HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-07-06 City Council (9)City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:
FROM:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE:JULY 6, 1998 CMR:294:98
SUBJECT:LOS TRANCOS ROAD (ARRILLAGA LANDS): DRAFT
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF A
TENTATIVE MAP AND REQUESTS FOR CONDITIONAL
EXCEPTION FOR SUBDIVISION OF 151.41 ACRES INTO
EIGHT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ONE
87.3+ ACRE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE/COMMON AREA
PARCEL; CONTINUED FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MAY 18, 1998 (City File Nos: 94-SUB-5, 97-ARB-190 and 94-EIA-
31)
REPORT IN BRIEF
On May 18, 1998, the City Council reviewed the proposed 8’lot residential subdivision of
151 acres of hillside located on Los Trancos Road. The Council voted (7-2) to recommend
approval of the subdivision (revised Tentative Map dated November 1997) with
modifications. Specifically, the Council directed a) that lot no: 8 be relocated to an area
adjacent to lot no. 5, b) that a one-story building height limit be established for lots no, 3 and
7, c) that a tree planting program be implemented for areas Withig or i~ediately abutting
the building envelopes of lots no. 2, 3 and 7 (to enhance scteen~g ofresidences), and d) that
staff return to the City Council with recommended findings and conditions. Per the
Council’s direction, the applicant has revised the Tentative Map (November 1998/Revised
June 1998) and staffhas prepared findings and conditions. The map revisions and findings
and conditions are outlined in this report.
CMR:294:98 Page 1 of 8
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
Adopt the Resolution certifying the Los Trancos Road Subdivision Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as adequate, making the findings, including a
Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment 1D - REVISED) and approving
the Mitigation Monitoring Program/Plan (Attachment 4).
Approve the Tentative Map and conditional exceptions from PANIC Section
21.20.210, permitting a portion of the main access road to be developed with a grade
in excess of 15 percent and PAMC Section 21.28.020, permitting a reduction in the
required road right-of-way and pavement width, as outlined in the Planning
Commission staff report dated November 12, 1997 (Attachment 5 of CMR: 132:98,
dated February 9, 1998, previously distributed to the City Council), based on a) the
findings presented in Attachment 2 and the Architectural Review Board findings
presented in Attachment 2A, and b) subject to the conditions presented in
Attachment 3.
BACKGROUND
The project proposes the subdivision of 151.41 acres into eight single-family residential lots
and one 87+ acre parcel for permanent, private open space/common area use. The property
is located in the Palo Alto foothills and is subject to the provisions of the OS (Open Space)
District. The OS District permits a maximum density of 10 acres per unit. The subdivision
proposes a density of one unit per 18.9 acres of gross land area. A detailed discussion of the
proposed subdivision and information on the site and setting are provided on pages 2 through
12 of the Planning Commission staff report, dated November 12, 1997 (Attachment 5 of
CMR: 132:98, dated February 9, 1998, previously distributed to the City Council).
As a follow-up to the City Council’s action of May 18, 1998, the Tentative Map for this
subdivision has been revised. The revisions are described in the attached letter from Mark
Thomas and Company, civil engineers, dated June 1, 1998 (Attachment 1A) and are
presented in Attachment 1B, entitled Revised Tentative Map, dated November 1997/revised
June 1998. The one significant change to the layoutlofthe map is the relocation oflot no. 8.
This lot has been located to an area adjacent to lot no. 5. Access to lot no. 8 would be
provided by an existing, graded road, which would be developed as a private driveway. This
driveway would be shared with lot no. 5 and the proposed water tank. The former location
of lot no. 8 is now proposed to be incorporated into lot no. 9, the private open space/common
area parcel. The map revisions have resulted in a) an overall increase in the acreage of the
permanent, private open space parcel (lot no. 9 has increased from approximately 81+ acres
to 87+ acres) and b) additional clustering of the Proposed building envelope areas. The
following table presents information on resulting lot sizes and access:
CMR:294:98 Page 2 of 8
Lot
No.
Lot/Parcel
Size
(acres)
8.81
9.54
7.72
5.07
5.41
5.24
9.64
7.78
Building Envelope and Driveway
Access
Envelope and access road are the
same as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997.
Envelope and access road are the
same .as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997.
Envelope and access road are the
same as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997. Shared
driveway access with lot no. 4.
Envelope and access road are the
same as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997. Shared
driveway access with lot no. 3.
Envelope and access road are the
same as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997. Shared
driveway access with lot no. 8 and
access road to water tank site.
Envelope and access road are the
same as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997,
Envelope and access road are the
same as proposed in previous map
dated November 1997.
Driveway access shared with lot
no. 5 and water tank.
Area/Site Characteristics
Building envelope located off of knoll/ridgetop and
in an open grassland area.
Building envelope located in an area of open
grassland and woodland,
Porous/permeable driveway surface required to
avoid development of on-site detention basin.
One-story building height restriction imposed,
along with implementation of tree planting
program.
Building envelope located in a woodland area.
Porous/permeable driveway surface required to
avoid development of on-site detention basin.
One-story building height restriction imposed,
along with implementation of tree planting
program.
Building envelope located in woodland area.
Porous/permeable driveway surface required to
avoid development of on-site detention basin.
Building envelope located in a woodland area.
Building envelope located in a woodland clearing.
Building envelope located in an open grassland
area.
One-story building height restriction imposed,
along with implementation of tree planting
program.
Building envelope located in a woodland clearing.
Sub-59.21 acres (40.4%of total site area)
total.
9 87.30 acres (59.6% of total site area)Caretaker’s residence and barn located at south end
of this parcel.
Total 146.5 acres*
*Gross acreage of the site estimated at 151+ acres. The difference between gross and total acreage is the Los¯Trancos Road 60-foot right-of-way dedication.
CMR:294:98 Page 3 of 8
The map revisions do not result in any changes to the configuration or layout of the main or
emergency access roads, subdivision infrastructure (subdivision improvements, including
location or size of water tank) or to the general grading plan for the subdivision.
DISCUSSION
Adequacy of Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
The map revisions have been reviewed by Nichols-Berman, the City’s EIR consultants. The
consultant fmdings are presented in the attached Appendix 8.5 of the FEIR, entitled Revised
Tentative Map (Attachment 1C). The EIR consultants find that the environmental impacts
of the latest Tentative Map revisions have been adequately addressed in the FEIR. Minor
amendments to impacts and mitigation measures are necessary to address the map revisions.
These minor amendments, which are outlined in Appendix 8.5, do not present any new
information or significant changes requiring a re-circulation of the Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEIR). In fact, the map revisions have implemented several of the FEIR
mitigation measures.
Given the minor changes in the Tentative Map layout and changes in the FEIR impacts and
mitigation measures, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been
revised. The revised MMRP is presented in Attachment 4 of this report. Approval of the
MMRP is recommended as part of the City Council’s action on this project.
Revisions to Draft Findings and Conditions of Approval
Per the direction of the City Council, fmdings and conditions have- been prepared for the
latest map revisions. This information is attached and is described as follows:
Findings for certification of FEIR and approval of Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Plan (MMRP).
Findings are presented in Attachment 1D of this report. While the map revisions have
resulted in some amendments to the findings, these amendments are minor. The
revisions would not result in any changes in the fmdings for significant, unavoidable
impacts. The revised map would continue to result in three significant, unavoidable
cumulative impacts, which cannot be mitigated to less-than-significant levels. These
impacts would occur regardless of project size or layout. Furthermore, while the map
revisions would continue to result in significant, unavoidable short-term visual
impacts (from construction), this impact would be slightly reduced with the relocation
of lot no. 8 development (development would be less visible from off-site).
Findings for Tentative Map and Architectural Review.
Findings for Tentative Map and Architectural Review approval are provided in
Attachments 2 (Tentative Map) and 2A (Architectural Review) of this report.
Revisions to draft findings are presented in redline and stfikeo~ format.
CMR:294:98 Page 4 of 8
Conditions of approval for Tentative Map.
Conditions of approval are provided in Attachment 3 of this report. Revisions to
conditions are presented in redline and strikeo~ format, Significant condition
changes are as follows:
Condition 2fhas been revised to require that the property deeds for lots 3, 4,
5, 6 and 8 acknowledge that these lots contain "protected trees" as defined by
PAMC Chapter 18.10.
bo Conditions 2g and 20h have been revised to require that the property deeds for
all lots (and the subdivision CC & Rs) prohibits the fencing of individual lot
boundaries. All lot fencing is to be restricted to the building envelope area.
Conditions 2h and 20i have been revised to require that the property deeds for
lots 2, 3 and 7 (and the subdivision CC & Rs) are recorded to restrict building
heights on these lots to one-story. In addition, the conditions require that the
property deeds and the CC & Rs acknowledge the implementation of a tree
planting program for areas immediately abutting the building envelopes of
these lots (planting to be implemented at the time subdivision improvements
are completed). The deed shall note that the trees shall be maintained to
enhance the screening of residences on these lots.. Long-term maintenance of
the trees shall be the requirement of the property owner.
Condition 5c has been added, which requires a tree planting program to be
implemented on lots 2, 3 and 7. The condition recommends the planting of
trees within or abutting the final, selected building envelope areas for lots 2,
3 and 7. The purpose of the planting is to enhance the screening of the
residences on these lots. The planting program is required to be implemented
at the time the subdivision improvements are completed, which would permit
some time for the tree to mature prior to construction on these lots. The
condition requires that the tree planting program be approved by the
Architectural Review Board and the City Planning Arborist.~
Conditions 2i and 20j have been revised to require that the property deeds for
lots 2, 3 and 4 (and the subdivision CC & Rs) include a provision restricting
the type of surface material for the private access driveways for these lots. A
porous/permeable driveway surface is required for these lots so as to avoid the
need to construct an on-site detention basin.
STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
After City Council approval of the Tentative Map and the request for conditional exceptions
from the PAMC Sections 21.20.210 and 21.28.020 (Subdivision Ordinance), the project
CMR:294:98 Page 5 of 8
sponsor would be required to prepare a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Plans, as
well as the necessary subdivision agreements. The Final Map would require the approval of
the City Council, prior to recordation with the County of Santa Clara. Some of the
components of the Subdivision Improvement Plans (final road design, retaining wall details,
tree replanting program and final design and color or water tank) would require final review
by the Architectural Review Board, prior to City Council approval of the Final Map. Each
single-family lot would be subject to Site and Design Review, which requires review by the
Planning Commission and approval by the City Council.
If the subdivision is approved, permits and/or approvals will or may be required by the
following agencies:
1.County of Santa Clara Department of Health Services (individual septic systems).
Santa Clara Valley Water District (all construction work within 50 feet of Los
Trancos Creek or Buckeye Creek).
3.Cal EPA- Regional Water Quality Control Board.
4.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
5.Califomia Department of Fish and Game.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Location Map
Attachment 1A: Letter from Mark Thomas and Company outlining Tentative Map revisions
dated November 1997/revised June 1998
Attachment 1B: Reduction of Revised Tentative Map; November 1997/reviSed June 1998.
Attachment 1C: Appendix 8.5 of Final Environmental Impact Report, summary of
Tentative Map revision consistency with Final Environmental Impact
Report, Nichols-Berman, EIR consultants; June 1998.
Attachment 1D: Resolution certifying the Los Trancos Road Subdivision Final
Environmental Impact Report and Findings, including a Statement of
Overriding Consideration (REVISED)
Attachment 2:Findings for Approval of the Tentative Map and Conditional Exceptions
(REVISED)
Attachment 2A: Findings for Architectural Review of Proposed Subdivision Improvements
(REVISED)
Attachment 3:Conditions of Approval (REVISED)
Attachment 4:Mitigation Monitoring Program/Plan (REVISED)
Attachment 5:Letter from Kenneth R. Schreiber, City of Palo Alto to John Arrillaga,
property owner, outlining the Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing
CMR:294:98 Page 6 of 8
Attachment 6:
Agreement; June 2, 1997 and signed by property owner on.October 20,
1997.
Action Agenda of the City Council Meeting of May 18, 1998
PREPARED BY: Paul Jensen, Contract Planner
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: ~"~~ _.~~
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Deputy City Manager, Special Projects
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL.’~@. ~~~)~"
EMILY nARPaSON -
Assistant City Manager
CC:John Arrillaga, Perry and Arrillaga, 2650 Mission College Boulevard, Suite 101,
Santa Clara, California 95054-1291
Sam Zullo, Mark Thomas and Company, Inc., 90 Archer Street, San Jose,
California 95112
Tony Guzzardo, Guzzardo and Associates, 836 Montgomery Street, San Francisco,.
California 94133
Bob Berman, Nichols-Berman, 142 Minna Street, San Francisco, California 94110
George Mader, Planning Department, Town of Portola Valley, 765 Portola Road,
Portola Valley, California 94028
Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health Services, 660 South
Fair Oaks Avenue,. Sunnyvale, California 94086
West Bay Sanitary District, 500 Laurel Street, Menlo Park, California 94025-3486
Santa Clara Valley Water District, 5740 Almaden Expressway, San Jose, California
95110-3686; Attention: Richard Andersen
Camas Hubenthal, The Committee for Green Foothills, Peninsula Conservation
Center, 3921 East Bayshore Boulevard, Palo Alto, California 94303
Santa Clara County Creeks Coalition, 1024 Emerson, Palo Alto, California 94301
Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, California
94022. Attn: Richard Andersen
Ted Vian, President, Portola Valley Ranch Homeowners Association, #2 Sandhill,
Portola Valley, California 94028
ElaineKay, Portola .Valley Ranch Association, # 1 Indian Crossing, Portola Valley,
California 94028
CMR:294:98 Page 7 of 8
Diana and Pierre Fischer, # 10 Valley Oak Street Portola Valley, California 94028
Linda Elkind, 14 Hawk View, Portola Valley, California 94028
N.ancy Strauss, 635 Los Trancos Road, Portola Valley, California 94028
Terilyn Langsev-Burt, # 1 Wintercreek, Portola Valley, California 94028
John Baca, P.O. Box 8527, Palo Alto, California 94309-8527
Ellen Christensen, 4217 Los Palos Drive,. Palo Alto, California 94306
Virginia Bacon, 205 Golden Oak Drive, Portola Valley, California 94028
CMR:294:98 Page 8 of 8
Town of
Portola Valley
PF(D)
PF
Los Trancos IP, oad, south of AIpin~ IP, oad
(APN#: 182-46-010)
PF
..I,L To Skyline B1vd !
Graphic Attachment
to Staff Report
FOOTHI,LLS PARK
Date: July 30, 1997
File #: 97-SUB-5; 97-EIA-3~
Scale: 1 inch=1500 FT
North
MARK THOMAS & CO. INC.
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS & MUNICIPAL PLANNERS
90 ARCHER STREET, SAN JOSE, CA 9511:2
PHONE (408) 453-5373 ¯ FAX (408) 453-5390
PRINCIPALS
SAM J. ZULLO
RICHARD K. TANAKA
PHILLIP R, SAVIO
TIMOTHY R, FLEMING
DAVID E. ROSS
MICHAEL J. LOHMAN
.June 1, 1998
ATTACHMENT 1A
File No. 94045
Mr. Scott McPherson
Nichols-Berman
142 Mirma Street
San Francisco, California 94105
Arrillaga - Portola Valley
June 1998 Tentative Map
Dear Mr. McPherson:
Enclosed is a preliminary layout on which we have made the following changes requested by
City Council at the last meeting:
1. Relocated Lot 8 from entry location to allocation between Lots 4 & 5.
2.Building site on Lot 8 is located at approximate location designated by Councilwoman Liz
Kniss.
3. The net change is an increase in the open space easement from 81.7 acres to 87.3 acres.
4. The area of lots is reduced from 66.02+ acres to 59.2+ acres.
5.The lengths of driveways will be reduced as Lots 5 and 8 will use the ingress and egress
easement to water tank.
Sincerely,
MARK THOMAS & CO. INC.
mjt
copy:John Arrillaga, w/enclosure
Paul Jensen, w/enclosure
Ken Schreiber, w/enclosure
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES MUNICIPAL ENGINEERS ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS HYDROLOGY AND DRAINAGE
S~TE DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS PARKS SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT AND INSPECTION SPECIAL DISTRICT MANAGEMENT
ATTACHMENT 1B
REVISED TENTATIVE MAP
November 1997/Revised June 1998
ATTACHMENT IC
APPENDIX 8.5 REVISED TENTATIVE MAP
After publication of the Draft EIR in June 1997, the applicant developed a revised tentative map in
order to incorporate recommended mitigation measures. A copy of this map was provided in the
October 1997 Final EIR as "Section 9.7 Revised Tentative Map". This section was provided in the
Final EIR solely for the publi~ and decision-makers to evaluate how well the applicant had met the
mitigations in the DEIR. The applicant subsequently submitted a map in November 1997 to further
meet mitigations recommended in the EIR.
