southwest property lines. In addition, an arborist shall
supervise any pruning required for the oaks on the site. All landscaping
required for screening purposes or for erosion control (as determined by
the City Engineer) must be installed prior to fmal inspection, unless the
Planning Director finds 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. Paint colors shall 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. White trim area should be
minimized, particularly on large surfaces such as doors, columns, railings,
and trellises. A color sample shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check. All applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the
approved color(s)prior to final inspection.
5. Fire retardant roofing is required for the new construction.
6. At the time of foundation inspection for the house and detached garage,
the location, and elevation of the new structures shall be certified in
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 5
writing by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor as being
in/at the approved location and elevation shown on the approved site.
development plan. At the time of framing,the height of the structures shall
be similarly certified as being at the height shown on the approved site
development plan. The hardscape and driveway locations shall also be
certified at time of installation.
7. Prior to commencement of any grading on the site, all significant trees are
to be fenced at the drip line. The fencing shall be of a material and
structure to clearly delineate the drip line. Town staff must inspect the
fencing and the trees to be fenced prior to commencement of grading. The
property owner shall call for said inspectionat least three days in
advance of the inspection. The fence must remain throughout the course
of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be
allowed within the drip lines of these trees.
8. The lighting for the exterior of the residence and accessory building is
approved for locations as indicated. Any additional outdoor lighting
requires approval by the Planning Department prior to installation.
Lighting shall be down shielded, low wattage, and shall not encroach or
reflect on adjacent properties. The source of the lighting shall not be
visible from off the site. Light fixtures must be approved by the Planning
Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. No
lighting may be placed within setbacks except for two driveway or entry
lights. Lighting (other than exterior house and accessory building
lighting) shall be reviewed with the landscape screening plan for the
residence.
9. As recommended by Cotton, Shires & Associates in their report dated
April 14, 1998,the applicant shall comply with the following:
a. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve
all geotechnical aspects of the development plans (i.e., site
preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design
parameters for retaining walls, foundations and driveway) to
ensure that his recommendations have been properly incorporated.
The results of the plan review and supplemental evaluations should
be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and
submitted to the Town for review and approval by the Town
Geotechnical Consultant prior to acceptance of plans for building
plan check.
b. 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 prior to 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
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 6
and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final (as
built) project approval.
For further detail, please refer to the Cotton, Shires & Associates letter
dated April 14, 1998.
10. A disclosure and indemnification statement shall be recorded stating that
the property owners acknowledge and accept the high level of risk
associated with constructing a detached garage in such proximity to a
known geotechnical hazard (the Altamont fault). The disclosure and
indemnification statement will be prepared by the Town and shall be
signed and notarized by the property owners prior to acceptance of plans
for building plan check
11. The proposed grading encroaches into the dripline of the 48 inch oak tree.
If the proposed grading cannot be changed to avoid encroachment into the
oak tree dripline, an arborist's report shall be submitted to the Town,
which addresses any potential impacts to the tree and gives
recommendations for protecting the tree, prior to acceptance of plans for
building plan check.
B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
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 except to allow for the
construction of the driveway access.
13. All public utility services serving this property shall be undergrounded.
14. The applicant shall restore the type IIB pathway fronting the property
along Altamont Road and shall reconstruct the type IIB pathway along the
eastern border of the property. The work shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection.
15. 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.
16. 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
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 7
Hidden Springs Court 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.
17. 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
18. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed, to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer,prior to final inspection.
19. The property owner shall be required to connect to public sanitary sewer
prior to final inspection. A copy of a permit from the City of Los Altos,
covering both the house and the secondary unit, shall be required to be
submitted to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check
20. 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 wherever possible. Due to concerns about the drainage from
this site reaching the neighboring property to the east, a drainage swale
shall be graded along the easterly property line, a minimum of 10 feet
from the property line, to carry the site drainage into the creek along
Altamont Road. A final grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for
approval by the 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.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT:
21. 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 with a 3/8 inch stroke.
22. The vertical clearance for the driveway shall be a minimum of 13 feet 6
inches. This dimension shall be maintained. The driveway shall have an all
weather surface that is designed and maintained to support the imposed
loads of fire apparatus (40,000 pounds). The gradient for a fire apparatus
access road (driveway) shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
August 26, 1998
Page 8
23. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall install a fire sprinldering
system to assure that adequate flow is available to the residence. The
design of the fire sprinldering system shall be reviewed and approved by
the fire department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check.
24. The emergency vehicle turnaround proposed shall be installed with
engineering to support 40,000 pounds.
25. The required driveway installations shall be in place, inspected, and
accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of construction. Bulk
combustible construction materials may not be delivered to the
construction site until installations are completed as stated above.
Upon completion of construction, a fmal inspection shall be set with the Planning
Department and Engineering Department at least two weeks prior to fmal building
inspection approval.
CONDITION NUMBERS 1, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 23 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 Alto_s 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.
NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until
August 26, 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.
AUG- 7-98 FRI 15 :37 G & G DESIGN 5106237596 P. 01
Glenn Cahoon
296 Kansas Way
Fremont, California 94539
August 4, 1998
Town of Los Altos Hills
attn; Curtis Williams
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
Re: ; New Residence and Detached Garage at
25518 Hidden Springs Lane. File #18-98-ZP-SD-GD
Dear Curtis;
The following revisions have been made to the 'DESIGN CONCEPT'
for the above application;
1 . Shifted the Residence (rotated) easterly pulling the proposed
siting away from the existing trees to the South.
2. Adding another 'garden wall' and pulling the proposed
retaining wall at the west closer to the Residence,
thus reducing the grading quantities.
