Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2 3. Town of Los Altos Hills September 9, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR ADDITION OF 1,253 SQUARE FOOT FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR ADDITIONS; 11195 HOOPER LANE (LANDS OF GOLUKHOV); FILE #72-97-ZP- SD-VAR. FROM: Curtis S. Williams,Planning Dire or RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: Approve the requested site development permit, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND On May 13, 1998, the Planning Commission considered this item and directed the applicant to redesign to try to avoid the need for a variance. The project as proposed included 1,143 square feet of new development over the existing garage and would have encroached into the front setback to the same extent as the garage (approximately 15 feet). The applicants have redesigned to eliminate the need for a variance, so that variance findings are no longer required. For additional background information, the Commission's minutes and the staff report from the May 13th meeting are attached. DISCUSSION Net Lot Area: 1.47 acres Avg. Slope: 25.6% L.U.F. 0.982 Floor Area and Development Area: Maximum Proposed Existing Increase Remaining Development Area 8,028 7,838 6,077 1,761 +190 Floor Area 4,998 4,997 3,744 1,253 +1 The applicant now proposes to add an 1,152 square foot second floor addition over the rear half of the house and cantilevered in the rear to the extent of the retaining wall behind the garage. This area would comprise a master bedroom suite and an excercise room. A 101 square foot first floor addition at the rear (over existing deck area) is also proposed to accommodate the new stairs to the second floor. No variance is required as Lands of Golukhov: September 9, 1998 . Page 2 the additions would all be located more than 40 feet from the front property line. A small open "summer kitchen" (BBQ area) and additional wood decking are also proposed separate from the residence. As the floor area is now proposed at the maximum allowed, a condition (#9) has been added to require a disclosure statement be recorded noting this limitation. Site and Architecture The proposed second story (1,152 square feet) would cover approximately 35 percent of the first floor. The maximum height of the house on a vertical plane would remain 27 feet above the finished grade, although the roof heights would range from 13 feet at the northwestern end of the house to 27 feet at the master bedroom addition. The applicant has worked with staff to reduce the extent of the addition to assure that the roofline does not extend beyond the retaining wall at the rear(which would exceed the height limitation). The revised plan would set the second story back approximately 15 feet from the front of the first floor, in particular at the garage. This will help to break up the addition visually from the street, although traffic is limited at the cul-de-sac since there is only one other resident using Hooper Lane beyond this lot. Staff believes this "nesting" of the second floor addresses the Commission's concerns about minimizing the bulk as well as eliminating the need for a variance. The structure is well screened at the rear by the many existing oak trees. Railing At Roof Deck The applicant's proposal would include a roof deck from the master bedroom over the garage. While this would not require any additional floor or development area,there would be a railing (probably 3 feet high) required by the Building Code. Staff does not consider this railing to constitute a structure and therefore to require a variance. If the Commission determines otherwise,the roof deck would need to be eliminated. Pathway The-Pathways Committee has requested (Attachment'7 in the previous Commission report) that a 30-foot wide off-road pathway easement be provided along the southern boundary of the property, and that a 5-foot wide native pathway be constructed within the easement (not to exceed 15% grade). This path would connect Hooper Lane to the existing Frampton Court-Fernhill Drive off-road pathway. According to Section 10-2.606 of the Site Development Code, the Town may require a pathway dedication where a development proposes in excess of 900 square feet of"habitable" floor area, where the path is shown on the Pathways Master Plan, and with guidelines suggesting that the path: 1) generally be located along the property boundary, 2) be located to connect to existing or future pathway easements at the boundary; and 3) not be located on terrain that cannot be safely traversed by pedestrians or equestrians. While this pathway easement would appear to meet all three criteria,the connection is not presently shown on the Master Pathways Plan. Lands of Golukhov: September 9, 1998 Page 3 Staff has not, therefore, included a condition requiring the dedication and pathway construction. At the May 13th meeting, the Commission indicated to the applicant the Town's desire to connect to the existing pathway, and suggested that he consider a voluntary dedication to the Town. Staff and, to our knowledge, the Pathways Committee, have not had any contact from the applicant regarding this issue since that time. Staff is available to answer any questions that the Commission or community may have. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Conditions of Approval 2. May 13, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes 3. Worksheet#2 4. May 13, 1998 Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments 5. Plans cc: Mr. Albert Golukhov Mr. David Blum 11195 Hooper Lane Blum Construction Los Altos Hills, CA 94024 1174 Fisher Ave. Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Lands of.G_olukhov: September 9, 1998 Page 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A MAJOR ADDITION LANDS OF GOLUKHOV-11195 HOOPER LANE FILE#72-97-ZP-SD-GD-VAR 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. Prior to final inspection of the residence, the Planning Director may require additional landscape screening to mitigate the visual impact of the project from offsite properties. If required, 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 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 cosf 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. If landscape screening is required, 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. 6. 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, unless determined to be necessary for safety. 7. Skylights shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted light No lighting may be placed within skylight wells. Lands of Golukhov: September 9, 1998 Page 5 8. At the time of foundation inspection for the house, the location and elevation of the structure 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 structure 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. 9. A disclosure statement shall be submitted and recorded stating that the floor area established for the property under this permit is the maximum floor area currently allowed by the Town. The Planning Department will prepare the statement and the signed, notarized document shall be returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. • B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 10. As recommended by Cotton, Shires, & Associates in their letter dated June 2, 1997, the applicant shall comply with the following: a. Supplemental geotechnical design criteria related to seismic ground accelerations and any seismic hazards related to the nearby trace of the Monte Vista fault shall be provided for review and approval by the Town's geotechnical consultant prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check b. Clarification of geotechnical design criteria related to the pier foundation, as specified in the Cotton, Shires, & Associates letter, shall be provided for review and approval by the Town's geotechnical consultant prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check c. The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project and 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 d. 