On May 18th, 1998 the City Council voted (7-2) to direct staff to prepare draft findings and conditions
of approval of the Los Trancos Road Subdivision. The vote supported the subdivision layout of the
November 1997 map, with the following modifications: Lots 2, 3, and 7 shall be limited to one-story
in height, and Lot 8 shall be to the area adjacent to the proposed building envelope for Lot 5. In June
1998 the applicant prepared a map to incorporate these modifications as recommended by the Council.
This map is shown in Exhibit 8.5-1.
Note that CEQA encourages and. expects the project to undergo revisions during and after
environmental review. ,’The CEQA reporting process is not designed to freeze the ultimate proposal
in the precise mold of the initial project; indeed, new and unforeseen insights may emerge during
investigation, evoking revision of the original proposal." (Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of
Hanford, 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 736-737).
The EIR authors and City staff analyzed the June 1998 revisions against the EIR to determine if the
environmental impacts of the revised map are adequately addressed in the EIR. Each impact and
mitigation measure was examined in relation to the June 1998 revisions.
In some cases, mitigation recommended in the EIR has already been included into the June 1998
revisions, and therefore is not required. This was the case in Mitigation 5.3-2(a) and a portion of
Mitigation 5.3-2(b) which discussed mitigation for site peak flow rates; Mitigation 5.3-4 (a) and (b)
which discussed downstream erosion and sedimentation; a portion of Mitigation 5.6-7 which restated
that applicant’s proposal to include a stormwater detention basin; a portion of Mitigation 5.6-8 which
recommended a revised alignment of the emergency access road to avoid trees; and a portion of
Mitigation 5.8-1 which recommended a relocation of homesites off of knolls to reduce visual impacts.
In other cases, minor rewording of mitigations were required. In these cases, the mitigation would
remain the same. However, as the original mitigation referred to particular areas of the site using the
locations .of certain project elements of the original Proposed Project, those portions referring to these
areas needed to be updated. This includes Mitigation 5.2-1 which requires landslide investigation and
repair, and Mitigation 5.3-6 which refers to particular leachfield locations.
All changes are included into the revised Mitigation Monitoring Plan, included at the end of this
appendix.
NEW INFORMATION
Section 15088.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines codifies recent case law on the recirculation of
EIRs. CEQA states that if subsequent to public review and interagency consultation, bUt prior to final
certification, the lead agency adds "significant new information" to the EIR, then the lead agency must
recirculate the EIR for additional commentary and consultation.1 New information is considered
"significant" when the EIR is changed in a way that "deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity
to comment". This occurs when:2
A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation
measure proposed to be implemented. The revised changes would not result in any new
significant environmental impact, or require new mitigation measures.
A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation
measures are adopted that reduce the. impact to a level of insignificance. No substantial increases
in any impact would occur. This impact could slightly increase the amount of tree loss over the
Proposed Project, but this increase would still be reduced to a less-than-significant impact with
mitigation. The amount of impervious surface by sub-watershed would be essentially the same,
and runoff would not be substantially changed. In particular, this revised tentative map would
not lead to measurable increase in runoff for sub-watershed 3, which would mean that a
stormwater retention basin would not be required (as detailed in Mitigation 5.3-2(a).
A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from other previously
analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts~ of the project, but the
project’s proponents decline to adopt it. This does not apply.
The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in natu’re that
meaningful public review an comment were precluded. This does not apply.
A recirculation guarantees that the public is not denied "an opportunity to test, assess, and evaluate the
data and make an informed judgment as to the validity of the conclusions" of the new information’’3
Section 15088.5 also states that recirculation is not required where the new information added to the
EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR.
No "triggering event" as specified under this section requiring recirculation has been identified, and
therefore it is concluded that recirculation is not required. No new significant impacts would occur, no
substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would occur, no substantially different
mitigation has been recommended (although some mitigations have been slightly reworded to
reference the same mitigation to revised lot locations), and the Draft EIR was deemed adequate.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The following Mitigation Monitoring plan repeats the plan originally published in the Final EIR. In
some instances, text changes would result the revised tentative map, as described above. In these
instances information that is to be deleted is c-tossed-ore, and information that is added is underlined.
1 Public Resources Code Sec. 21092.1.,
2 CEQA Guidelines 15088.5(a).
3 Sutter Sensible Planning, Inc, v. Board of Supervisors, 122 Cal.App.3d 813,822.
As discussed above, none of these changes represent a significant modification of the already adequate
EIR.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
CERTIFYING THE ADEQUACY OF THE LOS TRANCOS ROAD
SUBDIVISION FINAL EIR AND MAKING FINDINGS THEREON
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as
follows:
SECTION..I. Background.The City Council of the City of
Palo Alto ("City Council") finds, determines, and declares as
follows:
A. Sam Zullo, Mark Thomas and Company, Inc., for John
Arrillaga ("Applicant") has made application to the City of Palo
Alto ("City") for the Los Trancos Road Subdivision Project
("Project"). The~Project consists of the subdivision of a 151.41
acre parcel into 8 single-family residential lots, with building
envelopes to cover 20,000 square feet per lot; proposed access via
improvements to an existing graded road and emergency access road;
electricity and water provided by the City, with an on-site water
distribution system, stormwater drainage facilities, and individual
leachfields for wastewater disposal. The development approvals
required for the Project include a Tentative Subdivision Map,
conditional exceptions for the Palo Alto Municipal Code .Subdivision
Ordinance, Architectural Review approval for the Project’s public
infrastructure, and Site and Design review for each residence.
B. The City as the lead agency for the Project has caused
to be prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR").
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15132, the Final EIR
consists of the following documents and records: "Los Trancos Road
Subdivision Draft Environmental Impact Report, June 1997"; ."Los
Trancos Road Subdivision Final Environmental Impact Report, October
1997", and the planning and other City records, minutes, and files
constituting the record of proceedings. The Final EIR was prepared
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public
Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA"), and the State CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section
15000, et seq. The Final EIR is on file in the office of the
Director of Planning and Community Environment and, along with the
planning and other City records, minutes and files constituting the
record of proceedings, is incorporated herein by this reference.
C. The initial Notice of Preparation was distributed on
July i0, 1996, and an amended Notice of Preparation was distributed
on July 29, 1996. A scoping meeting was held on August 15, 1996.
The Draft EIR was circulated for public review between June 9,
1997-July 28, 1997. The Planning Commission held a public hearing
1
980701 |ac 0052013
on the Draft EIR July 30, 1997; and Planning Commission review on
August 13, 1997. The ARB conducted a meeting on the project on~
November 6, 1997. The Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the Project on November 12, 1997.
D. The City Council, in conjunction with this resolution,
is also approving a reporting and monitoring program pursuant to
Public Resources Code section 21081.6, which program is designed to
ensure compliance with Project changes and mitigation measures
imposed to avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects
identified in the Final EIR, and described in detail in Exhibit A
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
E. The City Council has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final EIR and record of proceedings,
including but not limited to testimony received by the Council
during the January 20, February 9, and April 27, 1998, public
hearings on the Project and responses by staff during these public
hearings.
SECTION 2. Certification. The City Council certifies that
the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act. The Final EIR was presented to the City
Council and the City Council has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final EIR, staff reports, oral and
written testimony given at public hearings on the proposed Project,
and all other matters deemed material and relevant before
considering for approval the various actions related to the Los
Trancos Road Subdivision project. The City Council hereby finds
that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City as
lead agency.
~. $ignificant Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated.%Q
a Less Than Significant L~v~l.. The City Council finds that the
Final EIR identifies potentially significant environmental effects
of the Project in regard to Land Use and Planning; Geology and
Soils; Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality; Air Quality; Traffic
and On-Site Circulation; Biotic Resources; Utilities and
Services/Fire Hazards; Aesthetics and Visual Impacts; Cultural
Resources; and Recreation and Open Space. The City Council finds
that, in response to each significant effect listed in this Section
3, all feasible changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen.
the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR
as summarized below. This follows Public Resources Code section
21081(a) (I) which allows for findings stating that for each
significant effect "changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the
significant effects on the environment." Each of the Mitigation
Measures summarized below is more fully described in the Final EIR.
2
980701 |ac 0052013
Land Use and Planning
Impact 5.1-3 concerns visual impacts created by the
incompatibility of land uses. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant level by implementation of Mitigation
Measures 5.8-1 to 5.8-8.
B. Geology and Soils
Impact 5.2-1 concerns impacts created by landslide
movements, which could potentially risk human life, damage or
destroy homes, and block or damage roadways and escape routes.
This impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by
the following measures as a condition of Tentative Map approval:
Perform slope stability analysis and evaluate landslides and
.unstable areas, mitigate if necessary consistent with the
recommendations in the FEIR.
Impact 5.2-2 concerns grading impacts that can create
secondary visual and air quality impacts. This impact will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
approval: Hydroseed, dispose of trash, spray cut areas water,
erosion control mitigations, replace trees and vegetation, protect
nesting or roosting birds, reduce construction dust, visual
mitigations.
Impact 5.2-3 concerns unstable slopes that could affect
access roads, building areas, and create erosion. This impact will
be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by. the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
approval: Evaluate slopes for stability, design cut slopes with
erosion and drainage control, install terrace drains as necessary.
Impact 5.2-4 concerns rockfall that could damage structures
and roadways and .injure people. This impact will be mitigated to
a less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: Evaluate
rockfall potential and repair as necessary.
Impact 5.2-5 concerns expansive soils, which could damage
development by cyclic shrinking and swelling of the soil. This
impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
following measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and
Design approval: Perform plasticity or expansion index testing,
and treat soil as necessary. Design residential development on
individual lots to account for each site’s expansive soils.
Impact 5.2-6 concerns groundwater .impacts, which can
destabilize structures if not adequately drained. This impact will
be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
3
980701 la~ 0052013
approval: Provide all earthen and mechanical retaining structures
with adequate drainage to prevent failure under hydrostatic loads.
Impact 5.2-7 concerns seismicity impacts. Seismic shaking
is expected to occur on the site some time during the life of the
development and could induce landsliding. This impact will be
mitigated to a. less-than-significant impact by the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
approval: Implement Mitigation Measure 5.2-1 (to mitigate
landslide impacts), design and build structures with Palo Alto and
UBC standards, require third party review by an engineering
geologist.
Impact 5.2-8 concerns areas of artificial fill, which could
result in non-uniform settlement or excessive erosion. This impact
will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
following mitigation as a condition of Tentative Map approval:
Mitigation Measure 5.3-4[a] requires realignment of the project
access roadway, removal of the .existing drainageway fill, and
restoration of the pre-fill topography and drainageway (Mitigation
Measure 5.3-4[b]). Also implement Mitigation Measure 5.2-I(a).
Impact 5.2-12 concerns on-site leachfields, which could
result in slope failure and groundwater contamination. This impact
will be mitigated to .a less-than-significant impact by the
following mitigation as a condition of Tentative Map approval:
Implement Mitigation Measure 5.3-6. (Relocate leachfields or
determine engineered solutions, as required by the County of Santa
Clara Department of Environmental Health Services. Relocate lot #8
and lot leachfield.)
C. Hydrology, Drainage, and Wat~
Impact 5.3-2 concerns site peak flow rates. Project
grading, construction of impervious surfaces, and installation of
storm drains will~ result in a significant increase in downstream
peak flow rates from Sub-watershed 3. These increases would affect
the performance of the roadway culvert under the Strauss property
access road and increase the frequency of roadway overtopping
during significant rainstorms. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map approval: Utilize the existing roadway
alignment and eliminate the proposed roadway diversion through the
fill zone and require porous/permeable access driveway surfaces for
lots 2, 3, and 4.
Impact 5°3-3 concerns downstream flooding.Theconstruction of a stormwater detention basin in Sub-watershed 3
would introduce a possibility, albeit slight, for embankment
failure and release of a large pulse of stored water downstream and
onto the Strauss property during a severe rainstorm. This impact
will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
4
98070! |ac 0052013
following measures as a condition of Tentative Map approval:
Implement Mitigation Measure 5.3-2(b) by utilizing the existing
roadway alignment and eliminating the proposed roadway diversion
through the fill zone and requiring porous/permeable access
driveway surfaces for lots 2, 3, and 4.
Impact 5.3-4 concerns downstream erosion and sedimentation.
Grading and construction activities would expose large areas of
ground to erosion from raindrop impact and overland impact. This
impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
following measures as a condition of Tentative ~Map approval:
Implement Mitigation Measure 5.3-2(b). Obtain a General
Construction Activity Stormwater Permit (GCASP) from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and prepare a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Impact 5.3-6 concerns leachfield impacts on surface water
quality. Installation of septic leachfields at building sites for
Lot 1 would result in a potentially significant increase in the
risk of leachfield failure and surfacing of contaminated effluent
during severe rainstorms in wet winters. This impact will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant impac~ by the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map approval: Either Relocate
the leachfield site on Lot 1 to other nearby areas where land
slopes are less than 20 percent or conduct site-specific
engineering studies for Leachfield 1 to determine special design
features that would ensure-against leachfield failure as required
by the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health
Services.
Impact 5.3-7 concerns cumulative downstream erosion and
sedimentation impacts. Implementation of the project, in
conjunction with other projects in the area, would result in
grading and construction that could increase downstream erosion and
sedimentation in the San Francisquito Creek watershed. This impact
will be mitigated to a lesS-than-significant impact by .the
following measures: Local jurisdictions shall obtain a General
Construction Activity Stormwater Permit (GCASP) from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for proposed projects. Prior
to issuing grading permits for construction activities, local
jurisdictions shall ensure that project applicants include BMP’s in
construction contracts implementing the requirements of NPDES
Municipal Storm Water Permit #CAS029718 in accordance with RWQCB
requirements.
Impact 5.3-8 concerns cttmulative surface water flows.
Implementation of the project, in conjunction with other projects
in the area would increase impervious surfaces, which in turn would
cumulatively increase the peak rates and volumes of surface runoff,
potentially increasing the frequency and severity of existing
downstream flooding in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed. This
impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
5
980701 lae 0052013
following measure as a condition of Tentative Map approval:
Implement Mitigation Measure 5.3-2(b).
Impact 5.3-9 concerns cumulative water quality.
Implementation of the project, in conjunction with other projects
in the area would increase urban contaminants in surface runoff,
potentially reducing water quality. This impact will be mitigated
to a less-than-significant impact by the following measure as a
condition of Tentative Map approval: Implement Mitigation Measure
5.3-7.
D. Air Ouality
Impact 5.4-1 concerns construction period air impacts.
During construction of the site surrounding areas could be impacted
by construction dust. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approva!.:
Earthmoving construction should not encompass more than 230,000
square feet (5.3 acres)in one day. Water all active construction
areas at least twice daily. -Use tarpaulins or other effect covers
for on-site storage piles and for haul trucks. Use water
stabilizers. Sweep streets. Cover trucks. Install sandbags.
Implement BAAQMD mitigations if working area exceeds four acresa
day.
E. Traffic and On-Site Circulation
Impact 5.5-3 concerns project access and internal
circulation. The main access road (Tierra Arboles), emergency
access road~ and conceptual driveways would exceed acceptable road
grades, the emergency access road would not meet acceptable road
widths, Tierra Arboles does not include turnouts, and parking has
not been determined for individual homes. These could create
emergency access problems. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map approval and the Site and Design
approval: Implement Mitigation Measure 5.5-3(a) (2) by revising
road grades of Tierra Arboles to 15 percent with no more than 18
percent for one 400 foot long portion of the roadway. The
emergency access road should be revised to a maximum grade of 15
percent, and aligned to avoid tree loss. Driveway grades should be
no more than 15 percent. For Emergency Access Road, provide
turnouts, widen in areas when possible given physical conditions,
strengthen shoulders, provide advisory signage and edge markers,
and develop Emergency Evacuation Plan. Provide parking turnouts
and ban roadside parking on Tierra Arboleso Provide six parking
spaces for each home.
Impact 5.5-5 concerns driveway site lines. Future driveway
alignments could result in inadequate sight lines. This impact
will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
6
980701 lac 0052013
following measures as a condition of Site and Design approval:~
Sufficient horizontal and vertical sight distances should be
maintained in all directions at the intersections of project
driveways with Tierra Arboles.