3. Relocating the Basement to be wholey under one floor
elevation.
4. Dropped the Master Suite wing one foot, also lowered the
roof profile so that the new concept roof steps down hill
more.
5. Also provided a design study showing Siting the residence
footprint more parallel with the contours does not
significantly reduce grading quantities.
I hope this addres' s the concerns of the Planning Commission
and that staff would support our 'Design Concept' proposal.
Shoul• •u have any questions please contact me at (510 ) 623-7896.
S� erel
Glenn . oon
Planning Commission Minutes Approved 6/23/98
June 10, 1998
Page 5
The Planning Director was asked to clarify t 'a Paloma policy with the height
restrictions imposed on other homes and the o:, ory appearance.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING r,t'' °` 4^"
Commissioner Schreiner p. '" ed staff recommendation #2 w� requires the gable on
the right side of the ho, be deleted to match the rooflin Inn the left side. She was in
x'j
favor of#11 which ; :uires that the existing buildings >,' in the setbacks not be used for
purposes other v the original uses (non-habita.,,4'structures). She felt Dr. Hill has
complied wi 4 4' e previous requests. Commi -:'finer Jinkerson agreed with condition #1
which as -,7-or a revision in the ceiling heig! : the entry to less than 17 feet or to have the .•;,,.
area ,•,,t• ted twice. He was also in fav :��'of deleting the gable on the right side to •
�YE
t.;t-'one story appearance on the • ,'=r three sides. He felt the barn and she,$G In"the
etbacks should be restricted to • ` -habitable uses. Commissioner Aurelio. _'"=ed with the
previous comments noting '"aloma Road is certainly not a rural ar; .a e would prefer
the removal of the non-c./orming structures. It was clarified thaw w edition#11 requires a
disclosure statement 2 I icating that the existing buildings w; • " the setbacks shall not be
used for purpose - er than for storage or stables, and ,, 61' not be converted to habitable
space. �
MOTIIP-'4 SECONDED AND PASSED: 4`'` otion by Commissioner Jinkerson >>'
sec..--.ed by Commissioner Aurelio t R::prove the Site Development Permit for : ' ew
x:' idence and attached garage, L. • f Hill, with the following additions/ch.Er_es to the
conditions of approval: delete.
,.' gable at the south end of the second #M1;or and mmodify
the roofline to be similar A: e north end, other than a small eyeb n'"1' dormer or other
dormer of similar size•_, y d reduce the height of the chimney. - the minimum height
required by the Uni >`'` Building Code
AYES: y'` hairman Gottlieb, Commissioners , einer, Jinkerson &Aurelio
NOES: /'" None
: Commissioner Cheng
This item will appear on the Ci ..;=?uncil agenda July 1, 1998.
Brief break at 8:35 p.
3.4 LANDS OF BOWERS, 25518 Hidden Springs Lane (19-98-ZP-SD-
GD); A request for a Site Development Permit for a new two-story,
5,469 square foot residence, 27 feet in height, and a 438 square foot
detached garage, 17 feet in height.
Commissioner Jinkerson stepped down from the public hearing due to the proximity of his
residence to the proposed project.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 10, 1998 a Approved 6/23/98
Page 6
The Planning Director introduced this item by noting a letter from Bev Brockway,
requesting that the four pistachio trees be preserved, if at all possible, for screening and
privacy. He also provided the Commissioners with a copy of the subdivision conditions of
approval for review.
OPENED PUBLIC HEARING
Glen Cahoon, 296 Kansas Way, Fremont, project designer, discussed the property and
design elements with the aid of an overhead presentation. Items discussed: existing trees,
the removal of two pistachio trees in the area of construction; landscape screening; nestling
the house into the site by stepping down the slope; house going across contours; drainage
and swale issues; review of drainage again with landscape plan; profile section review; and
the basement design to reduce cut and/or relocate the basement. The Planning Director
suggested staying under two levels only for the basement, no higher than 12 feet. Mr.
Cahoon continued by explaining the new grasscrete material which will be used.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING
Discussion ensued. The assistant engineer clarified the location of the conservation
3 easement. Commissioner Schreiner voiced difficulty with this project as it relates to fitting
on contours, stepping down, the excessive grading, the impact on the downhill neighbor,
cut and grading for the basement, and tree protection. She would like a redesign to address
these issues. Commissioner Aurelio discussed the excessive export from the site (grading
for the site would include 2,500 cubic yards of cut and 200 cubic yards of fill). He was not
sure the architecture was compatible with this site. He would like to see something that fits
the site better. Chairman Gottlieb stated this was a beautiful piece of property but this
design does not take advantage of the site. The roofline does not step, the house needs to
come down with the slope (refer to Design Guidelines), and the grading needs to be
reduced.
Mr. Cahoon felt there could be a certain amount of redesign although with few options
available. He can shift and reduce the basement. To accommodate a redesign, he will have
to completely change the design.
Chairman Gottlieb suggested going along the contours which would bring down the
roofline. This is a lovely home for a flat lot. Commissioner Schreiner referred to the
Design Guidelines (the structure should be stepped down the hill utilizing one story
building elements). She asked for the house to fit the land. The Planning Director
suggested the applicant look at a combination of the suggestions.
Planning Commission Minutes d Approved 6/23/98
June 10, 1998
Page 7
Stan Gamble, project contractor, commented that there was no public opposition. He felt a
redesign would not improve the situation as this is not the greatest site. Regarding the
export, it is a short haul to deposit the dirt at the Quarry.
