The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Report 805-10TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: JUNE 21, 2010 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT ITEM DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT CMR: 277:10 SUBJECT: Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of Site and Design Review and Record of Land Use Action for a new 11,857 square-foot single family home in the Open Space Zone District located at 805 Los Trancos Road. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal is to allow the construction of a new two-story residence on a vacant 3.5 acre creek side site in the Open Space zoning District, recommended by staff and the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) for approval. The development is consistent with City's Open Space development policies and regulations. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council approve the following: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum, prepared for the proposed residential development of the property located at 805 Los Trancos Road, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Attachment B). 2. A Record of Land Use Action approving a Site and Design Review application to allow a new 11, 184-square foot two-story single family home and associated site improvements, subject to the findings and conditions of approval contained the Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A). BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed two-story single-family home would have 11,184 square feet, including the garage and basement areas, and would be accessed by a private driveway from Los Trancos Road and a wood bridge over Buckeye Creek. Amenities woul~ include an 18 feet wide by 75 feet long swimming pool and landscaping improvements on the 3.5 acres undeveloped parcel of land. The driveway, to be located on the northeastern portion of the property, was originally used as to access a farm on the site. The proposed home site is a relatively flat and open area of the parcel located approximately 70 to 120 feet from the top of bank of the Los Trancos Creek and 190 feet from the top of bank of Buckeye Creek. All other elements of the development would be located at least 50 feet from the top of the Los Trancos Creek bank. Passive, landscaped open space and 1 from the top of bank of Buckeye Creek. All other elements of the development would be located at least 50 feet from the top of the Los Trancos Creek bank. Passive, landscaped open space and fencing would be installed at least 25 feet from Buckeye Creek. The applicant has worked with the City's Planning Arborist to refine the landscaping plans for several years. The application was submitted on May 7, 2004 and has been refined since then. The project has gone through several iterations and delay because of the requirement for additional technical studies and coordination with outside agencies. During the project's review process, there have been modifications and discussions in public hearings about the Open Space Zoning district development standards. However, the project is subject to the development standards in effect at the time the application was submitted. The project was reviewed by the PTC on March 24 and May 19,2010. DISCUSSION Visibility and Landscaping The primary concern raised by both the PTC and members of the public is the project's potential visibility from adjacent properties in both Palo Alto and Portola Valley. The subject site is located on a fairly level area within a valley in the hillside area adjacent to the Town of Portola Valley. Given the home's proposed location on a low point rather than on a hill and existing vegetation, visibility impacts would be minimal. To further reduce visibility, the applicant has increased landscape plantings, working closely with City staff, along with the Town of Portola Valley staff and their Planning Commission, and area residents to increase landscaping. A substantial number of trees, appropriate to the local environment, would be strategically installed around the residence, along with native trees at the project's perimeters along both Los Trancos Road and Los Trancos Creek (near Valley Oak Road) to better screen the development. Two native oak trees rather than palms, will be planted to mark the driveway entrance to the house. The grading plan reflects an increase in cuts and a reduction of fill, and has the home's finished floor located closer to the original grade of the site than what had originally been proposed. Creek Proximity The project is respectful of the site's riparian nature. The applicant, in response to PTC feedback, proposes to install a low profile wood bridge to span Buckeye Creek in lieu of the previously proposed culvert to accommodate the driveway. The bridge is designed to avoid impacting the creek while being consistent architecturally with the open space/rural nature of the site. The bridge will be approximately 4 feet 6 inches tall, 12 feet wide, and 15 feet long. The support structures for the bridge would be placed outside of the creek's banks. According to the Department of Fish and Game, no Fish and Game permits would be required because no work is being proposed within the creek banks. No activity is proposed along either the Los Trancos Creek or Buckeye Creek banks. BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS This project was first reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) on March 24, 2010. The PTC recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Site and Design Review application, but required PTC consent calendar review of responses from other agencies on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and to project plan revisions proposed to address a few outstanding issues. The PTC directed the applicant to modify the grading by reducing the amount of fill and increasing the amount of cut, 2 to replace the two palm trees with more appropriate tree species, to reduce fencing, and to explore the use of a bridge instead of the originally proposed culvert for Buckeye Creek. The PTC also desired the MND public circulation to conclude so that all comments on the MND could be reviewed by the PTC and forwarded to the Council.. On May 19, 2010, the PTC approved the consent calendar item recommending the revised project as having addressed all of the PTC's requests. The changes included lowering the grade of the building pad (which resulted in a reduction in fill and an increase in cuts), replacing the two palm trees with Oak trees, and the proposal of a wooden bridge over Buckeye (;reek. Staff was also able to confirm that both the staff of both Department of Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Board.had no objections or comments on the MND. Both agencies agreed that the proposed project, as revised to include the. bridge would result in less than significant impacts to the environment and were supportive of the project. In addition, the Town of Portola Valley stated that they have no objections to the project because the palm trees were replaced with native oaks. The PTC reaffirmed their recommendation that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Site and Design Review application. At the March 24th PTC meeting one member of the public, a resident of the adjacent Town of Portola Valley, spoke on the project. His primary concerns were about the visibility of the project and noise impacts. The applicant has consulted with the resident to increase screening and conditions of approval will require that onsite lighting will not extend beyond the property lines. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The project would comply with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Zoning Ordinance regulations. The project is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Open Space policies and the land use designations of Streamside Open Space and Open Space/Controlled Development. The project has been designed to protect and enhance the riparian corridor and the open space character of the site, consistent with the Stream Side Open Space and Open Space land use designation policies. The Open Space/Controlled Development land use designation, which allows residential densities from 0.1 to 1 dwelling unit per acre. Although the application was also submitted prior to the adoption of P AMC Chapter 18.40.140, the. Stream Corridor Protection standards, the project was designed to meet those standards and to protect the riparian corridor. The proposed residence also meets the standards for development in the Open Space Zoning District that were applicable at the time the application was submitted in 2004. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An environmental impact a~sessment was prepared for the project and staff determined that, with the implementation of mitigation measures, no potentially adverse impacts would result from the development, and therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was initially made available for public review beginning February 19, 2010 through March 10, 2010 and again on March 5 to April 5, 2010. The project was subsequently revised to replace the proposed culvert with a wood bridge. Because the revised project did not result in new impacts or mitigation measures, recirculation of the document was not required even though the project description was modified. 3 The bridge will be sited avoid any work within the banks of the creek and will therefore not create new impacts or require new mitigati()ns. Because the project site includes or is proximate to Buckeye Creek and Los Trancos Creek, the Department of Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Board were routed the CEQA documents for their input. Both agencies affirmed that they had no concerns with the original proposal, the revised proposals and the CEQA document. The mitigation measures were not modified from the March 24th PTC meeting and can be found in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration must be adopted prior to the Council decision on this Site and Design Review application. PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ATTACHMENTS: ELENA LEE Senior Planner ~-1~/'\ CURTIS WILLIAMS ~ Attachment' A: Draft Record of Land Use Action Attachment B: Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study Attachment C: Location Map Attachment D: Project Description and Revision Summary Letter* Attachment E: Build It Green Checklist* Attachment F: March 24, 2010 and May 19, 2010 PTC Staff Report and Minutes (available at http://www.cityomaloalto.org/knowzone/agendas/plamling.asp) .. Attachment G: Correspondence Presented to PTC on March 24,2010 and May 19,2010 Attachment H: Plan Set (Council only)* *Prepared by Applicant COURTESY COPIES: Mark Conroe, applicant Langenskiold Family Trust, Property OwnerlMarc Zucker Trustee 4 ATTACHMENT A APPROVAL NO. 2010- DRAFT RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE APPROVAL FOR 805 LOS TRANCOS ROAD: SITE AND DESIGN 04IPT-2217 (Lanqenskiold Family Trust, OWNERS) 'At its meeting on June 21, 2010, the Council of the City of Palo Alto approved the Site and Design Review for modifications to residential property at 805 Los Trancos Road in the City's Open Space District ("the Property"), making the following findings, determination and declarations: SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto ("City Council") finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. Mark Conroe, on behalf of the Langenskiold Family Trust, property owners, has requested the City's approval for a new 11,184 square foot single family home and site improvements on the Property ("the Project.") B. Following staff review, the Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed the Project on March 24, 2010, and recommended approval on May 19, 2010. The Planning and Transportation Commissions recommendations are contained in CMR:xx:10 and the attachments to it. SECTION 2. Environmental Review The City as the lead agency for the Project has determined that the project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Guideline section 15070, Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration. An environmental impact assessment was prepared for the project and it was determined that, with the implementation of mitigation measures, no potentially adverse impacts would result from the development, therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. The original Mi tigated Negative Declaration was made available for public review beginning February 19, 2010 through March 10, 2010. A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared, advertised and circulated for 30 days beginning March 5, 2010. The Environmental Impact Assessment and Mitigated Negative Declaration are attached in CMR: xx:10. SECTION 3. Open Space Development Criteria Section 18.28.070(0) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) 1 requires that the Open Space Development Criteria be used by the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council to evaluate the proposed project. These criteria are set forth below, followed by analyses of the project's compliance with them: 1. The development should not be visually intrusi ve from public roadways and public parklands. As much as possible, development should be sited so it is hidden from view. The proposed construction would not be visible from any identified view sheds (map L-4 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan). The project is located directly adjacent to Los Trancos Road, and is screeneq from Los Trancos Road by a dense canopy of existing trees and shrubs. Visibility from Los Trancos Road should be minimal. It is not expected that this project would be visible from any public parklands. 2. Development should be located away from hilltops and designed to not extend above the nearest ridge line. The proposed house would be located in a valley floor and not located near any ridges. 3. Si te and structure design should take into considera tion impacts on privacy and views of neighboring properties. Given the proposed house location at the bottom of a narrow valley, the privacy impacts from this development on neighboring residences would be minimal. Additionally, the dense perimeter screening would reduce visibility of the development from off~site to a less than significant impact. 4. Development should be clustered, or closely grouped, in relation to the area surrounding it to make it less conspicuous, minimize access roads, and reduce fragmentation of natural habitats. The proposed site improvements would all be located at one end of the existing flat meadow area to keep development at one part of the property and to maximize the distance of development from Los Trancos Road. 5. Buil t forms and landscape forms should mimic the na tural topography. Building lines should follow the lines of the terrain, and trees and bushes should appear natural from a distance. The landscape plan calls for maintaining the majority of existing natural landscaping and trees. The house would be built at existing grade, which is flat. 6. Existing trees wi th a circumference of 3? 5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level, should be preserved and integrated into the site design. Existing vegetation should be retained as much as possible. The majority of the trees on site would be preserved. The project includes the removal of 2 three dead trees (a bay, willow, and olive tree) and remove one black walnut, two bays, and one olive tree due to location of proposed driveway location or poor condition, and re-locate eight other trees that are in or near proposed driveway or are in potential fill area. Tree #21, a coast live oak (58.5" in diameter), as listed in the Tree Survey & Appraisals prepared for the project, fell during the December 21, 2009 wind and rain storm. The fallen tree has been removed from the site. The applicant will be required to work wi th City staff, including the City Arborist, to ensure that existing trees and .landscaping are maintained and that new landscaping will be consistent with the existing and the project will be conditioned to protect existing trees that are proposed to be preserved. 7. Cut is encouraged when it is necessary for geotechnical stabili ty and to enable the development to blend into the natural topography. Fill is generally discouraged and should never be distributed within the driplines of existing trees. Locate development to minimize the need for grading. The project is located on a relatively flat meadow (with approximately 3% slope from Los Trancos Road towards Los Trancos Creek). Thus, little cut (2,050 cubic yards) or fill (880 cubic yards) would be required. No fill is proposed within the dripline of any trees. 8. To reduce the need for cut and fill and to reduce potential runoff, large, flat expanses of impervious surfaces should be avoided. There are no large expansive areas of impervious surface proposed with this project. Impervious surfaces would be mainly used for the building's concrete foundation. Permeable surfaces are proposed for the driveway. 9. Buildings should use natural materials and earth tone or subdued colors. Natural building materials in earth tones are proposed. All proposed building materials are natural with earth tone colors that would blend with the surroundings. Conditions of approval will require non-reflective roofing and window surfaces. 10. Landscaping should be native species that require little or no irrigation. Immediately adjacent to structures, fire retardant plants should be used as a fire prevention technique. The proposed landscaping incorporates a large number of native species plantings which would minimize the need for irrigation. The conditions of approval will ensure the use of fire retardant plants in the final landscape design. 3 11. Exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is hot directly visible from off-site. Conditions of approval will require that lights be low-intensity and shielded from view to ensure that off-site lighting impacts are minimized. 12. Access roads should be of a rural rather than urban character. (Standard curb, gutter, and concrete sidewalk are usually inconsistent wi th the foothills environment.) The proposed driveway consists of decomposed granite and no curb, sidewalk or gutters. SECTION 4. Site and Design Review Findings 1. To ensure construction and operation of the use in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. City standards and regulations will help to ensure that the use, or operation, of the site will be conducted in a manner that is compatible with the single-family uses located in the immediate area. During construction, it is expected that there will be temporary impacts to the area in terms of construction-related noise, dust/debris and traffic. These impacts will be offset by applicable City construction standards, such as restrictions on hours of construction, the City's noise ordinance, and the mitigation measures found in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. To ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. As this site is located in, and surrounded by, single family uses, the addition of a new single family home should not reduce the overall desirability of the immediate area. Single family homes and uses are expressly permitted in the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and can be found on other nearby open space (OS) properties, such as 810 Los Trancos Road. 3. To ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed. This application was subj ect to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) , and it was determined that with appropriate mitigation measures, there will be no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed development. 4. To ensure that the use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. 4 This project will be in compliance with the intent of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and applicable Open Space policies as they relate to development in the Open Space areas of the City. SECTION 5. Site and Design Approvals Granted Site and Design Approval is granted by the City Council under Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.30(G) .070 for application 04IPT-2217, subject to the conditions of approval in Section 6 of this Record. SECTION 6. Plan Approval The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with those plans prepared by Devon Construction Incorporated titled "Langenskiold Family Trust", consisting of 8 pages, submitted on January 12, 2010, and landscape plans prepared by Heacox Associates Landscape Architects titled "Langenskiold Family Trust", consisting of 2 pages, submitted on January 12, 2010, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval. A copy of these plans is on file in the Department of Planning and Community Development. These conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted with the Building Permit application. Section 7. Indeminity To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indemnified parties") from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. SECTION 8. Conditions of Approval Department of Planning and Community Environment Planning and Transportation Division 1. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with plans received on April i8, 2010, except as modified to incorporate the following conditions of approval and any additional conditions placed on the project by the 5 Planning Commission or City Council. The following conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted with the Building Permit application. 