Impact 5.5-6 concerns on-site pedestrian pathways. On-site
pedestrian pathways are not included in the project, which can lead
to pedestrian safety concerns. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measure as a
condition of Tentative Map approval: Incorporate on-site pedestrian
pathways.
Impact 5.5-7 concerns construction traffic. Construction
traffic could interfere with peak traffic operations. Parking ~on
Los Trancos Road could interfere with traffic operations.
Construction traffic could damage Los Trancos Road. This impact
will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
following measures as a condition of Tentative’Map and Site and
Design approval: All fill haul trucks should be limited to 9:00 AM
to 4:00 PM operation to minimize construction vehicle impacts
during peak traffic hours, Monday-Friday. Construction vehicle
parking should be prohibited along Los Trancos Road.
F. Biotic R~$ource$
Impact 5.6-7 concerns Los Trancos Creek Water Quality.
Cut-and-fill grading associated with the proposed project could
result in significant sheet and gully erosion in exposed soils.
Sediment could also be carried by winter runoff in seasonal
drainages to Los Trancos Creek, possibly degrading aquatic habitat.
This impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by
the following measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and
Design approval: Install straw bales and stormwater detention
basin; implement Mitigation Measure 5.3-4 to reduce downstream
erosion and sedimentation impacts; protect, bare surfaces; locate
construction staging areas away from sensitive habitat.
Impact 5.6-8 concerns tree loss. The project will require
the removal of as many as 196 to 290 trees (not including those
lost for ancillary structUres and other developed uses), many of
ordinance-size, from the project site. This impact will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
approval: Relocate a portion of the emergency access road;
relocate leachfields in Lots 2 and 3 to avoid wooded areas;
individual homeowners shall align driveways and design homes to
minimize damage to trees; native trees of more than 11.5" in
diameter removed for the project shall be replaced at a ratio of
3:1 on a per acre basis by the same species from locally collected
stock (grown from seeds collected on site if possible); non,native
trees shall be replaced on a two-to-one ratio, similar to above;
meet regulations of City’s Tree Ordinance; identify trees outside
7
980701 lac 0052013
of construction zones by flagging; implement
construction-related mitigations specified in the EIR.
other
Impact 5.6-9 concerns nesting or roosting habitat loss.
Construction activities during project implementation could result
in incidental loss of eggs or nestlings or in nest abandonment by
birds of prey protected by Federal and State statutes. This impact
will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the
following measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and
Design approval: Before construction, a qualified ornithologist
shall inspect the project site. Tree removal shall not take place
between February 15 and June 30, or as determined by the CDFG or
the project ornithologist. Exclusion zones will be established
around each active nest.
Impact 5.6-10 concerns introduction of invasive exotic
plants to the site. Future residential landscaping may introduce
exotic plants to the site which are capable of naturalizing in
native habitats and reducing the diversity of native plants of the
site. This impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant
impact by the following measures as a condition of Tentative Map
and Site and Design approval: A qualified biologist or
horticulturist shall prepare a list of all exotic plants known to
readily naturalize in habitats similar to those found in the
project site. Species on this list should not be used.
G. Utilities and S rvi ~r H r
Impact 5.7-4 concerns fire and emergency medical service
impacts. Site development would create the potential of more fire
incidents and emergency medical calls. The PAFD has stated that
they could not guarantee with current staffing that they would be
able to meet their services standard of being able to respond 90
percent of the time to emergencies within 15 minutes, for both fire
and paramedic service. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: Maintain
Trapper’s Firebreak. Provide sprinklers for all new structures.
Water hose around structures. Maintain a Fuel Modification zone.
Install "knox box" into any future gate design. In addition, the
City will enter into a Joint Simultaneous Response agreement with
Woodside Fire Protection District.
Impact 5.7-5 concerns wildland-building fire exposure
impacts. New buildings constructed adjacent to wildland areas on
the project site would be exposed to fire hazards under severe
weather and wind conditions. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition ef Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: Install
all project roadway and water requirements before any residential
sidewall construction on the site. Clear brush and other potential
fire fuel around construction areas. Maintain and clearly mark
8
980701 lac 0052013
on-site fire response equipment. Ensure that all construction
workers are trained to use on-site fire response equipment. Locate
and clearly identify a cellular phone or other communication device
on-site at all times during construction.
Impact 5.7-6 concerns cumulative fire and emergency medical
service impacts. Cumulative development projects would add to the
demands of the PAFDo This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by relying on cumulative contributions
to the City’s General Fund to add staff to offset the impacts.
Impact 5.7-8 concerns cumulative police protection service
impacts. Cumulative development projects would add to the demand
on the PAPD, requiring additional personnel. This impact will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by or relying on
cumulative contributions to the City’s General Fund to add staff to
offset the impacts.
Impact 5.7-11 concerns solid waste generation. A small
amount of construction and annual waste would be generated by the
project, which would be met within current and future landfill
capacity. However, ’the project would require an increase insolid
waste diversion to meet AB 939. This impact will be mitigated to
a less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: During
home construction, recovery of waste concrete, asphalt and other
inert solids, scrap metals, and reusableitems shall be required.
A recycling drop-off point at the entrance of the project at Los
Trancos Road should be indicated on project plans.
Impact 5.7-12 concerns cumulative solid waste generation.
Cumulative projects would require an increase in solid waste
diversion to meet lib 939. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measure implemented
by the City: All new significant development projects, submitted
for ARB review, ishould prepare construction recycling plans and
operation recycling programs.
H. Aesthetics and Visual Impacts
Impact 5.8-1 concerns the view from the Hewlett
Subdivision. The form and line of the homes on Lots 1 and 5-8
would create significant visual contrast impacts. The form and
line of grading required for the emergency access road would create
significant visual contrast impacts. This impact will be mitigated
to a less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: Plant
trees around buildings to break up their form. Relocate the
building envelopes for homes off of ridgelines and knolls. Limit
building heights to one-story for lots 2, 3 and 7.. Relocate lot #8
to an area adjacent to lot #5. Individual homeowners would be
required to submit photo simulations from at least three
9
9~0701 lac 0052013
representative locations during the Site and Design process for
each lot. Use earth tone colors on buildings and colors with
values similar to surrounding colors. Use wood (shingle or siding)
or other building materials which create a finer texture on
building facades. Hydroseed areas disturbed by grading immediately
after construction. Plant small trees and shrubs in.areas graded
for road widening of the emergency access road or for landslide
repair. If retaining walls are built, they should be "stepped
back" if possible, and planted with trailing and creeping plants.
Impact 5.8-2 concerns the view from Hawkview Drive, Portola
Valley. The form and line of the homes on Lots 1-3 and 5-8 would
create significant contrast impacts. As the color of the homes is
not known, color contrasts would be a potentially significant
impact. This impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant
impact by the following measures as a condition of Tentative Map
and Site and Design approval: Implement Mitigation 5.8-1.
Relocate lot #8 to an area adjacent to lot #5. Limit building
heights to one-story for lots 2, 3 and 7. Plant small trees or
shrubs to screen the portion of the main access road (Tierra
Arboles) near the hairpin curve.
Impact 5.8-3 concerns the view from Hillbrook Drive,
Portola Valley. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measure as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: Implement
Mitigation Measure 5.8-1.
Impact 5.8-4 concerns the view from Vista Hill in Foothills
Park. This impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant
impact by the following measure as a condition of Tentative Map and
Site and Design approval: Implement Mitigation Measure 5.8-1.
Impact 5.8-5 concerns the view from Los Trancos Trail in
Foothills Park. .The bright color of pools would be a potentially
significant impact. This impact will be mitigated to a
less’than-significant impact by the following mitigation as a
condition of Site and Design approval: Implement Mitigation
Measure 5.8-1. Development of a swimming pool on lot 7 should be
blocked from views of the Los Trancos Trail.
Impact 5.8-8 concerns light and glare impacts. Nighttime
lighting could dominate the surrounding area. This impact will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by the following
measures as a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
approval: Shield or focus outdoor night lighting downward and
select roadway and pavement surfaces to minimize upward reflected
light. Recess lighting elements within fixtures to prevent glare.
Conceal lights. Avoid high-angle high-candela distribution.
Select lighting fixtures which can be shielded after installation.
Use low-intensity lighting, designed ~to focus downward, on any
streetlights.
i0
980701 lac 0052013
I. Cultural Resources
Impact 5.9-2 concerns potential disturbance of unknown
cultural resources. Construction could disturb currently unknown
cul~ural resources. This impact will be mitigated to a
less-than-significant impact by the following measures as a
condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design approval: If
cultural deposits ate encountered, halt construction in the
vicinity and consult a qualified archeologist and the Native
American community. Conduct excavation activities thereafter in
accordance with the protocol described in the Fina! EIR.
J. Recreation and Open Space
Impact 5.10-3 concerns impacts to Foothills Park.
Residents may trespass into Foothills Park from the project site.
This impact will be mitigated to a less-than-significant impact by
the following measures as a condition of Tentative Map approval:
Signs should be posted at the property line where the existing fire
road (Trapper’s Trail) enters Foothills Park, explaining that
direct access is not allowed, and that violators will be cited and
fined.
SECTION 4. Sianificant Impacts Which ¢~nnot B@ FDIIy
Mitigated. The City Council finds that the Final EIR identifies
significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to
Biotic Resources and Aesthetics and Visual Impacts. The City
Council finds that, in response to each such significant effect
identified in this Section 4, while all identified feasible changes
or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
Project which lessen to the extent feasible the significant
environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR, these effects
cannot be totally avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance
if the Project is implemented. Biotic resource mitigations (in
Impacts 5.6-12 through 5.6-14) are found to be partially within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies according
to Public Resources Code section 21081(a) (2). Short-term visual
impacts (Impact 5~8-9) are found to be infeasible to fully mitigate
according to Section 21081(a) (3). Accordingly, the impacts
summarized below remain unavoidable adverse impacts of the Project.
A. Biotic Resourc.9$
Impact 5.6-12 concerns ctunulative tree loss.
Implementation of the project, in conjunction with other projects
in the area, would result in incremental loss of trees and assorted
wildlife habitat. This impact will be mitigated by the following
measures: (I) As a condition of Tentative Map and Site and Design
approval, implement Mitigation Measure 5.6-8 to reduce tree loss on
the project site; and (2) implementation by jurisdictions in the
surrounding area of their respective tree protection and
preservation ordinances. Although these mitigations will reduce
980701 lac 0052013
impacts, this impact will remain significant and unavoidable
because it falls within the responsibility of other agencies to
enforce and monitor their ordinances.
Impact 5.6-13 concerns c~ulative nesting or roosting
habitat. Implementation of the project, in conjunction with other
projects in the project area, could cumulatively result in tree
removals that could result in the incidental loss of eggs or
nestlings or in nest abandonment by birds of prey protected by
Federal and State statutes. This impact will be mitigated by the
following measures: (I) As a condition of Tentative Map and Site
and Design approval, implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.6-9 to
reduce nesting or roosting habitat loss; and (2) implementation by
other jurisdictions of mitigation similar to Mitigation Measure
5.6-9 on a project-by-project basis. Although these mitigations
will reduce impacts, this impact will remain significant and
unavoidable because the mitigation falls partially within the
jurisdiction of other agencies to enforce and monitor.
Impact 5.6-14 Concerns cumulative grassland loss. The
proposed project, in conjunction with other projects in or adjacent
to the San Francisquito Creek watershed, would result in the loss
of non-native grasslands, which, due to contiguousness with
riparian habitat, provide increasing habitat diversity and foraging
habitat for certain wildlife species, including raptors. This
impact could be mitigated by the following measure: A regional
habitat program, in which developers would pay a fee which would be
used to purchase habitat for future conservation. In the absence
of such a regional program, which is beyond the jurisdiction of the
City to implement, this impact will remain significant and
unavoidable.
B. Aesthetics and Visual Impacts
Impact 5.8-9 concerns short-term visual impacts~ Visual
disturbance from construction of the project could have temporary
adverse visual impacts. In addition, views of development could be
significant until vegetation matures. This impact will be
mitigated by the following measure as a condition of Tentative Map
and Site and Design approval: On-site staging and storage of
construction equipment and materials shall be minimized to reduce
visual disturbance during construction° Equipment and material
storage that does occur on-site shall be visually screened. Graded
areas should be watered regularly to avoid construction dust
impacts. Although these mitigations will reduce impacts, this
impact will remain significant and unavoidable.
No feasible mitigation or alternative exists to reduce this
impact to a less-than-significant level. Construction will always
induce some amount of short-term visual impact to the surrounding
area which cannot be mitigated without some sort of screening°
Screening the total construction site would be impossible, and in
12
9807011~0052013
any event non-natural screening would create its own visual
impacts. While conditions of approval for the Tentative Map
include the relocation of one lot (lot #8) to a less visible area
of the site, no alternative .short of no development would reduce
the impact to less-than-significant, and this would effectively
eliminate all construction in the City, which is not feasible.
SECTIQN 5. The City Council certifies that the Final EIR
describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project, or to
its location, which could feasibly obtain the basic objectives of
the Project, and that the City Council has evaluated the
comparative merits of the alternatives and rejected them in favor
of the proposed Project as summarized below:
A. No Development Alternative
This alternative does not foreclose any site development
at a later time but assumes maintenance of the status quo. This
means that, in addition to no development occurring, prevailing
site conditions also would persist unabated or unmitigated. This
alternative would not meet the applicant’s basic objectives of
creating eight lots for residential development.
This alternative is not desirable for the City because:
It will not provide needed new housing units within the City, ot
in-lieu Below Market Rate .(BMR) fees to further the City’s assisted
housing needs. ABAG studies project a specific need for
construction of 1,244 new housing units in the City by the year
2002, including 461 units for above-moderate income residents. In
a4dition, the City has an obligation under State law for providing
units for low and moderate income households, which can be
partially met by in-lieu BMR fees the project would provide.
In addition, the Project is proposed at a density
consistent with the existing general plan (Comprehensive Plan) and
zoning designations applicable to ~the site.
B. 15-Lot Cl~stered Alternative
Th±s alternative assumes up to 15 single-family lots (the
maximum density allowed on the site under the City’s OS district)
and preservation of the remaining land as open space. This
alternative uses the same roadway widths and slopes as the Proposed
Project, but assumes that on-site pathways would also be
constructed. This site plan for this alternative is shown on
Exhibit 6.2-1 of the Draft EIR.
This alternative is not desirable for the City because of
much greater environmental impacts as compared with the approved
project. This alternative would require much more extensive
grading, would increase stormwater flow rates considerable and
would require the use of an on-site detention basin, would result
13
9807011~0052013
in an almost doubling of the project-generated AM and PM peak hour
traffic volumes, would result in the loss of many more trees, and
result in much greater visual impacts, particularly to Portola
Valley residences.
C. 8-Lot Clustered Alternative
This alternative assumes development according to a closely
grouped site plan, using the same density as proposed by the
project. This alternative is designed to avoid environmentally
sensitive areas, thus serving as the "mitigated" alternative. This
alternative uses the same roadway widths and slopes as the Proposed
Project, but assumes that the main access roadway would be
realigned to follow the existing graded fire road and assumes that
on-site pathways would also be constructed. Leachfields would be
constructed in areas where the slope is under 20 percent. The site
plan for this alternative is shown in Exhibit 6.3-1 in the Draft
EIR.
This alternative was designed to avoid development in the
artificial fill area in the center of the development area, and so
the proposed main roadway in the Proposed Project has been
re-routed to the existing graded fire road. This would reduce
hydrologic and biological impacts and eliminate the need to
construct an on-site stormwater detention basin. In addition,
building envelopes were designed to be located below hilltops and
ridgelines to reduce visual impacts, and to make the project more
consistent with the City’s Open Space Development Guidelines.
Lastly, building envelopes are clustered to reduce the amount of
development on the rest of the site.
This alternative is basically the equivalent of the
Proposed Project with conditions, as the conditions refer to
mitigation measures in the EIR, This alternative was designed to
take into account .the mitigations in the EIR. Slight differences
are apparent in the layout of the proposed homesites. However, the
approved project with conditions would result in less impacts from
tree loss. In the approved project, the turnaround at the end of
the main access road would be located outside of the tree canopy,
to the west of the turnaround in this alternative.
D. 8-L D" r A1 rn iv
This alternative assumes development similar to the
Proposed Project but with building envelopes / pads located below
the ridgeline. This alternative uses the same roadway alignment,
widths and slopes as the Proposed Project, but assumes that on-site
pathways would also be constructed. The site plan for this
alternative is shown in Exhibit 6.4-1.