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 refer to the letter from Cotton, Shires, &Associates dated June 2, 1997. 11. 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. 12. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. Lands of Golukhov: September 9, 1998 Page 6 13. 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. 14. 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 Hooper Lane 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. 15. 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 16. The property owner shall irrevocably dedicate the portion of Hooper Lane which is a part of this property as public right of way to the Town. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits prepared by a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check The dedication shall not be accepted by the Town at this time. 17. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior to final inspection. An encroachment permit shall be required to be issued by the --- Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right of way prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. A copy of a permit from the City of Los Altos shall also be required to be submitted to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 18. A sewer plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer for the extension of the sewer main up Hooper Lane shall be required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check An as-built mylar shall be required to be submitted to the Town prior to final project approval. 19. 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 designedto maintain the existing flow patterns. A Lands of Golukhov: September 9, 1998 Page 7 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. 20. The property owner shall grant a conservation easement to the Town over the portion of the property shown on the site plan below the 455' contour to encompass the existing slopes that equal or exceed a 30% grade, the significant stands of oak trees, and the natural drainage Swale. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the grant document. The grant document, including approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 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. Numbering must be in place prior to final inspection. 22. The driveway to the residence shall have a minimum width of fourteen feet. Vertical clearance for the driveway and for Hooper Lane 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. 23. The property shall comply with requirements of Appendix II-A of the Uniform Fire Code to maintain vegetative clearance around the house. Natural grasses adjacent to the residence and along the roadway shall be removed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 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 4, 6, 9, 10a, b, and c,'13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, AND 20 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. Lands of Golukhov: September 9, 1998 Page 8 NOTE: The Site Development permit is valid for one year from the approval date (until September 9, 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. Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/27/98 May 13, 1998 Page 8 3.6 LANDS OF GOLUKHOV, 11195 Hooper Lane (72-97-ZP-SD-GD-VAR); A request for a Site Development Permit for a second story addition of 1,143 square feet above the garage, and a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback. The Planning Director introduced this item providing some background regarding the design process and changes made to the placement of the house and the elimination of a tower element. He also discussed a recommendation by the Pathway Committee for a pathway connection down to the existing off-road path. However, it is not on the Master Pathway Plan. Unless the applicant is willing to dedicate the easement, he did not believe the Town could require it. It was not known when the property was annexed to the town. He further clarified that the summer house which is actually a BBQ and a deck is approximately 500 square feet. David Blum, Blum Construction, 1174 Fisher Avenue, Morgan Hill, project consultant and general contractor, discussed the purchase of the property with an existing house noting the layout and view. However, the house size was not adequate for the applicant. The house was originally built in 1953 under the old County codes with a 25 foot front setback. He discussed the restrictive site and the conservation easement which appears to be over half of the property. He further discussed neighbor support, connecting to sewer, the views, the unique property built under old codes, the existing private 60 foot width street with a 40 foot radius (larger than usual cul-de-sac), and only four houses on Hooper Lane. He felt due to the nature of the property, asking for a variance was appropriate for this site. He was willing to work with the Commission and staff. Les Earnest, Pathway Committee, hoped the applicants would consider granting an easement although, as stated, it is not on the Master Pathway Plan. He felt it would make a good connection for the neighborhood to the Fernhill Drive path. Barbara Luther, 23920 Jabil Lane, neighbor above the project, voiced support of the project. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Aurelio voiced concern with building a large structure within the setback. He would have great difficulty_,approving the project as submitted. Commissioner Cheng agreed, although she did not know where they could add to the property. Commissioner Schreiner also agreed. She suggested doing something on the first floor, going out the back in the concrete patio area which would also save some of the trees. Or perhaps a combination of going out toward the center and to the left. She was not sure he could go out from the garage although that may be another option. She had difficulty approving an increase with a drastic non-conforming situation already. Commissioner Jinkerson was also concerned with increasing the non- conformity. He was struck how close this house is to the road realizing that this is toward the end of a cul-de-sac. However, if they were to approve the increase of non-conformity on this property, how could say to any other applicant that they could not do the same. Even with the steep slope in the back, he felt there were places to build on behind the existing house. There is too much non-conforming structure on the second floor so close to the roadway. Chairman Planning Commission Minutes Approved 5/27/98 May 13, 1998 Page 9 Gottlieb agreed. She understands they are looking for a view. However, this design adds too much to the non-conformity. Commissioner Schreiner asked if they considered going out the back or the side, following the contours. RE-OPENED PUBLIC HEARING David Blum responded they did consider this but it cuts off the view from the existing rooms. They would like to explore the option of redesigning on the second floor outside of the setback area, and possibility going over the back patio area with some cantilever, keeping something with less than the 27 foot height restriction. He asked if the ultra-modern design would be a problem with the Commission. The response was no. Commissioner Jinkerson stated the Town was made up of various