MOTION SECONDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and
seconded by Commissioner Aurelio to continue the Site Development Permit for a new
residence, Lands of Bowers, for a redesign. The applicant was directed to consider all
previous comments and concerns, working with staff on preliminary plans to see what
could be accomplished in a design change.
AYES: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Aurelio, Jinkerson & Schreiner
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Cheng
This item will be re-notice for a future public hearing.
4. OLD BUSINESS
rxF
4.1 Reportt F " subcommittees. Commissioner Jinkerson red e. -' on a meeting with
the Envir•,2t'`ental Design Committee. The Committee is eng on the preparation of a
broc.,,,'--regarding native plantings.
5; NEW BUSINESS == '
Discussion ensued regarding .:-° er from Betsy Bertram addressed to the. ning
Commission (with copies °'`e City Council) commenting on the Lands ..>•`utner, May
27, 1998 public heari.;.-�Y'� he Planning Commission clarified their po i,' n on the project
and why a contit. ion was requested. They agreed to respondciting to Mrs. Bertram
for clarifi _..' n of the facts.
REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL lyzETING
6.1 Planning Commission .r4frgentative for June 3`d, Commissioner Jinker
reported on the following items: ;-ands of Wong; Lands of Dornan; Lands of , vong;
Lands of Ewald; report on -Oval of graffiti; Lands of Gorham appeal; ..,®` Campaign
refoiu�. f
6.2 tanning Commission Representative for June 1,', - Aurelio
•
Town of Los Altos Hills June 10, 1998
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND
DETACHED GARAGE; LANDS OF BOWERS; 25518 HIDDEN SPRINGS
COURT; File#18-98-ZP-SD-GD.
FROM: Susan Stevenson, Planner SS
APPROVED BY: Curtis S. Williams, Planning Directors
RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission EITHER:
1. Approve the requested Site Development Permit, subject to the attached
conditions of approval; OR
2. Direct the applicant to redesign to better step the roofline to minimize bulk and to
reduce or revise the basement to minimize cut.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is located at the eastern terminus of the Hidden Springs Court cul-
de-sac, on the south side of Altamont Road. The parcel was created as Lot 1 of Tract
8721, a 6 lot subdivision approved in 1996. The lot was restricted by the subdivision to
step a minimum of 2 feet and to preserve some of the existing views for the single story
house to the east of this lot.
Several easements occur onsite including: a 10-foot wide public utilities easement along
the face of the cul-de-sac and along the Altamont Road property line; a 25-foot wide
storm drain easement and public utility easement along the Altamont Road property line;
a 100-foot wide non human habitation easement, located along the north portion of the
property; a 10 foot wide pathway easement along the east boundary; and a conservation
easement encompassing the 48-inch diameter oak tree south of the driveway.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
As required by Section 10-2.301 of the Site Development Ordinance, this application for
a new residence has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and
approval. Criteria for review from the Site Development Ordinance include grading,
drainage, building siting, pathways, landscape screening and outdoor lighting. Zoning
Code review encompasses compliance with floor and development area requirements,
setbacks, height and parking.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Site Data:
Net Lot Area: 1.11
Average Slope: 13.7%
Lot Unit Factor 1.02
Floor Area and Development Area:
Area Max. Prop. Exist. Incrs. Remaining
Devel. 13,885 9,627 0 9,627 4,258
Floor 5,931 5,907 0 5,907 24
Site and Architecture
The applicant requests approval of a Site Development Permit for a new 4,796 square
foot partial two story residence with a 673 square foot attached 3 car garage, and a 438
square foot detached garage. The exterior materials proposed for the residence are a
combination of stucco siding with gray stone accents. The applicant proposes to utilize
gray concrete tile roofing.
The maximum height of the house on a vertical plane would be 27 feet through the center
portion of the house (profile section Al). The height of the residence from the lowest to
highest point would be 30 feet. The house steps a total of 8 feet from the west side of the
house to the garage. The roofline steps with the contours in 3 portions of the roof,
stepping 1 foot at each section (profile section Al). Story poles have been erected on the
site outlining the proposed new residence and accessory building for the Commissioners'
review.
The second story comprises 42 percent of the lower floor area of the main residence
(second story includes open areas over 17 feet in height). There are a number of
architectural features, including varying rooflines, use of columns, bay windows, and the
proposed exterior materials (stone veneer sections), which would help to reduce the
appearance of bulk of the house and limit long horizontal elements. The second story area
is mitigated along the exterior through the use of a second story balcony, steep rooflines
that hide some of the floor area, and overhanging area over a veranda and the use of
columns along the lower floor.
The proposed structures would not be visible from Hidden Springs Court, as the site
elevation is located lower than the cul-de-sac and the existing oaks provide very good
screening along that property line. Some of this will likely be cleared to open some view
towards the detached garage with the construction of the driveway. Mature vegetation on
the property, especially on the northern property line (adjacent to Altamont Road) would
help to screen the property from adjacent developed parcels, and would greatly limit
views of the proposed residence from offsite. The residence would be somewhat visible
from Bledsoe Court and the existing property to the east (off Altamont Road) through
existing vegetation.
The residence would be located with corners at these setback lines adjacent to those 2
lots, as the house is situated quite low on the hillside. Relocation higher on the hill is
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 3
constrained by the human habitation setback, although there may be some room to rotate
the house to more closely parallel to the contour lines. While the pad level of the house
drops 8 feet over its length, the roofline only drops 3 feet, creating a more bulky
appearance. Revising the design to more closely step the rooflines with the changes in the
floor levels may reduce the visual impact to the downhill neighbors.