This alternative is not desirable for the City because of
the majority of development in Sub-watershed 3, which drains
14
980701 iae 0052013
through the Strauss property, including the construction of the
main roadway through a grassy swale located on unconsolidated fill.
This alternative would require the construction of an on-site
stormwater detention basin. This condition would increase erosion
and sedimentation impacts to Los Trancos Creek, and would require
the construction of a detention basin.
E. 8-Lot Clustered Variation Alternative
This alternative assumes development according to a closely
grouped site plan, using the same density as proposed by the
project. The closely grouped site plan is designed based on the
County of Santa Clara Hillside Cluster Ordinance, requiring that
deve!opment areas encompass I0 percent of the total site area and
the remaining 90 percent of the site be maintained-in permanent
open space. This alternative assumes the same roadway widths and
slopes as the Proposed Project, but assumes that the main access
roadway would be aligned to follow the existing graded fire road.
The eight lots would be clustered together at the easterly terminus
of the access road.
This alternative would result in impacts equivalent to the
8-1ot clustered alternative, with slightly greater tree loss
impacts and slightly less visual impacts (see impacts cited under
Section 5.C., above).
F. Off-Site Alternativ@$
There are four parcels located in the City in the Open
Space Zone that could physically accommodate the project. However,
development of eight residential lots-on these parcels would not be
feasible. This includes the .Palo Alto Hills Golf / County Club,
which is infeasible as it is already developed; two parcels of the
Kaiser Cement. Corporation, which are infeasible as an alternative
because of lack of adequate access and the need for major
infrastructure improvements (which would result in ~increased
environmental impacts over the Proposed Project); and the Irene
Fogarty Trustee Site. off of Skyline Boulevard, which would not
reduce and probably increase environmental impacts due to the need
for secondary access and fnadequate response times for emergency
service from the City. Other vacant land in the area that could
accommodate eight residential units is either under permanent open
space protection, or is awaiting development°
SECTION 6. Statement of Overriding Con$idera its. The
City Council finds that unavoidable environmental impacts of the
Project, described in Section 4 of this Resolution, are acceptable
when balanced against the benefits of the Project, even after
giving greater weight to its duty to avoid the environmental
impacts, and to protect the environment to the maximum extent
feasible. This determination is made based upon the following
15
980701 lac 0052013
factors and public benefits which are~identified in the Final EIR
and record of proceedings on the Project:
A. The Project will provide a total of eight needed new
housing units within the City, and in-lieu Below Market Rate (BMR)
fees to further the City’s ~assisted housing needs.
Studies performed by the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG), summarized in the draft Housing Element
Technical Document for the draft City of Palo Alto Comprehensive
Plan now in preparation, project a continuing need for construction
of new housing to enable the City to satisfy its fair share of
regional housing demands. ABAG studfes project a specific need for
construction of 1,244 new housing units in the City by the’year
2002, including 461 units forabove-moderate income residents The
project will help meet the ABAG goals for above-moderate units, and
the in-lieu BMR fees will help meet the City’s housing obligations
under State law for providing units for low and moderate income
households.
B. The Council, in past deliberations and in the course
of considering proposed policies for a new City Comprehensive Plan,
has found there exists a substantial imbalance between employment
and available housing opportunities in the City of Palo Alto,
resulting in many persons employed in the City living outside the
City, often in distant locations. This imbalance results in
lengthy commutes for many workers, loss of family time, increased
vehicle traffic on City and regional roadways, traffic-related air
pollution and a lessened sense of community. The approved project
will reduce the existing negative jobs to housing balance by
providing new residences in the City.
C. The project represents an optimum balancing ~of city
housing and environmental policies and objectives. In approving
the Los Trancos Subdivision project the Council has been required
to consider and balance a wide range of City goals and public
objectives, ranging from a compelling need for new housing to an
understandable desire to preserve scarce remaining open space in
the Citg and minimize visual effects of the project to neighboring
Portola Valley. After considering all factors, the Council is
persuaded the project represents the best available choice for
balancing these policies on a long-term City,wide and regional
basis. In reaching these conclusions, the Council has considered
the following factors:
(I) No feasible alternate locations have been
discovered that would meet the project’s objectives. The City,
through the CEQA review process for the project, identified and
evaluated potential alternative sites that would meet the project
objectives. The Council has fully evaluated those alternative
sites identified in the EIR and determined that none are feasible
16
980701 lac 0052013
and/or would not result in significantly less environmental impact
than the approved project.
(2) Development of the site for housing is consistent
with the City zoning ordinance, which allows up to 15 single-family
homes.
(3) The project design with conditions as approved
by the City Council is superior and minimizes environmental
impacts. While the project will result in the loss of open space,
the design of the project with conditions achieves a remarkable
degree of protection for environmental resources on the site. The
project will water quality of Los Trancos Creek, provide safe
access for emergency vehicles into the site, greatly protect tree
resources, provide for wildland fire protection of the site and
surrounding areas, and greatly reduce visual impacts of development
by screening most development. In considering the various
alternate proposalswhich have been offered for development of the
site, none has any significant environmental advantage over the
project with conditions. The Council believes that the approved
project represents an optimal planning and environmental choice for
development of new housing in the City.
SECTIQN 7. Impacts Found NOt To Be Significant. The City
finds that the Final EIR neither expressly identifies, nor contains
any substantial evidence identifying,, significant environmental
effects of the Project with respect to any of the environmental
impacts, dismissed through the scoping process with "no" responses
on the initial Environmental Assessment (contained in Section 8.1
of the Draft EIR) and with respect to the following potential
impacts identified as~ not significant in Section 4.6 of the Draft
EIR.
~ECTION 8. Substantial evidence supporting each and every
finding made herein is contained in the Final EIR and in the record
of proceedings on the Project.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
17
9807011~0052013
SECTION 9. The Council.finds that there is no substantial
evidence to support a conclusion that significant new information
has been added to the Final EIR so as to warrant recirculation of
the EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 2i092.1 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088.5. This finding is based upon all the
information presented in the Final EIR and record of proceedings.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
Mayor
City Manager
Interim Director of Planning
and Community Environment
18
9807011~0052013
ATTACHMENT2
Findings for Tentative Subdivision Map (94-SUB-5) and
Conditional Exceptions from PAMC Section 21.20.210 and 21.28.020
(Revised Tentative Map dated November 1997/Revised June 1’998)
Findings for Tentative Subdivision Map
1. As amended by map revisions recommended by the City Council and by
conditions of approval, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable
policies and programs of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, in that it would result
in a division of land that would establish a residential density of one dwelling unit
per 18.9 acres and a permanent, private open space parcel of 8-1~- 87+ acres,
encompassing over :5a9% 59% of the land area. The subdivision would result in a
project that is compatible with the scale and development pattern of the
surrounding residential development and the permanent, public and private open
space lands. In addition, as revised, the subdivision would be consistent with the
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, in that it would result in a residential density that
is within the density range of the Open Space-Controlled Development land use
designation. The project, as revised and as recommended for additional design and
layout modifications, would be consistent with ~ Policies 4 and t’1 of the
Open Space Element in that, the lots and the proposed improvements, specifically
the building envelope areas, would be rcl~catcd located to protect scenic areas and
a significant portion of the site is proposed for permanent open space.
Furthermore, the map revisions include ~a relocation:~of 10t#8 ~to::an..area!~t is l~s
visible from off,Site (adjacent:to:tot #5~.’. While n’mrty several of the recommended
building envelopes would be in areas of open grassland, the recommended
locations are appropriate in that a) adequate clustering can be achieved, b) the open
area provides gentle topography (for minimizing grading and earthmovement), na’~d
c) the location would minimize impacts to mature trees and oak woodland areas,
which are an important part of the site’s scenic resources!andd~::,ibuiltlin~:hei~ts
for lots #2, 3 and7 .would:be:res~eted:to~O~¢.sto~; an~:i:a:tr~e!pl~g:ipro~
would be implemented~.on these|ots t0 ienh~ce,:the~sere~ng :of.~e~ide~ees:
Additionally, the project, as-~ee~m~:a’~te~, approVedand withcomplianee:~With
recommended conditions of approval, would be consistent with Policy 11 of the
Open Space Element, which encourages residential developments to provide the
maximum amount of open space, in that, the subdivision would not only preserve
over 8-1-+ 87+ of the site in a permanent open space but would require that a
building envelope be recorded for each residential lot, thus limiting most of the
land area for each lot for "passive recreation/private open space" use; this
combination would result in protection of over 90% of the site in permanent open
space. Furthermore, as approved and as revised by conditions of approval, the
subdivision would be consistent with Policy 1 and Policy 14 of the Environmental
2-1
Resources Element in that, a) the main access road would be realigned to eliminate
the need for an on-site stormwater detention basin, which would minimize the
quantity and effects of water runoff and b) recommendations for slope stabilization
would lessen the risk to human life and property.
The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed single-
family .residential development, in that the lots are sized and configured to be
clustered, specific building envelopes are recommended to accommodate home
development, ancillary uses and outdoor living space and a substantial portion of
the site is proposed for permanent, private open space. Furthermore, the proposed
subdivision respects the physical conditions of the site by appropriately arranging
residential lots with access to and frontage along the main access road, which by
conditions of approval is required to follow the alignment of the existing, graded
fire road. As approved and as modified by conditions of approval, the proposed
subdivision would respect the physical conditions of the site by avoiding excessive
tree removal, localizing grading and minimizing the impacts to the southern
watershed (Sub-area 3).
The subdivision design would not cause significant environmental impacts or
substantially or unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, as documented
in the Los Trancos Road Subdivision Final Environmental Impact Report (DEIR
and Response to Comments, 94-EIA-32). Mitigation measure have been
incorporated into the conditions of approval for the Tentative Subdivision Map,
which will, where feasible, reduce potentially significant impacts to less-than-
significant levels. In addition, conditions of approval require compliance with the
Mitigation Monitoring Program/Plan through the design and construction phases
of the residential lots.
As approved anti,as modified by conditions of approval, the design of the
subdivision and the proposed improvements will not result in serious public health
problems in that, all necessary public services, including utilities and access to Los
Trancos Road, a public street, are available and will be provided. The Final
Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project concludes that property soils
are suitable to successfully accommodate eight, individual septic/leachfield
systems, with recommendations for more detailed study and/or relocation of
leachfield sites during the Final Map stage of development. Furthermore,
conditions of approval require the development of an on-site water tank that would
be adequately sized to accommodate domestic water service and required fire flow.
The subdivision design and recommended conditions of approval for erosion and
sediment control would ensure protection of downstream water quality,
specifically within the Los Trancos and Buckeye Creeks.
2-2
The design of the subdivision will not conflict with the provision of utilities to
adjacent land uses or public easements in that the project layout and map is
designed or proposed to receive direct utility connections from public right-of-
ways.
¯ Findings for Conditional Exception from the Maximum Permitted .15% Roadway
Grades per PAMC Section 21.20.210
1.There are special circumstances and conditions surrounding the subject property
which warrant the approval of a conditional exception for permitting one, 400 foot
long segment of the main access road (Tierra Arboles) to exceed the 15% roadway
grade limits. Firstly, the segment of the road which exceeds the grade limits
represents a small portion of the access road (14% of the road length). Secondly,
the access road would serve a limited number of residential lots (maximum of
eight), thus generating a low amount of traffic. In addition, the 400 foot long
portion of the road that would exceed the grade limits is located in an area that is
most visible from off site. Compliance with the maximum slope grade, at this
location, would require an excessive grading and tree removal, resulting in
significant visual impacts.
o
The exception from the maximum road grade requirements at the one, 400 foot
long segrnent of the roadway is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right, in that, it would permit a subdivision design that would
reduce the amount of tree removal and .grading, yet provide an appropriate grade
and surface (scored concrete) that would present safe and accessible two-way
travel for resident and emergency vehicles.
The granting of the exception, which would permit an 18% road grade for a 400
foot long portion of the main access road, will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other property of the neighborhood, in that this portion of
the main access road is limited in length and would be surfaced to provide
adequate emergency vehicle maneuvering and access (scored concrete). While the
road at this one location would exceed the 15% road grade limits of the PAMC, the
Final Environmental Impact Report for this project has concluded that it will not
result in significant environmental or emergency service impacts in that a) an
alternative emergency vehicle access route is provided in the design of the
subdivision, b) an on-site water tank is required for reeltrired fire flow storage
needs and c) Trapper’s Trail would be maintained as a firebreak. Furthermore,
conditions of subdivision approval require that each residence be equip with a fire
sprinkler system and that a fuel modification plan be implemented.
The granting of the conditional exception would not violate the requirements,
goals, policies or spirit of the law in that the exception would be limited to
2-3
permitting a reduced road right-of-way width, as well as an 18% roadway slope for
a limited portion of the road, serving a limited number of residential lots. Other
requirements and goals for approval of the subdivision can be met or are required
to be met through implementation of conditions of subdivision approval.
Findings for Conditional Exception from Minimum Required Widths for Local
Hillside Roads, per PAMC Section 21.28.020
1.There are special circumstances and conditions surrounding the subject property
which warrant the approval of a conditional exception for the reduced road right-
of-way width for the main access road to the subdivision (Tierra Arboles). The
subject property being served by the road represents a small area would serve a
limited number of residential lots (8), which would generate a low amount of
traffic.
The exception from the minimum road width and right-of-way requirement is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right in that
it would permit a subdivision design that would reduce the amount of tree removal
and grading, yet provide an appropriate width to provide two-way travel for
resident and emergency vehicles.
The granting of the exception, which would permit a 42 foot wide road right-of-
way width and an improved road width of 24 feet, will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property of the neighborhood, in that the street
is sized (width and cul-de-sac turning radius) to provide adequate emergency
vehicle maneuvering and access. While the road width would limit on-street
parking to separate parking bays along the hilltop portion of the road, the
individual residential lots are adequately sized to provide the minimum required
on-site parking (six on-site parking spaces required by conditions of approval).
The granting of the conditional exception would not violate the requirements,
goals, policies or spirit of the law in that the exception would be limited to
permitting a reduced road right-of-way width, as well as an 18% roadway slope for
a limited portion of the road, serving a limited number of residential lots. Other
requirements and goals for approval of the subdivision can be met or are required
to be met through implementation of conditions of subdivision approval.
Fndgstm3.1st
2-4
ATTACHMENT 2A
Findings for Architectural Review of Proposed Subdivision Improvements
File Numbers: 94-SUB-5, 97-ARB-190 and 94-EIA-31
(Revised Tentative Map dated November 1997/revised June1998)
The proposed subdivision improvements, as amended by recommended revisions,
would be consistent and compatible with the applicable elements of the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed improvements with recommended
revisions would be consistent with Urban Design Element Policy 1, which addresses
the need to maintain the present scale of the City. The map, ~as recommended and
approved by: the City Council, .would be~ eonsigtent’ with R-eeommeraimt
recommended conditions of approval -- ~ .... " -: ........ ’- -’ :--: -: -- h-npr
wotttd--re~tt~ requiring revisions to road grading, implementation of a tree planting
program, and water tank screening, which would reduce project visibility.
Relocation of the main access road would also promote further clustering of
building areas, thus reducing project visibility from off-site. Likewise, the
proposed subdivision improvements, as modified by conditions of approval, would
be consistent with Open Space Policies 3, 4, 9 and 11, which encourage the
protection of scenic areas. Furthermore, the proposed improvements, as modified
by conditions of approval, would result in the realignment of the proposed main
access road and deletion of an on-site stormwater detention basin; these
modifications would be consistent with Environmental Resources Element Policies
1 and 14.
The proposed subdivision improvements, as designed and as further modified by
conditions of approval, would be compatible with the immediate environment and
the surrounding improvements. Specifically, the improvements would permit a
road design which is consistent with the rural character of the surrounding area.
Recommended revisions to the design and .layout of the map, as required by
conditions of approval, would reduce potential tree loss and promote additional
project clustering, consistent with developed areas which surround the site.
The design of the proposed subdivision improvements would be appropriate for
their function to serve an 8 lot, single-family residential subdivision. Specifically,
the main access road and emergency vehicle access road, as revised per conditions
of approval, would provide safe and convenient access to proposed building sites,
fire trails, and on-site water tank. Furthermore, the development of an on-site
water tank is appropriate to its function of providing domestic water service and
required fire flows.
The subject property is not located in an area that has a unified design or historical
character. However, the proposed subdivision improvements, as designed land as
2A-1
o
o
further modified by conditions of approval, would be in keeping with the rural
residential improvements that are present in the surrounding area.