designs. They were entitled to have a contemporary design, if desired. What is important is the siting into the natural surroundings. Commissioner Schreiner does not want them to create a stark vertical two-story element. If they have to do a two-story,somehow set it back, nesting it in , breaking it up. She would also like them to look at going out in either an "L" or "U" shape, keeping the middle portion for views. Commissioner Aurelio made suggestions to pull the entire garage back which will break up the front, set back the vertical element, and nesting. Also, to follow the Design Guidelines. Commissioner Schreiner suggested the applicant meet with Les Earnest to discuss the pathway request. • Albert Golukhov, applicant, emphasized the uniqueness of the property, well hidden from most neighbors. He understands the issues regarding setbacks, however, its on a private road. He could possibly move back 5 to 10 feet to break,up the massing and lessen the area in the setback. However, the project may still require a small variance for a few feet. Commissioner Jinkerson suggested to try to build outside of the 40 foot setback and if it cannot be accomplished, return to the Commission to explain why. Variance findings were further discussed. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING - MOTION SECONDED, AMENDED AND PASSED: Motion by Commissioner Schreiner and seconded by Commissioner Jinkerson to continue the applicant for a Site Development Permit for addition of 1,143 square feet above the garage, and a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback, Lands of Golukhov, working with staff to redesign per directions given by the Commission, following the Design Guidelines. AYES: Chairman Gottlieb, Commissioners Cheng, Aurelio, Jinkerson &Schreiner NOES: None 4. ' OLD BUSINESS TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos Fills,California 94022 • (415)941=7222 • FAX(415)941-3160 • WORKSHEET #2 - EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA • TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION • PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME G.O 10 k Ott- PROPERTY ADDRESS ill ci 6- %oc ear L a vst CALCULATED BY C DATE %/5192 1. DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed - Total (Additions or Deletions) - A. House and Garage from Part 2.A.) 31145- .1 z53 419`I B. Decking 117 3-71 . 1 l i n • C. Driveway and Parking (Measured 100' along centerline) S13 O S' 13 D. Patios and Walkways (ZIS Z ) 3'] • • /0/7 E. Tennis Court O 0 _ F. Pool and Decking ' 160 0 • /b° G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B) - Q 0 0 H. Any other coverage O 0 0 TOTALS G 017 / 76/ 1‘3 Y Maximum Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1) CeO a ie 2. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total • (Additions or Deletions) A. House and Garage a. 1st Floor 3 73 /0/ 337`J . b. 2nd Floor C> //S2- // SZ c. Attic and Basement p 0 o • d. Garage 1-411 0 14-7/ B. Accessory Buildings a. 1st Floor 0 0 0 b. 2nd Floor D _ 0 0 c. Attic and Basement p O O TOTALS 3-71-1q 1 A513 Maximum Floor Area Allowed - MFA (from Worksheet #1) 'y c i g TOWN USE ONLY CHECKED BY DATE Town of Los Altos Hills May 13, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR ADDITION OF 1,143 SQUARE FEET ABOVE GARAGE, AND A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK; HOOPER LANE (LANDS OF GOLUKHOV); FILE#72-97-ZP-SD-VAR. FROM: Curtis S. Williams, Planning Direc� RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: 1. Approve the requested variance and site development permit, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in Attachment 1 and with reference to the findings described in Attachment 2. 2. Approve the project as above, but require added architectural treatment to break up the front of the second floor addition, or that all or a portion of the addition be stepped back at least five(5)feet from the wall of the garage below. BACKGROUND The subject site is 1.86 acres in size, and is located on Hooper Lane, which is a private road. A record of survey (RS-37-M3) was filed for the lot in July of 1952. A 30 foot private road easement (half-width) exists along the frontage of the site, with a 40-foot radius cul-de-sac easement at its terminus. The road serves one property beyond the Golukhov site. A single story home and decking exists on the property, and the surrounding lots are all developed with single family residences. The property is heavily covered with trees, mostly oaks, so that it is not highly visible to neighbors. The existing house sits on a relatively level area, with steep slopes over the remainder of the lot. CODE REQUIREMENTS According to Section 10-2.301 of the Site Development Code, all new second story additions are to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Generally, the sections of the Zoning and Site Development Codes utilized to evaluate-site development permits include floor_and development, area limitations, grading, height, setbacks, visibility, and parking requirements. A variance is requested to allow the encroachment of the addition into the required front setback area. In order to grant a variance, Section 10-1.1107(2)(b) of the Zoning Code requires the Planning Commission to make four findings in support of the action, as outlined in Attachment 2. If the Commission cannot make any one or more of the findings, the variance must be denied. Lands of Gsolukhov: May 13, 1998 Page 2 DISCUSSION • Net Lot Area: 1.47 acres Avg. Slope: 25.6% L.U.F. 0.982 Floor Area and Development Area: Maximum Proposed Existing Increase Remaining Development Area 8,028 7,857 6,077 1,780 +171 Floor Area 4,998 4,887 3,744 1,143 +111 The applicant proposes to add an 1,143 square foot second floor addition over the existing garage and guest bedroom and cantilevered in the rear to the extent of the retaining wall behind the garage. A variance is also requested, as the existing garage and lower level area encroach about 15 feet into the 40 foot front setback, so that the addition above would as well. A small open "summer kitchen" (BBQ area) and additional wood decking are also proposed separate from the residence. The applicant has also requested (although noted as "optional" on the plans) an increase in the roof height over the dining and living room areas to increase the openness of those rooms. Site and Architecture The proposed second story (1,143 square feet) would cover the garage and guest room, amounting to approximately 35 percent of the first floor. The maximum height of the house on a vertical plane would be 27 feet above the fmished grade, although the roof heights would range from 13 feet at the northwestern end of the house to 20 feet for the increased roof above the living and dining rooms to 27 feet at the master bedroom addition. The applicant has worked with staff to reduce the extent of the addition to assure that the roofline does not extend beyond the retaining wall at the rear (which would exceed the height limitation). The roofline in the front of the addition would overhang the walls about 4 feet, similar to the existing roof,which would provide some relief from the vertical walls. Staff initially suggested to the applicant the possibility of"nesting" the second floor back about 5 feet from garage facade, but the applicant responded that the reduction would impair the usefulness of the stairs and the room sizes proposed, and has already reduced the extent of the rear of theaddition to comply with the height requirements. Staff notes that the addition at the front would only be visible to one neighbor driving by, and to no one from their residence. If the Commission feels it is necessary to break up this facade, however, condition#1 could be modified to allow the applicant to work with staff, so that only a portion of the addition is set back, or such that architectural details could be added to break up the wall plane. The site is not very visible to surrounding properties (all developed) due to the extensive tree cover to the rear, and due to the limited access to Hooper Lane in front of the house. Story poles have been placed on the site to outline the proposed plans for the Commissioners' review. Staff notes, however, that the poles do not extend to the cantilevered portion of the second story at the rear, as the applicant would have had a difficult time placing 27 foot high poles on top of the retaining wall, with the limited area available. The cantilever would carry the roofline out about 6-8 feet beyond the existing garage and guest room at the rear. Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998. Page 3 The proposed project would substantially change the residence to a more modern architectural style, with stucco siding and various geometric window shapes. Most of the roof will remain flat or slightly sloped with built-up roofing. The "summer house" is proposed as an open structure on a concrete slab, with a height of about 10'6" and a metal roof. While the structure is small and well screened, if the Commission is concerned about the metal roofing, a different material could be required. Landscaping and Trees As previously discussed, there is extensive tree cover, especially oaks, at the side and rear of the property. Two small oaks are proposed to be removed at the rear in the vicinity of the cantilevered addition, and a 30-inch oak in the deck near the corner of the dining room is proposed to be removed as well. This tree has had most of the lower branches removed over previous years, and the remaining upper canopy hangs low over the existing roofline, presenting a safety hazard. The applicant's arborist indicates (Attachment 8)that the tree is structurally unsound and a safety problem, and the Environmental Design Committee noted the same in its comments. It is unlikely that additional screening will be necessary, but staff has included a condition of approval (#2) allowing staff to require added landscaping prior to final inspection. Lighting Two skylights (one 16 sq. ft., one 18 sq. ft.) are proposed on the plans. Standard language is included in the proposed conditions (#7) to require skylights to reduce emitted light and prohibiting lighting within skylight wells. No lighting is proposed on the floor plans, but the standard lighting condition (#6) requires that any proposed lighting fixtures be downshielded and must be submitted for approval by staff prior to submittal of building plans. Parking and Driveway As discussed previously, Hooper Lane is a private road, and provides access to just one lot beyond the Golukhov residence. As noted on the site plan, the edge of pavement for the cul-de-sac actually extends beyond the right-of-way into the subject lot and the neighboring property. The existing site provides for three parking spaces, two in the garage and one within the paved setback area of the cul-de-sac. Additional parking at the site is readily accommodated within the cul-de-sac, but is technically_on the neighbor's property or in right-of-way. A fourth parking space on the subject site would probably require widening the pavement on the norih side of the driveway, near the entry walkway, which appears to staff to be overly disruptive. There is no new parking or driveway proposed. The Fire Department has indicated that the plans are acceptable as far as access is concerned and has only required that appropriate vegetation clearance be maintained. The Engineering Department has included a condition (#15) that the private road easement on this property be offered for public dedication,although it would not be accepted at this time. Grading and Drainage Virtually no grading is required for the site, other than a small amount of fill for the "summer kitchen". The proposed drainage for the site would discharge collected runoff through an energy dissipater to a drainage swale southeast of the residence. The Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998 Page 4 Engineering Department will review a final drainage and grading plan prior to submittal of building plans and will inspect final drainage and grading prior to final inspection. The Engineering Department has included a condition (#19) that all of the site below the 455 foot contour elevation be dedicated as a conservation easement to encompass slopes over 30%, significant oak trees, and the natural drainage swale. The applicant proposes to extend sewer service from Magdalena Ave. and Hooper Lane (Lands of Hu)to the site,which will allow several other nearby property owners to connect to the sewer system. The Engineering Department has included a condition of approval (#17) requiring that the final sewer system design be approved by staff prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. Pathway The Pathways Committee has requested (Attachment 7) that a 30-foot wide off-road pathway easement be provided along the southern boundary of the property, and that a 5- foot wide native pathway be constructed within the easement (not to exceed 15% grade). This path would connect Hooper Lane to the existing Frampton Road-Fernhill Drive off- road pathway. According to Section 10-2.606 of the Site Development Code,the Town may require a pathway dedication where a development proposes in excess of 900 square feet of "habitable" floor area, where the path is shown on the Pathways Master Plan, and with guidelines suggesting that the path: 1) generally be located along the property boundary,2) be located to connect to existing or future pathway easements at the boundary; and 3) not be located on terrain that cannot be safely traversed by pedestrians or equestrians. While this pathway easement would appear to meet all three criteria, the connection is not presently shown on the Master Pathways Plan. Staff has not, therefore, included a condition requiring the dedication and pathway construction. However,the Commission may inform the applicant of the Town's desire to connect to the existing pathway, and allow him the opportunity to volunteer dedication to the Town. Variance Section 10-1.505 of the Zoning Code requires a 40-foot front yard setback for all structures. As the applicant proposes a second-story addition which encroaches(approximately 15 feet) into the setback, a variance is required. The applicant has indicated(Attachment 9)that the need for the variance stems from the nonconforming location of the existing house and the private road right-of-way,which impacts this property,more than others. In order to approve a variance, the Planning Commission must make four findings, as required by the Zoning Code: 1) that there are circumstances unique to this property which make compliance with the Code impractical; 2) that the intent of the Code is met and that approval would not comprise a special privilege for the applicant; 3) that there would be no adverse impacts on neighboring properties; and 4) that the use is consistent with the Zoning Code. Attachment 2 (Exhibit "B") outlines staff's proposed findings for approval of the variance request. In particular, the site is highly constrained by the location of the existing house, the private road right-of-way on the front side, and steep slopes (in excess of 30%) and extensive mature trees to the rear. Any substantial first floor addition would be precluded by those constraints. The intent of the Code appears to be met, as there is substantial space between the structure and neighboring