The basement is proposed to be cut as much as 16 feet below the finished floor level on
the uphill end, and as much as 18 feet below existing grade. To minimize grading and to
reflect the steps in the house, the basement could be limited to the area under the 379.7
finished floor or could be stepped up to the next level (381.7), but not beyond that point.
This would be similar to and consistent with the new homes approved on Moon Lane,
where basement cut was reduced to 8 to 10 feet below the finished floor.
Parking, Driveway, and Turnaround
The applicant proposes to enter the site off the Hidden Springs Court cul de sac, between
the 40 foot front setback off Altamont Road and the conservation easement around the
heritage oak tree. The driveway would be partially located within the dripline of the oak
although it would be out of the conservation easement. Three of the 4 required parking
spaces would be located in the attached garage, with the 4th space to be located along the
backup area. All of the pavement is proposed out of the required setbacks. The access to
the detached garage and the extra back up area required for the emergency vehicle
turnaround is proposed to be constructed with grasscrete, allowing for a 50 percent
reduction of that area counted toward the development area.
Lighting and Landscaping
No skylights are proposed for the main residence. House lighting is shown on the floor
plans, with generally one light at each exit. Standard lighting condition #8 includes
language for low wattage and downlit fixtures. The landscape lighting is not included in
plans at this time and will be reviewed at a Site Development Hearing, along with the
proposed landscaping, after the residence is framed.
The existing landscaping on the site includes heavy mature screening over much of the
property that would screen the view of the residence from Altamont Road and from
adjacent developed and undeveloped properties. Additional landscaping along the east
side of the property would help to screen the new residence from the existing residence
(see letter from neighbor, Attachment#7). The retaining wall and grading to the west of
the residence would require the removal of several screening trees between this property
and Lot 6 (the Vellequette residence, under construction). Staff recommends that the
grading in this area be redesigned to maintain as many of these trees as is feasible (see
condition#1).
Geotechnical Review and Drainage
The Town's geotechnical consultant notes that the garage is proposed within the Human
Habitation Setback, and over the Altamont fault. The consultant notes that the applicant
must be willing to accept the disclosure that the garage is located above the fault and that
there is a potential for loss of the garage in the event of an earthquake. Staff has included
condition #10 requiring the statement as well as condition #9, requiring geotechnical
evaluation/update prior to preparation of detailed structural drawings or final grading
plans.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 4
Fire Department Review
The Fire Department's initial review of plans indicated the need for redesign of the
turnaround to have a minimum radius of 36 feet. Consultation between the Fire
Department and the applicant has resulted in the proposed turnaround.
There is not adequate fire flow available to the lot for the size residence proposed. The
Fire Department has indicated that installing fire sprinklers into the residence would
provide adequate fire protection and this has been included as a condition of approval
(#23). The remaining comments from the Fire Department include standard conditions for
house numbers, access dimensions, surface requirements, and road grade. Staff has
included these as conditions#21-25.
Grading and Drainage
The plans indicate that the grading for the site would include 2,500 cubic yards of cut
(maximum depth of 8 feet, excluding the basement cut, which increases the depth of cut
to 18 to 19 feet at the uphill side of the basement) and 200 cubic yards of fill (maximum
depth of 3 feet). The residence has been proposed to be located against the contours, due
to the human habitation setback on the site. The residence as proposed would generally
meet the Town's adopted grading policy, with the top of slab approximately 2.5 feet
higher than the existing elevation at the garage, and the main residence approximately 8
feet lower than the natural grade at the parlor. The detached garage is proposed to be
located approximately 3 feet above existing grade at the northeast corner of the structure.
As noted, however, cuts of up to 18 to 19 feet are required for the basement.
The construction of the residence requires the use of a retaining wall to be located to the
west of the residence. The height of the wall would be 3 feet and grading around the wall
would be required to provide drainage. While the wall would be only 3 feet high, cuts of
up to 8 feet in depth would be required to locate the wall. The cuts would be sloped
behind the wall towards the property lines.
Drainage of the site is characterized by sheetflow from the west side of the house and
several drains outletting in the creek around the east side of the house. An earthen swale
is proposed at the rear of the main residence. Staff has included a condition (#20)
requiring that the final drainage design be reviewed and that drainage be designed as
sheet flow, as there is some concern regarding drainage from the neighbors to the east.
Committee Recommendations
The Pathways Committee has recommended that the type II-B path along Altamont Road
be restored and that the path along the eastern boundary be reconstructed (condition#14).
The Environmental Design Committee had a concern about the heritage oak tree located
within the conservation easement and commented on the importance of tree fencing
during construction. The Committee also requested that a certified arborist prune the oak
tree to maintain the health of the oak. Staff has included the standard condition of
approval (#2) that the landscape screening and lighting will be reviewed after framing of
the residence.
Staff is available to answer any questions that the Commission or community may have.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 5
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended conditions of approval;
2. Worksheet#2;
3. Fire Department letter, dated May 19, 1997;
4. Letter from Cotton, Shires &Assoc., dated April 14, 1998;
5. Recommendation from Pathways Committee, dated March 31, 1998;
6. Recommendation from Environmental Design Committee, dated February 11, 1998;
7. Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Williams, dated June 1, 1998;
8. Letter from Mrs. Vellequette, dated June 2, 1998;
9. Development plans.
cc: Mr. Derek Bowers Stan Gamble Glenn Cahoon
1502 Harrison Court 247 North 3rd St. 296 Kansas Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94087 San Jose, CA 95112 Fremont, CA 94539
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 6
ATTACHMENT 1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
FOR A NEW RESIDENCE AND DETACHED GARAGE
LANDS OF BOWERS, 25518 HIDDEN SPRINGS COURT
FILE#18-98-ZP-SD-GD
A. PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
1. The applicant shall redesign the grading along the southwest property line
to reduce the grading associated with the retaining wall and to maintain
the existing trees to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and
Engineering Department. The exterior exit from the basement should be
designed to meet the minimum exit requirements as stated in the UBC.
Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to
acceptance of plans for building plan check. Any further modifications to
the approved plans requires prior approval of the Planning Director or
Planning Commission depending upon the scope of the changes.
2. Subsequent to final framing of the residence, a landscape screening and
erosion control plan shall be reviewed by the Site Development
Committee. Special attention should be given to planting along the
northeast and southwest property lines. In addition, an arborist shall
supervise any pruning required for the oaks on the site. All landscaping
required for screening purposes or for erosion control (as determined by
the City Engineer) must be installed prior to final inspection, unless the
Planning Director finds 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 final inspection. An
inspection of the landscape to ensure adequate establishment and
maintenance shall be made two years after installation. The deposit will
be released at that time if the plantings remain viable.
4. Paint colors shall 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. White trim area should be
minimized, particularly on large surfaces such as doors, columns, railings,
and trellises. A color sample shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check. All applicable structures shall be painted in conformance with the
approved color(s)prior to final inspection.
5. Fire retardant roofing is required for the new construction.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 7
6. At the time of foundation inspection for the house and detached garage,
the location, and elevation of the new structures shall be certified in
writing by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor as being
in/at the approved location and elevation shown on the approved site
development plan. At the time of framing, the height of the structures shall
be similarly certified as being at the height shown on the approved site
development plan. The hardscape and driveway locations shall also be
certified at time of installation.
7. Prior to commencement of any grading on the site, all significant trees are
to be fenced at the drip line. The fencing shall be of a material and
structure to clearly delineate the drip line. Town staff must inspect the
fencing and the trees to be fenced prior to commencement of grading. The
property owner shall call for said inspection at least three days in
advance of the inspection. The fence must remain throughout the course
of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be
allowed within the drip lines of these trees.
8. The lighting for the exterior of the residence and accessory building is
approved for locations as indicated. Any additional outdoor lighting
requires approval by the Planning Department prior to installation.
Lighting shall be down shielded, low wattage, and shall not encroach or
reflect on adjacent properties. The source of the lighting shall not be
visible from off the site. Light fixtures must be approved by the Planning
Department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. No
lighting may be placed within setbacks except for two driveway or entry
lights. Lighting (other than exterior house and accessory building
lighting) shall be reviewed with the landscape screening plan for the
residence.
9. As recommended by Cotton, Shires & Associates in their report dated
April 14, 1998, the applicant shall comply with the following:
a. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve
all geotechnical aspects of the development plans (i.e., site
preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design
parameters for retaining walls, foundations and driveway) to
ensure that his recommendations have been properly incorporated.
The results of the plan review and supplemental evaluations should
be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and
submitted to the Town for review and approval by the Town
Geotechnical Consultant prior to acceptance of plans for building
plan check.
b. 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 prior to placement
of steel and concrete.
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 8
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.
For further detail, please refer to the Cotton, Shires & Associates letter
dated April 14, 1998.
10. A disclosure and indemnification statement shall be recorded stating that
the property owners acknowledge and accept the high level of risk
associated with constructing a detached garage in such proximity to a
known geotechnical hazard (the Altamont fault). The disclosure and
indemnification statement will be prepared by the Town and shall be
signed and notarized by the property owners prior to acceptance of plans
for building plan check
11. The proposed grading encroaches into the dripline of the 48 inch oak tree.
If the proposed grading cannot be changed to avoid encroachment into the
oak tree dripline, an arborist's report shall be submitted to the Town,
which addresses any potential impacts to the tree and gives
recommendations for protecting the tree, prior to acceptance of plans for
building plan check.
B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT:
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 except to allow for the
construction of the driveway access.
13. All public utility services serving this property shall be undergrounded.
14. The applicant shall restore the type IIB pathway fronting the property
along Altamont Road and shall reconstruct the type IIB pathway along the
eastern border ofthe property. The work shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to final inspection.
15. 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.
16. 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
Planning Commission
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 9
plan check The grading/construction plan shall address truck traffic
issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety on
Hidden Springs Court 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.
17. 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.
18. The driveway shall be required to be fully constructed, to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer,prior to final inspection.
19. The property owner shall be required to connect to public sanitary sewer
prior to final inspection. A copy of a permit from the City of Los Altos,
covering both the house and the secondary unit, shall be required to be
submitted to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan
check
20. 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 wherever possible. Due to concerns about the drainage from
this site reading the neighboring property to the east, the drainage
improvements shall carry the drainage from the eastern property boundary
to the existing creek along the northern property line. A final grading and
drainage plan shall be submitted for approval by the 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.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT:
21. 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 with a 3/8 inch stroke.
22. The vertical clearance for the driveway shall be a minimum of 13 feet 6
inches. This dimension shall be maintained. The driveway shall have an all
weather surface that is designed and maintained to support the imposed
Planning Commission •
Lands of Bowers
June 10, 1998
Page 10
loads of fire apparatus (40,000 pounds). The gradient for a fire apparatus
access road(driveway) shall not exceed fifteen(15) feet.
23. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall install a fire sprinidering
system to assure that adequate flow is available to the residence. The
design of the fire sprinklering system shall be reviewed and approved by
the fire department prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check.