The proposed improvements, as designed and as modified by conditions of
approval, would assist in promoting harmonious transitions in scale and character
between different designated land uses. Specifically, the project proposes a large
area of open space, in addition to eight, single-family residential lots. The
proposed road improvements and water tank, as recommended by conditions of
approval, are appropriately designed for the two land use components on the site.
Specifically, modifications to the design of the main access road (minimization of
cut and f’lll slopes) would minimize the loss of trees in the area of the project that
is designated for open space. Furthermore, recommended deletion of the on-site
stormwater detention basin would avoid tree loss in a heavily wooded area, and
maintain natural drainage. The proposed water tank could be located in an area
designated for open space; this location is appropriate in that measures are
recommended to ensure screening of the tank.
The design of the proposed subdivision improvements, as modified by conditions
of approval, would be consistent with existing on-site and off-site improvements.
Specifically, :the approved design with further recommended changes to the grading
and alignment of the main access road and emergency vehicle access road would
follow the alignment of the existing, graded fire road. T-t’fis-etrar~ The approved
design with further ::changes would minimize grading and tree removal, and would
promote further clustering of development. Furthermore, access maintenance to the
on-site water tank is designed to utilize the existing graded fire road. The proposed
road design and subdivision improvements, as conditioned and modified, would be
compatible with improvements which serve similar off-site developments.
As approved, and as modified by conditions of approval, the planning and siting of
the proposed subdivision improvements would create an internal sense of order and
provide a desirable environment for future residents of the subdivision, and for
surrounding property owners. Specifically, modifications to the main access road
and deletion of the on-site stormwater detention basin would result in the reduction
in grading and tree removal, and would facilitate further clustering of development
within the subdivision. ’
o As approved and as modified by conditions of approval~ the amount and
arrangement of open space that is proposed is appropriate to the design and function
of the subdivision and future structures that would be permitted on the individual
lots. The open space that Would be preserved encompasses a large expanse of oak
woodland and open grassland which is anl important part of the natural landscape
of the surrounding area
2A-2
10.
11.
12.
As approved, and as modified by conditions of approval, the subdivision
improvements provide sufficient ancillary functions to support the proposed
subdivision. Specifically, additional revisions recommended for the main access
road would ensure that on-street parking turn-outs are provided, as well as turn-outs
along the emergency access road. The deletion of the on-site stormwater detention
basin is appropriate, given the recommended realignment of the main access road.
Furthermore, the inclusion of an on-site water tank would ensure adequate water
storage for domestic use and fire flow needs.
The proposed subdivision improvements, specifically the main access road and
emergency access road, are designed to ensure that property access and circulation
are convenient for residences of the subdivision. Recommended modifications to
the map would ensure that appropriate slope grades along the road are met, and that
on-street parking turn-outs are provided.
By As :designed by and with additional revisions to the Tentative Map and thr0u~
compliance with conditions of approval, natural features on the site would be
preserved and integrated into the project. Specifically, recommended changes to
the grading of the main access road and emergency access road would reduce tree
removal.
Conditions of approval require that the materials, textures, and colors for specific
subdivision improvements are incorporated to maintained the wooded and rural
character of the site. Conditions require that the materials, height, and design of
retaining walls be developed to maintain the rural, wooded character of the site and
surrounding area. Furthermore, conditions of approval require that an earthtone
color be selected for the on-site water tank.
13.As designed and as revised through~:eomplianc~ ~With recommended by conditions
of approval, the natural landscape design for the subdivision would be protected and
enhanced. Specifically, the proposed open space would protect large expanses of
oak woodland and native plant forms. In addition, recommended tree replanting to
mitigate for tree .loss.
14.As recommended by conditions of approval, the plant materials required for tree
replanting would be suitable for the site and capable of being properly maintained.
Native plant species selected would require limited irrigation demands.
arbfndgs.lst
2A-3
ATTACHMENT 3
Tentative Map and Architectural Review Conditions
for Los Trancos Road Subdivision
File #s 94-SUB-5, 97-ARB-190, 94-EIA-31)
(Revised:Tentative Map~dated November:1997/Revised June 1998)
Prior to Filing the Final Subdivision Map for Approval and Recordation
In order to comply with the conditions of approval of this Tentative Map, the Final
Map and Improvement Plans shall incorporate the following revisions to the map
design and layout (suggested example with the exception of the recommended
building envelopes, presented in Attachment 4, Additional Recommended
Revisions to Tentative Map, October 15, 1997 of this staff report):
a. Realign the first 400 lineal feet of the main access road (cross section
station 12+50) so that it follows the alignment of the existing, graded fire
road (eliminate 40 feet of fill). For this area, a geotechnical engineer shall
identify appropriate and sensitive measures for stabilization of the mapped
landslide, in order to minimize tree removal. Preliminary recommended
stabilization measures (e.g., subsurface retaining wall, "stitch-pin pier
system") shall be incorporated into the redesign of this portion of the road.
Furthermore, the cut banks shall not a exceed 2:1 slope.
b.Redesign the grading for the first 1,800-2,000 lineal feet of the main access
road so that all but one segment is designed with slope grades of 15% or
less. Road grades for one, 400 foot long segment of the main access road "
(cross section Stations 22+75 to 27+25) can be designed with grades of up
to 18%, provided that the road in this area is surfaced with a scored,
concrete material.
c.Redesign the grading for the first 1,800-2,000 lineal feet of the main access
road by using retaining walls, in-lieu of cut and fill slope banks. While cut
and fill slope banks may be required in addition to use of retaining walls,
use of these banks shall be minimized. Maximum use of retaining walls
along this road is necessary to minimize tree removal. The following
specifications shall be incorporated:
1) Retaining walls shall be no higher than five feet any one location; if
a higher wall is necessary, the area shall be retained with terraced
walls.
2)The slope banks of any proposed cut and fill slope shall not shall not
exceed 2:1.
d.Redesign the grading of the main access road at the "hair-pin" turn so that
cut and fill banks transition into natural grade. This area is recommended
for tree replanting; therefore, a maximum 2:1 slope bank is required for this
area.
3-1
eo
go
ho
jo
k°
Realign the last 900 lineal feet of the main access road, so that it follows the
alignment of the existing, graded fire road that is along the hilltop portion of
the site. Realignment of this road, as recommended, permits the elimination
of the on-site stormwater detention basin (between Lots # 1 and #2) and off-
site slope stabilization (Lands of Strauss). In addition, this recommended
alignment will reduce the length of the road by approximately 100 lineal
feet.
The final map shall incorporate four, 10 foot wide by 40 foot long on-street
parking turn-outs along the hilltop portion of the main access road. In
addition, a four foot wide pedestrian path shall be designed to parallel the
hilltop portion of the main access road.
Realign the first 200 lineal foot segment of the emergency access road so
that it follows the alignment of the existing, graded fire road. In addition,
the emergency access road shall be designed so that all segments of the road
have slope grades of 15% or less (reduce grades at cross section station
38+00). Turn-outs are required along this road and shall be designed so
that each turn-out is in direct line of sight of the next turn-out.
The lot lines for all lots shall be as depicted on the revised Tentative Map
dated November 1997/revised June 1998. All lots shall be less than 10
acres in size, with the surplus acreage applied to lot #9 (private open
space/common area).
Individual building envelopes for lots # 1-8 shall be identified on the Final
Map. The building envelopes shall be configured and sized (approximately.
20,000 square feet) generally consistent with those depicted on the revised
Tentative Map dated November 1997/revised June 1998. The 20,000
square foot building envelope area shall accommodate a home site,
ancillary/accessory structures and uses, driveways and parking, manicured
landscaping and all permitted impervious surface coverage area, except as
necessary for driveway access.
The final map shall identify specific acreage area for each lot, building
envelope, private open space/common area parcel and the 60 foot wide
right-of-way dedication along Los Trancos Road ........
In addition to the above map revisions, the project engineer shall prepare
and submit detailed calculations/quantities for proposed impervious surface
coverage. Maximum permitted impervious surface coverage shall not
exceed 3.5%, as determined per PAMC Section 18.71.080 (permitted
coverage for entire subdivision). Prior to calculation of coverage, exact
site/property acreage shall be determined, discounting the 60 foot wide Los
Trancos Road right-of-way that is proposed for dedication. Impervious
surface shall be first determined for the following improvements:
1)Main access road and emergency access road
2) Existing caretakers home and barn (estimated at 7,600 square feet)
3) Water tank (estimated at 3,000 square feet)
Once the coverage for the above improvements is determined, the
remaining impervious surface coverage that is permitted to maintain the
maximum code allowance (3.5% maximum) shall be proportioned to each
lot for building envelope and driveway improvements.
The Final Map and property deed for each lot shall include the foliowing
information:
a. A designated building envelope for each residential parcel. The envelope
shall be consistent with the envelopes depicted on the approved, revised
Tentative Map and shall be confirmed with a meets and bounds description.
The Final Map shall include a note which states, "Building Envelope areas
are recorded for each lot. All development required for home construction,
ancillary uses and structures manicured landscaping and maximum
permitted impervious surface coverage (except as necessary for driveway
access) shall be confined to this envelope. Lot area located outside the
designated building envelope shall be for use as passive recreation/private
open space and limited to improvements necessary to accommodate
driveway access, septic leachfields and utilities." A legal description of the
building envelope shall be recorded with deed for each residential lot.
b.A designated Private Open Space/Common Area parcel encompassing the
subdivision land area that is located outside the boundaries of individual
lots (lot #9). This area shall~ be recorded as "Permanent Open
Space/C0mmon Area". The Final Map Shall include a note that states: "The
Permanent Open Space/Common Area parcel is a non-development area,
which shall serve as .open space and common area for the residents of the¯subdivision, with the exception of the continued use of and improvements
for the existing caretaker’s residence and barn, located adjacent to the
emergency access road. This parcel (lot #9), as well as the caretaker’s
residence and barn, are to be maintained in the ownership of the
homeowners association and cannot be sold for development or future
subdivision. Use of this parcel shall be restricted to passive recreation
(hiking, viewing), pedestrian access, roads for subdivision, emergency
access and access to the on-site water tank and other necessary utilities".
c.A note and provisions that each lot is subject to City of Palo Alto approval
of Site and Design Review. The note and provisions shall indicate that
development of each lot is subject to the procedures and requirements of the
approved Mitigation Monitoring Plan/Program, outlining the mitigation
measures of the Los Trancos Road Subdivision Final EIR, both on-file with
the City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community
Environment.
3-3
o
do
eo
go
The Final Map shall include a note that the subdivision is subject to the
approved and recorded Subdivision Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions
(CC &Rs, see condition 20).
Approved impervious surface coverage for the subdivision improvements
and for individual lots (as determined through compliance with condition
lk, above) shall be noted on the Final Map and in the CC & Rs. The
approved impervious surface coverage allowance for each lotshall be
recorded with the deed for each lot.
The property deed for lots #3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 shall include a provision/note
that this lot is located in a heavily vegetated area, containing "protected
trees" as defined by PAMC Chapter 18.10. The deed provision shall note
that removal of "protected trees" may be required for lot development. The
deed provisions shall note that the following will be required during the Site
and Design Review and development process for the lot:
1)Preparation of a tree survey/inventory to identify "protected trees".
2)Designing the structure(s) and driveway to minimize tree removal.
3)Requiring tree replanting for any loss of "protected trees".
The property deed for each lot shall include a provision which prohibits the
fencing of the individual residential lots. Private fencing for each lot shall
be limited to the designated and recorded building envelope area and
authorized by Site and Design Review approval only.
The property deed for lots #2, 3 and 7 shall include a provision which limits
all buildings on these lots to one-story in height. Theproperty deedfor
these lots shall acknowledge ~ithati~;a tree-plar!tingiprogram ~s ~required aS!~part
of the: subdivision improvementS,’ilTrees areto~be planted along areas
within orimmediately.abutting .the buildingienvelopes forthesetots.
trees are~ntended-to .enhance sereemngi0~fresidenees on these lots.and:are
to be maintained by tlae.individua110t 0wnerS:i(seecondition 5c).
The property deed for lots #2, 3 and 4 shall include a provision which
restricts the type of surface materials for the private access driveways. The
surface used for the access driveways on these lots shall be limited to a
porous/permeable material, as approved by Public Works Engineering.
The Final Map and Improvement Plans shall incorporate the required mitigation
measures presented in the Los Trancos Road Subdivision Final Environmental
Impact Report, October 1997 (94-EIA-31), and the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program (June 1998), both on-file with the Department of Planning
and Community Environment.
A detailed grading and drainage plan shall be prepared as part of the Final Map
Improvement Plans and shall be reviewed for approval by the Architectural
Review Board. The plan shall be prepared consistent with the revisions to design
3-4
and layout of the map, as required by condition # 1, above, and shall include the
following:
a. The plans shall include a detailed erosion and sediment control plan to
ensure that the potential for erosion is minimized. The plans shall also
include permanent design measures in the improvements that would
maximize the control of drainage and runoff and protect water quality.
b.Grading for the water tank proposed on lot #9. The final grading shall
require partial to full burial of the water tank.
c.The area of artificial fill (hilltop meadow around proposed cul-de-sac) shall
be regraded to its original grades, incorporating contours which re-create a
natural drainage swale with "stepped bottom" topography.
d.All catch basins.shall be stenciled with the approved City of Palo Alto logo
and the.words "No Dumping! Flows to Los Trancos Creek". This shall be
noted on the plans.
e.Terraced drains shall be designed on cut and fill slopes every 30 feet of
vertical height on all slopes that are steeper than 3:1. Terrace drains shall
have a minimum flow gradient of 6% (so that they. are self-cleaning).
Down drains shall be fitted every 150 lineal feet.
f.Geotechnical sub-drains shall be installed to maintain slope stability in
areas beneath and/or adjacent to rocked or otherwise stabilized drainage
channels extending out onto fill slopes.
g.The shoulders of the roads shall be widened, to the extent feasible to
minimized tree removal, which would provide the maximum load-bearing
surface for emergency vehicles.
A detailed landscaping plan, native tree replanting program, and ~eeplanting
program (for screening 0f~sidences on tots 2~ 3 ~17) shall be prepared and part
of the Final Map Improvement Plans. The plans shall be prepared by a landscape
architect and a certified arborist, both having expertise in large scale design using
vegetation native to the Santa Cruz Mountains and the plant communities found on
the site. The plan shall be reviewed by the City Planning Arborist and the
Planning Division and approved by the Architectural Review Board, The plans
shall include the following:
a, A detailed tree survey and accurate mapping of all trees with diameters of
6" or greater for areas of grading along the main access road, emergency
access road and water tank site. Trees subject to PAMC Chapter 8.10 (Tree
Preservation and Management Procedures, Coast Live Oak and Valley
Oak). The survey shall be accompanied by a report prepared by a certified
arborist, which provides a detailed inventory of tree size, species and
condition/health of trees.
3-5
Co
b.A detailed tree replanting plan for native tree and grass planting in the
following areas:
l) Replanting of areas along the main access and emergency access
roads, where tree removal is consistent with the Tentative Map, as
revised by conditions of approval.
2)Planting of an open, grassland area located on the southwestern
slopes of lot # 1. The lot # 1 planting area includes the "hair-pin" turn
along the main access road, where grading is required to meet road
grades.
3)Planting of the artificial fill area (meadow) on lots #3 and #4.
4)Along the emergency vehicle access road, where slope stabilization
is required.
5) Around the area of the water tank (for additional screening)
The tree replanting program shall include the following:
6) An estimation of canopy loss area .(acreage) and identification of
areas that are .three times larger (replanting areas specified above).
7)Replacement ratio for trees that are removed shall be 3:1 on a per
acre basis by the same species from locally selected stock. Tree
planting size for this ratio shall be one 24" box, one 15 gallon and
one 1 gallon container stock.
8)Tree planting densities shall be 15-foot on center for oaks and large
native trees and 8-foot on center for small trees.
9)Trees shall be planted during the fall on exposed graded surfaces.
10)Specifications for irrigation of trees (during summer) and weeding
during the initial planting and growth period (five years).
11) Reseeding of graded slopes with a native grass mix.
The tree replanting program shall be accompanied by a report from a
certified arborist, which shall include maintenance requirements (irrigation
and weeding), performance standards (a minimum 80% survivability rate
after five years) and any additional recommendations as required by the
City’s Tree Technical Manual.
A detailed tree plantingprogram :isl.reqhired~0n:lotSi’2, 3::andT~i:.to~.prOmote!and
enhance the screening ofresidencesfrom off site. Theprogramshall propose~:tree
planting within or abutting the final, selected building ~envelope :areas on..these lots.