2. The approved building materials and color scheme shall be shown on the building permit drawings for all buildings, patios, fences, utilitarian enclosures and other landscape features. 3. Upon submittal of an application for a building permit, the applicant is required to comply with both the City's Construction & Demolition (C&D) Diversion Program (PAMC 5.24) and Green Building Program (PAMC 18.44 Tables A&B). More information and the application can be found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pln/green building/default.a sp and all questions concerning the City's Green Building Standards should be direct to Kristin Parineh at (650) 329-2189. 4. Any proposed exterior lighting shall be shown on the final construction drawings and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Palo Alto Planning Division. All lighting shall be minimal and shall direct light down and shield light away from the surrounding residences and open space lands. 5. All new windows and glass doors shall be of a non reflective material. 6. If during grading and construction acti vi ties, any archaeological or human remains are encountered, construction shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall visit the site to address the find. The Santa Clara County Medical Examiner's office shall be notified to provide proper direction on how to proceed. If any Native American resources are encountered during construction, construction shall cease immediately until a Native American descendant, appointed by the Native American Heritage Commission of the State of California, is able to evaluate the site and make further recommendations and be involved in mitigation planning. 6. Perimeter fencing shall be designed to not restrict wildlife movement through the project site. Planning Staff shall review and approve the proposed perimeter fence design prior to issuance of a building permit. ' 7. Construction of the project shall be in compliance with Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of the PAMC limiting construction between the hours of eight a.m. and six p.m. Monday -Friday, nine a.m. and six p.m. on Saturday, and construction hours prohibited Sundays and Holidays. 8. The applicant shall pay the Development Impact Fees for parks, libraries and community centers, totaling an estimated 6 $3,000, $780.00, and $269.00 respectively (at current rates, subject to annual increase) for this project. The final Development Impact Fee amount will be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. Prior to building permit submittal, the applicant shall submit a Soils Engineer report for review by the Planning Arborist and the Public Works Engineering Department describing the usefulness of the excavated bedrock as fill material and for the construction of stone landscape walls. Staff shall review this report for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the effect on the natural environment. 9. Prior to the submittal of Building Permit application, the applicants shall submit a proposal for semi pervious terrace areas in detailed plans showing exactly which of the semi-pervious areas will be permeable and which of the semi pervious areas will be impervious, such that 50% of the area will be permeable. No area represented as permeable paving in project plans dated February 23, 2010 shall be converted to impervious paving unless an equal are of impervious paving is converted to permeable paving, subj ect to the approval by the Director of Planning. 10. All native riparian vegetation within 100 feet from the top of bank shall be retained unless its removal is approved by the Director of Planning and Community Environment. Replacement planting shall be required when native riparian vegetation is approved for removal. The applicant shall work wi th the Director of Planning and Community Environment to replace invasive vegetation with native riparian species as appropriate. 11. Planting of non-native invasive plant species is not permitted. Prohibited plant material is listed in the Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative User Manual Guidelines and Standards for Land Uses Near Streams. 12. Only native riparian vegetarian shall be planted between the top of the banks of a stream. 13. The fence shall be placed at least 25 feet from Buckeye Creek. The applicant shall submit revised plans prior to the submittal for a building permit. Only natural riparian vegetation shall be planted within 25 feet of the creek. 14. Nighttime lighting shall be directed away from the riparian corridor of a stream. 15. Irrigation systems shall be designed such that they do not cause soil erosion. 7 16. Tree Protection Compliance -The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in the Tree Protection Report, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the project. Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly acti vi ty report sent to the Ci ty. A mandatory Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City beginning w~th the initial verification approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11. 17. Sensitive Habitat Protection -The project site is within a rural area that generally supports iensitive habitat. As such, a mitigation measure has been incorporated into the 18. Conditions of approval which will ·ensure that sensitive lo~al species and migratory birds will not be subject to disruption by the construction of this project. Removal of any on site trees shall be conducted between September 1 and February 1 to avoid roosting bats and nesting migratory birds. If tree removal must be conducted outside this period, a survey of the tree must be performed by a qualified biologist. Should any species be found, an exclusion zone with. a radius to be determined by proj ect biologist, but no less than 50 feet, should be established. (Mitigation Measure 0-1) 17. Prior to submittal for staff review, the plans submitted for building permit shall be reviewed by the project site arborist to verify that all the arborist's recommendations have been incorporated into the final plan set. The submittal set shall be accompanied by the project site arborist's certification letter that the plans have incorporated the following information: a. Final Tree Protection R~port (TPR) design changes and preservation measures. b. Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual Standards, Section 2.00 and PAMC 8.10.080. c. precautions. outstanding items. Itemized list of special d. Landscape and irrigation plans are consistent with CPA Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.45 and Appendix L, Landscaping under Native Oaks and PAMC 18.40.130. 18. Tree Appraisal & Security Deposit Agreement (Reference: CPA Tree Technical Manual, Section 6.25) -Four coast live oak trees are protected under the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10. The four oaks are at risk from the property development project and have been appraised at the request of the 8 Community Forester. For the purposes of a security deposit agreement, the monetary market or replacement value was determined by using the most recent version of the "Guide for Plan Appraisal", in conj unction with the Species and Classification Guide for Northern California. The appraisal has been accepted by the Community Forester for inclusion in the Record of Land Use Action and Conditions of Approval for the project as follows: a. Securi ty Deposi t Agreement -Prior to grading or building permit issuance, as a condition of development approval, the applicant shall post a security deposit for the 150% of the appraised replacement value of the five (5) coast live oak trees: # 17, 18, 19, and 20, to be retained and protected.. The total amount for this project is: $46,100.00. The security may be a cash deposit, letter of credit, or surety bond and shall be filed with the Revenue Collections/Finance Department or in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney. b. Security Deposit Monitoring Program -The project sponsor shall provide to the City of Palo Al to an annual tree evaluation report prepared by the project arborist or other qualified certified arborist, assessing the condition and recommendations to correct potential tree decline for trees remain and trees planted as part of the mitigation program. The monitoring program shall end five years from date of final occupancy, unless extended due to tree mortality and replacement, in which case a new five year monitoring program and annual evaluation report for the replacement tree shall. begin. Prior to occupancy, a final report and assessment shall be submitted for City review and approval. The final report shall summarize the Tree Resources program, documenting tree or site changes to the approved plans, update status of tree health and recommend specific tree care maintenance practices for the property owner(s). The owner or project sponsor shall call for a final inspection by the Planning Division Arborist. c . Security Deposit Duration -The security deposit duration period shall be five years. Return of the security guarantee shall be subject to City approval of the final monitoring report. A tree shall be considered dead when the main leader has died back, 25% of the crown is dead or if major trunk or root damage is evident. A new tree of equal or greater appraised value shall be planted in the same area by the property owner. Landscape area and irrigation shall be readapted to provide optimum growing conditions for the replacement tree. The replacement tree that is planted shall be subj ect to a new five-year establishment and monitoring program. The project sponsor shall provide an annual tree evaluation repo~t as originally required. 9 19. Sudden Oak Death (Best Management Practices) Contractor Responsibility -To deter the potential spread of sudden oak death disease in Palo Alto, the City requires that all contractor activities and delivery vehicles perform the work according to the county and city quarantine restrictions in the attached Sudden Oak Death Best Management Practices. Violation is . subject to penalty and/or prosecution. The contractor in concert with the project site arborist shall be responsible for educational briefings of all subcontractor education of the required BMP's. contractor http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/default.asp 20. Site Plan Requirements -The final Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following information and notes on the relevant plan sheets: a. Sheet T-1 Tree Protection-it's Part of the Plan (http://www.cityofpaloalt-o.org/environment/urbancanopy.asp) Applicant shall complete the Tree Disclosure Statement. Inspections and monthly reporting by the proj ect arborist are mandatory. Applicant to check #2-7 .. b. The Tree Preservation Report (TPR) -All sheets of the TPR approved by the City, (McClenahan Consulting, LLC, dated October 19, 2009) shall be printed on numbered Sheet T-1 (T-2, T-3, etc) and added to the sheet index. c. Protective plans, irrigation plans, Tree Fencing Type -Delineate on grading site plans and utility plans, Type II fencing around Street around Protected/Designated the Tree Protection Zone Report) per instructions City Tree Technical Manual, Trees and Type I fencing trees as a bold dashed line enclosing (per . the approved Tree Preservation on Detail #605, Sheet T-1, and the Section 6.35-Site Plans. d. Site Plan Notes. Note #1 -Apply to the site plan stating, "All tree protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations, watering and construction scheduling shall be ·implemented in full by' owner and contractor, as stated in the Tree Protection Report on Sheet T-1 and the approved plans". Note #2. All civil plans, grading plans, irrigation plans, site plans and utility plans and relevant sheets shall include a note applying to the trees to be protected, including neighboring trees stating: "Regulated Tree--before working in this area contact the Project Site Arborist at (650-326- 8781"; Note #3. "Any work in a TPZ or around roots wi thin the Buckeye Creek Bypass Culvert/Bridge shall be conducted under the direct supervision of the project site arborist". Any variance from this procedure requires City Arborist approval, please call (650) 329-2441." Note #4. Utility plan sheets shall include the following 10 note: "Utility trenching shall not occur wi thin the TPZ of the protected tree. Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that no trenching occurs wi thin the TPZ of the protected tree by contractors, City crews or final landscape workers. See sheet T-1 for instructions." e. Access Road Plan Submittal Details -The private driveway road connection to Los Trancos Road requiring fill and substantial elevation lift over existing tree roots to be preserved shall specify use of Biaxial Geogrid Tensar and ENGINEERED SOIL MIX (ESM). Engineered Soil Mix base material shall be utilized in specified areas to achieve normal shade tree rooting potential and maximum service life of the parking surface and curbs in parking and compacted areas. Plans and Civil Drawings shall use CPA Public Works Engineering Specifications, Section 30 and Detail #604, designate the areas of use with cross-hatch symbol. The installation of materials shall be the subject of project site arborist inspection and approval. 21. Provide the following on Landscape Plans - a. Project landscape shall be developed in substantial compliance with the Landscape Site Plan received dated 10/27/2009 with the following exceptions or additions. b. The Riparian Co~ridorfrom top of bank to the 100' mark and any disturbed area wi thin the proj ect limits to Los Trancos Road shall be applied with the Palo Alto Hydroseed Mix for Los Trancos Watershed available from planning staff. c. Provide a detailed landscape and irrigation plan with a Landscape Water Use statement, water use calculations and a statement of design intent shall be submitted for the proj~ct. A licensed landscape architect and qualified "irrigation consultant will prepare these plans, to include: i. All existing trees identified both "to be retained and removed including street trees. ii. Complete plant list indicating tree and plant species, quantity, size, and locations. iii. Irrigation schedule and plan. iv. Fence locations. v. Lighting plan with photometric data ( if applicable) . 11 vi. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival. vii. Automatic irrigation shall be provided to all trees. For trees, PW Detail #513 shall be included on the irrigation plans and show two bubbler heads mounted on flexible tubing placed at the edge of the root ball. Bubblers shall not be mounted inside an aeration tube. The tree irrigation system shall be connected to a separate valve from other shrubbery and ground cover, pursuant to the City's Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. viii. Landscape Plan shall ensure the backflow device is adequately obscured with the appropriate screening to minimize visibility (planted shrubbery is preferred, painted dark green, decorative boulder covering acceptable; wire cages are discouraged) . 22. Fenced enclosures shall be erected around trees to be protected to achieve three primary functions, 1) to keep the foliage canopy and branching structure clear from contact by equipment, materials and activities; 2) to preserve roots and soil conditions in an intact and non-compacted state and 3) to identify the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) in which no soil disturbance is permitted and activities are restricted, unless otherwise approved. 23. Tree fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction begins and remain in place until final inspection of the project, except for work specifically allowed in the TPZ. Work in the TPZ requires approval by the project arborist or City Arborist (in the case of work around Street Trees). The following tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be retained: • No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the tree enclosure area. • The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be altered. • Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival. • Watering Schedule. All trees to be retained shall receive monthly watering as identified in the,Tree Protection Plan during all phases of construction per the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.45. A written log of each application of water shall be kept at the site. The City Planning Arborist shall be in receipt of this log before final inspection is requested. 24. Verification Mandatory Landscape Architect to the City. The LA of record 12 (LA) shall Inspection verify the performance measurements are achieved with a separate letter of verification to City Planning staff, in addition to owner's representative for each of the following: i. Percolation & drainage checks have been performed and are acceptable. ii. Fine grading inspection of all plantable areas has been personally inspected for tilling depth, rubble removal, soil test amendments are mixed and irrigation trenching will not cut through any tree roots. iii. Tree and Shrub Planting Specifications, including delivered stock, meets Standards in the CPA Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.30-3.50. Girdling roots and previously topped trees are subject to rejection. 23. Tree Protection Verification -Prior to demolition, grading or building permit issuance, a written verification from the contractor that the required protective fencing is in place shall be submitted to the Building Inspections Division. The fencing shall contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project. 24. Excavation Restrictions Apply (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D) - Any approved grading, digging or trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be preformed using 'air-spade' method as a preference, with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching, including sewer line, roots exposed with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain intact and not be damaged. If directional boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots, then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans. 25. Plan Changes -Revisions and/or changes to plans before or during construction shall be reviewed and responded to by the project site arborist, (McClenahan Consulting, LLC, 650-326-8781) with written letter of acceptance before submitting the revision to the city for review. 26. Conditions -All Planning Department .conditions of approvai for the project shall be printed on the second page of plans submitted for building permit. 27. Tree Protection Compliance -The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in the TPR, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the proj ect. Proj ect arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly 13 acti vi ty report sent to the City. A mandatory Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City beginning with the initial verification approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11. 28. Tree Damage Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor. Reporting, injury mitig~tion measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply pursuant to TTM, Section 2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible, for the repair or replacement of any publicly owned or protected trees that are damaged during the course of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree Technical Manual, Section 2.25. 29. General The following general tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be retained: No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the tree enclosure area. The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be altered. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival. 30. Landscape Inspection -Prior to occupancy, the Planning Department shall be in receipt of written verification that the Landscape Architect has inspected all trees, shrubs, planting and irrigation and that they are installed and functioning as specified in the approved plans. 31. Tree Inspection -Prior to occupancy, the contractor shall call for an inspection by the Proj ect Arborist. A final inspection and report by the project arborist shall evaluate all trees to be retained and protected, as indicated in the approved plans, the activity, health, welfare, mitigation remedies for injury, if any, and for the long term care of the trees for the new owner. The report shall provide written verification to the Planning Department that all trees, shrubs, planting and irrigation are installed and functioning as specified in the approved plans. The final arborist report shall be provided to the Planning Department prior to written request for temporary or final occupancy. The final report may be used to navigate the security guarantee return process, when applicable. 32. Planning Inspection Prior to final sign off, contractor or owner shall contact the city planner (650-329-2441) to inspect and verify Special Conditions relating to the conditions for structures, fixtures, colors and site plan accessories. 33. Maintenance -All landscape and trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned according to Best Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2001 or current 14 version) . Any vegetation that dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation repaired by the current property owner within 30 days of discovery. 34. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a detailed landscape plan for both the disturbed areas of the site and the construction and access areas. The landscape plan shall specify all disturbed or compacted soil areas prepared and seeded using Palo Alto Hydroseeding Specification for the Los Trancos Watershed Area. 35. The staging, storage and parking area shall be crosshatched in a designated section in the open hill area and not in the dripline of any tree. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain and submit all required permits or letters that permits are not needed from outside agencies, including the Department of Fish and Game and the US Army Corps of Engineers, for the proposed bridge and creek work as appropriate. 37. Lighting to comply with Open Space District requirements. 38. No construction is allowed during weekends. Construction shall comply with the requirements of the PAMC. 39. During construction, the site shall be kept clear of debris on a daily basis. 40. All noise producing equipment shall be consistent with PAMC noise requirements. 41. The fire sprinkler system shall be fed through domestic water service or the swimming pool. 42. Prior to issuance of a building permit, planning staff shall review and approve of the amount of proposed lawn area. 43. The project would be subject to the City's standard conditions of approval regarding dust minimization during construction: • All active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily. • All trucks hauling soil, sand, and loose materials shall be covered or shall retain at least two feet of freeboard. 15 • All paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site shall be swept and. watered daily. • Submit a plan for the recovery/recycling of demolition waste and debris before the issuance of a demolition permit. • Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Department of Public Works Engineering Division 44. The applicant shall implement the construction techniques and erosion control measures required by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department and requirements listed in the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc. (dated September 2007) would reduce the geotechnical impacts to a less than significant level. (Mitigation Measure F-1): Such measure/s shall include: a. A grading permit will be required. Include a table on the site plan showing the quantities of cut and fill. b. The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. The overland flow path of the expected periodic high-flow creek flooding should be shown on the building permit submittal drawings. Adjacent grades must slope away from the house a minimum of 2%. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales, inlets and outlets. 45. The applicant shall submit construction management plan for review and approval by the Public Works Department (secured before building permit issuance) which includes the following: a. Traffic control measures during grading and construction activities, and delivery of construction materials, shall be detailed as part of the construction management plan. 46. The applicant has agreed to include the following construction management measures that will help reduce the Project's GHG emissions: a. The contractor will be required to reduce emissions through any of the following options or others that achieve 16 reduction in overall emissions: use late-model engines, low emission diesel products or alternative fuels (e.g., Lubrizol, Puri NOx, biodisel fuel) in all heavy duty off-road equipment. b. The contractor will be required to minimize idling time for all heavy-duty equipment when not engaged in work activities, inbluding on-road haul trucks while being loaded or unloaded onsite. The contractor will also ensure proper maintenance of these construction vehicles and equipments, such as tuning up and filtering of the mufflers-of the vehicles. c. A City-approved Construction Waste program will be in place prior to start of proj ect construction. The Plan will demonstrate the diversion from landfills and recycling of all nonhazardous, salvageable and re-useable wood, metal, plastic and paper products during construction. 47. The applicant shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMP's) to be incorporated into a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project. The SWPPP shall include both temporary BMP's to be implemented during demolition and construction. 48. The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention -It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from Public Works at the Development Center or on our website. The following conditions shall be incorporated on this sheet:AII active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily. a. All trucks hauling soil, sand, and loose materials shall be covered or shall retain at least two feet of freeboard. b. All paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site shall be swept and watered daily. c . Submit a plan for the recovery/recycling of demolition waste and debris before the issuance of a demolition permit. d. Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. 49. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the proposed "stone wall" cited in Mr. Conroe's memo received on February 26, 2010 should be reviewed by Public Works Engineering staff to determine whether it reasonably protects the new house and swimming pool from potential flooding from the creek. 17 Fire Department 50. A fire sprinkler system shall be provided which meets the requirements of NFPA Standard No. 13, 2002 Edition. (PAMC 15.04.160) . 51. All mitigation Department to address fire incorporated into the design. measures hazards identified on this by site the must Fire be 52. Provide a 100 foot defensible space between the house and wildland interface and include a minimum 30 foot irrigated wet band around structures. 53. In areas with slopes in excess of ten percent, the driveway surface shall be engineered to provide adequate wet traction to emergency vehicles. Prior to building permit, an engineering study of the adequacy of the material chosen may be required by the Fire Department. Total impervious areas on the site shall be limited not to exceed 3.5%. Utilities Department Electrical Engineering 54. Applicant/Developer must notify Utilities Engineering (Electric) if the proposed renovation/change of use has any impact on the existing electrical service size, voltage, or location. If there are any changes, the Utilities will provide comments and/or conditions along with any applicable fees and cost estimate. Water, Gas, Wastewater Prior to Submittal for Building Permits 55. The applicant shall submit a completed Utilities Application/Load Sheet for each unit for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in g.p.m.). 56. The applicant shall submit 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, and any other required utilities. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 57. For contractor installed water mains or services, the applicant shall submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department two copies of the installation plans of water utilities The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of 18 work, method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. 58. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with the installation of the new utility service/s to be installed by the City of Palo Alto Utilities. The approved relocation of services, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity requesting the relocation. 59. Each unit, parcel or place of business shall have its own water meter shown on the plans. 60. the City of wastewater. All utility installations shall be in accordance with Palo Alto utility standards for water, gas & 61. The applicant shall submit calculations by a registered civil engineer to show that the on-site and off site water, sewer and fire systems are capable of serving the needs of the development and adjacent properties during peak flow demands. 62. The applicant shall provide temporary construction access on both sides of the creek to avoid having to impact Buckeye Creek during construction. SECTION 9. Term of Approval Site and Design Approval. In the event actual construction of the project is not commenced within two years of the date of City Council approval, the approvals shall expire and be of no further force or effect, pursuant to Palo Al to Municipal Code Section 18.30(G) .080. PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: 19 ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: APPROVED: Director of Planning and Community Environment 1. Those plans prepared by Devon Construction Incorporated titled "Langenskiold Family Trust", consisting of 8 pages, dated received on April 28, 2010, and landscape plans prepared by Heacox Associates Landscape Architects titled "Langenskiold Family Trust", dated received April 28, 2010. 20 City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2441 FAX (650) 329-2154 www.cityofpaloalto.org ATTACHMENT:·B Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration A notice, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code 21,000, et that the . . will not have a· . ant effect on the environment: Notice is hereby given that a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Revised March 4,2010) has been prepared by the Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment for the project listed above. In accordance with A.B. 866, this document will be available for review and comment during a minimum 30- day inspection period. Public Comments regarding the correctness, completeness, or adequacy of this mitigated negative declaration are invited and must be received on or before the hearing date. Such comments should be based on specific environmental concerns. Written comments should be addressed to the City of Palo Alto. Oral comments may be made at the hearing. A file containing additional information on this project may be reviewed at the Planning Office under the file number appearing at the top of this form. For additional information regarding this project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, please contact Elena Lee at (650) 617-3196 (1) Palo Alto Planning Department at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (2) Palo Alto Development Center at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Biological Resources Mitigation Measure D-l: Removal of anyon-site trees shall be conducted between September 1 and February 1 to avoid roosting bats and nesting migratory birds. If tree removal must be. conducted outside this period, a survey of the tree must be performed by a qualified biologist., Should any I species be found, an exclusion zone with a radius to be determined by project biologist, but no less than 50 feet, should be established. Geology, Soils and Seismicity Mitigation Measure F-l: Implementation of the construction techniques and erosion control measures required by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department and requirements listed in the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc. (dated September 2007) would reduce the geotechnical impacts to a less than significant level. Such measures include: • A grading permit will be required. Include a table on the site plan showing the quantiti~s of cut and fill. • The plan set must include a grading and drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Adjacent grades· must slope away from the house a minimum·of 2%. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales~ inlets and outlets. Prepared by: Approved by: ::!lILt/tv Date ~ Date ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. PROJECT TITLE 805 Los Trancos (Langenskiold Home) 805 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, California 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton A venue Palo Alto, CA 94303 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Elena Lee City of Palo Alto (65d) 617-3196 4. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS Langenskiold Family Trust Attn: Mark Conroe 1390 Market Street, #112 San Francisco, CA 94102 5. APPLICATION NUMBER 04IPT-2217 6. PROJECT LOCATION 805 Los Trancos Road Palo Alto, CA The project site is a vacant parcel of land (APN 182-36-022) located in the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains in the western portion of the City of Palo Alto, in the northern part of Santa Clara 805 Los Trancos Road Page 1 Mitigated Negative Declaration County, west of Interstate 280, as shown on Figure 1, Regional Map. The property is accessed via frontage onto Los Trancos Road, as shown on Figure 2, Vicinity Map. 7. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: The majority of the site is designated as Streamside Open Space because of its proximity to Los Trancos Creek. A small portion of the southeastern comer of the lot is designated Open Space/Controlled Development per the Palo Alto 1998 -2010 Comprehensive Plan. 8. ZONING The 805 Los Trancos Road site is in the Open Space District (OS), regulated by the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.28. The as district is intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; protect and preserve open space land as a limited and valuable resource; permit the reasonable use of open space lands, while at the same time preserving and protecting its inherent open space characteristics to assure its continued availability for the following: as agricultural land, scenic land, recreation land, conservation or natural resource land; for the containment of urban sprawl and the structuring of urban development; and for the retention of land in its natural or near-natural state, and to protect life and property in the community from the hazards of fire, flood, and seismic activity; and; coordinate with and carry out federal, state, regional, county, and city open space plans. Single-family uses are permitted in this zone district. 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is the construction of a new two-story, 11,184 square foot single-family home (which includes the garage and basement areas) on the 154,479 square foot undeveloped site with minimal grading (2270 cubic yards of cut, 625 cubic yards of fill), an access drive from Los Trancos Road, amenities including a swimming pool, and relocation of four mature olive trees. The home is to be located on a relatively flat and open area of the site, approximately 70 to 120 feet from the Los Trancos Creek bank (top) and all other elements of the development would be located at least 50 feet from the top of bank. A natural earth berm would be constructed approximately 50 feet from the top of the Los Trancos Creek bank to protect the riparian corridor. The improvements also include construction of a 4-foot 6-inch tall by 15 feet wide dark wood bridge to allow for Buckeye Creek to continue to flow undisturbed through the site. The remainder of the creeks will be maintained undisturbed. 10. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING The 3.55 acre project site is located in the Palo Alto Foothills. The site is located in an area predominately characterized by publicly and privately owned open space. The property is bordered by Los Trancos Creek to the west and the Town of Portola Valley beyond, Los Trancos Road to the north and east, and a vacant parcel to the south. The existing site has no above grade improvements. Views from the portion of the site to be improved and constructed on are to the west towards Portola Valley. A small segment of Buckeye Creek traverses a narrow center portion of the site, which eventually connects to Los Trancos Creek offsite to the west. The creek originally ran along the southern boundary of the property to Los Trancos .Creek. However, approximately 50-80 years ago, a concrete culvert was constructed offsite southeast of the 805 Los Trancos Road Page 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration property to artificially redirect the creek, which is why the current path is considered a bypass. Buckeye Creek is both fairly shallow and narrow. It measures approximately three to five feet in width, measured to the top of bank. 11. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES • County of Santa Clara, Office of the County Clerk-Recorder • Santa Clara Valley Water District • Department of Fish and Game • California State Clearinghouse ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. [A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).] 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is'substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "(Mitigated) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (C)(3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, 805 Los Trancos Road Page 3 Mitigated Negative Declaration and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS The following Environmental Checklist was used to identify environmental impacts, which could occur if the proposed project is implemented. The left-hand column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each question. The sources cited are identified at the end of the checklist. Discussions of the basis for each answer and a discussion of mitigation measures that are proposed to reduce potential significant impacts are included. A. AESTHETICS Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Resources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Would the project: Mitigation Incorporated a) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1,5 X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on a 1,2- public view or view corridor? MapL4,5 X c) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock 1,2- outcroppings, and historic buildings within MapL4 X a state scenic highway? d) Violate existing Comprehensive Plan policies regarding visual resources? 2,5 X e) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1,5 X f) Substantially shadow public open space (other than public streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 1,5 X p.m. from September 21 to March 21? 805 Los Trancos Road Page 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The project site is located in the northwest portion of Santa Clara County on the eastern slope of the Santa Cruz Mountains in the Palo Alto foothills. The topography of the site is relatively flat with a downward slope at roughly a 3% grade from Los Trancos Road to Los Trancos Creek. The perimeter of the site is heavily vegetated. The building would not obstruct a public view corridor and is not located within a state scenic highway. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan relative to visual resources. The site is a single vacant parcel to be developed with a single-family home. The proposed structure will be intermittently visible through the existing foliage and trees from the adjacent Los Trancos Road. Site development will occur on the southern portion of the site, which will leave it potentially visible from the slopes located to the west of the site. Views from neighboring slopes to the east and south will be minimal, given the dense screening that will be directly adjacent to the home. The building materials have been chosen to blend with the natural surroundings. A light-colored natural stone will' be used for the base of many of the permeable areas that surround the home. Muted, natural colors have been chosen for both the siding and stucco that will constitute the majority of the wall areas that may be visible from both on and off-site. A treated and stained wood has been selected for all doors, window frames and railings that should, help reduce the reflectivity of these elements. A non-reflective roof material, Spanish style clay tiles, in keeping with the overall architectural theme of the home, has been chosen to mitigate any sun reflection that may naturally arise at given times during the daylight hours. The proposed bridge is a low scale structure that'is consistent with the rural character of the site. Other than the structure itself, very little impervious hardscape is proposed with this project. All driveway surfaces, as well as the majority of walkways and outdoor areas, are to remain either natural or will make use of permeable materials. Overall, the project will not exceed the maximum impervious area permitted in this zone district (see Section I, Land Use Planning). Substantial perimeter vegetation with trees surrounds the site and would help screen the development ,from off-site views. The majority of trees will be maintained onsite. The project also includes the planting of 26 additional trees, ground cover and shrubs that are consistent with the rural character of the area. The development of the site may result in light and glare generated from within the building and window glazing. City's standard conditions of approval will ensure the light and glare impacts of the project will be less than significant. The conditions <?f approval require the shielding of lighting such that the light does not extend beyond the site, the lighting will be directional, and the source of light is not directly visible. The project submittal includes full architectural and landscaping plans, site sections, color palette, material samples, and story poles erected on site. The project will be reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council to ensure that the potential aesthetic impacts will be reduced by the preservation of the natural screening features of the site. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 5 Mitigated Negative Declaration The project will be reviewed in public hearings by the Planning and Transportation Commission and by City Council to ensure that the potential aesthetic impacts will be mitigated. The project would be subject to the City's standard conditions of approval requiring new windows and glass doors to be of a non reflective material, lighting to be minimal, directed down and shielded from the surrounding properties and open space lands and construction drawings to include any proposed exterior lighting for Planning staff review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure: None required. B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation. as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No a) b) c) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California 1,10 X Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural 1,2- use, or a Williamson Act contract? MapL9, 11 X Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 1,2 X DISCUSSION: The site is not located in a "Prime Farmland", "Unique Farmland", or "Farmland of Statewide Importance" area, as shown on the maps prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Although the site was formerly used for agricultural uses, it is not zoned for agricultural use, and is not regulated by the Williamson Act. Mitigation Measures: None required. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 6 Mitigated Negative Declaration c. AIR QUALITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Conflict with or obstruct with implementation of the applicable air quality plan (1982 Bay 1,2 X Area Air Quality Plan & 2000 Clean Air Plan)? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air 1,2 X quality violation indicated by the following: i. Direct and/or indirect operational X emissions that exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) criteria air pollutants of 80 pounds per day and/or 15 tons per year for nitrogen oxides (NO), reactive organic gases (ROG), and fine particulate matter of less than 10 microns in diameter (PM 10); ii. Contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations exceeding the State Ambient Air Quality Standard of nine parts per million (ppm) averaged over eight hours or 20 ppm for one hour( as demonstrated by CALlNE4 modeling, which would be performed when a) project CO emissions exceed 550 pounds per day or 100 tons per year; or b) project traffic would impact intersections or roadway links operating at Level of Service (LOS) D, E or F or would cause LOS to decline to . D, E or F; or c) project would increase traffic volumes on nearby roadways by X 10% or more)? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an ....... applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (includi,ng releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone 1,2,5 X precursors) ? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels of toxic air contaminants? 1,2,12 X i. Probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEl) X exceeds lOin one million ii. Ground-level concentrations of non-X carcinogenic T ACs would result in a hazard index greater than one (1) for the MEl e) Create objectionable odors affecting a 805 Los Trancos Road Page 7 Mitigated Negative Declaration t) Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated substantial. number of people? 1 X Not implement all applicable construction emission control measures recommended in the . Bay Area Air Quality Management District 1,2,3,12 X CEQA Guidelines? DISCUSSION: The City of Palo Alto uses the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) thresholds of significance for air quality impacts, as follows: Construction Impacts: The project would involve grading, paving and landscaping which has the potential to cause localized dust related impacts resulting in increases in particulate matter (PM lO). Dust related impacts are considered potentially significant but would be minimized with the application of standard dust control· measures. Construction equipment would also emit NO x and ROC. However, in order for emissions from construction equipment to be considered significant, the project must involve the extensive use of construction equipment over a long period of time. Based on the size of the proposed project, emissions of NO x and ROC are anticipated to be less than significant. Long Term Impacts: Long-term and operational project emissions would primarily stem from motor . vehicles associated with the proposed project. The project is not expected to result in a large number of new vehicle trips as this is a single-family dwelling. Therefore, long-term air-quality impacts related to motor vehicles are expected to be less than significant. Sensitive receptors are defined as children, elderly, or ill people who can be adversely affected by air quality problems. The project is on 3.55 acres and is not immediately adjacent to dense housing or other sensitive receptors. The project is not expected to have a significant impact on air quality. The proposed project, a residential use, does not typically create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The project is not expected to create objectionable odors when the project is complete. The project would be subject to the City's standard conditions of approval regarding dust minimization during construction: • All active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily. • All trucks hauling soil, sand, and loose materials shall be covered or shall retain at least two feet of freeboard. • All paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site shall be swept and watered daily. • Submit a plan for the recovery/recycling of demolition waste and debris before the issuance of a demolition permit. • Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Mitigation Measures: None required. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 8 Mitigated Negative Declaration D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional 1,2- plans, policies, or regulations, or by the MapN-California Department of Fish and Game or u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service? 1,7 X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, including federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 1,2-of the Clean Water Act (including, but not MapN-limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological 1,7 X interruption, or other means? c) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife 1,2- species or with established native resident or MapN- migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use 1,7 X of native wildlife nursery sites? d) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree 1,2,5,7,9 preservation policy or as defined by the City of 8,9, Palo Alto's Tree Preservation Ordinance 12,13 X (Municipal Code Section 8.10)? e) Conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, 1,2,7 X regional, or state habitat conservation plan? DISCUSSION: While no sensitive or protected species of plant or animal life have been directly observed on the site, the project site is within a rural area that generally supports sensitive habitat. As such, a mitigation measure has been included below that will ensure that sensitive local species and migratory birds will not be subject to disruption by the construction of this project. Since Los Trancos Creek is directly adjacent to and Buckeye Creek traverses the site, the project was designed to be consistent with the City of Palo Alto's Stream Corridor Protection regulations and the Comprehensive Plan Natural Environment policies. The project does not propose any development within the sensitive Los Trancos Creek riparian corridor. No changes are proposed within the banks of Buckeye Creek. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 9 Mitigated Negative Declaration There are 54 existing trees on the subject site of which fourteen are protected trees, Coast Live Oaks, pursuant to PAMC Section 8.10. None of these protected trees are proposed for removal or relocation. However, one protected oak tree, tree #21 listed in the Tree Survey & Appraisals prepared for the project, fell during the wind and rain storm the night of December 21, 2009. The tree has since been removed from the site. The project includes the removal of two dead trees (bay and willow) and seven other trees (three bay, one willow, one walnut and two olive) due to poor health and to accommodate the new driveway or other fill area. A standard condition of approval would ensure that the project meets the City's tree protection requirements. Additionally, 20 non-ornamental/non-invasive fruit trees and two Canary Island date trees will be planted near the home site in addition to some cherry, strawberry, hackberry, crepe myrtle, and fern pine trees. The following standard conditions of approval would be imposed on this project: 1. Perimeter fencing shall be designed to not restrict wildlife movement through the project site. Planning Staff shall review and approve the proposed perimeter fence design prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. New fences sh~ll be constructed a minimum of five feet landward from the top of bank. 3. All native riparian vegetation within 100 feet from the top of bank shall be retained unless its removal is approved by the Director of Planning and Community Environment. Replacement planting shall be required when native riparian vegetation is approved for removal. 4. Planting of non-native invasive plant species is not permitted. Prohibited plant material is listed in the Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative's User Manual Guidelines and Standards for Land Uses Near Streams. 5. Only native riparian vegetarian shall be planted between the top of the banks of a stream. 6. Nighttime lighting shall be directed away from the riparian corridor of a stream. 7. Irrigation systems shall be designed such that they do not cause soil erosion. 8. Tree Protection Compliance -The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in the Tree Protection Report, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the project. Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly activity report sent to the City. A mandatory Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City beginning with the initial verification approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11. In addition to standard approval conditions, the following mitigation measure is proposed: Mitigation Measure D-l: Removal of anyon-site trees shall be conducted between September 1 and February 1 to avoid roosting bats and nesting migratory birds. If tree removal must be conducted outside this period, a survey of 4the tree must b~ performed by a qualified biologist. Should any species b'e found, 805 Los Trancos Road Page 10 Mitigated Negative Declaration an exclusion zone with a radius to be determined by project biologist, but no less than 50 feet, should be established. Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant. E. CULTURAL RESOURCES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No a) b) c) d) e) f) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural resource that is recognized by City Council 1 X resolution? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource 1,2- pursuant to 15064.5? MapL-8 X Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique 1,2- geologic feature? MapL-8 X Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 1, 2-X MapL-8 Adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or 1,2- California Register, or listed on the City's MapL-7 X Historic Inventory? Eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory? 1 X DISCUSSION: The Comprehensive Plan (map L-8) indicates that the site is in a moderate archaeological resource sensitivity zone. Although existing and historic development in the surrounding area nearby the site has altered the native landscape, the potential exists that now-buried Native American sites could be uncovered in future planning area construction. The City's standard condition of approval, designed to address archeological discoveries as detailed below, will redu~e this potential to less than significant. Standard Condition: If during grading and construction activities, any archaeological or human remains are encountered, construction shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall visit the site to address the find. The Santa Clara County Medical Examiner's office shall be notified to provide proper direction on how to proceed. If any Native American Resources are encountered during construction, construction shall cease immediately until a Native American descendant, appointed by the Native American Heritage Commission of the State of California, is able to evaluate the site and make further recommendations and be involved in mitigation planning. Mitigation Measures: None required. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 11 Mitigated Negative Declaration F. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the See risk of loss, injury, or death involving: below i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and 1,2,6,8 X Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 2- MapN-X 10,6 iii) Seismic-related ground failure, 2- including liquefaction? MapN-X 5,6 iv) Landslides? 2- MapN-X 5,6 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 5,12 X c) Result in substantial siltation? 5,12 X d) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral 2- spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or MapN-X collapse? 5,6 e) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building 2- Code (1994), creating substantial risks to MapN-X life or property? 5,6 f) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the 6,12 X disposal of waste water? g) Expose people or property to major geologic hazards that cannot be mitigated through the use of standard engineering 6,12 X design and seismic safety techniques? 805 Los Trancos Road Page 12 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The site located at 805 Los Trancos Road is subject to a high potential for surface rupture (Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, map N-5), and would be subject to violent ground shaking (map N-10). The geotechnical investigation prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc. in September 2007 details these and other hazards that have the potential to impact the development. Page 5 of the report concludes that so long as the recommendations provided in the report are incorporated, construction of the proposed single-family development should be possible. The entire state of California is in a seismically active area. According to the Comprehensive Plan the project site is not in an area that is subject to liquefaction or violent ground shaking in the event of an earthquake but is within an area subject to expansive soils and strong ground shaking. The City's required standard conditions of approval ensure that potential impacts on erosion and soil will not be significant. Project conditions of approval will require the applicant to submit a final grading and drainage plan subject to review by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading and building permits. The entire state of California is in a seismically active area and the site located in a strong seismic risk area, subject to very strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction and subsidence or subsidence, of the land is possible, but not likely at the site. No known faults cross the project site, although a portion of the site located at the western edge of the property has shown historical occurrences of liquefaction and the potential for permanent earthquake induced ground displacements to exist. Given these conditions, mitigation measures, detailed below, will be required to be implemented to ensure the safe construction and habitability of the site improvements. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure F·l: Implementation of the construction techniques and erosion control measures required by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department and requirements listed in the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc. (dated September 2007) would reduce the geotechnical impacts to a less than significant level. Such measures include: • A grading permit will be required.' Include a table on the site plan showing the quantities of cut and fill. • The plan set must include a grading and drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Adjacent grades must slope away from the house a minimum of 2%. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales, inlets and outlets. Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 13 Mitigated Negative Declaration G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routing transport, use, 5 X or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the 5 X environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or 1,2,5 X ~ proposed school? d) Construct a school on a property that is subject to hazards from hazardous materials 1,2 X contamination, emissions or accidental release? e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a 1,2- result, would it create a significant hazard to MapN-9 X the public or the environment? f) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in 1,2 X the project area? g) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working the " 1,2 X project area? h) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response 1,2- plan or emergency evacuation plan? MapN-7 X i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to 2- urbanized areas or where residences are MapN-7 X intermixed with wildlands? j) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from existing hazardous materials contamination by exposing future occupants or users of the site to contamination in excess of soil and ground water cleanup goals developed 1,5,12 X for the site? 805 Los Trancos Road Page 14 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The project is within a high fire danger area due to the dense vegetation in the area, and grasslands on site. To help reduce the risk of exposure to wildland fires, standard open space conditions, detailed below, have been included requiring that the structure be sprinkled for fire protection. No known hazardous materials are currently being used, stored, or disposed of on or adjacent to the project site. In addition, the land has not been previously used for agriculture or any other operations that would require the use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials on the site. Imposition of the City~ s standard .conditions of approval will ensure impacts are less than significant: • A fire sprinkler system shall be provided which meets the requirements of NFPA Standard No. 13,2002 Edition (PAMCI5.04.160). • Provide a 100 foot defensible space between the house and wildland interface and include a minimum 30 foot irrigated wet band around structures. • All measures identified by the Fire Department to address fire hazards on this site must be incorporated into the design. Mitigation Measures: None required. H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 5,12 X b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to 2,5-a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have MapN-2 X been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? 1,5,6,12 X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of 5,6,12 X surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would 805 Los Trancos Road Page 15 Mitigated Negative Declaration t) g) .h) i) j) k) exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide X substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 5,12 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 5,6,12 X Place housing within a IOO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard 1,2- Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or MapN-6, other flood hazard delineation map? 12 X Place within a IOO-year flood hazard area 1,2- structures which would impede or redirect MapN-6, X flood flows? 12 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involve flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a 1, 2- levee or dam or being located within a IOO-year MapN-X flood hazard area? 6,8,12 Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 2- MapN-6, X 8 Result in stream bank instability? 5,12 X DISCUSSION: The site is predominately in Flood Zone X, which is designated as a moderate to low risk area and is not a special flood hazard zone. A small portion of the site is in Flood Zone A, a high risk area, due to the proximity of Los Trancos Creek. Areas within Flood Zone A have a 1 % annual chance of flooding. However, no structures are proposed near or within this area. Site coverage will be increased with the new home development and runoff would be higher than predevelopment runoff due to the increase in impervious surface area from an existing vacant lot. However, on-site runoff shall be surface water and downspout discharge will be directed away from the bUilding. During, grading and construction activities, storm water pollution could result. Runoff from the project site flows to the San Francisco Bat without treatment. Nonpoint source pollution is a serious problem for wildlife dependant on the waterways and for people who live near polluted streams or Baylands. Therefore, City's standard conditions of approval, incorporated as part of an approved construction management plan (secured before building permit issuance) would include the following: • Prior to submittal of plans for a building permit, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan which includes drainage patterns on site and from adjacent properties. • The applicant shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMP' s) to be incorporated into a Storm Water Pollution. Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project. The SWPPP shall include both temporary BMP's to be implemented during demolition and construction. Imposition of the City's standard conditions would ensure impacts will be less than significant. The project site is not located in an area of groundwater recharge, and will not deplete groundwater supplies. The project site is not in an area that is subject to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 16 Mitigated Negative Declaration The project site is adjacent to Los Trancos Creek to the west and a small portion of Buckeye Creek traverses through the center of the site. No work is proposed within Los Trancos Creek or Buckeye Creek or their banks. The applicant is proposing a bridge to allow vehicles to cross over Buckeye Creek. The bridge will span across Buckeye Creek and no support structures will be placed within the creek. A condition of approval will require the applicant to obtain permits from outside agencies that regulate the watershed, including the Department of Fish and Game. The home is to be located on a relatively flat and open area of the site, approximately 70 to 120 feet from the top bank of the Los Trancos Creek and 180 feet from the top of bank of Buckeye Creek. All other elements of the development would be located at least 50 feet from the top of the Los Trancos Creek bank. Mitigation Measures: None required. I. LAND USE AND PLANNING Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No a) b) c) d) e) f) g) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Physically divide an established community? 1,2,5 X Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal· program, or zoning ordinance) adopted 1,2,3,5 X for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community 1,2,5 X conservation plan? Substantially adversely change the type or intensity of existing or planned land use in the 1,2,5 X area? Be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with the general character of the surrounding 1,5 X area, including density and building height? Conflict with established residential, recreational, educational, religious, or scientific 1,2 X uses of an area? Convert prime' farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (farmland) to 1,5,10 X non-agricultural use? DISCUSSION: The Comprehe~sive Plan designation for site is designated Streamside Open Space because of its proximity to Los Trancos Creek. A very small portion of the southeast comer of the property is designated Open Space/Controlled Development. The intent of the Streamside Open Space designation is to protect the corridor of riparian vegetation along natural streams. The corridor can vary in width up to 200 feet on either side of the center line of the creek. The project has been designed to protect and enhance the riparian corridor and the project includes the construction of an earthen berm to clearly 805 Los Trancos Road Page 17 Mitigated Negative Declaration delineate and protect the riparian corridor along a 50-foot setback from the top of bank. No other work is proposed within the' riparian corridor. No buildings are proposed within the riparian corridor. The applicant has developed a planting plan that is non-invasive and compatible with the riparian and rural nature of the site. The applicant is maintaining most of the existing trees onsite. The proposed berm will help protect the corridor by defining a line between developable and undevelopable areas. Application of the maximum 200-foot open space buffer allowed under the Streamside Open Space designation would render the site undevelopable. The Comprehensive Plan provides for flexibility in the corridor width because it recognizes that conditions will vary site to site. Because the project was designed to protect and enhance the Los Trancos Creek riparian corridor, it has been deemed to be consistent with the designation. The Open Space/Controlled Development land use designation allows residential densities from 0.1 to 1 dwelling unit per acre. The site has a Zoning Designation is OS (Open Space District). Single family dwellings are a permitted use in the OS District. Adjacent surrounding land uses are residential uses on large parcels. Given the proposed design of the project, which minimizes potential effects to the surrounding uses (residential), it is compatible with all adjacent development. The project is considered consistent with Comprehensive Plan Open Space policies and the land use designation of Streamside Open Space. The proposed architectural and site changes comply with the Site and Design development regulations and conform to the Open Space zone district at the time in which the application was filed with the City. The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan in that the design promotes the following policies for development in the Open Space, including: Policy N- 6: Through implementation of the Site and Design process and the Open Space zone district regulations (PAMC 18.28), minimize impacts of any new development on views of the hillsides, on the open space character, and the natural ecology of the hillsides. The Comprehensive Plan Open Space Development Criteria, Policy N-7 will be used by the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council, along with the story poles and other visual aids required in Section 18.28.070(n), to evaluate the proposed project. The project is consistent with the open space criteria as follows: • The development should not be visually intrusive from public roadways and public parklands. As much as possible, development ,should be sited so it is hidden from view. The proposed construction will not be visible from any identified view sheds (map L-4 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan). The project is located directly adjacent to Los Trancos Road, and is screened from Los Trancos Road by a dense canopy of existing trees and shrubs. Visibility from Los Trancos Road should be minimal. It is not expected that this project will be visible from any public parklands. • Development should be located away from hilltops and designed to not extend above the nearest ridge line. The proposed house is located in a valley floor and is not located near any ridges. • Site and structure design should take into consideration impacts on privacy and views of neighboring properties. Given the proposed house location, at the bottom of a narrow valley, the privacy impacts from this development on neighboring residences will be minimal. Additionally, the dense perimeter screening will reduce visibility of the development from off-site to a less than significant impact. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 18 Mitigated Negative Declaration • Development should be clustered, or closely grouped, in relation to the area surrounding it to make it less conspicuous, minimize access roads, and reduce fragmentation of natural habitats. The proposed site improvements are all located at one end of the existing flat meadow area to both keep development at one part of the property and to maximize the distance of development from Los Trancos Road. • Built forms and landscape forms should mimic the natural topography. Building lines should follow the lines of the terrain, and trees and bushes should appear natural from a distance. The landscape plan calls for leaving the majority of existing natural landscaping and trees. The house will be built at existing grade, which is flat. • Existing trees with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level, should be preserved and integrated into the site design. Existing vegetation should be retained as much as possible. The majority of the trees on-site would be preserved. The tree survey prepared for the site found 54 trees onsite, including fourteen protected trees. One protected oak tree (Tree #21) fell during a storm in December 21,2009 and was removed from the site. But no protected trees are proposed for removal. The applicant proposes to remove two dead trees (bay and willow) and seven other trees (three bay, one willow, one walnut and two olive) due to poor health and to accommodate the new driveway or other fill area. Eight other trees that are in or near proposed driveway or are in potential fill area are proposed to be relocated onsite. The fallen tree has been removed from the site. A standard condition of approval requires the applicant to work with City staff, including the City Arborist, to ensure that existing trees and landscaping are maintained and that new landscaping will be consistent with the existing and the project will be conditioned to protect existing trees that are proposed to be preserved. • Cut is encouraged when it is necessary for geotechnical stability and to enable the development to blend into the natural topography. Fill is generally discouraged and should never be distributed within the driplines of existing trees. Locate development to minimize the need for grading. The project is located on a relatively flat meadow (with approximately 3% slope from Los Trancos Road towards Los Trancos Creek). Thus, very little cut (5 cubic yards) or fill (625 cubic yards) will be required. No fill is proposed within the dripline of any trees. • To reduce the need for cut and fill and to reduce potential runoff, large, flat expanses of impervious surfaces should be avoided. There are no large expansive areas of impervious surface proposed with this project. Impervious surfaces will be mainly used for the building's concrete foundation. Permeable surfaces are proposed for the driveway. • Buildings should use natural materials and earth tone or subdued colors. Natural building materials in earth tones are proposed. All proposed building materials are natural with earth tone colors that will blend with the surroundings. Conditions of approval will require non~reflective roofing and window surfaces. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 19 Mitigated Negative Declaration • Landscaping should be native species that require little or no irrigation. Immediately adjacent to structures, fire retardant plants should be used as a fire prevention technique. The proposed landscaping incorporates a large number of nati ve species plantings which will minimize the need for irrigation. The conditions of approval will ensure the use of fire retardant plants in the final landscape design. • Exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is not directly visible from off-site. The exterior lighting will be reviewed by staff, the Planning & Transportation Commission and City Council to ensure that off-site lighting impacts are minimized. • Access roads should be of a rural rather than urban character. (Standard curb, gutter, and concrete sidewalk are usually inconsistent with the foothills environment.) The proposed driveway consists of decomposed granite and no curb, sidewalk or gutters. Impervious Coverage: Section 18.28.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) limits impervious area and building coverage in the OS zone district to 3.5% of the project site. The project site is 154,479 square feet allowing for 5,407 square feet of impervious area. The impervious coverage of the existing residence including the driveway is as follows: Existing Coverage: Vacant Site o square feet The new project would add the following impervious area to the site: New Coverage: Footprint Hardscape Total 5,177 square feet 230 square feet 5,407 square feet The project as proposed meets all applicable zoning and comprehensive plan regulation, and will thus have no impact. Although the project has less than a 100 setback from Los Trancos Creek and Buckeye Creek, the project is providing measures to protect and enhance the creeks, consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan program N7. The project proposes an earth berm to protect the riparian corridor along Los Trancos Creek, maintaining a minimum 50 feet of undisturbed riparian corridor. Standard conditions of approval would require the applicant to work with the City to replace invasive species with native plants and provide a 25 feet protective area adjacent to Buckeye Creek, to ensure that the creeks would be adequately protected. The applicant will also be required as a condition of approval to obtain all the required permits from all applicable agencies for any work proposed for the creek and/or riparian corridor. Mitigation Measures: None required. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 20 Mitigated Negative Declaration J. MINERAL RESOURCES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 1,2 X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan 1,2 X or other land use plan? DISCUSSION: The City of Palo Alto has been classified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC), Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) as a Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-1). This designation signifies that there are no aggregate resources in the area. The DMG has not classified the City for other resources. The 2010 Comprehensive Plan does not identify locally or regionally valuable mineral resources within the City of Palo Alto. Mitigation Measures: None required. K. NOISE Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or 1,2,5 X applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibrations or ground 1,5 X borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels 1,5 X existing without the proje~t? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity 1,3,5 X above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to 1,2 X excessive noise levels? " f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 1,2 X 805 Los Trancos Road Page 21 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact g) h) i)- j) k) 1) Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Cause the average 24 hour noise level (Ldn) to increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an existing residential area, even if the Ldn would 1,5 X remain below 60 dB? Cause the Ldn to increase by 3.0 dB or more in an existing residential area, thereby causing the 1,5 X Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB? Cause an increase of 3.0 dB or more in an existing residential area where the Ldn 1,5 X currently exceeds 60 dB? Result in indoor noise levels for residential development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB? 1,5 X Result in instantaneous noise levels of greater than 50 dB in bedrooms or 55 dB in other 1,2-Map rooms in areas with an exterior Ldn of 60 dB or N3,5 X greater? Generate construction noise exceeding the daytime background Leg at sensitive receptors 1,5 X by 10 dBA or more? DISCUSSION: The project site is located within a rural area and is not adjacent to any urban noise sources. The proposed project, once completed, would not increase existing noise levels over the established thresholds of the area. In addition, the area is not within any public or private airport zone. Construction of the project will result in temporary increases in local ambient noise levels. Typical noise sources would include mechanical equipment associated with excavation, grading and construction of the home, which will be short term in duration. Once completed, long term noise associated with the new residence would be within acceptable noise limits and no impacts are anticipated. Proper implementation of and compliance with Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of the PAMC (limiting construction between the hours of eight a.m. and six p.m. Monday - Friday, nine a.m. and six p.m. on Saturday, and construction hours prohibited Sundays and Holidays would reduce construction-related noise impacts to less than significant levels. The project would be subject to the City's standard conditions of approval regarding noise. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The location of the project within a rural area, set back from Los Trancos Creek and Los Trancos Road, should prevent construction noise from exceeding nuisance levels. Project related traffic would not cause a noticeable increase in noise on any public street over what is currently experienced, especially on Los Trancos Road or on nearby Alpine Drive which would be the most likely access road to Los Trancos Road from nearby Interstate 280. Mitigation Measure: None required. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 22 Mitigated Negative Declaration L. POPULATION AND HOUSING Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact a) b) c) d) e) Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other 1,2,5 X infrastructure) ? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1,5 X Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1,5 X Create a substantial imbalance between employed residents and jobs? 1,2 X Cumulatively exceed regional or local population projections? 1,2 X DISCUSSION: The project will add a single-family home to a vacant lot. State Housing Element law requires that localities provide their "fair share" of the region's housing needs. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) has determined that Palo Alto will need to add significant numbers of housing units to meet State Law and to help reduce the imbalance between jobs and housing. This project, which involves the addition of a single-family housing unit, will have a slightly positive effect on both the City's jobs and housing imbalance and on density. The proposed residence will be occupied by the applicant of record. This project is expected to have a less than significant impact, and is supported by the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, Policy H-2: . "Policy H-2: Identify and implement a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity in appropriate locations. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable and attainable housing. " The expansion of infrastructure to this site will not induce substantial growth in the project area because it is limited by current zoning. Mitigation Measures: None required. 805 Los Trancos Road Page 23 Mitigated Negative Declaration M. PUBLIC SERVICES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact a) Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? 1,2,12 X Police protection? 1,2 X Schools? Parks? 1,2 X Other public facilities? 1,2 X 1,2 X DISCUSSION: Adherence to codes will minimize the potential damage and risk from fire and other hazards. The proposed project would not impact fire service to the area as the police and fire departments have sufficient resources to accommodate moderate growth within the City. The conditions of approval for the project contain requirements to address all fire prevention measures. No significant demand for school services would result from the project, which is not expected to generate a substantial increase in Palo Alto's residential population due to the fact that only one single family residence is proposed. No significant direct demand for additional parks would result from the project, which is not expected to generate a substantial increase in Palo Alto's residential population. Mitigation Measures: None required. N. RECREATION Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incor_porated a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or 805 Los Trancos Road Page 24 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact b) Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 1,2,3,12 X Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the 1,2,3 X environment? DISCUSSION: Adding a single family residence as proposed to a substantially open and flat Open Space lot should have a less than significant impact on existing parks, nor include or require the construction of recreational facilities. Furthermore, the undeveloped portions of the property would remain as private open space. To help ensure that the impacts of the additional residential unit to the City's housing stock will be less than significant, the City collects Development Impact Fees for parks, libraries and community centers, totaling an estimated $3,000, $780.00, and $269.00 respectively (at current rates, subject to annual increase). The final Development Impact Fee amount will be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. As these fees are standard with any increase in density, and will apply here, no project specific mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures: None required. o. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at 1,5 X intersections) ? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for 1,5 X designated roads or highways? c) Result in change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in 1,5 X 805 Los Trancos Road Page 25 Mitigated Negative Declaration substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible 1,5,12 X uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1,5,12 X t) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 1,5,12 X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., pedestrian, transit & 1,2,12 X bicycle facilities)? h) Cause a local (City of Palo Alto) intersection to deteriorate below Level of Service (LOS) D and cause an increase in the average stopped delay for the critical movements by four seconds or more and the critical 1,5 X volume/capacity ratio (V /C) value to increase by 0.01 or more? i) Cause a local intersection already operating at LOS E or F to deteriorate in the average stopped delay for the critical movements by 5,12 X four seconds or more? j) Cause a regional intersection to deteriorate from an LOS E or better to LOS F or cause critical movement delay at such an intersection already operating at LOS F to increase by four seconds or more and the 5,12 X critical VIC value to increase by 0.01 or more? k) Cause a freeway segment to operate at LOS F or contribute traffic in excess of 1 % of segment capacity to a freeway segment 5,12 X already operating at LOS F? 1) Cause any change in traffic that would increase the Traffic Infusion on Residential 12 X Environment (TIRE) index by 0.1 or more? m) Cause queuing impacts based on a comparative analysis between the design queue length and the available queue storage capacity? Queuing impacts include, but are not limited to, spillback queues at project access locations; queues at turn lanes at intersections that block through traffic; queues at lane drops; queues at one 5,12 X intersection that extend back to impact other intersections, and spillback queues on ramps. n) Impede the development or function of 1,2,5 X planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities? 