24. The emergency vehicle turnaround proposed shall be installed with
engineering to support 40,000 pounds.
25. The required driveway installations shall be in place, inspected, and
accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of construction. Bulk
combustible construction materials may not be delivered to the
construction site until installations are completed as stated above.
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 1, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 23 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.
NOTE:. The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until
June 10, 1999). All required building permits must be obtained within that year and work
on items not requiring a building permitshall be commenced within one year and
completed within two years. •
•
•
t .;) ATTACHMENT
'TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Hills,California 94022 • (415)941-7222 • FAX (415) 941-3160
WORKSHEET #2
EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA
• TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION •
ROPERTY OWNER'S NAME Vere k sower s LANE
ROPERTY ADDRESS /155 j gj H l h S p r j V1cf. !ANE p
ALCULATED BY '(e t{^ Cq,koo i ._ DATE I— 24" J e
DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
Existing Proposed Total
(Additions or Deletions)
A. House and Garage (from Part 2. A.) 5;46 , ."1-g 9 ,
B. Decking
C. Driveway and Parking
(Measured 100' along centerline) _ 2 3
i 7 Q0
D. Patios and Walkways zo v 420 ✓
E. Tennis Court
F. Pool and Decking
G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B) 435 V. 43a
H. Any other coverage
TOTALS ✓t�I�7 '�
E55FLMaximum Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1) 1 3 f 0E55-
FLOOR
OOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE)
Existing Proposed Total
(Additions or Deletions)
A. House and Garage
a. 1st Floor 3117 3 31 73
tv
b. 2nd Floor ( co 23 16 23
c. Attic and Basement (e)Cewpf) j , 45
d. Garage 673 6'7 3 ✓
B. Accessory Buildings
a. 1st Floor 43e 436 '.
b. 2nd Floor
c. Attic and Basement
TOTALS P7
Maximum Floor Area Allowed - MFA (from Worksheet #1) $j 93
TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY � DATI /
,r„.'1nTr"TKT A T e/DT A MNT1Mr./Wnr'rchiu.t #?
ATTACHMENT.5
•
. oma 0,
AA ' d °6 ERE DEPARTMENT
s�' o. �' CONTROL NUMBER
--LFI1�]El '4' SANTA CLARA COUNTY
w C ' 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER
...85ER,�E (408) 378-4010 (phone) • (408) 378-9342 (fax)
98
PLAN REVIEW NUMBER - 0314
�+
FILE NUMBER 18=99-ZP-SD
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS
CODE/SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT
Review of proposed new 4,575 square foot single family residence with a 673
square foot garage. The planner for this project is Ms. Susan Manca.
1. Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access
and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be
construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with
adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall apply to
the Building Department for applicable construction permits.
uFc 2. Required Fire Flow: Required fire flow for this project is 2,000 GPM at 20 psi
Appendix
III-A residual pressure. The required fire flow is not available from area water mains
and fire hydrant(s) which are spaced at the required spacing.
UFC 3. Required Fire Flow Option (Single Family Dwellings): Provide required fire
903.2 flow from fire hydrants spaced at a maximum of 500 feet OR Provide an
approved fire sprinkler system throughout all portions of the building. The
fire sprinkler system shall conform to National Fire Protection Association
Standard #13D, 1994 Edition, and local ordinance requirements.
UFC 4. Fire Apparatus (Engine)Access Driveway Required: Provide an access driveway
902.2.2 with a paved all weather surface and a minimum unobstructed width of 14
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 to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1.
DISTRICT PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST.TYPE PERMITTEE DATE PAGE
LAH 0 0 0 0 0 GIULIANI & KULL INC 02/27/98 1 OF 2
SECJFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY
TRACT#8721 Residential Development Hokanson,Wayne
NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
LANDS OF BOWER 25518 Hidden Springs Ln
A California Fire Protection District serving Santa Clara County and the communities of
Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill,and Saratoga
yARA
(St" _�°6- FIRE DEPARTMENT
° LI+'IREl. - SANTA CLARA COUNTY CONTROL NUMBER
14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818
7 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER
COURTESY 6SERVICE (408) 378-4010 (phone) • (408) 378-9342 (fax)
98
PLAN REVIEW NUMBER -0314
�+
FILE NUMBER 18-99- SD-SD
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS
CODE/SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT
UFC 5. Fire Department (Engine) Driveway Turn-around Required: Provide an
902.2.2.4 approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum
radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire
Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. (See attached).
UFC 6. Premises Identification: Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all
901.4.4 new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible
from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with
their background and be a minimum of four inches in height.
DISTRICT PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST.TYPE PERMITTEE DATE PAGE
LAH 0 0 0 0 0 GIULIANI & KULL INC 02/27/98 2 of 2
• SECJFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY
TRACT#8721 Residential Development Hokanson,Wayne
NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
LANDS OF BOWER 25518 Hidden Springs Ln
A California Fire Protection District serving Santa Clara County and the communities of
Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill,and Saratoga
MAY-22-98 14 :51 FROM:COTTON SHIRES ASSOC ID:4083541852 PAGE /.2
ATTACHMENT
COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC_
CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
FILECCPY April 14, 1998
L3048A
TO: Susan Stevenson
Planner
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
26379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, California 94022
SUBJECT: Supplemental Geotechnical Review
RE: Lands of Bowers
File #18-98-ZP-SD-GD-ZP-SD-GD
25518 Hidden Springs Court
At your request, we have completed a supplemental geotechnical review of
subject property using.
• Geotechnical Review (letter) prepared by Earth Investigations
Consultants, dated April 3, 1998.