Trees planted outside the boundaries of the envelopearea :shall:be of:a !natiVe
species (e.g., oak). The required tree size,-planting .specifications and irrigation
requirements shall be the same as required for the tree replanting plan (condition
5b, above).
The following shall be included on the Final Map Improvement Plans, with the
design and details subject to the approval by the Architectural Review Board:
3-6
ao
b°
Co
f.
go
Details for the location and specifications for street lighting, if proposed.
Street lighting shall be minimal, yet meet the security and safety standards
of the Police Department. If street lighting is proposed, the selected
standard shall be a short, low-intensity fixture designed with shields to
direct light in a downward
An enclosure for waste recycling drop-off/pick,up, located at entrance of
the main access road. The enclosure shall be designed to 1) meet PASCO
requirements for access and 2) utilize materials and colors that are
consistent and compatible withthe rural setting of the area.
A detailed design specification and materials for retaining walls along the
main access road. Walls shall not exceed five feet in height. Wood/timber
or natural rock surface shall be used as a standard for design. Use of
concrete block or pored-in-place concrete is prohibited.
A guard rail shall be placed along the down slope side of the main access
road. The design and materials of the guardrail shall be consistent with the
rural setting of the site.
A selected color for the water tank. The color of the water tank shall be an
earthtone to match, at best, the oak woodland setting..
The location and the design of the security/privacy gate that is proposed at
the base of the main access road. The colors, materials and the size of the
gate shall be consistent with the rural setting of the site.
The location and design of all fencing proposed along the perimeter of the
site. All proposed perimeter fencing shall be rural in character (no cyClone-
type wire fence or barbed wire) and designed to permit wildlife movement
throughout the site.
A detailed tree protection plan, prepared by a certified arborist, for review and
approval by the Planning Division and the City’s Planning Arborist, and
implemented prior to commencement of grading.. This plan shall include
measures for tree protection during construction, including a temporary
construction fence to be erected around individual trees or tree groupings that are
to be saved. The fence shall consist of portable cyclone fencing or wire mesh,
security attached to metal posts driven into the ground, or alternative fencing
approved in writing by the City’s Planning Arborist. A "warning sign" shall be
prominently displayed on the tree protection fence. The sign shall be a minimum
of 18 inches square and state: "WARNING - This fence shall not be removed or
relocated without written authorization from the City of Palo Alto Planning
Director. Violators will be prosecuted and are subject to fines according to City
Code 8.10.110." The purpose of the fencing is to keep all construction activity and
storage outside the dripline area of the trees. :The fencing shall be erected before
.any construction machinery enters the site, and shall not be removed until the final
grading for improvements and re-landscaping are completed. The tree protection
3-7
plan shall include the additional measures, as required by the Mitigation
Monitoring Plan:
a. Native trees immediately located outside of construction zones shall be
identified by placing stakes with brightly colored flagging around the
dripline defined by the outer canopy in order that crews will know to avoid
operating heavy equipment within their root zones.
b.Tree roots which measure over 1.5" in diameter and must be severed for
grading or construction shall be cleanly and smoothly cut without crushing,
shredding or tearing. Cuts should be made to lateral roots only, if possible.
c.Incorporate instructions to equipment operators that machinery can cause
injury to a tree and that fines may be levied for tree damage.
d.Avoidance of stockpiling soil and construction materials under tree
driplines, if the storage causes grade changes.
e.Establish limits for use and duration of machinery in heavy traffic areas,
where additional stress to trees can be caused.
f.Avoidance of storing, pouring, or leaking any fuel, oil, or chemical beneath
a tree canopy.
g.Avoidance of attaching (nailing, posting) signs, wires or other .construction
apparatus to any tree.
h.Measures for tree trimming that is necessary for grading and/or construction
clearance.
The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Palo Alto
to guarantee the costs fo~ maintenance and monitoring of the tree replanting
program for a period of five years following installation of landscaping and
irrigation.
The Final Map and Improvement Plans shall include details for the construction of
and common easements that are necessary for the following:
a. Construction and use of parking turnouts along the main access road. A
total of four parking bays shall be placed parallel to and along the hilltop
portion of the main access road. Each parking bays shall be 10 feet wide by
25 feet long and shall be surfaced with a crushed gravel or aggregate
material (no impervious pavement material is permitted).
b.Construction and use of the pedestrian path along the hilltop portion of the
main access road. The path shall be four feet in width and shall be surfaced
with a crushed gravel or aggregate material (no impervious pavement
material is permitted).
c.Construction and use of the fire access trail (Trapper’s Trail), which
traverses proposed lots #3, #4 and #9. This road shall be maintained as a
firebreak and shall provide access to the water tank site. Easements for use
3-8
10.
11.
12.
13.
of this road shall include access to the water tank for maintenance, access
for a firebreak and pedestrian for residents within the subdivision.
Final, detailed percolation tests and soil profiles shall be completed for all lots (as
locations adjusted per recommended revisions to the Tentative Map). The tests
shall include information on slope stability and potential to contaminate ground
and surface water. The tests shall be submitted to and approved by the Santa Clara
County Department of Health Services prior to submittal of a Final Map to the
City. Leachfields for all lots shall be located in an area where slope grades are less
than 20%, unless approved, through special study by the Santa Clara County
Department of Health Services.
The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Palo Alto.
The agreement shall be recorded with the approved Final Map at the office of the
Santa Clara County Recorder, and shall guarantee the completion of public
improvements. This agreement shall include the subdivider’s agreement to fulfill
Program. 13 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Housing Element, Below Market
Rate (BMR) housing program, through payment of in-lieu fees. The executed
agreement shall include the in-lieu fee program and fee payment structure outlined
in the letter to John Arrillaga, property owner, from Kenneth R. Schreiber, City of
Palo alto Director of Planning and Community Environment, dated June 2, 1997.
The agreement requires that the housing mitigation fee for the eight single-family
residential lots be paid to the City prior to City Council approval of the Final Map.
The agreement requires that a further mitigation fee be paid at the time of the first
building permit is issued for each residential lot.
The Final Map Improvement Plans shall include details for road signage, pavement
markings and graphics at the following locations:
a. Along the main access road. Signs to be posted for speed limit, turns, steep
grade areas, pedestrian crossings.
b.Along the emergency access road. Signs to be posted to indicate the
emergency travel route, turn-out locations and instructions for use of turn-
outs and right-of-way procedures.
c.Along the Trapper’s Trail firebreak. Signs to be posted to indicate "No
Smoking" and "No Fireworks". At the property line, post a sign explaining
that direct access into Foothills Park is not allowed and that violators will
be cited and fined..
d.Provide edge markers in the form of thermoplastic striping, reflective
pavement markers and shoulder delineators.
A Fuel ManagementJModification Plan shall be prepared and submitted for
approval by the Fire Department. The plan (which shall be incorporated into the
3-9
14.
15.¸
16.
17.
Subdivision CC & Rs), shall be prepared to ensure a 30 foot wide grass and
underbrush clearance around all access roads and a 100 foot clearance around all
residences. The plan shall incorporate all the requirements and standards
presented in the Final EIR Mitigation Measure 5.7-4(e).
The Final Map Improvement Plans shall include the placement of fire hydrants
every 300 feet (Model 76 type). A specific plan showing the new and relocated
hydrants shall be submitted to the Fire Department, prior to completion of the
Improvement Plans.
If a gate is proposed at the entrance of the main access road, a "knox-box" shall be
required for access by the Fire Department (see condition 6f for design
requirements)
The Final Map Improvement Plans shall include detailed plans for design and
construction of an on-site water tank. The approved tank location is elevation
+990 on lots #9, adjacent and accessible to the existing, fire road (Trapper’s Trail
firebreak). The tank shall not exceed 200,000 gallons in size and 42" in diameter.
A final water service study (including water flow calculations) shall be prepared
by a licensed engineer to determine the ultimate tank size, in order to meet
adequate fire flow supplies. Design and construction plans for the water tank shall
include the following:
a. The .system shall be designed based on the City providing a 100 gallon per
minute flow rate to fill the water tank (in order to minimize impacts to the
existing City water distribution system). The system shall be designed to
ensure that there is an adequate hydraulic grade established to fill the water
tank.
b.A small pumping station might be needed, depending upon the ultimate
location of building envelopes. This determination shall be made as part of
the final water service study.
c.The tank. shall be partially buried to ensure that no part of the tank extends
above the existing tree line. Grading plans for the tank shall address this
requirement.
d.Improvements to the access road (Trapper’s Trail firebreak).shall be
required but limited to a pervious/porous surface.
The final water service study and construction plans shall be reviewed and
approved by Public Works Engineering, the Utilities Engineering and the Fire
Department.
The water service system commencing from the outlet side of the meter, shall be
privately funded, owned and maintained. This private water system requires the
following:
3-10
18.
19.
bo
Co
The project sponsor shall secure all easements necessary to extend the
existing water main to Los Trancos Road (the proposed connection point to
he City of Palo Alto water system.
Design, construction management and all materials of construction for the
water supply system, commencing at the main extension from the existing
City water main, through the meter vault (including meter by-pass) and into
the subdivision shall be furnished and paid for by the project sponsor
(including water tank). A master meter and control valve to limit flow rates
shall be fumished to the City.
The final Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC & Rs) shall include
provisions for continued ownership and on-going maintenance of the on-
site water supply system by the association of homeowner’s within the
subdivision. In addition, Article 2, Section 2.13, Water Tank (page 6) of
the CC & Rs shall be amended to note that 1) the City will provide
approximately a 100 gallon per minute flow rate to fill the water tank (in
order to minimize impacts to the existing City water distribution system)
and 2) the water tank shall serve both fire and domestic water needs of the
proposed subdivision.
A detailed geotechnical investigation shall be prepared by a licensed geotechnical
engineer and engineering geologist, which shall include a slope stability analysis
and analysis of potential rockfall hazard (particularly, specific analysis of northeast
facing slopes of lots #6 and 7 and along the emergency access road). The
investigation shall determine specific recommendations and/or appropriate
measures for slope stabilization for all landslides and areas of instability and
measures for reducing hazards for rockfalls. Measures presented in the
investigation shall include the following:
a. The use of retaining walls, buttresses and mechanically stabilized
embankments (geogrid-reinforced earth retaining walls) in areas of heavy
vegetation/tree cover (to minimize tree removal).
b.Slide removal and recompaction with stabilized fills and earth buttressing in
open areas with little tree cover.
c.Recommended setbacks from or removal of loose rocks and/or other
stabilization devices.
d.Recommended measures for adequate drainage of all earthen and
mechanical retaining structures to prevent failure under hydrostatic loads.
Upon submittal of the investigation to the City (Public Works Engineering), the
City shall hire, at the expense of the project sponsor, an engineering geologist to
provide a "peer" review of the investigation.
The Final Map shall show the location of all lots along with easements for deed
restricted areas and reciprocal use of land for access to private open space/common
3-11
20.
areas, common driveways, maintenance roads, pedestrian paths and on-street
parking.
The final Conditions, Covenants and Restriction (CC & Rs) shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Planning Division, Public Works Engineering and the
City Attorney’s Office to determine compliance with Tentative Map conditions
and measures presented in the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The final CC & Rs
shall include the following additions and modifications:
a. Reference to all of the Final Map and property deed requirements outlined
Condition 2, above. These requirements include the recordation of building
envelopes for each lot, the use and restrictions for the permanent open
space/common area and requirements that each lot be subject to City of
Palo Alto Site and Design Review. Definitions for "building envelopes",
"permanent private open space/common area", "Site and Design Review",
etc., shall be provided in Article 1 of the CC & Rs.
b.The final CC & Rs shall acknowledge that as part of the Site and Design
Review process for each lot, property owners will be required to comply
.with the approved Mitigation Monitoring Plan/Program. This plan!program
requires specific analysis and study of each lot/site. The CC & Rs shall
specifically cite the following mitigation measures from the monitoring
plan/program:
1) Measure 5.2-1, additional studies/requirements for slope stabilization
on lot #6.
2)Measure 5.2-2, requirements for erosion/sediment control, dust
control measures and tree replacement for tree removal.
3)Measure 5.2-3, requirement for site/lot-specific geotechnical
evaluation at the time of Site and Design Review.
4)Measure 5.2-4, requirement to incorporate rockfall hazard measures.
5)Measure 5.2-5, requirement for site/lot-specific plasticity analysis at
time of Site and Design Review.
6)Measure 5.2~6, provide earthen and mechanical retaining wall design
for each lot, if required.
7)Measure 5.2-7, requirement for design compliance with Uniform
building Code (UBC) standards.
8)Measure 5.4-1, requirements for controlling dust and earthmovement
during construction.
9)Measure 5.5-3(b), requirement that private driveways for each lot not
exceed slope grades of 15%.
10) Measure 5.5-3(d), requirement for each lot to provide a minimum of.
six on-site parking spaces.
11)Measure 5.5-5, requirements for private driveways to properly align
with main access road (for sight distance),
3-12
Co
12)Measures 5.5-7 and 5.8-9, requirements for construction staging and
logistics plan during development of each lot. Construction staging
and storage must be screened.
13)Measure 5.6-7, requirement for installation of erosion control
measures during construction oneach lot.
14)Measure 5.6-8(c), requirement to locate driveways and structures to
minimize tree removal. A tree survey/inventory will be required at
the time of Site and Design Review. Tree replanting is required for
all tree removal.
15)Measure 5.6-9, requirement to an ornithologist to conduct nesting
surveys prior to construction on each lot.
16)Measure 5.6-10, requirement for site design to comply with a list of
acceptable plant species for landscaping on each lot.
17)Measure 5.7-4(c), .requirement that each residential structure be
designed with an automatic fire sprinkler system.
18)Measure 5.7-4(e), requirement to implement a fuel modification zone
around each home.
19)Measures 5.7-4(d) and 5.7-5, requirements for fire protection
measures during construction on each lot.
20)Measure 5.7-11, requirement for recycling of building materials
during construction.
21)Measures 5.8-1(a) through 5.8-1(f), requirements to comply with
specific development standards in design of improvements on each
lot. Development standards include earthtone building colors, wood
siding materials, tree planting and landscaping for screening and
completion of a visual analysis for all proposed improvements
during the Site and Design Review process. All building surface
materials shall have a ’reflectivity factor’ of less than 50%.
22)Measure 5.8-5, specific requirements for screening lot improvements
on lot #7 and #8.
23)Measure 518-8, required specifications to minimize light and glare
from development on each lot. These specifications shall include
restrictions on the colors for window glazing and skylights. All
glazing materials (windows, skylights) shall have a ’reflectivity
factor’ of less than 50%.
24)Measure 5.9-2, requirement for a site/lot-specific archaeological
survey in the event cultural finds are discovered during construction.
The final CC & Rs shall include a list of plant species acceptable for
landscaping on each lot (prepared by a landscape architect). The provisions
shall note that development on each lot shall comply with the approved
plant list, as determined at the time of Site and Design Review.
3-13
f.
The final CC & Rs shall be amended so that lot #9 is referred to as
"Permanent, Private Open Space/Common Area", rather than "Common
Area". Article 2.2 (Easements; Dedications of Common Area) shall be
amended to clearly state that sale, transfer, dedication or lease of the
property for the purposes of land development or further subdivision is
prohibited. In addition, the CC & Rs shall state that uses in this area shall
be restricted to passive recreation uses (e.g., hiking and viewing), utilities
and emergency access, and the continued use of the existing caretaker’s
residence and barn.
The final CC & Rs shall be amended to eliminate reference to the on-site
stormwater detention basin.
Requirements and provisions for the homeowner’s association on-going
maintenance and monitoring responsibilities for the following:
1)Tree replanting program, annual reports to the City for first five
years of completed subdivision improvements.
2)Monitoring of regraded and revegetated areas, annual report to the
City for the first five years of completed subdivision improvements.
¯ 3) Implementation and monitoring the Fuel Modification Plan, annual
reports to the City (Fire Department).
4)Continued maintenance and ownership, in perpetuity, the caretaker’s
residence and barn located at the southeast comer of site (lot #9).
The CC & Rs shall note that these structures/facilities cannot be sold
or parceled from the subdivision.
The final CC & Rs shall include a detailed Emergency Evacuation Plan for
residents of the subdivision. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by
the Fire Department.
The final CC & Rs shall include provisions which prohibit the perimeter
fencing of residential lots. The provisions shall limit private fencing to the
designated, recorded building envelope area, as approved by Site and
Design Review only.