0) Impede the operation of a transit system as a 1,2,5 X result of congestion? p) Create an operational safety hazard? 5,12 X 805 Los Trancos Road Page 26 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The project site is not located on a designated emergency route. Given the location of the site in a rural area, emergency access is limited. The proposed new single-family home will be accessed via a dedicated driveway from Los Trancos Road that will be built to accommodate emergency vehicles. While the new dedicated driveway will add to those already located on Los Trancos Road, it will have a less than significant impact on existing traffic conditions. The project will not generate air or significant new automobile traffic and will not cause or contribute to known traffic hazards. Construction of the proposed project will add truck trips to haul excavated materials off site, and construction crews and equipment will also increase the daily trips on Los Trancos Road and Alpine Road. Thus, construction of the project would result in localized congestion due to truck traffic associated with construction. The applicant has indicated that there would be an estimate total of 150 construction trips over the 18 month construction period. However, construction traffic impacts would be temporary and are anticipated to not substantially disrupt peak traffic hours which would result in a less than significant impact. Conditions of approval for standard traffic control measures, incorporated as part of an approved construction management plan (secured before building permit issuance) would include the following in order to minimize temporary traffic congestion during grading and construction activities: Mitigation Measures: None required. P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality 5,12 X Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant 5,12 X environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental 5,12 X effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded 5,12 X entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may 805 Los Trancos Road Page 27 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact f) g) h) Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing 12 X commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the 12 X project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes X and regulations related to solid waste? 12 Result in a substantial physical deterioration of a public facility due to increased use as a 12 X result of the project? DISCUSSION: The proposed residential project would not significantly increase the demand on existing utilities and service systems, or use resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Standard conditions of approval require the applicant to submit calculations by a registered civil engineer to show that the on-site and off site water, sewer and fire systems are capable of serving the needs of the development and adjacent properties during peak flow demands. Trash and recycling facilities that currently serve the existing single-family residences in the area will be used by the proposed dwelling, which would not be expected to cause a significant impact. Mitigation Measures: None required. Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal 1,2,5,11 X or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, 1,2,5 X 805 Los Trancos Road Page 28 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or 1,5,12 X indirectly? DISCUSSION: The proposed new residence will not substantially degrade the surrounding environment, impact protected trees, impact wildlife species or their habitat, or eliminate important examples of cultural history or pre-history. The project would create less than significant impacts on the quality of the environment. When considered with other current projects and reasonably foreseeable future projects, the project is not anticipated to result in cumulatively significant impacts. Global Climate Change Impacts: The potential effect of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on global climate change is an emerging issue that warrants discussion under CEQA. Unlike the pollutants discussed previously that may have regional and local effects, greenhouse gases have the potential to cause global changes in the environment. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions do not directly produce a localized impact, but may cause an indirect impact if the local climate is adversely changed by its cumulative contribution to a change in global climate. Individual projects contribute relatively small amounts of greenhouse gases that when added to all other greenhouse gas producing activities around the world result in increases in these emissions that have led many to conclude is changing the global climate. However, no threshold has been established for what would constitute a cumulatively considerable increase in greenhouse gases for individual development projects. The State of California has taken several actions that help to address potential global climate change impacts. Although not originally intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, California Code of Regulations Title 2 re4 Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce ·California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 describes how global climate change will impact the environment in California. The impacts described in AB 32 include changing sea l~vels, changes in snow pack and availability of potable water, changes in storm flows and flood inundation zones, and other impacts. The list of impacts included in AB 32 may be considered substantial evidence of environmental impacts requiring analysis in CEQA documents. AB 32 focuses on reducing GHG in California. The GHG emissions reductions found in AB 32 and Executive Order S-3-05, signed in June 2005, are consistent with the climate stabilization models produced by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These climate stabilization models show that if GHG emissions are reduced to the levels shown in Executive Order S-3- OS, the climate will stabilize at approximately a 2 degree Celsius rise, averting the worst impacts associated with global climate change. GHG as defined under AB 32 include: carbon dioxide, methane, 805 Los Trancos Road Page 29 Mitigated Negative Declaration nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. AB 32 requires the CARB, the State agency charged with regulating statewide air quality, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020. In June 2008, the California's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) issued an interim Technical Advisory on the role of CEQA in addressing climate change and OHOs. As part of the advisory, OPR asked the California Air Resources Board (ARB) staff to recommend a method for setting statewide thresholds of significance for OHG emissions, to encourage consistency and uniformity in the CEQ A analysis for OHG emissions throughout the state. ARB is currently developing recommended statewide interim thresholds of significance for GHGs that may be adopted by local agencies for their own use. On October 24, 2008, ARB released the Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal on the Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act. The proposal, which is currently undergoing public review, focuses on common project types that, collectively, are responsible for substantial GRG emissions -specifically, industrial, residential, and commercial projects. The report proposes a quantitative threshold of 7,000 metric tons of C02 equivalent per year (MTC02e/year) for operational emissions (excluding transportation) associated with industrial projects, and performance· standards for construction and transportation emissions. ARB staff intends to make its final recommendations on thresholds in 2009, but currently no quantitative, significant criterion has been adopted for determining impact significance. According to the OPR interim Technical Advisory, in the absence of clearly defined thresholds for GHO emissions, CEQ A requires that lead agencies disclose and mitigate such emissions to the extent feasible whenever the lead agency determines that the project contributes to a significant, cumulative climate change impact. The advisory recommends identifying and quantifying, to the extent possible, GHG emissions, assessing the significance of the impact, and identifying alternatives or mitigation measures to reduce impact significance, as appropriate. In the absence of adopted significance thresholds for GHG emissions, the following discussion is provided to disclose qualitatively the potential effects of the proposed project (from both construction and operation) on global climate change. The project would generate GHGs during construction and ongoing operations. During construction, the operation of heavy construction equipment would be the primary source of GHGs. However, these emissions would in effect be temporary, for approximately 18 months, and would cease upon completion of construction. For that reason and given the relatively small-scale of construction, the project is not expected to result in a net increase in GHG emissions that would significantly delay or hinder the State's ability to meet the reduction targets contained in California Governor's Executive Order S-3-05 and the impact is considered less than significant. The applicant has agreed to include the following construction management measures that will help reduce the Project's GHG emissions: a. The contractor will be required to reduce emissions through any of the following options or others that achieve reduction in overall emissions: use late-model engines, low-emission diesel products or alternative fuels (e.g., Lubrizol, Puri NOx, biodisel fuel) in all heavy duty off-road equipment. b. The contractor will be required to minimize idling time for all heavy-duty equipment when not engaged in work activities, including on-road haul trucks while being loaded or unloaded onsite. The contractor will also ensure proper maintenance of these construction vehicles and equipments, such as tuning up and filtering of the mufflers of the vehicles. c. A City-approved Construction Waste program will be in place prior to start of project construction. The Plan will demonstrate the diversion from landfills and recycling of all 805 Los Trancos Road Page 30 Mitigated Negative Declaration nonhazardous, salvageable and re-useable wood, metal, plastic and paper products during construction. The project will be constructed of all new products, many of which will have high-recycled-material content. Construction materials and products will be delivered to the site by trucks via designated truck routes. Following construction the use of the new building is expected to generate minor quantities of GHG emissions over the long-term. The primary sources of ORG emissions would be associated with vehicle trips of occupants of the new home and their guests. Given the overwhelming scope of global climate change, it is not anticipated that a single development project would have an individually discernable effect on global climate change (e.g., that any increase in global temperature or rise in sea level could be attributed to the emissions resulting from one single development project). Rather, it is more appropriate to conclude that the greenhouse gas emissions generated by the proposed project would combine with emissions across the state, nation, and globe to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. In an effort to make a good faith effort at disclosing environmental impacts and to conform with the CEQ A Guidelines [§16064(b)], it is the City's position that, based on the nature and size of this project, and the proposed measures to reduce ORO emissions, the proposed project would not impede the state's ability to reach the emission reduction limits/standards set forth by the State of California by Executive Order S-3-05 and AB 32. For these reasons, this project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change associated with greenhouse gas emissions. As such, impacts are considered less than significant. SOURCE REFERENCES 1. Project Planner's knowledge of the site and the proposed project 2. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, 1998-2010 3. Palo Alto Municipal Code, Title 18 -Zoning Ordinance 4. Uniform Building Code (UBC) Standards 5. Project Plans, Devcon Construction Inc., submitted on October 9, 2007 6. Geotechnical Investigation for Langenskiold Residence, 805 Los Trancos Road, prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc., September 2007 7. Biotic Study, prepared by WRA Environmental Consultants, May 27, 2008 8. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map 9. Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual, Municipal Code Chapter 8.10.030, June 2001 10. Important Farmland in California Map, California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 2004 11. Agricultural Preserves Map, California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resources 12. City of Palo Alto Departmental Review. 13. Tree Survey & Appraisals, prepared by McClenahan Consulting, LLC, September 8, 2008 and as amended, October 19,2009 805 Los Trancos Road Page 31 Mitigated Negative Declaration DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the X project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MA Y have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DE CLARA TION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARA TION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Elena Lee, Senior Planner Date 805 Los Trancos Road Page 32 Mitigated Negative Declaration The City of Palo Alto Vicinity Map Figure 2 805 Los Trancos This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS -. 0' 222' This document Is a grephlc rapresentall:'l: t~ :;~~ ~~I:I;~~::S. The Clly of Palo Alto •• sumes no responslblllly for any errors. The City of Palo Alto 9Ie82,2010-02-0814:01:54 (lIcc-mapslgis$lglsladmlnIPersonanPlanning.mdb) ATTACHMENl'C 805 Los Trancos Rd. Location Map This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS -. 0' 174' This document Is a graphic representation only of best available sources. The CIIy of Palo Allo assumes no responsibillly for any errors. ©1989 to 2010 Cily of Palo Allo ATTACHMENT D Page 10f2 Lee, Elena From: Mark Conroe [mark@presidiodp.com] Tuesday, May 11,2010 11 :21 AM Lee, Elena Sent: To: Subject: 805 Los Trancos Road: Follow up to March 24 Planning Commission meeting Importance: High Dear Elena, On March 24th the Planning Commission unanimously approved our proposed project at 805 Los Trancos Road subject to having us address a few issues/questions and then return on their Consent Calendar. As you know, we have been working continuously over the past six weeks to a~dress all issues/questions raised during that meeting. We believe that the current plans reflect all changes requested by the Planning Commission, City Staff and others (such as the Town of Portola Valley). For the sake of completeness, I have summarized each of the questions/issues raised and specify how we have addressed them. Before addressing the detailed issues, let me say that our approach over the past six weeks (as well as before) has been to listen carefully to the issue raised and to modify the project to address the issue; we believe that this results in the best possible project. For example, we were very pleased to get an email yesterday from George Mader (the Town of Portola Valley's principal planner) who expressed his appreciation regarding our cooperative attitude towards the Town regarding issues they raised (his exact words: "You have been extremely cooperative"). Here are the issues which we identified during the March 24 Planning Commission meeting and how we have addressed them (with such changes being reflected in the updated plans provided to you): 1. Bridge over Buckeye Creek: The Planning Commission asked that we work with City Staff and the Department of Fish & Game to determine whether the proposed culvert was the best solution for the driveway crossing over Buckeye Creek. In coordination with you, I contacted the Dept of Fish & Game (Dave Johnston) both by phone and email to get their feedback regarding the proposed culvert. The Dept of Fish & Game r/F&G") said that while there would not be any problem obtaining a permit from them to install a culvert in Buckeye Creek, the least disruptive approach, which would not require a permit from them, would be to bridge Buckeye Creek (we provided F&G with the proposed bridge design, as found in the updated plans, as part of their review). Based on F&G's feedback, we revised the plans to show the culvert being replaced with a bridge. I understand that you also had direct contact with F&G and verified the foregoing. 2. Tree screening: We received feedback from the Town of Portola Valley asking us to add trees between Los Trancos Road and the proposed home. We worked with you and Dave Dockter to approve the type and location of trees to plant in this area and then sent this info to the Town of Portola Valley for their feedback, which they approved. We also received feedback from one neighbor who lives along Valley Oak (in Portola Valley) across Los Trancos Creek (he spoke at the March 24th Planning Commission meeting). "In response to his request for additional tree screening, we worked with you and Dave Dockter to add additional trees between the proposed home and Valley Oak; we contacted this person to solicit his feedback and never heard back from him. 3. Palm trees: We received feedback from the Town of Portola Valley that the palm trees were not ideal in their view; this was in contrast to Dave Dockter's approval of several varieties of palms which would not grow too large and which were acceptable to him. We then discussed with Dave Dockter substituting Italian Cypress for the two subject palm trees, which he approved. However, when we sent this plan to the Town of Portola Valley, they objected. After reviewing a number of alternative trees with Dave Dockter and the Town of Portola Valley, both of them whole-heartedly approved replacing the palms/cypress with Valley Oaks. Hence, Valley Oaks are shown on the updated plans. 4. Grading: Based on feedback from the Planning Commission regarding having us revisit the grading plan to see if there was a way of having the home fit better with the existing site contours as well as reducing the amount of fill (thereby increasing the amount of cut), we went back to our civil engineer and went through several iterations of revising the grading plan to accomplish this. The end result is that we dropped both the garage and home by 3 Yz to 4 feet to better align the home" improvements with the existing grade (more specifically, the garage slab dropped 3 Yz I [from 516.50 to 513.00] and the finished floor of the home dropped approximately 4' [from 518.70 to 514.75]). Furthermore, we are now exporting soil instead of importing soil. 5/1112010 Page 2of2 ·5. Fencing: Based on feedback from the Planning Commission regarding reducing the amount of fencing, we have significantly reduced the amount of fencing by removing all Type II fencing (which resulted in all fencing around the driveway being removed) as well as removing a portion of the Type I fence on the side of the home facing Los Trancos Cree~ '. 