In addition,we have reviewed pertinent documents from our office files.
DISCUSSION
Our review of the referenced documents indicates that the applicant is proposing
to construct a single-family, two story residence with garage and an additional
unattached garage. In our previous review report(dated March 9, 1998),we noted that
the proposed garage was located in an area subjected to surface fault rupture hazards
and recommended that the Project Geotechnical Consultant evaluate current site
development plans.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION
The referenced letter prepared by the Project Geotechnical Consultant adequately
addresses the issues of our previous review. The applicant must be willing to accept the
disclosure of the Project Geotechnical Consultant that the detached garage could be
seriously damaged or destroyed in its current position because of the underlying
Altamont fault. If this is not acceptable,then the garage should be moved outside of the
fault setback zone. With this understanding,we recommend geotechnical approval of
permit applications for project construction with the following conditions:
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, retaining walls and driveway) to ensure that his
•
recommendations have been properly incorporated.
Northern California Office Southern California Office
330 YIIage 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-mai:Iosgecsageo.com e-mail:carlecsageo.com
MAY-22-98 14 : 52 FROM:COTTON SHIRES ASSOC ID:4063541E152 PAGE 2/2
Ms.Susan Stevenson April 14, 1998
Page 2 1.3048A
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
with discretionary permit decisions. Our services have been limited to review of the
documents previously identified,and a visual review of the property. Our opinions and
conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles 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
Senior Engineering Geologist
CEG 1795
Patrick O.Shires.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
GE 770
POS:TS:rb
•
COTTON, SHIRES&ASSOCIATES, INC.
ATTACHMENT -5
Town of Los Altos Hills C :, "
3/31/98 `..S1''352)
To: Planning Commission & Staff path on the West side of .0/11$
from that point constr�!�,� ive path
From: Les Earnest, Pathways at the toe of the slope along Stonebrook
Committee Chair connecting to the existing native path
Subject: 1998 Pathway leading to Juan Prado Mesa Preserve.
recommendations 1/26/98
This is a cumulative listing of all 14470 Manuella; Lands of Kwong:
Construct II-B path along Manuella.
pathway recommendations for 1998, in
alphabetical order by street and number, 3/23/98
with the effective date at the end of 12580 Miraloma Way; Lands of Harari:
each item. In cases where a No request. 1/26/98
recommendation for a given address has 11471 Page Mill Road; Lands of Wilson:
been revised, two dates are shown but Provide sufficient easement along Page
only the final recommendation is listed. Mill Road to encompass at least 10 feet
Where construction or upgrading of from the top of the bank and construct a
paths to the II-B standard is native path along this route; construct
recommended, it is to include irrigation an off-road native path on the South
at least 5 feet away from path and a side of Buena Vista Drive beginning
non-slip surface on any crossing about 50 feet from Page Mill Road and
driveways. Where there is "no request" ending adjacent to Buena Vista at the
the Committee recommends that in lieu East boundary of the property and
fees be collected where possible. provide a pathway easement at least 10
Recommendations feet wide that encompasses this route.
1/26/98
12025 Adobe Creek Lodge Road; Lands of 11972 Rhus Ridge Road; Lands of Malek:
Chang Construct II-B path along Adobe No request. 1/26/98
Creek Lodge Road separated from the
road by 5 feet. Construct II-B path in a 13474 Robleda Road;Lands of Danvers
20 foot easement adjacent to Moody No request. 3/23/98
Road at the toe of the slope. 1/26/98 24055 Jabil Lane; Lands of Yeh: In order
12238 Via Arline; Lands of Robinson& to connect to a future path to Fernhill,
Ikeda: No request. 1/26/98 construct a II-B path along Jabil Lane
12246 Via Arline; Lands of Godby: No from Magdalena to the Southeast corner
request. 3/23/98 of the property. 3x23/98
14470 De Bell Road; Lands of Wong: No 27760 Sherlock Road; Lands of Huang:
request. 1/26/98 Provide a pathway easement on Sherlock.
3/23/98
12010 Elsie Way;Lands of Murthy&
Srinath: Restore II-B path along
Concepcion Road. 3/23/98
25935 Estacada Way; Lands of Lee: No
request. 2/23/98
25518 Hidden Springs Lane; Lands of.
Bower: Restore II-B path along
Altamont; reconstruct II-B path along
eastern boundary. 2/23/98
24004 Oak Knoll Circle;Lands of
Gorman Restore II-B path along Oak
Knoll Circle; construct a II-B path along
Stonebrook from Oak Knoll Circle to a
point opposite the beginning of the II-B
ATTACHMENT la
• ENVIRONMENTALDESIGN COMMITTEE RECEIVED
NEW RESIDENCE EVALUATION FEB 13 1958
Applicant's Name: ```%` Z�%� TOWN QF LOS ALTOS H11LS
Address: t '9 f?jia/atia
Reviewed by: fir` '4Al Date: c>OA)9
Existing Trees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building
site. Recommended protection during construction.)
(.2. )/k. k .07, • / AlffigWA *If -/oT
• / ir A./02, -/ Apv),A&//4/z/ly
Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby vegetation. Erosion potenti.
grading at least 10' from property line?)
,, se' / /fI /"
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).) _
Other Comments: (--- )/).-g (-7(-; A2 ' ./._ _____24,14Z„06
40 .O, 87,7a Ln axitr.