The final CC & Rs shall include provisions which limit the building height
of all structures on lots #2, 3 and 7 to one-story. In ~addition,~e~cC:~i~
shall acknowledge the tree planting"program:~reqUiredforthese’tots
(condition 5c). The tree planting within andabutting the building envelopes
for these lots is required to enhance the screening of residences fromoff
site. The CC & :Rs shall acknowledge.the property owners oflots 2, 3.and7
are responsible for the long-term maintenance oftheplanted trees.
The final CC & Rs shall include provisions which restrict the access
driveway surfaces for lots #2, 3 and 4 to a porous, permeable material, as
approved by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Engineering Division.
3-14
21.All construction and grading activities proposed within or near Los Trancos.Creek
and/or Buckeye Creek may be subject to approvals and/or permits from the Santa
Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD permit requirement for all activities within
50 feet of the creek), California Department offish and Game (CDFG- stream bed
alteration agreement) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).. The
following shall be submitted with the Final Map if grading and construction
activities are within or near Los Trancos Creek:
a. A written determination from CDFG that the proposed actions do not fall
within their jurisdiction, or that a standard stream bed alteration agreement
has been executed for authorized work.
b.Proof of authorization and/or permits form the Corps, if any grading or
construction activities are proposed within the creek.
c.A written authorization and/or proof of an approved permit from the
SCVWD, for all construction and grading work within 50 feet of Los
Trancos Creek or Buckeye Creek.
22.The project sponsor shall obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater
Permit (GCASP) from the Regional Water Quality control Board (RWQCB). The
permit application would require the filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and
accompanying fee to undertake the construction on more than 5.0 acres of land.
Prior to the issuance of this permit fromthe RWQCB, the project sponsor will be
¯ required to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for submittal
to the City of Palo Alto Public Works Engineering, which is to include Best
management Practices (BMPs) for the design of erosion control and stormwater
quality treatment measures. BMPs can include the following measures:
a. Reduction of the area and length of time that the site is cleared and graded,
especially during the non-dry season (October 15 to April 15).
b.Revegetation and stabilization of cleared areas.
c.Installation of comprehensive erosion, dust and sediment control measures
such as straw hay bales, silt fences and sediment traps.
d..Straw bales shall be installed on the contour below all graded surfaces, with
each bale embedded four inches into the soil.
e.Prior to the on-set of winter rains, a seed mix of native grasses shall be
planted on bare or graded slopes. The seed mix shall be native to the Santa
Cruz Mountain area.
f.Measures to control potential construction activity pollutants such as
concrete, asphalt, paints and solvents, fuel and lubricating, oils, pesticides
and herbicides.
In addition to the above, the Final Map Improvement Plans shall include
permanent measures to ensure long-term control of drainage and water quality.
The most restrictive measures for control shall be incorporated into the
3-15
23.
24.
25.’
improvement plans based on recommendations provided by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board.
Major grading operations on this site may be limited to the dry season months
(April 15 to October 15), as determined by Public Works Engineering. Grading
activities during non-dry season months may be limited to minor clearing and
grading, provided that all erosion and sediment control measures have been
installed. Any grading within 50 feet of drainageways that occurs after October 15
(weather permitting) will require a special exemption from both the Santa Clara
Valley Water District and California Department ofFish and Game.
The following permits may be required from City Public Works Engineering:
a. An Encroachment Permit for use of and improvements to the public right-
of-way.
b.A Permit for construction in the public street.
c.A Grading and Excavation Permit.
Any construction within the CPA right-of-way, easements or other property
controlled by the City of Palo Alto must conform to the standards established in
the CPA Standard Specifications for Utilities Department and Public Works
Engineering.
The name of the main access road, "Tierra Arboles" shall appear on the Final Map.
In additign, Los Trancos Road shall be referred to and appear on the Final Map as
"Los Trancos Woods Road".
26.The Final Map Improvement Plans shall include the followi~ng plans and
documents to address utility service:
a. Improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must show the size
and location of all underground utilities within the development and the
public right-of-way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service
requirements and other required facilities. The plans must also show the
existence of any water well, or auxiliary water supply~
b.A detailed map showing existing electrical utilities that are off-site, which
serve the general area and subject property. The map shall show where
electrical service for the subdivision will connect with the existing service
lines in the area. The map shall be reviewed and confirmed for accuracy by
the Utilities Engineering Division.
c.A complete WATER-GAS-WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION
APPLICATION - LOAD SHEET shall be submitted. The application must
provide all the information requested for utility service demands.
d.The Improvement Plans shall show one water meter for each parcel.
3-16
eo The Improvement Plans shall include the design of the water system
(WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM), which shall be designed and
installed per the City’s Utility Standards for Water, Gas and Wastewater,
dated 1992.
27.The final layout and design for the main access and emergency access roads shall
conform to Article 9, Section 902, meeting specifications for emergency vehicle
access.
28.
29.
30.
The project sponsor shall contribute to the City, a sum of $6,000 toward
resurfacing Los Trancos Road (Los Trancos Woods Road). The fee for
resurfacing the road is based on the "Minor Operational Improvement!Reasonable
Maintenance" option approved by the City Council in September 1996
(CMR:391:96).
In accordance with City Council approval of the "Minor Operational
Improvement!Reasonable Maintenance" option for Los Trancos Road (September
1996, CMR:391:96), the Final Map shall include an irrevocable offer of dedication
of permanent right-of-way for a 60 foot width of the entire frontage of Los Trancos
Road. At the time of Final Map review and approval, the City Council will accept
for dedication, a 40 foot right-of-way only (right-of-way needed for minor
operational improvements and maintenance).
The proposed developmentwill result in a change in the impervious area of
property. The project sponsor shall provide calculations showing the adjusted
impervious surface area, submitted with the Final Map. A storm drainage fee
adjustment will take place in the month following the approval of construction by
the Building Inspection Division.
31.The project sponsor must apply to the Santa Clara County Assessor’s Office for a
tract number for this subdivision.
32.The Tentative Map shall be valid for a period of 24 months (2 years) fi~om the date
of final approval.
Prior to the Issuance of a Grading and/or Building Permit for Subdivision
Improvements
33.A Construction Logistics Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Transportation Division, Public Works Engineering and the Planning Division.
This plan shall address, at minimum, the following:
3,17
Construction vehicle truck routes and staging areas. The plan shall ensure
that no construction vehicle staging is to occur in the public right-of-way
(Los Trancos Road). All construction routes shall conform to the-City of
Palo Alto’s Truck and Truck Route Ordinance, PAMC Chapter 10.48, and
the route map which identifies truck routes that are available throughout the
City of Palo Alto.
All fill hauls trucks shall be limited to a 9:00AM to 4:00PM during
weekdays, to minimize construction vehicle traffic during the peak traffic
hours.
On-site vehicle, equipment and materials storage and staging.
Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
Constructibn vehicle parking shal! be prohibited on Los Trancos Road.
A construction staging area shall be established on site, in an area that is not
highly visible from off site. The staging area shall be located at least 100
feet away from drainageways and creeks.
34.A Tree Protection Statement shall be submitted to the City’s Planning Arborist.
The City’s Planning Arborist shall be in receipt of a statement from the project
sponsor or the project arborist verifying that the protective tree fencing is in place
before demolition, or issuance of a building or grading permit, unless otherwise
approved.
35.Before construction, a qualified omithologist shall inspect the project site. Pre-
construction surveys are necessary before February 15 to protect possible early
nesting raptors. Following inspection, the ornithologist shall prepare a report of
the survey findings and submit it to the Department of Planning and Community
Environmental. If nests are discovered, the City shall forward the report to the
California Department offish and Game (CDFG) and/or US Fish and Wildlife
Service. Appropriate protocols may be implemented by these other agencies,
including removal of nest or establishment of exclusion zones around the effected
nest areas. As an alternative, tree removal shall be prohibited between February
15 and June 30, or as determined by CDFG or the project ornithologist.
36.All new development on the proposed single-family residential lots shall be
subject to Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) school fees, to be
determined by the district. Proof of fee payment shall be submitted to the City
prior to the issuance of a building permit for the single-family residential lots.
During Construction
37.The project sponsor shall be responsible for overseeing and/or ensuring that the
contractors properly implement the approved construction logistics plan and
3-18
staging area. Signs shall be posted informing workers of restricted hours and fines
for violations.
38.The project sponsor shall require his/her contractor to incorporate best
management practices (BMP’s) for stormwater pollution prevention in all
construction operations, in conformance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint
Source Pollution Control Program. The BMPs shall be consistent with the
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), as required by above. The
Inspection Services Division shall monitor BMP’s with respect to the project
sponsors construction activities on public property. It is unlawful to discharge any
construction debris (soil, asphalt, saw-cut slurry, paint, chemicals, etc.) Or other
waste materials into gutters, drainageways or storm drains (Federal Clean Water
Act).
39.
40.
Dust control measures shall be imposed to ensure that temporary air impacts to the
surrounding area are minimized. Measures during construction of the subdivision
improvements shall include:
a. The watering of all exposed earth surfaces during the construction process
(twice a day or as needed to control dust plumes).
b.A~void overfilling of trucks to reduce spillage into the public right-of-way
and requiring contractors to clean-up spillage in the public right-of-way.
c.Use tarpaulins or other effective covers for on-site storage piles and for haul
trucks that travel on public streets.
d.Earth movement construction should not encompass more than 230,000
square feet (5.3 acres) in one day, in order to reduce total dust emissions to
under 80 pounds a day.
e.All trucks hauling soil and other loose material shall be covered to maintain
at least two feet of freeboard.
f.Apply water or non-toxic soil stabilizers on unpaved access roads, parking
and staging areas three times per day.
g.Sweep paved access roads, parking and staging areas daily.
h.Install sandbags and other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to
public roads.
I.Enclose/cover or water (twice daily) exposed stockpiles of soil and loose
materials.
All construction activities, except for the hauling of cut and fill material (import
and export of earth) shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Noise
. Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 of the PAMC, which requires, among other things, that a
sign be posted and that construction times be limited 8:00AM-6:00PM, Monday-
FridaN. Truck traffic for hauling cut and fill material shall be restricted to the
hours of 9:00AM-4:00PM, Monday-Friday.
3-19
41.
42.
43.
"44.
45.
All new electrical service shall be placed underground. All electrical substructures
required from the service point to the switchgear shall be installed in accordance
with the standards published by the Utilities Engineering Division.
No storage of construction materials is permitted in the public right-of-way (Los
Trancos Road or on the adjacent 7.7 acre City-owned parcel).
The following fire prevention measures shall be implemented during construction:
a. All project roadway and water system required to serve the subdivision
shall be installed prior to issuance ofany building permits for any
residential sidewall construction on the site (consistent with Section 10.502
of the Uniform Fire Code).
b.Clear brush and other potential fire fuel around construction areas.
c.Maintain and clearly mark on-site fire response equipment at each
construction area.
d. Ensure that there are instructions available and posted to all workers and
that workers are trained to use fire response equipment and workplace
safety measures.
e.Ensure that a cellular telephone or other communication device is available
on site, at all times during construction.
During construction, a qualified archaeologist shall be obtained by the project
sponsor to observe approved ground disturbance activities. The archaeologist shall
inspect the exposed ground surface immediately following the initial disturbance
of the uppermost two feet of soil on any part of the project. In the event indicators
of archaeological resources are discovered, all work shall be halted in the area for
further investigation. Further investigation may result in a requirement to remove,
relocate or cover any finds, as recommended by the archaeologist.
The project sponsor shall employ the services of a licensed civil engineer (at no
cost to the City) to provide appropriate inspections during construction of the
proposed (private) water supply system. The civil engineer shall complete
inspections during construction and installation of the water tank, water lines,
fittings, valves, pumps and all other associated mechanical devices and facilities.
Upon completion of the system and improvements, the civil engineer shall certify,
in writing, that all work was completed consistent with recommended studies and
approved plans and specifications. Prior to final inspections, a copy of this written
certification shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering prior to final
inspections. Material testing shall be provided by a certified laboratory approved
by the Public Works Director.
3-20
46.A certified arborist shall complete inspections during the installation of trees,
seeding and irrigation for the tree replanting program. Upon completion of the
installation, the arborist shall report, in writing, that all work was completed
consistent with the approved plans and specifications. Prior to final inspections, a
copy of this written report shall be submitted to the City Planning Arborist and the
Planning Division.
Post-Construction Monitoring
47.For the first five years following the completion of the subdivision improvements
and landscaping, on-going monitoring shall be required for the tree replanting
program. An inspection of the success of the tree replanting program shall be
completed once a year by a certified arborist and submitted to the City for review
by the City’s Planning Arborist and Planning Division. The annual inspection
report shall be submitted on or after June 15 of each year. The annual inspections
shall report on the success of new tree growth and recommendations for
corrections and remediation. Specifically, if the survivability of trees falls below
80%, additional replacement trees shall be planted. If, at the time of the fifth and
final year of annual inspections the certified arborist finds that tree growth has not
met the performance standards for five years of growth, the certified arborist shall
present, to the City’s Planning Arborist, additional measures and detailed
recommendations for remediation, including possible extension of the monitoring
period for up to an additional five years.
48.For the first five years following completion of the subdivision improvements, an
annual inspection of the re-graded/re-vegetated area of artificial fill (meadow at
hilltop) shall be completed by a licensed engineer. The inspection shall ensure that
the area is stabilized and draining properly. This annual inspection shall be
summarized in a report and submitted to the Planning Division and Public Works
Engineering on or after June 15 of each year. If corrective measures are required
(e.g., erosion control, re-vegetation), they shall be recommended in this written
report.
49.For the first five years following the completion of the subdivision improvements,
all graded areas shall be regularly monitored, by a licensed engineer, during the
rainy season to detect any erosion problems. An annual report shall be submitted
to the Planning Division and Public Works Engineering on or around February. 15
of each year to report on erosion and recommend corrective measures, if
necessary.
50.On or after June 15 of each year, the homeowners association shall submit a report
to the Fire Department, on the status of fire clearing activities and implementation
3-21
51.
of the Fuel Modification Plan. The Fire Department shall be responsible for
ensuring that the report in submitted and that the plan measures are properly
implemented by the homeowners association.
For the first five years following the subdivision improvements, all drainage
improvements and potential erosion shall be monitored during the wet/rainy
season.
On-going (Throughout Processing and Construction)
52.City staff time required for implementation and monitoring of the Mitigation
Monitoring Program .shall be subject to cost recovery fees charged to the project
sponsor.
Cndnstm.lst
3-22
ATTACHMENT 4
o
O9
#
=. A
0 oo
-o I
June 2, 199:7 ATTACHMENT
Mr. John Arrillaga
2650 Mission College Boulevard, Suite 101
Santa Clara, California 95054-1291
SUBJ’ECT:Below Market Rate (’BMR) Agreement for 8 lot Los Trancos Road
Subdivision .
Dear ~
oo
Thank you for meeting with staff on May 12, 1997, to discuss your proposed
subdivision, including the Below Market Rate (BMR) componen(. AS we discussed, ¯ ¯
you have proposed an in-lieu fee agreement in satisfaction of Program 13 of the
Housing. Elemen.t of the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. Staff and.the Palo
Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) are in agreement that in-lieu fees are appropriate
rather than the provision of a lot within the subdivision.
This letter describes the BMR Agreement for housing mitigation in-lieu fees.
1. The total housing mitigation fee will be collected in two stages based on:
a) the appraised value of the vacant lots, and
b) the estimated value of the improvements to be constructed.
The housing mitigation fee on the vacant lots shall be equal to 4.5 % (four and one-
half percent) of the sum of the appraised value of each of the 8 lots as determined in
i~em 3, below.
o The total appraised value shall be determined based on the fair market value of each
lot, as a fully improved and ready to build residential lot, as determined by an
independent appraiser selected by the City. The City shall be given at least 60 days
notice prior to the date the appraisal information is required. The cost of the
appraisal will be paid by the applicant.
250 Hami.ltor~ Avenue
P,O. BOx 10ZS0
P,’do Alto, CA94303
415.3~9.2441
415.329.2240Fax
Mr. John Arrillaga
June 2, 1997
Page 2
o
The housing mitigation fee on all eight vacant lots must be paid to the City prior to
City Council approval of the final subdivision map. ’
A.further mitigation fee based on the estimated value of the proposed improvements.
shall be paid at the time of issuance of the first building permit for each lot. This--
fee shall be equal to 4.5% (four and one-half percent) of the value of the -
improvements as determined using the most recent International Conference of
Building Officials (ICBO), Building Standards, ’.’Building Valuation Data" in effect
as of the date of the building permit application. The calculation shall use the
"good" cost per square foot figure and the San Francisco area regional modifier
(currently 1.13) applied to the greater of 1,750 square feet or the actual .total square
footage of improvements shown on the plans approved by the City .for building
permit. Thereafter, an2,’ addition of greater than 1,500 square feet shall be subject
to thefee. The total square footage of improvements shall include basement space
unless .the basements are semi-finished 6r unfinished, in which case the lower
basement rates specified in the ICBO data shall be used. Square footage in garages
shall be calculated using the ICBO rate for wood frame garages.
t The mitigation fee described under item 5 above shall be increased by an additional
amount equal to 40% (forty percent) of the ICBO valuation, in order to account for
estimated soft costs, fixtures, finishing details, appliances and floor coverings, etc.
that are not included in the "Building Valuation Data." The purpose of this is to
utilize an estimated value of the improvements comparable to actual developers
costs for a completed home.