6. Miscellaneous: There were several other more minor issues raised at the Planning Commission meeting which we either clarified (such as reviewing the pool requirements with the Palo Alto Fire Department) or which will be handled with a condition of approval (such as for site lighting or noise mitigation). I believe the above items address all items requested by the Planning Commission as follow up. The revised plans reflect the above changes. Once again, we truly appreciate the cooperative and professional approach of you and the others on the Planning Staff (as well as the other departments who have weighed in). Please do not hesitate to let us know if you have any questions or require any additional information. Sincerely, Mark Mark Conroe 5/1112010 -----Original Message----- From: George Mader [mailto:mader@spangleassociates.com] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 2:58 PM To: Mark@PresidioDP.com Cc: Alex von feldt;denisegilb Subject: Re: Langenskiold Project Mark- Fantastic! I will forward you comments to Alex and Denise. I will also inform the rest of the planning commission at its next meeting on the 19th. You have been' extremely cooperative. Best wishes, George On 5/10/10 2:36 PM, "Mark Conroe" <mark@presidiodp.com> wrote: > George, > > After much consideration, and to demonstrate my family·s continuing efforts > to be a good neighbor to Portola Valley (and show respect for what it says) , > we will follow Alex· recommendation and change the two Cypress trees > that flank the driveway (which were formerly Palm trees) to Valley Oaks. > > I trust will be pleasing to everyone. > > Sincerely, > > Mark > > Mark Conroe > ) w ~ z ~ = u ~ ~ < GreenPoint Rated Checklist: Single Family The GreenPoint Rated checklist tracks green features incorporated into the home. A home is only GreenPoint Rated if all features are verified by a Certified GreenPoint Rater through Build It Green. GreenPoint Rated is provided as a public service by Build It Green, a professional non-profit whose mission is to promote healthy, energy and resource efficient buildings in California. Green The minimum requirements of GreenPoint Rated are: verification of 50 or more points; Earn the following minimum points per category: Energy (30), Indoor Air Quality/Health (5), Resources (6), and Water (9); and meet the prerequisites A.2.a, H10a., J.2, K7., and N.1. Projects meeting measure J4. Obtain EPA Indoor airPLUS Certification should automatically meet the requirements of 29 other measures; when J4 is chosen, these 29 measures will be highlighted in blue for your convenience. The criteria for the green building practices listed below are described in the GreenPoint Rated Single Family Rating Manual. For more information please visit www.builditgreen.org/greenpointrated 1. Protect Topsoil and Minimize Disruption of Existing Plants & Trees a. Protect Topsoil and Reuse after Construction b. Limit and Delineate Construction Footorint for Maximum Protection 2. Divert/Recycle Job Site Construction Waste (Including Green Waste and Existing Structures) a. Required: Divert 50% (by weight) of All Construction and Demolition Waste (Recycling or Reuse) b. Divert 100% of Asphalt and Concrete and 65% (by wei€)ht) of Remaining Materials c. Divert 100% of Asohalt and C'oncrete and 80% (bv weicht) of Remaininc Materials ~.,.,....,.~=~ 3. Use Recycled Content Aggregate (Minimum 25%) ......... p;;;:, I a. Walkway and Driveway Base b. Roadwav with J4: EPA I © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New HomeVersion 4.0 A PROGRAM OF BUILD IT GREEN rT~1 Points Targeted: 150 I 17 o Page fof 11 Drainage System irement associated with J4: EPA I Crawlspace . irement associated with J4: EPA L .. ,11. Design Landscape to Meet Water Budget a. Install Irrigation System That Will Be Operated at S70% Reference ET (Prerequisites for Credit are C1. and C2.) b. Install Irrigation System That Will Be Operated at S50% Reference ET (Prerequisites for Credit are C1, C2, and C6a or C6b.) © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 2 3 2 Page 2 of 11 c. Engineered Lumber for Roof Rafters d. Engineered or Finger-Jointed Studs for Vertical Applications e. Oriented Strand Board for Subfloor f. Oriented Strand Board for Wall and Roof Sh I ""1;=;,::\f=·;,....]-S=D=!ill=;~;""'~~15. ~~!:;;i~~:i~~~:~o~UdS and Timber (Minimum 40%) . ..... b. Panel Products (Minimum 6. Use Solid Wall Systems (Includes SIPS, ICFs, & Any Non-Stick Frame Assembly) a. Floors b. Walls Attic Insulation ~~~~"",8. Install Overhangs and Gutters I a. Minimum 16-lnch Overhangs and Gutters b. Minimum 24-lnch Overhanas and Gutters 9. Reduce Pollution Entering the Home from the Garage [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] a. Install Garage Exhaust Fan OR Build a Detached Garage b. Tightly Seal the Air Barrier between Garage and Living Area (Performance Test © Build It Green Total Points Available in Structural Frame and Building Envelope = 39 Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 ~ = rn 'c CD ::l CiS Co) >-CD 10. E C) ~ II 10. E 10. (; ! CD 0 c::: ~ 3: 0 w Page 3 of 11 1. Distribute Domestic Hot Water Efficiently (Max. 5 pOints, G1 a. is a Prerequisite for G1 b-e) a. Insulate All Hot Water Pipes [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] b. Use Engineered Parallel Plumbing c. Use Engineered Parallel Plumbing with Demand Controlled Circulation Loop(s) d. Use Traditional Trunk, Branch and Twig Plumbing with Demand Controlled Circulation Loop(s) e. Use.Central Core PI © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 Page 4 of 11 Control a. Required: Compliance with ASHRAE 62.2 Mechanical Ventilation Standards (as adopted in Title 24 Part 6) [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] b. Advanced Ventilation Practices (Continuous Operation, Sone Limit, Minimum Efficiency, Minimum Ventilation Rate, Homeowner Instructions) c. Outdoor Air Ducted to Bedroom and Livina Areas of Home 11. Install Carbon Monoxide Alarm(s) (or No Combustion Appliances in Living Space and No Attached Garage) credit is a reauirement associated with J4: EPA © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 = f::! ;:, ... o Q) U) -Q) CIS a: 3: Page 5 of 11 1. Building Envelope Diagnostic Evaluations a. Verify Quality of Insulation Installation & Thermal Bypass Checklist before Drywall [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] b. House Passes Blower Door Test [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] c. Blower Door Results are Max 2.5 ACH so for Unbalanced Systems (Supply or Exhaust) or Max 1.0 ACH so for Balanced Systems (2 Total Points for J1 b. and J1 c.) . read Signed by a CABEC Certified Energy Plans © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 Page 6 of 11 © Build It Green Single Family Checklist .New Home Version 4.0 >--·c ::J E E 0 0 >-C) ... CD r:: W .s:: fI) -CD cu U CD ... :::J: II ... (3 CD -CIS S == R 4 2 2 Page 7 of 11 4. Install Built-In Recycling Center or Composting Center a. Built-In Recycling Center b. Built-In Comoostina Center ........,,..,..,.....~=~5. Install High-Efficacy Lighting and Design Lighting System " a. Install High-Efficacy Lighting b. Install a Lighting System to IESNA Footcandle Standards or Hire Lighting Consultant 1. Develop Infill Sites a. Project is an Urban Infill Development b. Home(s)/Develooment is Located within 1/2 Mile of a ~==,..,..,.....~3. Cluster Homes & Keep Size in Check IS;;;;fiihtOn ::;:<1 a. Cluster Homes for Land Preservation b. Conserve Resources by Increasing Density (10 Units per Acre or Greater) c. Home Size Efficiency i. Enter Average Unit Square Footage ii. Enter Averaae Number of Bedrooms/Unit 4. Design for Walking & Bicycling ......,.......,.,..,..,.....=-" a. Site Has Pedestrian Access Within 1/2 Mile of Community Services: TIER 1: Enter Number of Services Within 1/2 Mile 1) Day Care -2) Community Center 3) Public Park 4) Drug Store 5) Restaurant 6) School 7) Library 8) Farmer's Market 9) After School Programs 10) Convenience Store Where Meat & Produce are Sold TIER 2: Enter Number of Services Within 1/2 Mile 1) Bank 2) Place of Worship 3) Laundry/Cleaners 4) Hardware 5) Theater/Entertainment 6) Fitness/Gym 7) Post Office 8) Senior Care Facility 9) Medical/Dental 10) Hair Care 11) Commercial Office or Major Employer 12) Full Scale Supermarket i. 5 Services Listed Above (Tier 2 Services Count as 1/2 Service Value) ii. 10 Services Listed Above (Tier 2 Services Count as 1/2 Service Value) © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 >-:5 II) -'c CI) :::J Cii U >-CI) a.. E C) J: II a.. E a.. (3 CI) CI) -0 c ~ ~ 0 w Page 8 of 11 b. Development is Connected with A Dedicated Pedestrian Pathway to Places of Recreational Interest Within 1/4 mile c. Install Traffic Calming Strategies (Minimum of Two): -Designated Bicycle Lanes are Present on Roadways; -Ten-Foot Vehicle Travel Lanes; -Street Crossings Closest to Site are Located Less Than 300 Feet Apart; -Streets Have Rumble Strips, Bulbouts, Raised Crosswalks or Refuge Islands 5. Design for Safety & Social Gathering 1~,\~;~}~:>~Y::::e::::'s;~5;~' -., a. All Home Front Entrances Have Views from the Inside to Outside Callers b. All Home Front Entrances Can be Seen from the Street and/or from Other Front Doors c. Orient Porches (min. 100sf) to Streets and Public Spaces d. Develooment Includes a Social Gatherin 6. Design for Diverse Households (6a. is a Prerequisite for 6b. and 6c.) a. All Homes Have At Least One Zero-Step Entrance b. All Main Floor Interior Doors & Passageways Have a Minimum 32-lnch Clear Passage Space c. Locate Half-Bath on the Ground Floor d. Provide Full-Function I 1. Stormwater Control: Prescriptive Path (Maximum of 3 Points, Mutually Exclusive with PA2.) a. Use Permeable Paving for 25% of Driveways, Patios and Walkways b. Install Bio-Retention and Filtration Features c. Route Downspout Through Permeable Landscape d. Use Non-Leaching Roofing Materials e. Include Smart Street/Driveway Design 2. Stormwater Control: Performance Path (Mutually Exclusive with PA1): Perform Soil Percolation Test and Caoture and Treat 85% of Total Annual Runoff rement D. Structural Frame & Building Envelope ~==="",1. Design, Build and Maintain Structural Pest and Rot Controls a. Locate All Wood (Siding, Trim, Structure) At Least 12" Above Soil b. All Wood Framing 3 Feet from the Foundation is Treated. with Borates (or Use Factory-Impregnated Materials) OR Walls are Not Made of Wood 2. Use Moisture Resistant Materials in Wet Areas: Kitchen, Bathrooms, Utility Rooms, and Basements [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] 1. Vegetated Roof (Minimum 25%) © Build It Green 'Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 2 Page 9 of 11 ~~-.,."~.",,G. Plumbing 1;);NJiiiiij:M.~.~; .. '\"11, Greywater .Pre-Plumbing (Includes Clothes Washer at Minimum) 2. Greywater System Operational (Includes Clothes Washer at Minimum) 3. Innovative Wastewater Technology (Constructed Wetland, Sand Filter, Aerobic System) Ie mBD,: .;':;;;14. Composting or Waterless Toilet 5. Install Drain Water Heat-Recovery System 6. Install a Hot Water Desuoerheater H. Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning 1. Humidity Control Systems (Only in California Humid/Marine Climate Zones 1,3,5,6,7) [*This credit is a requirement associated with J4: EPA lAP] HVAC Svstem to Manual T for Cani<>+ar 1. Materials Meet SMaRT Criteria the number of N. Other 1. Detailed Durability Plan and Third-Party Verification of Plan Implementation 2. Educational Signage of Project's Green Features Ib'(~{"~'hi~!¥:~,e~,$~i'i'~>ii~>1 a. Promotion of Green Building Practices b. Installed Green Building Educational Signage 3. Innovation: List innovative measures that meet green building objectives. Enter in the number of points in each category for a maximum of 4 points for the measure in the blue cells. Points achieved column will be automatically fill in based on the sum of the points in each category. Points and measures will be evaluated by Build It Green. © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 >. J: en -'c -Q) ::l >. 'iii ~ E Q) JI ... C) J: E ... (; ~ Q) 0 c::: S 3: 0 w Page 10 of 11 Project has not yet met the following recommended minimum requirements: -Total Project Score of At Least 50 Points -Required measures: -A3a: 50% waste diversion by weight -H10a: Compliance with ASHRAE 62.2 Mechanical Ventilation Standards -J2: 15% above Title 24 ~ ·c ::::I E E 0 0 = U) CI) "i u >-"- C) :::E: JI "- "-" .s CI) c ca W ~ 3= -K7: Reduce Formaldehyde in Interior Finish -Meet Current CARB A TCM for Composite Wood Formaldehyde Limits by Mandatory Compliance Dates -N1: Incorporate GreenPoint Rated Checklist into blueprints -Minimum points in specific categories: -Energy (30 points) -IAQ/Health (5 points) -Resources (6 points) -Water (9 points) © Build It Green Single Family Checklist New Home Version 4.0 Page 11 of 11 Date: To: From: Subject: Attachment F PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION DIVISION MEMORANDUM May 19,2010 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Amy French, Planning Manager 805 Los Trancos Road Additional Condition The applicant plans to construct the bridge over Buckeye Creek prior to commencing construction activity on the home. The family has obtained a temporary construction easement across the land to the south which accesses Los Trancos Road directly (on the same side of Buckeye Creek as the proposed home) so there will be access provided on both sides of Buckeye Creek in order to build the bridge without impacting Buckeye Creek. Staff has suggested the following additional condition of approval, and the applicant concurs with the condition: "The applicant shall provide temporary construction access on both sides of the creek to avoid having to impact Buckeye Creek during construction." This will become Condition of Approval #57 in the staff report to City Council. ) ) ITEM NO.1 805 LOS TRANCOS ROAD CORRESPONDENCE AND ATTACHMENTS ) Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Lee, Elena Monday, March 22, 2010 6:53 PM Betten, Zariah Subject: FW: Fencing Plan ) Attachments: L-3,3.19.10.pdf; Portola Valley comment letter.pdf; ViewFence_706LosTrancos.jpg Please forward to the Commissioners Page 1 of1 Please find attached a comment letter from the Town of Portola Valley Planning Commission, a revised fence plan and a photo of the proposed fence. Fence: In response to concerns from staff and the Midpeninsula Open Space District, the applicant has revised the fence plan to enhance animal passage on site. In consultation with the other agencies, the applicant has removed most of the fence along Los Trancos Road. Fencing remains only along the driveway and around the residence. The applicant is proposing fencing that has been approved by Dave Dockter as appropriate in the OS district and for wildlife safety. A copy of the revised fence plan is attached. The applicant will revised the plan set to incorporate the new proposal prior to review by the City Council should the Commission recommend the project move forward. Landscaping: In response to a concern raised by the Portola Valley, the applicant is working with the Planning arborist to replace to the two proposed canary island palm trees with an alternative palm tree species. As requested by the Portola Valley Planning Commission, the new tree will be limited to a lower growing drought resistant variety. The applicant will specify a tree subject to the approval of the Planning arborist and Planning Director prior to the submittal of a building permit. However, it is likely that one will be chosen prior to the City Council hearing should the Commission forward the application. With these changes, staff believes that all of the issues raised by the other agencies have been resolved. From: Mark Conroe [mailto:mark@presidiodp.com] Sent: Monday, March 22, 20107:40 AM To: Lee, Elena Subject: Fencing Plan Elena, Here is the fencing plan you requested which eliminates essentially all (97%) of the fencing along Los Trancos. Please call my cell at 415/309-1958 if you have any questions. Thanks, Mark 3/23/2010 ,... .. / .. ...... :"';; ... / BUCKE~E CREEK .------- "\ " .. -Z~:~<:~;.;-:~ (' / / ( i ' ....... " , \,. -------r-""'''''''''/ / ~j\ ~. ii' \ -----------------.. / /~.--\~J:.:~:r.::< r i, f! i. /-\ \ ~. "\ ·_,.,~" •• .,w> '" " ; '/ ' ; -~'~~~~~~~~~0:~)~~}~~~~::- ,'J: '\', ~,\, i/', ... "( ~ ,,~~ \\ \~:~~Z"".), . ( " ,,~, " \" /, \, ./ /) '<~~~~~~-- " "." -./ FENCING LEGEND ---0---0---0--PROPOSED TYPE I FENCE (SEE DETAIL L SHEEY L-j) POPOSED TYPE II FENCE. (SEE DETAIL 2. SHEET L-I) 0' tS' 30' 60' ,....~ i $= FENCING PLAN ~ SCALE, to = 30' REVISIONS: ~y: &:. I~~h~ L-J •. H. ~ U) ~ ~Q;:$ ~<~ d~o :::ECZ)~ <8~ ~ZU Q < ~ ~~o ·O~~ .~ CZ) ~ :::40< (/)~o ZtrlH ~0<t: OOOj:l., ~ ~ CIJ rna..lt)!!J 2 ~~~~ .~ ~~~~ o 0 ci<l! ~ ~ ~o~ -< g,:g~ >< at ~II o ~~~~ ~ 'd()~l! til ~ !;:<i ::r::...J Nf1J£ A DATE: 10/01107 DRAWN: S.W.H. SCALE: I" ~ 30' JOB NO: 200712 FENCING PLAN SHEET NUMBER L-3&:. OF 3 SHEETS ) t;OW'l1 of 'Pj~C}'}®LA VALLE~ \ \/:4'f:~-"-< "7·./ Town Hall: 765 Portola Road, Portola ~\(~1:rn ,::4:028 Tel: (650) 851-1700 Fax: (650) 851-4677 ~ .. ~ ~::lJ~~: ... !~.:~~ ,~f? Mr. Dan Garber, Chair Planning Commission City of Palo Alto" 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Subject: Langenskiod Family Trust Project, File Number 041PT -2217 Dear Mr. Garber, March 18, 2010 Thank you for referring the above project to the Town of Portola Valley for review and comment. Our planning commission reviewed the project at its meeting last night. Our town planner, George Mader reported on his March 16 discussions with Elena Lee of your planning department and March 18 discussions with Mark Conroe, the applicant. Both were very helpful in helping us to understand the project. I would like to offer a few comments. The project, both in terms of size and overall design, is not one that we believe fits in with the natural surroundings of Portola Valley. However, given this project falls under the purview of Palo Alto we understand Portola Valley has limited ability to influence the design. Should Palo Alto go ahead with the project as designed, we believe there are certain steps that can be taken to minimize the visual impact the project will have on Portola Valley residents: 1. The plans include two Canary, isiand Date.'· p~i'l1l trees. The~e tr~es' ~a~. re,~ch. up to 60 feet in height in time rising considerably abqve the surrounding oak canopy. 'While the intent is for the project to b~ compatible with the natural qualities. of the site, palm trees are not compatible. External views of such mature trees would be highly out of place given the. oak and grassland setting., Mr. Conroe informed us that he would be willing to consider this matter. While a different type of tree would be preferable, if he really wants palm trees, we recommend that a different variety be used. There are varieties, for instance, that would not exceed 20 to 30 feet. We would urge that the palm trees, if permitted, be limited to ~ height not to exceed 30 feet. 2. Portola Valley residents traveling on Los T.rancos Road to t~e Portola Glen Estates or the Blue Oak.s sub¢visio'ns drive by the. "Site daily. Most of the ,site . is well screened by vegetation from passersby. There is, however, 'a str~tch oflOO to 200' feet where the site is highly visible. This strip of. land between Mr. Conroe's property and the road is owned by Mr. Neely whose property extends across the road from the other side. Mr. Conroe informed us that he would be willing to provide some screen planting between his property and the road provided Mr. Neely would give permission for planting on his property. We would urge that as part of the project screen planting be installed along this stretch of land, provided permission from Mr. Neely can be obtained .. 3. The curr~nt plans call for a numbe~ of native '-shr~bs to be' pia'nte~" .aI6~g. the riparian corridor at th~':back of: the·prop~rty .. We fully. support this a,nd-..appredate,.the effo.rts to screen :the project· from' the~ 'residence~ on'. Valley ·Oak in :Port.ola' Valley _Ranch, for without this planting part of the proposed residence, and in particular, much of the hardscape and grounds would be visible from Valley Oak. We thank Palo Alto for providing the opportunity to review the plans and the cooperation of your staff. We hope you will stipulate revisions to the plan consistent with our concerns. Sincerely, D~~[:t Portpla Valley Planning Co.mmission cc. Mr. Mark Conroe Ms. Elena Lee GYP -Ferice x;.41,(1 HdME 6F . PEOVIED Ty pt2 ..T- -4c-e woe Typ riot) ?O S2 QS vi uvs(y fo S05 LO S TRARCOS RO AD PALO ALTO, CA [ 7/P^DJ , ousTAuCORPOR Anon MCTED LANGENSKIOLD FAMILY TRUST 111 11111 11111 7" f ka 111 H111111111' . Nlilnl 1 11111111111D „ n1I IU11II1III, W111111I !I WIN ippon 'UIIIt111PIltltl DU n1ltiltt111111113i4 Inhnnlunml Betten, Zariah Subject: FW: Comments for the Planning Commission hearing March 24: 805 Los Trancos Road -.;.. - --Original Message-- --- From: Len Lehmann [mailto:len@vitelus.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 8:02 AM To: Williams, Curtis Subject: Comments for the Planning Commission hearing March 24: 805 Los Trancos Road Curtis Williams Director of Planning and Community Environment City of Palo Alto Re: The Langenskiold Family Trust residence development at 805 Los Trancos Road Mr. Williams: I am unable to attend the public hearing of the Planning and Transportation Commission scheduled for March 24th, and request that these comments be forwarded to the Commissioners and included in the public record. I reside at 850 Los Trancos Road, in Palo Alto, adjacent to the subject property at 805 Los Trancos. Mr. Conroe, the applicant, has shared with me his development plan drawings. I have also observed the story poles on the subject property. I am familiar with the City' s development guidelines as they apply within the OS District. Mr. Conroe's planned residence appears to be well-conceived and will have minimal impact on surrounding waterways and riparian habitat, eXisting trees, and public views. He has connected to the local sanitary sewer system. He has been planning this project for an unusual amount of time and has been very thoughtful in considering the many issues. I support the project and look forward to having his family as neighbors. Respectfully, Leonard Lehmann 1 ) Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Lee, Elena Tuesday, March 23, 20105:15 PM Betten, Zariah Subject: FW: fencing for Conroe project at 805 Los Trancos Road ) Attachments: MROSD comments.pdf; DOC1 00323.pdf; story poles, 2.21.1 O.JPG; view of story poles from Los Trancos.JPG; 805 Los Trancos Colored Elevations 3.23.1 O.pdf Page 1 of 1 Please find attached a comment letter from the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. The District does not have objections after the redesign of the proposed fence, as shown in the revised fence plan that was forwarded to the Commissioners earlier today. Also attached is a labeled context location map. The map now identifies property lines, Foothills Park and Arastradero Preserve. The photos of the story poles originally 'provided in your packet are attached in color to this email to provide more information. Staff will provide detailed response to the Commissioners' questions on Wednesday. Please note that grading and drainage plans were provided in the packet as sheet C-1. A color elevation was also recently provided by the applicant. Hard copies will be available on Wednesday night. From: Julie Andersen [mailto:jandersen@openspace.