properties, as well as from the road, and as the Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998 • Page 5 existing structure is already encroaching into the setback. The existing screening and the limited access to the private road will minimize any potential impacts on other properties or the public, and the use (residential addition) is clearly consistent with the single family residential use of the property. In summary, the second story addition appears to minimize disturbance to the site without creating adverse visual impacts from offsite. Staff and Committee Comments The Fire Department has requested (Attachment 5) that the address be clearly labeled, that the vertical and horizontal clearances of the driveway be maintained, and that brush be cleared around the house and decks for fire protection. Fire flow appears to be adequate for this size residence and access is available from the street and cul-de-sac. The Town's geotechnical consultant has reviewed the proposed plans and supporting geotechnical reports and has approved the construction, subject to conditions of approval, including clarification of design criteria and standard plan review and inspection letters. The geotechnical conditions are included as condition#9 in Attachment 1 and provide reference to Cotton, Shires&Associates' letter dated June 2, 1997(Attachment 4). The Environmental Design Committee (Attachment 6) commented that proposed tree removal was acceptable,that significant mature screening exists and that there should not be impacts on neighbors' views. The Committee suggested that a conservation easement be required, which has been included as condition of approval, and that the concrete decking for the"summer kitchen"be a permeable wood deck to reduce impact on the oak trees. The applicant's arborist has determined that the slab will not impact the nearby 24" oak (the 8" oak is to be removed) and that the wood deck should be built on piers, which is proposed. If the Commission desires, condition #1 could be modified to more specifically require piers for the decking. The Pathways Committee request is discussed above. Staff is available to answer any questions that the Commission or community may have. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Conditions of Approval 2. _ Proposed Variance Findings 3. Worksheet#2 4. June 2, 1997 Letter from Cotton, Shires &Associates 5. May 20, 1997 Letter from Santa Clara County Fire Department 6. May 16, 1997 Recommendation from Environmental Design Committee 7. May 27, 1997 Recommendation from Pathways Committee 8. April 23, 1997 Letter from Herb Fong, Certified Arborist 9. Applicant's Variance Findings 10. Plans cc: Mr.Albert Golukhov Mr. David Blum 11195 Hooper Lane Blum Construction Los Altos Hills, CA 94024 1174 Fisher Ave. Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998 Page 6 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR A MAJOR ADDITION AND VARIANCE LANDS OF GOLUKHOV-11195 HOOPER LANE FILE#72-97-ZP-SD-GD-VAR 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. Prior to final inspection of the residence, the Planning Director may require additional landscape screening to mitigate the visual impact of the project from offsite.properties. If required, 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. If landscape screening is required, 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 reflectivityvalue 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 iii conformance with the approved — color(s)prior to final inspection. 5. Fire retardant roofing is required for the new construction. 6. 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, unless determined to be necessary for safety. 7. Skylights shall be designed and constructed to reduce emitted light No lighting ' may be placed within skylight wells. Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998 Page 7 8. At the time of framing inspection,the height of the structure shall be certified by a registered civil engineer as being at the height shown on the approved site development plan. B. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 9. As recommended by Cotton, Shires, &Associates in their letter dated June 2, 1997, the applicant shall comply with the following: a. Supplemental geotechnical design criteria related to seismic ground accelerations and any seismic hazards related to the nearby trace of the Monte Vista fault shall be provided for review and approval by the Town's geotechnical consultant prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check b. : Clarification of geotechnical design criteria related to the pier foundation, as specified in the Cotton, Shires, & Associates letter, shall be provided for review and approval by the Town's geotechnical consultant prior. to acceptance of plans for building plan check c. The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project and 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 d. 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 refer to the letter from Cotton, Shires, &Associates dated June 2, 1997. 10. 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. 11. All public utility services serving this property shall be placed underground. 12. 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. 13. 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 Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998 Page 8 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 Hooper Lane 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. 14. 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 15. The property owner shall irrevocably dedicate the portion of Hooper Lane which is a part of this property as public right of way to the Town. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits prepared by a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check The dedication shall not be accepted by the Town at this time. 16. The property owner shall be required to connect to the public sanitary sewer prior to final inspection. An encroachment permit shall be required to be issued by the Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right of way prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. A copy of a permit from the City of Los Altos shall also be required to be submitted to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check 17. A sewer plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer for the extension of the sewer main up Hooper Lane shall be required to be approved by the City Engineer prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check An as-built mylar shall be required to be submitted to the Town prior to final project approval. 18. 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 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. 19. The property owner shall grant a conservation easement to the Town over the portion of the property shown on the site plan below the• 455' contour to encompass the existing slopes that equal or exceed a 30% grade, the significant stands of oak trees, and the natural drainage swale. The property owner shall • Lands of G.olukhov: May 13, 1998 • Page 9 provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the grant document. The grant document, including approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check C. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 20. 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. Numbering must be in place prior to final inspection. 21. The driveway to the residence shall have a minimum width of fourteen feet.Vertical clearance for the driveway and for Hooper Lane 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. 