For example, using the current, April 1997, ICBO Building’Valuation Data (copy
atta’ehed), the in-lieu fee on each residence, if wood frame construction, would be
calculated using an estimated value of construction as follows:
$81.50 × 1.13 = $92.095 per square foot + $36.838 ($92.095 x 4.0%) = $128.933
per square foot
The terms of this letter of agreement shall.be incorporated into the conditions of the
Tentative Map and the Subdivision Agreement. The Subdivision Agreement mustbe
completed and signed prior to the final map being.considered by the City Council.
S :\PLAN\PLANDI V\S HARE\LTBblRARR
Mr. John Arriltaga
June 2, 1997
Page 3
Thank you for your c.~opera:io~ during the planning.process on t~.s project. If you
agree with ’th~.s revised proposal, please sign this letter indizatin~ that we have reached
agreement regarding the BMB. component for your project.
Sincerely,
~d~..NNETH R. S~I.IREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community ]~avirot~:en~
Att~cl’m~ent: Building ’Valuation Data, April 1997
Sam Zullo, Mark Thomas a~d Company
Marlene Prendergast, ~Palo Alto Housing CorporatiOn
D~bra C~.ub!e, Assistant City Alto?hey~ ~a G~lliland, Assistant Plzm~ng, Offi=ial
Pau~ ~ensen, Contract Planner
agree io provJ.de a Below Marke; Rete componen,, to the 8 lot subdivision on
"l"raneos P, oad as de-~cribed in this letter dated June 2, 1997..
BUILDING VALUATION DATA
Co~! p~’r Sq,,ar¢
1.A~AET,~IENT HOUSES:~).pe I o~ I1 f.R." ..............
Type V~.Xla~unty .(nr Type IIU ..................64.00
(Gnod~ $7~ 20
T)l)e V--Wood Frame .....56.20
(G~od} S72.~20
T)p.’l--0a~,emr.’nt Garage 33.00
2. AUDITORIUMS:
"t’) pe I or II E.R .................92.30
Iyp,.’ II--I .Hour ..............66.80iype Ii--N ......................63.30type II=-- I -Hour .............70.30r).pu IIt-N .....................6,6.70
r) pe v--i .Hour ..............67.20
f)pe V--N ......................62.70
3, BANKS:Fype I or II F.R." ..............130.30[HJe I1--1 .Huur ..............96.00rype II--N ......................93
Typ’.’V--Woed Frame... 59.30
(Coadl SBI .SO
LLI$~lllelllS--Semi.Finlsl~d ...........i 7.70ICed) S~0.50UnEnhhed ................-12.80
¯ (G~dl S I S.~0
FIRE STATIONS:
r)’pe Iot II F.R ...............100.B0
[ype I1--1 .Hour ............66.20
[ype II--N ....................6~.50
{ype II1~1-Hour ...........72.60
~)’pe I,--N .................L 69.50
Dpe v~l .Hour..: .........~B.00{ype V--N ....................64.70
HOMES FOR THE ltD~RLY:
Type I or It F:R ...............$140.00Tipe I11~1 .Hour ...........128.00"i’).pe V~I -Hour ............96.0014. LIBRARIES:’)pc I or II F.R ...............102,S~ype ll--I -Hour ............75.00’~.pe II--N .....................7130ipe 111--1-Hour ...........79.20’)pc Ilion ....................75.20’)pc V~i -Hour ............74.50)’pe V--N ....................7130
1"~. MEDICAL OFFICES:Type I or II F.R." ............lOS.20Type II-- i .Hour ............81.20Type II~N .....................77.20Type II1~!-Hour ...........85.40Type Ilion ....................82.00Tvpe V~I -Hour., ..........79.40Ti’pe V~N ....................76.6Q
20.RESTaURaNTS: ¯Type II1--1T~.pe llI--H ....................90.0~T)~e V--l.Hnut .....: ......78.60Type V--~ ....................75.50
2 I. SCHOOLS:7)’pc I or II F.R ...............98.00Type I1--1Type I1~--I ,Hour ...........71.50~ype I~1--~ ....................68.80Type V-- I.Hour ............67.00Type V--H ....................64.0022. SERVICE STATIONS:Type I~--H .....................5~.20Type II1--1 ,Hour ..........."6 i .70~ype V--I .Hour ............5~.60,Canopies .......................24.70
23. STORES:’
Type I’or II F.R.’ ............72.~0Type II~l.Hour ............’ 44.S0Type II--N .....................43.30Type ~--I ,Hou~ ...........54.00Type III~H ....................S0.?OType V--I .Hou~ ............4~.50Type V--H ....................4 2.00
[) f.’e III-- i-Huur .............I 0G.00
lype III--N .....................10..2.20
Type V--I .Hour ..............96.00
"type V--N ......................92.00
4, BO\VLING ALLEYS:
Typu II--I-Hour .............i 45.00
Type II--N ......................42.00"lype IIl--I,Hour ............." 48.B0"l’ype III--N .....................45.80Type V--I .Hour ..............33.00
5. CHURCHES:
Type I or II F.R .................87.,%0Iype I1~1 .Ho~,r ..............6S.50
lype II--N ......................62.30
Type II1~’1 ¯Hour .............71.30Type III--N .....................68.20Type V--1 .Hour ..............66.70Type. V~/’,I ......................62.70
" Type I or II F.R..~ ............91.50¯type II--I .Hour ............74.30[yp~ I|--N ....................71.00[ype II1~| .Hour ...........77.20
D’pe Ilion ...................74.20" I)’pe V--I.Huur ............74.80
type V--N ....................72.00
10. HOSPITALS:
Type I o~ II F.R." ............143.80
Type II1--I .Hour ...........119.00Type V--1 -Hour ............113.$0
11. HOTELS AND MOTELS:
Type I or II F.R.’ ............89.00Type II1~1 .Hour ...........77.00Type III--N ....................73.50Type V--I ¯Hour ............67.00T)’pe V--N ....................65.70
12. INDUSTRIAL PLANTS:
[ype I or II F.R ...............50.20D’pL, I1--1 .Hour ............3S.00D.pe II--N .....................32.00I’ype III .--i-Hou~ ...........38.S0i’),l)e III--N ....................3G.20Jill.up ...........................26.30
G. CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS:
Type I or II F.R." ..............122.50"
Typu II~|.Hour ..........~..,8S.00
Type 1|1--1 ¯Hour .............87.20
Type V--I-Hour ..............82.20
16. OFFICES": "’ypo I or II F.R." ........~.,.9.1.00"ype ll--l.Hour ........;...63.00’)p’e II--N .....................60.00;ype Ill--l.Hour .......,..68.00’)pc III--~,Z’ ....................65.00"ype V--! .Hour ............63.70:)pc V--N ....: ...............60.00
17. PRIVATE GARAGES:Wood Frame .................21.50~4a$onry ........................24.20Open Carports ..............| 4.6018. PUBLIC BUILDINGS:Type I or II F.R.* ............108.60Type II~ I -Hour; ...........88.00T)pe ll--N ..........~ ..........84.20T)pe lll--I -Hour ...........91.40Type III--N ...................88.20Ti-pe V--I-Hour ............83.70Type V~N ....................80,6019. PUBLIC GARAGES:
24. THEATER~:Type I or It F.R ...............96.70Type II1--1-Hour ...........70.40Type IIl--H ....................67.00Type V--~ .Hour ............66.30Type V--N ....................62.70
2.~. \VAREHOUSES" ’:Type I or It F.R..~ ............43.50Type II or V--I. Hour ...25.80Type II or V--H .............24.30Type IIl--l-Hour ...........29.30Type III--N ....................28.00
EQUIPh~EI%q"AIR CONDITIONING:Comme~clal ..............3.60Residentlal ................:3.00¯ Type 1 or !1 F.R." ............ 43.00 SPRINKLER SYSTEMS ....Type I or II Oue;t Parking" 32.40Type V--I.Hour ............36.20 "I)’pe II--N....,r, ..............." 25.30Type V--N ....................33.20 Type IIl--I.Hour ........L.32.60Type III--N ....................29.00Type V~l-Hour ............29.70
"Add 03 percen~ Io tolal cosl for each slo,y over Ih,ee.""Deducl 20 percenl ior shell..only buildin,~s.
REGIONAL MODIFIERS
Tl~.~ol!o:...m~..~odi~ecs are re.F..ommende.d for .us..~ in .co,!i..,,~Cllon with ~h~ buiIdm~ vah.,a~ion dala, Addillonally. terra n Iota c0ndilions may reo,.,ffe lu;’l
Y PP P " eg’o a mod,iie~. Fo~ exam le. to ad~sl Ihe cost o,
0.80 x 72.00 ~ S~I .GO (ad~u~ed cos~ pez squaze
.60
""’D~ducl 11 percenl (or min;.warehou.~es.
Easlern U.S.Modifier
Co,mect;cul .........................
Del.~;’.’are.............................0.8.1
D;sldcl of Cnlumbi.’~ ............0.87Florida.....: ...........................0.74
Geori~ia ................................~lal,e.........................~ ........0.8 I
hlar).land .............................0.79h~.as~¢hu.¢elli ......................0.~4
N,..;.~ Hampshir~ .........; .........0.82r~e.:, le,ey ...........................0.9New Y0,kN,.:-.v Y0,k Cily .................1.16
Od~et ...............................0.87
Nurlh Catulina.~...~ ...............0.70
Eastern U.S. (cont.)Modilier
Philadelphia ....................0.96O{her ...............................0.83Rhode Island ........................0.9-1Suull", Caruhn,~ ......................0.70Vermo.I ...............................t).80\’ir~;ni:~ ................................0.73\Vesl Virginia .......................0.82
Cenlral U.S.
Alal)arua ..............................0.72Arkansas..............................0.70lllinols ..................................0.87I:tdi.~=u ................................0.82Io;va ...................................0.80
Cenl,al U.S. (cont.)Modifie,
t:enlucky..............................0.77Louisiana .............................0.780~.hchi~.~n .............................0;84.~,~in n,:$o.’a ............................0.66,hss,~S~pp,...........................U.71.Mi.~Sourl .............................0.78Nebraska.............................0.7SNorth Oakota .......................0.80Ohio...................................0.80Oklahoma ............................0.71Sou{l~ Dakota .......................0,78Tennessee ............................0.72T,.’.x~ s ....................................0.7,1\Viscun~;,n ............................0.8S
\V~lem U.S.~.todifier
Alaska ....................., ............t .30Arizona................................0.82
Lol AnBules .....................i .00
San Francisco ..................I.I 3O:lu:r ...............................0.94
Colorado ..............................0.8 IH~:.,all .................................1,14Idaho ...................................0.80
,x~on’,ana ..............................0.79
N~vad~ ................................0.89
New Mexico ........................0.7 b
O,~’egon ................................0.83Ulan..................~ ................0,75
\\’.1~hlnglOn ..........................
\ .)’u:,,~g .............................0.80
UUILDL~G S’I’AROAROS?M~..ch.Apdl ! 99 7
Attachment 6
EXCERPT of the Action Agenda. of the
Palo Alto City Council meeting of
May 18, 1998.
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
AND BROADCAST ON KZSU, 90.1 FM.
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. A binder containing supporting materials is available in the
Council Chambers on the Fdday preceding the rneeliI~gula r Me e t i ng
May 18, 1998
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Council Chambers at 7:07 p.m.
.ROLL.CALL
PRESENT:Eakins, Fazzino (arrived at 7:28 p.m.), Huber,
Kniss (arrived at 7:11 p.m.), Mossar, Ojakian,
Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Richard Joncas, 452 Carolina Lane, spoke regarding the Historic
Preservation Ordinance.
Laura A. MacDougall, 3059 Alma Street, spoke regarding Palo Alto
lease ordinance.
Vonnie Brown, 831 Colorado Avenue, spoke regarding Midtown homes
and maximizing of housing.
Mike Midolo, spoke regarding thanks to the Mayor and Council on its ....
deliberations of the CDBG discussion at the Monday, May ii,. 1998,
City Council Meeting.
Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, spoke regarding Foothills Park
entrance fee.
Sylvia Gartner, 824 Moreno Avenue, spoke regarding residential
construction.
Elaine Meyer, 609 Kingsley Avenue, Spoke regarding I) Downtown
library, and 2) thanks to City staff.
Annelise Emerson, spoke ’regarding Palo Alto Town Meeting.
Daniel Emerson, 1849 Middlefield, spoke regarding preservation
ordinance.
Daniel Serna, 233 San Simeon, Sunnyvale, spoke regarding agency
shop.
to Provide An Additional Appropriation for the Palo Alto
Housing Corporation to Fully Fund the City’s Share of
$2,354,500 for the Acquisition and Rehabilitation of the
Sheridan Apartments Project"
Consultant Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Lucas
Concrete Inc. for. Curb and Gutter Replacement Project
Amendment No. One to Contract No. C7087722 between the City of
Palo Alto and Deloitte & Touche for Additional Audit Services
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS.
CLOSED SESSION
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
P.UBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider a
Tentative Map application for Los Trancos Road
Subdivision(Lands of Arrillaga, AP# 182-46-010) to subdivide
151+ acres into 8-1or, single-family residential lots and one
private open space/common area parcel of 81+ acres in size.
The application is accompanied by requests for Conditional
Exceptions to permit I) main access road grades in excess of
the 15% maximum grade limitation of PAMC Section 21.20.210 and
2) a main access road width of 24~feet and right-of-way width
of 42 feet, in-lieu of the required 30-foot road width and 50-
foot right-of-way width, as required by PAMC Section
21.28.020. (continued from 4/27/98) (Public Hearing Closed)
MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Kniss, to approve
the applicant’s Revised Tentative Map, dated November 24, 1997, per
Attachment ID to the staff report (CMR:496:97) from Mark Thomas &
Co., Inc.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Wheeler moved to amend the motion to
require relocation of Lot 8 to a suitable lot in the vicinity of
Lot 5, that the buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 7 be restricted to one
story in height and that enhanced tree screening be added, and to
the extent that there is any fencing of the property that it be
kept in line with the City’s fencing regulations within the open
space areas.
AMENDMENT INCORPORATED INTO THE MAIN MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
~&%K~R AND SECONDER to require relocation of Lot 8 to a suitable lot
in the vicinity of Lot 5, that the buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 7 be
3 05/18/98
restricted to one story in height, that enhanced tree screening be
added, and to the extent that there is any fencing of the property
that it be kept in line with the City’s fencing regulations within
the open space areas.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MAIN MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND
THE SECONDER that the staff return to the City Council in July 1998
with the appropriate findings and conditions, and approval of the
certification of the Los.Trancos Road Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR).
Resolution 7758 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of
Palo Alto Certifying the Adequacy of the Los Trancos Road
Subdivision Final EIR and Making Findings Thereon Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act"
MOTION PASSED 7-2, Mossar, Ojakian ~no."
RECESS: 9:00 P.M. - 9:10 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider
approval of the Planning Commission’s recommendation to deny
the appeal of Michael Weed and uphold the decision of the
Director of Planning and Community Development for a Parcel
Map to divide an existing .64 acre lot into two parcels of
9,056 and 18,915 square feet for property loc~ted at 221
Kingsley Avenue.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Schneider moved, seconded by Ojakian, to approve
the negative declaration and the staff recommendation that the
decision of the Director of Planning and Community Environment be
upheld and that the appeal be denied subject to the findings and
conditions (Attachments C and D).
Draft Findings for Parcel Map Approval
~221 Kingsley Avenue
97-PM-003, 97-EIA-26
The Parcel Map is in compliance with the City of Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan in that it results in two lots that meet
single-family residential densities and that preserve the
character of the surrounding neighborhood as called for in
Policy I, Program 2 of the Urban Design Element of the
existing Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the Parcel Map
encourages the private preservation of buildings which have
historic or architectural merit or both as called for in
Policy 2 of the Urban Design Element of the existing
4 05/18/98