ATTACHMENT 7
Richard & Denise Williams
25462 Altamont Rd
Los Altos Hills
CA 94022
(650) 947-0194 Pa 'r'r', �
by ,;��
4 7998
TOWN or10s A1,.„y111
s
June 1, 1998
Curtis S.Williams
Planning Director
Los Altos Hills Town Hall
26379 Fremont Rd
Los Altos Hills CA 94022
Dear Curtis S.Williams:
Subject: Lands of BOWERS 25518 Hidden Springs Lane(19-98-ZP-SD-GD)
The subject property is adjacent to the west side of our property and we have several concerns.
1. Drainage: There is a major problem with water run-off from this property. The water flows into our
property and causes flooding. We are concerned that the development will aggravate the.
situation. The drainage ditch installed on the new property to the south proved to be inadequate
during the rainy season—it overflowed into our yard.
2. Privacy: The house appears to look down into our property. We would like to work with the new
owners on landscaping to ensure mutual privacy.
3. Car Lights: We are unclear from the plans if the headlights from cars will shine directly into our
home.
If you have questions regarding these issues please let us know.
Sincerely, •
Richard&Denise Williams
ATTACHMENT g •
,..
a .
. .
•
•
..'7-.Zti:.. . ' • . . _
- .
. ..
•
. .
•
•
. • .
. .. . .
„ .. ..
. .
- •'-.•• •• _ ,..:,....:,:.,....::.:_trilLzi-:-..:-.-,2"-"fi's:-_1.7--;':,--'-.7.7:; -.. •
--7-----.1"Li.:--.-....•
J'-i.."-•71."-1-:'T''17--.F•;.F.-=.,--- -::.'•-•,:i='-"Z"7L.:7.:7. 7-,--7.:-..7.1---7 .7-:"--: 7--;f'''-z--1.; .. ..-- . -
:-:-.:"-:•"1--"''''..--.'i;-:',..,:4'..,-7:--'•-7:-.:-:.-. '"-:--"'.,-. --74.--:•••"..'_.•=7-L,7t...-_-'.....1,7. : . •
"."1. • .
-".':-:..::::";t.,.. .:":",•T'2.7,;:r.r.,;." 1","."7:-.,-"4-..7.:..:::;:•,'..."•:-...L.,:,-",-7,-._F:.,:::7"..
. .
."---. • ,• • ,-. ,.- ... ._ .,
• . • .---•
,L,...s.a.,,,,_ ___
•
.•
F , .
.
.
. • .
•
._..--- i n ;_.
1 LL.aAre _ L,c-r..4c..7.4:t aT- .
La., L go
..., a0
;
•
.b 0 P i Ct:/kt Pk—'1--j
:.. .i
•
• 1
ein C•.'Gll't -7''"'‘ r4...1'-'2.r .
''.
•
:, It. • ..
-.. •
.1. • ,
• ,
.- :• . • .•
• _ . - •
•
,T6. all a•-•2•P F os c-,.I, (.....,_ , 2-_-. L a
• • • • • " -•
- -----•_-‘,...."- --.,:la
. .. , ,.. -,. _:.,:•-ri".';•:.7 '_:."7:.1.,77-1'.7".7:.:•. .f-
F".,'-'1"rl-7.-7.:-.•.."-‘1"....t.:;.1.1.--''',7:-...=.--.-.-,45•‘-_--;,--.„7.----,--,- --.,-.,,..„..:
zr--•Tz-a-m.,_,-ti.:-
-.-..._,...7--74.-._;=....-_ -_, ...=-,----=',-;:--,.=---.---,.---:,_•-.-.4...,_,.:::-=.• _„:;.,--S7,7. 1-D-\-C':-:lrel lc- CC,A,k,,-,1, vV1--e;t:+ri v-e. '--t-y----e...c.s., .2tIff
_--=,-.-------- --1..-:--.15--_-7------7.----,-7---„,-.F.-z-_-...,-......,F-_—,:FE:-...-,•,._.
0 -
-.:,;...,-,,..,,.....,,,,....
.... ,, %.
.:•F•:.=7,-7,,...1.,•,.......;,-.=:::,--„,,,,j,:-.--=.--..._ --. •
• \./IP #95;* '-11A-Gki- Y15-\/71 a"-.2-. 5s C-'r-C -'1-.\-4"‘":1 1
(,1
1'')...-c.-4---,--v-e-4-1--- --4;:it •-) 0-14,1_ f},--r--)&e-L.--b_.;
.. .
! ,
CR__ 71, , ._1_ ,
•
.:.
x-
.T.' .
-71-•'2'1A-P:e--- L'i,•-6r-P,‘..-.• Vr../)'--11 21-2,L4A-C.....-6,..._
1 .s
' . •
. /
.,)• •
. ,.
•
. .
2- il-•:::.-,: .-.-
•
.fq "----.0"S---- •(..2) f..." S-C7C-- (..!...44 •E--..'f
... _
:7•_-.r.--•••,,-_:.::::::•• •
.- - - - ..- -•
..?"1.;-'7:.77:-.7÷-''''-';'7;•:-I''2'7,...:4.1.5:-...• -7--,' "-7-•'fi:---i.,--••i-:.7.1,....:!: ••
. • • -.-
.-'El...2,7•:7::.--;...:::- ,-... .7114 7--,...:.f i'•:,' .-,.".- :-...r-,' ......•E i:•,I i f-...1 .„--,/,., 7
, r..... , _ ,.....,
! , , , :._ _ _..
.„..,::;....:.-___7.:_2-2--:•,-.. -•';',,_,-:,_.-- . .... --•--. -: . _-
•
'• —
. .
!.
•
-:•
•
. .
•
. .
•
. .
••
•
•
. . .
. . -_. .. . .
. _ . . . . . .
- •
. . .. ..
- - —
-. _ •