22. The property shall comply with requirements of Appendix II-A of the Uniform Fire Code to maintain vegetative clearance around the house. Natural grasses adjacent to the residence and along the roadway shall be removed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 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 4, 6, 9a, b, and c, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, AND 19 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 May 13, 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. Lands of Golukhov: May 13, 1998 Page 10 ATTACHMENT 2 • RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION TO ENCROACH WITHIN FRONT YARD SETBACK LANDS OF GOLUKHOV - 11195 HOOPER LANE FILE#72-97-ZP-SD-GD-VAR Because of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the provisions of this Title is found to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; The applicant's property is unusual in that the existing structure is non- conforming, and conforming locations for building on the site are substantially limited by slopes in excess of 30% and by a large number of mature oak and bay trees. Strict application of the ordinance provisions regarding setbacks would prohibit all but very minor additions to the structure, whereas the proposed development could be accommodated substantially within the existing footprint. 2. Upon the granting of the variance, the intent and purpose of the applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance will still be served and the recipient of the variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners; The intent and purposes of the Zoning Ordinance will still be served because the visibility and impacts of the increased development will be negligible, as the second floor addition would only be visible from the road, which is used by only one other property owner. The proposed encroachments would be no closer to front property line than the encroachments of the existing residence. The property owner will not be granted special privileges as other surrounding properties are not similarly constrained by the combination of the private road right-of-way and slopes and mature trees. 3. The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district; The granting of the variances would not negatively impact any neighboring properties, as the additions will have a negligible impact visually, and will not encroach closer to the property lines than the existing residence. No significant vegetation will be removed, and virtually no grading will be required. 4. The variance will not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the Zoning District regulations governing the parcel of property. The proposed additions will be consistent with the current residential use of the property and surrounding properties. Arc tifl1- - TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 26379 Fremont Road • Los Altos EIls,.Califoania 94022 • (415)941-7222 • FAX(415)941-3160 WORKSHEET#2 - EXISITNG AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA AND FLOOR AREA • TURN IN WITH YOUR APPLICATION • PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME a o t u k 1 o V . PROPERTY ADDRESS % %MS M o® Q t ar L o.n e. CALCULATED BY R DATE 0 o J Zo Aral 1. DEVELOPMENT AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total (Additions or Deletions) A. House and Garage (froom Part 2.A.) 37415 !!413 LIS 8 B. Decking 117 3 4/a d! aA C. Driveway and Parking (Measured 100'along centerline) 513 0 -$1.3 - D. Patios and Walkways BSA ! i, g E. Tennis Court 0 d p . F. Pool and Decking 1 &O O 14o G. Accessory Buildings (from Part B) p 0 H. Any other coverage 0 0 TOTALS 60/7 17 O 79S-7 Maximum Development Area Allowed - MDA (from Worksheet #1) B O 2 e 2. FLOOR AREA (SQUARE FOOTAGE) Existing Proposed Total (Additions or Deletions) A. House and Garage a. 1st Floor 3 Q 73 -- - ® 34213 b. 2nd Floor 0 I1 // c. Attic and Basement O 0 o d. Garage 4P/, O 401 B. Accessory Buildings a. lst Floor p o b. 2nd Floor O . 0 c. Attic and Basement O p TOTALS 3/4/ n Maximum Floor Area Allowed - MFA (from Worksheet #1) 44/9 TOWN USE ONLY tCHECKED BY — d DATE • ria • COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES,. INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS June 2, 1997 L3207 TO: Suzanne Davis Planner TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Review RE: Golukhov, Addition File#72-97-ZP-SD-GD-VAR 11195 Hooper Lane At your request, we have completed a geotechnical review of the subject application using: • Geotechnical Investigation (report) prepared by United Soil Engineering, inc., dated April 29, 1997; • Floor Plans, Elevations and Sections (4 sheets, 4-scale) prepared by Roaten Hinson Associates, undated; and • Site Plan (1 sheet, 20-scale) prepared by TS Nowack, dated April 1997. In addition, we have reviewed pertinent documents from our office files and completed a recent site inspection. DISCUSSION Based on our review of the referenced plans, it is our understanding that the applicant proposes to construct a second-floor addition above the existing garage. A portion of the proposed addition would cantilever beyond the rear of the garage. A new foundation system is proposed for the garage in order to support the addition. The applicant also proposes to remodel the living area adjacent to the garage which would entail raising the roofline to the level of the second-floor addition. SITE CONDITIONS -- The subject property is generally characterized by gentle to very steep (12 to 74 percent inclination) north- to east-facing hillside topography. Previous grading associated with construction of the existing residence has resulted in an apparent combination cut and fill pad. Drainage is characterized by sheet flow to the north and east which is partially intercepted by a northward-draining swale located near the eastern property boundary. According to the Geotechnical Map of Los Altos Hills, the property is underlain, at depth,by bedrock materials of the Franciscan assemblage. Colluvial materials overlie the bedrock in the swales located east and northwest of the existing residence. A mapped trace of the potentially active Monta Vista fault is located approximately 250 feet east of the property. Northern California Office Southern California Office 331)Village Lane 5245 Avenida Encinas • Suite i\ Lips(;atos,Ci\95030 Carlsbad,CA 921108 (408)354_5512 • Fax (408)351-1852 (619)931-2700 • Fax (619)931-1020 e mail: Insgocsay;eo.c m) -mnil:rarinrcagen.c mi Suzanne DaVis June 2, 1997 Page 2 L3207 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION Based on our review of the referenced Geotechnical investigation (report), it appears that the Project.Geotechnical Consultant has provided a general characterization of the soil conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development. However, several aspects of the foundation design recommendations require clarification, and the seismic - setting requires characterization. We concur with the l'roject Geotechnical Consultant that the proposed addition is feasible with utilization of appropriate engineering design measures. We recommend that the following items be satisfactorily completed prior to issuance of permits for site construction: 1. Supplemental Geotechnical Design Criteria - The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide anticipated peak and -repeatable seismic ground accelerations associated with large earthquakes on nearby faults for consideration during structural design of the proposed addition. In addition, the consultant shall address any seismic hazards related to the nearby trace of the Monta Vista fault. 2. Clarification of Geotechnical Design Criteria -Several aspects of the geotechnical design recommendations provided in the referenced report do not appear to be consistent with standard of care for construction in this type of hillside environment. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide justification for the following recommendations, or provide revisions thereof: • An end bearing, 12-inch diameter pier foundation system has been recommended to support the proposed addition. in order for piers to be effectively end bearing, the bottom of the pier holes must be free of any loose material. In our opinion, thorough cleaning of the bottom of 12-inch diameter pier holes is not realistic. Furthermore, the proposed addition would be partially supported by piers constructed in a very steep (74 percent inclination) hillside. in our opinion, 12-inch diameter piers do not provide sufficient space for the reinforcing bars which would be required for piers in this environment. /\ minimum 16-inch diameter pier would be required for _ consistency with the local standards of practice for end- bearing design. • The foundation piers required in this hillside setting should be designed to resist lateral pressures. Lateral creep forces need to he provided. • The recommended minimum depth of embedment for the foundation piers should be clarified. The minimum pier depth as recommended is "5 feet into the competent soil and 2 feet into bedrock." This recommendation should be revised to include a minimum depth of total embedment, and a minimum depth of embedment into bedrock. COTTON;SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Suzanne Davis June 2, 1997 Page 3 L3207 • The recommended design end-bearing capacity of 8,000 p.s.f. requires clarification. Laboratory testing results should be provided to substantiate this recommendation or a different recommendation should be made (e.g., UBC values). The results of items 1 and 2 shall be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to issuance of permits for the proposed construction. 3. Geotechnical Plan Review - 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 foundations) 'to ensure that his recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results of the plan review shall 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. LIMITATIONS 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 & ASSOCIATES, INC. TOWN GEOTECi1NiCAi.. CONSULTANT William Schulz Staff Engineering Geologist Patrick O. Shires Principal Geotechnical Engineer GE 770 POS:BS:st COTTON. SHIRES & ASSOCIATES. INC. (<?' vnr n eo �.I. • :. )EPA I T 14 N11 Pr" + s viFIRE �� SANTA CLARA COUNTY \ •E9L,941^. "' 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95030-1818 COURTESY 85ERVILE (408) 378-4010 (phone) • (408) 378-9342 (fax) May 20, 1997 Suzanne Davis, Planner Town of Los Altos Hills • 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills CA 94022 RE: File #72-97-ZP-SD-GD-VAR Lands of Golukhov 11195 Hooper Lane . Second Story Addition Dear Suzanne: The Fire Department has completed its review of the above mentioned project. Notes and conditions for approval are attached. My office can be reached at (408) 378-4010 for clarification of items listed. Sincerely, Daniel Dunlap U • District Chief 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 I CONTROL NUMBER BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER PLAN REVIEW NUMBER 9 7- 1 13 5 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS CODE/SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT This plan review is for the addition of approximately 1,100 square feet to an already existing 3,629 square foot single-story, single family residence. Access is from Hooper Lane, a nonconforming private street. Project Planner is Suzanne Davis. UFC 1 Access Dimensions: The fire apparatus access to the residence shall have a 902.2.2.1 minimum width of fourteen feet. Vertical clearance shall be a minimum of thirteen feet six inches. Both dimesnsions shall be maintained. Trimming of existing brush and shrubs will accomplish the desired minimums. UFC 2 Property shall comply with the requirements of Appendix II-A. Natural grasses App. adjacent to the residence and along the roadway shall be removed. A copy of II-A the Appendix is attached for reference. Sect. 16 UFC 10 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 0 0 0 0 0 Roaten Hinson 5/20/97 1 OF 1 SEC./FLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY Residential Construction Dunlap, Dan NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION SFR 11195 Hooper Ln Pe cti t (, ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN COMMITTEE NEW RESIDENCE EVALUATION ' 'I ''' Applicant's Name: -/-71)—e5162 ,' -�(-�Gy 4-- ? , i e(. / Address: 777#1'''.1-�`' A/15 Reviewed by: C-:-.6:��.'',3 ,.- Tr-C-€ Date: 7e“- h 2 • Existing Trees: (Comment on size, type, condition, location with respect to building Asite. Recommended protection during construction.) I^ .a!'� L"-- 1:1;7-C" (t� / y/1 �L-f 7c--f [=--.C/p -- ( /n/` -c � l �' )/1 Xls Ar-r72-4 r'-; 'e'lK Proposed Grading: (Impact on water table, nearby vegetation. Erosion potential. All / y grading at least 10' from property line?) /1;`'�.( 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).) - /.-7-1,2,4) c- •--/- - 1 .- ---e ,-S'e. moi.. . Other Comments: l x7-/, .,;7/1--5-,--/-04--A77-7;-,. ] -�� t--)---64f _.7---r---e--.,---- ,v c-liae ,m,f,a-H, ,v676.2/ dic ii„ ,,_ 0/ atl: --<)/26V Gell ae c_: Vl -1Y gy( .2 Pe Tft .. l-w‘izJVT ---/ corner of the property measuring 50 feet 11240 Magdalena Road; Lands of Hu: in the North-South direction and 100 Restore II-B path along Magdalena. feet in the East-West direction. 4/28/97 3/24/97 13961 Fremont Pines Lane; Lands of 28625 Matadero Creek Court;Lands of Ware&Cates: Construct II-B path along Groff&Taylor Construct a native path Fremont Pines Lane. 3/24/97 in a 10 foot easement along the 25311 Fremont Road; Lands of boundary with 28620 Matadero Creek Fitzpatrick: Construct II-B path along Court so as to connect the cul-de-sac to Fremont Road. 5/27/97 the existing path on the lower portion of 26170 Fremont Road:Lands of property. Restore the latter path. 4/28/97 Zatparvar. Construct II-B path along Fremont Road. 9/22/97 28500 Matadero Creek Lane; Lands of 26242 Fremont Road; Lands of Vane= Ruiner: Restore II-B path along Matadero No request. 7/28/97 Creek Lane. 7/28/97 Lands of 25528 Hidden Springs Court; 28510 Matadero Creek Lane; Lands of Jain:No request. 4/28/97 7 : Restore II-B path along Matadero Creek Lane and the asphalt path above .4 11195 Hooper Lane; Lands of Goluknov: Page Mill Road. 2/24/97 Construct a native path from Hooper 12205 Menalto Drive; Lands of Godinha Lane to the existing path from Frampton No request. 6/23/97 Court within a 30 foot pathway easement with the pathway slope not 12631 Miraloma Way; Lands of Breetwor: exceeding 15%. 5/27/97 Restore II-B path along Summerhill and construct II-B path along Miraloma with 4400 Kingsley Way;Lands of Clevenger: the drainage ditch between the path and Construct II-B paths along Altadena Drive and Kingsley Way. 3/24/97 the road. 2/24/97 13001 La Cresta; Lands of Hsiao: No 27371 Moody Road;Lands of Rocchetti& request. 2/24/97 Herdell: Construct II-B path along Moody Road on the property side of the ditch 25309 La Loma; Lands of Longhmiller: and acquire a road and pathway Construct a native path in a 10 foot easement as needed to encompass the easement along the southern boundary path. 7/28/97 of the property from the water tank 26075 Newbridge Drive; Lands of access road to the southwest corner of Critchfield: Restore II-B paths along La the property. Provide pathway easement Paloma and Newbridge. 5/27/97 over the access road. 5/27/97 amended 6/23/97 24021 Oak Knoll Circle;Lands of J.Lohr 13870 La Paloma Road; Lands of Hill: Properties: No request. 2/24/97 Restore II-B path along La Paloma. 24036 Oak Knoll Circle;Lands of J.Lohr 6/23/97- ._- Properties: Restore II-B path along Oak 13935 La Paloma Road; Lands of Knoll Circle. 1/9/97 Silvestri: Construct II-B path along La 24044 Oak Knoll Circle; Lands of Lohr. Paloma. 7/28/97 Restore II-B path along Oak Knoll Circle. 25703 Lomita Linda Court; Lands of 4/28/97 Stitt: Construct II-B path along 24052 Oak Knoll Circle; Lands of Lohr: Ravensbury Avenue that deals with the Restore II-B path along Oak Knoll Circle. drainage problems there. 3/24/97 5/27/97 10705 Magdalena Road; Lands of Urbach 12113 Oak Park Court;Lands of Lohr: No request. 6/23/97 Restore II-B path along Oak Park Court. 6/23/97 . fri TP'�hcW Aef �V Herb Fong Certified Arborist • Western chapter ISA Lie. #148 315 Bonair Siding Stanford, Calif. 94305 415-725=3175 !/33/41 • Mr. Dave Blum 1175 Fisher Ave. Morgan Hill, Calif. 95037 Re: Lands of Golukhov 11195 Hooper Tin Los Altos Hills, Ca. Dear Mr. Blum, At your request I inspected and reviewed the trees at the Hooper site that are to be impacted by construction. This report is sectioned into two groups of trees. Those impacted by the remodel of the main home and those impacted by the summer kitchen. . Trees impacted by the Main Home. One of`the 12" oak§ is really a Bay tree, Umbellularia californica. The other 12 and 14 inch oaks are Coastal Live Oaks. All three trccs are sound and.without serious structural problems. There is a 30 inch Coastal Live Oak tree in the deck next to the home addition. This tree is not a structurally sound tree. It has had several large branches removed in the past and shows some decay. One large limb hangs over the house and removal may be needed for fire safety concerns. If this limb is removed there is questionable value in the -remaining tree since this tree's value has already been minimized by past severe pruning. • • Page 2. Tree Report Trees impacted by Summer Kitchen. The two 8 inch oaks next to the kitchen are structurally sound with no serious problems. They are growing in a grove of other oaks and their removal is actually beneficial to the remaining larger trees on the site. The distance of the slab structure is far enough away according to the drawings to not interfere with the health of the 24 inch oak closest to the deck and structure. The deck should be built with piers and not a poured in place foundation. The fewer penetrations into the rootbalI of this tree the better. Joists and hangers should be above ground level and trenching should be minimized. If large roots over 2 inches in diameter are encountered in excavations, further digging at that specific location should be done by hand or pier block location shifted to accommodate the root. If any roots larger than 1 inch need to be cut for construction this should be done with a ' sharp pair of pruning shears. Cuts should be clean and not torn. Wounds do not need further treatment or painting: In general, the site is wooded with many large and young trees. The removal of the five trees discussed above will actually benefit the remaining large trees by reducing the competition and crowding that currently exist with this site. It has been a pleasure to address your arboricultural questions. Please let me know if there are any other concerns or if I can serve you further. S inc•rel • • 111 •ong • • Le , %. , . RECEIVED • FINDINGS MAY 0 5 1997 The findings for a Variance are as follows: TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 1. Because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the ordinance is found to deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications: Hovt 6 FAA L,7 _ �R y ( -4&04-b:" ) -170 / ,t; ` , L.., l-p}J11.fif, rte/ ,1 ✓`�l'i��i�L ;i" 7L)1 ��f J r S /7l7h r�CS • 2. That upon granting of the Variance, the intent and purpose of the • • • ordinance will still be served and the recipient of the Variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners: !}• ,_ drr� •FI •.r;a!_ • y..�• ^�. I.�i.,r.'� ! 'i 'L ! !J)�4 j A � r-t,-/c1 5 l { • 1 7 ,7/){J—V) r• / N 1"-) )..•1 •- { ) rj i a. �: /_.��')i:'I?! J' i i,r�( � 'C.r #� • 3. That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the . public welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district: sr,/ ,••••••I, •-• 1•1-,f1).: . \A 6\ /T CZ ,,, i: U (i1 J 'Ft' -1 • h. \�{ G1 • • 4. That,the Variance will not allow a use or activity which is not expressly .. authorized by the Zoning Ordinance: ur, '. ,a ��Ni!n� .- dl' l'�:%r J', !oh..) V l ✓��1,' /) ... I% C'%) �/ ,.i p-� /• �. t D • -5- Variance Application Information Packet Rev. S/1/94 .2 corner of the property measuring 50 feet 11240 Magdalena Road; Lands of Hu: in the North-South direction and 100 Restore II-B path along Magdalena. feet in the East-West direction. 4/28/97 3/24/97 13961 Fremont Pines Lane; Lands of 28625 Matadero Creek Court;Lands of Ware&Cates: Construct II-B path along Groff&Taylor Construct a native path Fremont Pines Lane. 3/24/97 in a 10 foot easement along the 25311 Fremont Road; Lands of boundary with 28620 Matadero Creek Fitzpatrick: Construct II-B path along Court so as to connect the cul-de-sac to Fremont Road. 5/27/97 the existing path on the lower portion of 26170 Fremont Road:Lands of property. Restore the latter path. 4/28/97 Zatparvan Construct II-B path along Fremont Road. 9/22/97 28500 Matadero Creek Lane; Lands of ' 26242 Fremont Road; Lands of Yam= Rutner: Res tore II-B path along Matadero NoCreek Lane. 7/28/97 request. 7/28/97 25528 Hidden Springs Court; Lands of 28510 Matadero Creek Lane; Lands of Taylor No request. 4/28/97 Jain: Restore II-B path along Matadero Creek Lane and the asphalt path above 11195 Hooper Lane; Lands of Goluknov: Page Mill Road. 2/24/97 Construct a native path from Hooper 12205 Menalto Drive; Lands of Godinho: Lane to the existing path from Frampton No request. 6/23/97 Court within a 30 foot pathway easement with the pathway slope not 12631 Miraloma Way; Lands of Breetwor: exceeding 15%. 5/27/97 Restore II-B path along Summerhill and construct II-B path along Miraloma with 14400 Kingsley Way;Lands of Clevenger the drainage ditch between the path and Construct II-B paths along Altadena Drive and Kingsley Way. 3/24/97 the road. 2/24/97 13001 La Cresta; Lands of Hsiaoc N o 27371 Moody Road;Lands of Rocchetti& request. 2/24/97 Herdell: Construct II-B path along Moody Road on the property side of the ditch 25309 La Loma; Lands of Longhmiller: and acquire a road and pathway Construct a native path in a 10 foot easement as needed to encompas s the easement along the southern boundary path. 7/28/97 of the property from the water tank 26075 Newbridge Drive; Lands of access road to the southwest corner of Critchfield: Restore II-B paths along La the property. Provide pathway easement Paloma and Newbridge. 5/27/97 over the access road. 5/27/97 amended 6/23/97 24021 Oak Knoll Circle;Lands of J.Lohr 13870 La Paloma Road; Lands of Hill: Properties: No request. 2/24/97 Restore II-B path along La Paloma. 24036 Oak Knoll Circle;Lands of J.Lohr 6/23/97 Properties: Restore II-B path along Oak 13935 La.Paloma Road; Lands of Knoll Circle. 1/9/97 Silvestri: Construct II-B path along La 24044 Oak Knoll Circle; Lands of Lohr: Paloma. 7/28/97 Restore II-B path along Oak Knoll Circle. 25703 Lomita Linda Court; Lands of 4/28/97 Stitt: Construct II-B path along 24052 Oak Knoll Circle; Lands of Lohr. Ravensbury Avenue that deals with the Restore II-B path along Oak Knoll Circle. drainage problems there. 3/24/97 5/27/97 10705 Magdalena Road; Lands of Urbach: 12113 Oak Park Court;Lands of Lohr: No request. 6/23/97 Restore II-B path along Oak Park Court. 6/23/97 6