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 12:53 PM To: Lee, Elena Cc: mark@presidiodp.com; Ana Ruiz Subject: RE: fencing for Conroe project at 805 Los Trancos Road Hi Elena, Please see our attached comment letter. The District has no additional project related concerns pertaining to wildlife fencing. Please note that Los Trancos Creek is utilized by steelhead rainbow trout, a federally threatened species. California Department of Fish and Game is the desi'gnated regulatory authority for threatened and endangered species in California. Please adhere to any comments they may have pertaining to project design and its impact to steelhead usage of the stream (if any). Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Julie Andersen 3/23/2010 Julie K. Andersen Resource Planner Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022 P: (650) 691-1200 -F: (650) 691-0485 Email: jandersen @openspace.org Web: WWW~.R~.!J.§Q'§.Q~J>19.1 twitter: @mrosd Regional OpenSpace f.,.1idpeninsu!a Re.gional Open Space. District March 19, 2010 Elena Lee, Senior Planner City of Palo Alto Ms. Lee~ The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Site plan for the proposed development located at 805 Los Trancos Road. Upon initial review, the District had concerns regarding the type and anlount of fencing proposed for the property along Los Trancos Road, as well as along the drive way and sUlTounding the home. As initially designed the type; height, length, and placement of fencing would act as a banier in a sensitive riparian area that is cUlTently used by wildlife. These issues were discussed by telephone with the project proponent Mr. Mark Conroe on Iv1arch 17, 2010. A pUblication that discusses w.ildlife friendly fencing design was provided to Mr. Conroe by email on March 17,2010. After reviewing the information, Mr. Conroe presented a proposed revision to his original fence design (see attached); In reviewing the revised design, it appears that Mr. Conroe will insta]] fencing " " sUlTounding the housing cOlnpound and a gated entryway, but will no longer add fenCing along the majority of Los Trancos Road, or sUlTounding that portion of the driveway that crosses Buckeye Creek Including these proposed revisions in. the project design will allow Mr. Conroe to install desired fencing while providing an imp0l1ant wildlife canidor albng Buckeye Creek, as well as allow for wildlife crossing of Los Trancos Creek and continuing eastward across the property. As revised, the project plans will reduce the overall anlount of fencing installed and will be more favorable to continued movement of wild lite tlrrough the project area. Habitat for steelhead rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a federally listed threatened species within the Central California Coast Evo.lutionalY Significant Unit occurs in the project area within Los Trancos Creek. Ongoing coordination with the California Depaltment of Fish and Game should occur to ensure that project design does not impact use of Los Trancos Creek by steelhead trout. Although the project will add a built feature, the size, location, and design of the project is in keeping with the surrounding rural residential area. Views into the project area are undisturbed, the stluctu.re is visible in areas where the viewshed is ah-eady iInpacted. by surrounding stluctures, and is not visible in areas where no structures are visible. No other project concerns were identified. The District appreciates the efforts of the project proponent and the City to reduce the project footprint and to provide continued public and agency revie"\v of the project. Sincerely, -~~ Ana Ruiz Planning Manager ) Received MAR 242010 Departme.nt of Planning & Commumty Environment Palo Alto Planning Department 250 Hamilton Palo Alto, CA 94301 ) 20 Coyote Hill Portola Valley, CA 94028 March 21,2010 Re: Langenskiod Project #041 PT-2217 Dear Planning Department: Recently I viewed this proposed site and must say it looks terribly grand and out of place with the surroundings. Especially if Date Palms are planted. Here in Portola Valley we pride ourselves in harmonizing with the natural surroundings by planting oaks, redwoods and native shrubs. There are many large homes in our Blue Oaks subdivision that are large and handsome, yet hewing to the concept of harmonizing with the natural vegetative patterns of the hillsides. Please, help us be able to say: "Welcome to the Neighborhood!" Marilyn J. t'''q::\j tU1L/ _____ ~t_'4·\,;'t"'''~'''' .. " .. '" .. i;.<';·,0:}y __ < ___ _ NATURAL RESOURC E ASSESSMENT AND RESTORATION SERVIC ES March 22, 2010 To: City of Palo Alto Planning Commission Members RE: COMMENTS FOR 805 LOS TRANCOS RD. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR CONROE PROPERTY Dear Planning Commissioners, I was born and raised in Portola Valley near Los Trancos Creek and I have been working as a professional biological consultant and volunteer with the San Francisquito . Watershed Council, within the San Francisquito Creek watershed, for the past 13 years. I started the Watershed Council's Steelhead Task Force in 2000 and have been deeply involved with assessing and restoring the Federally Threatened steelhead trout to our creek throughout this time. I have also served as the Central California Coast Society for Conservation Biology co-President and currently serve on the Conservation Committee for the California-Nevada Chapter of the American Fisheries Society. The property being proposed for development of an over 11,000 square foot house occurs is a critical area for the Federally Threatened steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Both Los Trancos Creek and Buckeye Creek (sometimes called the East Fork of Los Trancos Creek) currently contains listed steelhead trout and both creeks are federally listed as "Critical Habitat" for steelhead. See the underwater photo at the end of this letter of wild juvenile stee1head and native California roach taken while surveying fish populations in Los Trancos Creek not far downstream from this proposed development. Members of the San Francisquito Watershed Council have identified steelhead in Los Trancos Creek along this area, as well as within Buckeye Creek up to the Los Trancos Road culvert crossing, over the past decade. Buckeye Creek is a critically important tributary stream that provides all surface flows to Los Trancos Creek during summer and fall of drier years. The Mitigated Negative Declaration fails to acknowledge the ecological significance of these creeks for steelhead. It is my professional opinion that the following changes should be made: Riparian Corridor (pg. 3) The document states "The applicant proposes to construct a natural earth berm, two to three feet in height, along the 50 feet top of back setback area to clearly define and protect what would be the undisturbed riparian corridor." Why would an applicant propose to build a 2- 3 foot high berm adjacent to the riparian setback of a creek to "protect" the riparian cooridor? It sounds like a proposal to build an earthen levee to prevent possible high flows 1 from entering the property. The document states "Other than the culvert used to allow Buckeye Creek to continue flow undisturbed under the new driveway, no changes are proposed to Buckeye Creek." If a new driveway is proposed over a creek that has listed steeij1.ead and is Critical Habitat, then NOAA and DFG should be consulted and the culvert mentioned should be removed and the stream channel restored with no instream culvert that may be a partial fish passage barrier during certain flows. Stream flow through a culvert cannot be classified as "undisturbed". Grading (pg. 3) The document states "A majority of the grading work will be done for the building pad, swimming pool, culvert for Buckeye Creek ... " The document continues to state "A condition of approval will require the applicant to obtain and submit all required pennits or letters stating permits are not required from outside agencies, including the Department of Fish and Game and the US Army Corps of Engineers, for the proposed culvert and creek work as appropriate." Any grading at a culvert, within or adjacent to a stream channel will require permits from DFG and Us. Army Corps with NOAA consultation. Page 9 Table D. Biological Resources a) I believe this row should be listed as a "Potentially Significant Issues" check box due to the fact that this proposed development will occur at the confluence of two critically important streams with federally listed steelhead occurring in both. b) I believe this row should be listed as a "Potentially Significant Issues" check box due to the fact that both adjacent streams are listed as Critical Habitat by NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service and riparian corridors occur adjacent to and across the proposed development site. c) Depending on the proposed creek channel impacts adjacent to Buckeye Creek this row may need to be listed as a "Potentially Significant Issues" check box due to the fact any modifications to any of the stream channels or grading at culvert could impede the highly migratory steelhead trout. The meadow is also a well known deer rutting area in the Fall and fawning location in the Spring that should qualify as "native wildlife nursery site". d) and e) I believe both of these rows should be listed as a "Potentially Significant Issues" check box due to the listing of both streams as Critical Habitat by NOAA. State Department of Fish and Game conservation plans may also apply here as the San Francisquito Creek steelhead population is a high priority steelhead recovery stream for DFG. Discussion (pg. 9) The document states "no sensitive or protected species of plant or animal life have been directly observed on the site". Buckeye Creek traverses the site and contains steelhead trout as noted by a 2002 San Francisquito Watershed Council Table San Francisquito Creek Watershed SteelheadlRainbow Trout (0. mykiss Observations and Distribution 1999-2001 (File attached in email). 2 Mandatory Findings or Significance -Table Q (pg. 28-29) a) It is my opinion that this row should be listed as "Potentially Significant Issues" due to the already stated concerns above about impacts to threatened steelhead, Critical Habitat, in stream work at culvert, and impacts to these two riparian corridors. I strongly urge the Planning Commission to not recommend that the City Council adopt this Mitigated Negative Declaration nor approve the Site and Design Review application as they stand. The documents submitted need to be updated and corrected with the above information and both NOAA Fisheries and California Department ofFish and Game personnel should be asked for input on this critically important land use discussion and document preparation. Please include this letter in the public record for this property, Planning Commissioner packets, and records for the March 24, 2010 Planning and Transportation Commission Meeting. Thank you for your time and consideration and please contact me with any questions you may have. Matt Stoecker Owner and Principle Biologist Stoecker Ecological 3130 Alpine Rd. #288-411 Portola Valley Ca. 94028 matt@stoeckerecological.com www.stoeckerecological.com (650) 380-2965 mobile cc: NOAA-National Marine Fisheries Service California Department of Fish and Game Members of San Francisquito Watershed Project-Acterra 3 Two federally threatened steelhead trout juveniles and California roach in Los Trancos Creek. Matt Stoecker 4 RESPONSES TO COMMISSION'S REQUESTS 805 Los Trancos Road Responses to Commissioner Martinez's Questions 1. Can you ask the Applicant to provide a Grading and Drainage plan? Sheet L-2 shows substantial grading but nowhere can lfind how run off is managed. Staff Response: A grading and drainage plan was included in the packet plan set. Please refer to sheet C-2 and ER-1 for the information. The project was designed to direct runoff to swales and landscaping to maximize filtration. 2. The house is being raised 8' above natural grade. Why? Staff Response: The house is being raised because the natural grade slopes up from 510 to 516 towards the south of the site. Fill is being added to make the house level at a pad level of 516.50 and a finish floor level of 518.70. Applicant Response: The home pad is at 516' and the garage pad is at 513.58'. The existing grade in the area of the garage and home varies from 511' to 514'. Therefore for the home and garage to be on the same level, the site needs to be leveled, which means that there is minor cut and fill that takes place; more specifically the area round the garage is cut around l' and the home pad is filled around 4' on avereage. Refer to Civil Plan C-2 for more detail. 3. Are the heights of the story poles 25' or are they measuredfrom the proposedfinishfloor (518') + 5' which equals 33' ? Staff Response: The height of the story poles is 33 to show the maximum height of the proposed structure. 4. Discounting the basement excavation, there is substantial grading and fill leading up to the house (L- 2). Yet, the Report says there is less than 1 cubic yard offill. Please clarify. The projectproposes 625 cubic yards of fill to accommodate the development, as shown in the both the plans and staff report. 5. Please provide a map that shows ownership of surrounding lands. Are the hills visible to the west in public ownership? Staff Response: An annotated map is attached. The hills to the west are within the Town of Portola Valley. The hill is part of the Portola Valley Ranch Planned Development. There are no public parks within that development. 6. The plans call for a joint trench. I don't believe that electricity (lnd gas can be run in the same trench. Please confirm. Staff Response: Staff will work with utilities to ensure that there are adequate trenches for utilities. Applicant Response: If required, we will run 2 trenches side by side in the same area as shown on the plan for trenching. Impervious Propo,sed square surface* footage that would count as impervious surface j House footprint 3,705 3,705 sq. ft. Garage and 1,472 breezeway 1,472 sg. ft. Pool coping 230 230 sq. ft. Driveway apron 0 1,440 sq. ft. (75 % permeable) Rear patio 0 250 sq. ft. (75% l!ermeable) Swimming Pool 0 1,350 sq. ft. Total 5402 sq. ft. 805 Los Trancos Road Impervious and Pervious Coverage Tables March 24, 2010 Maximum Conformance Maximum allowed in the to 2007 allowed under ordinance (2007) Ordinance 2009.0rdinance the project is (5%) subject to (3.5% ) 5402 sq. ft. Yes 7,724 sq. ft. Proposed square Conformance footage that to 2009 would count as Ordinance impervious surface in 2009 Ordinance 3,705 1,472 230 360 63 1,350 7,145 sq. ft. Yes *Under the 2007 ordinance, any type of permeable paver is considered fully permeable. Per the 2009 ordinance, partially permeable pavers would be granted credit for only the percentage of permeability. Additionally, the approximately 1350 sq. ft. swimming pool would also be considered an impervious surface under today's regulation. 805 Los Trancos Road Stream Conidor Protection Ordinance Compliance March 24, 2010 The project was submitted prior to the adoption of the Stream Conidor Protection Ordinance. Although it was not subject to the ordinance, it was designed to meet the requirements, as demonstrated in the table below. The Ordinance was adopted by the City in 2007 in response a cooperative effort with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). Prior to 2007, the SCVWD reviewed any work proposed within 50 feet of any recognized water ways per their ordinance. The SCVWD ordinance requires only that a permit is obtained for work within 50 feet and did not identify any regulations. To provide more detailed and consistent review and implementation, the City adopted the specific regulations in the Stream Conidor Protection ordinance to regulate construction near recognized water ways. The City's ordinance incorporates specific provisions that would meet the SCVWD standards and the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Stream Corridor Protection Compliance Regulation Slope Stability Protection Area: All development shall be located outside the slope stability protection area or 20 feet landwardfrom the top of bank or to a point measured at a ratio of 2:1. Given the shallow nature of the stream, 20 feet would be considered the farthest point. New fences shall be at least 5 feet landward from the top of bank Native riparian vegetation within 100 feet of top of bank shall be retained or removed only upon approval of the Planning and Community Environment Planting of non-native species is not permitted Accessory uses, such as trash enclosures, shall be located at least 50 feet from the top of bank Proposal The residence is more than 50 feet away from either Los Trancos Creek or Buckeye Creek top of bank. All acti vi ty is proposed to be placed at least 50 feet from the top of the Los Trancos Creek Bank. Fences are proposed at least 50 feet from the top of the Los Trancos Creek top of bank and 25 feet from Buckeye Creek. Applicant is working with Planning arborist to maintain riparian vegetation and to plant additional as required. Non riparian vegetation is only approved beyond the 100 foot area. Only native riparian species is proposed along the riparian conidor. No structures are proposed within 50 feet of the top of bank. Conformance Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Nighttime lighting shall be All lighting is directed away from Yes directed away from the riparian Los Trancos Creek and Buckeye corridor Creek. Only low level down lighting is proposed. Irrigation systems shall be Primarily drought resistant species Yes designed to avoid soil erosion are proposed and the irrigation system has been designed to avoid soil erosion. Distance between nighttime No lights are proposed within the Yes lighting and riparian corridor protected riparian corridor of Los shall be maximized Trancos Creek and the smaller Buckeye Creek. Bright color and glossy or -glare-No bright colors or glare Yes producing finishes on buildings producing elements are proposed. shall not face riparian areas. Non-reflective building materials are incorporated into the project. Regulation Minimum Site Area Impervious Area Floor Area Ratio Front Setback Interior Side Yard Street Side Yard Rear Setback Crediting of permeable surfaces REVISED ATTACHMENT F ZONING COMPLIANCE TABLE 805 Los Trancos Road / 04IPT-2217 March 24, 2010 Proposed Required/ Conformance Permitted in to 2007 2007* requirements 3.55 acres (154, 10 acres Existing 479 sq. ft.) condition 5,407 square 3.5% or 5,407 Conforms feet sq. feet 0.058: 1 or 8,904 No restrictions Conforms sq. ft. > 30 feet 30 feet Conforms > 30 feet 30 feet Conforms 30 feet 30 feet Conforms 30 feet 30 feet Conforms At least 75% No restrictions Conforms permeable on type of permeable surface that can be deducted from total impervious surface Current Code Requirement as adopted in 2009 10 acres 5% 0.05:1 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet All paved surfaces shall be classified as 100%, 750/0, 50%, or 25% impervious and credited accordingly * Chapter 18.28 (OS District) Regulations at time application was submitted in 2004 & revised in 2007. The project is not subject to the current code requirements. However, the data is being provided for comparison -only. rage 1 or 1 Betten, Zariah From: Lee, Elena Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 12:47 PM To: Betten, Zariah Subject: 805 Los Trancos photos Importance: High Attachments: Vista Point.JPG; Shotgun Fire Rd, view 1.JPG; Shotgun Fire Rd, view 2.JPG; Trappers Fire Rd Photo.JPG -----Original Message----- From: Mark Conroe [mailto:mark@presidiodp.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 12:36 PM To: Lee I Elena Subject: RE: photo request Importance: High Elena, As requested, I took photos this morning from both Vista Point in.Foothills Park and on the Los Trancos Trail both at the peak of Shotgun Fire Rd and Trappers Fire Rd looking towards 805 Los Trancos to see if there were any views of the subject site. At no time was 805 Los Trancos Rd sighted; since the site is in a valley with 200-300' high hills sULrounding it (Portola Valley Ranch homes to the west and the McNealy/Hewlett/Arrillaga properties to the east), I was unable to find any angle where the site could be seen. I have attached 4 photos: #1: Taken from Vista Point in Foothills Park looking towards the subject (805 Los Trancos Rd). As noted thereon, Blue Oaks development in Portola Valley is very visible. The subject cannot be seen since it is in the valley below. #2: Taken from the high vista point on Trappers Fire Rd; as noted thereon, Portola Valley Ranch homes along the ridge are easily seen. The subject cannot be seen since it is in the valley several hundred feet below. #3 and #4 (which form a panoramic·view when put side by side): Both taken from Shotgun Fire Rd at the vista point which provides the best view of the area towards the subject; as noted thereon, Blue Oaks development and Portola Valley Ranch homes are easily seen. The subject cannot be seen since it is in the valley below. In conclusion, in my exploration from both of these parks, I was unable to see the subject property; the surrounding hills are easily seen but the valley floor (where the subject home is located) below was not seen. Mark 3/24/2010 I~ i! eel l Y ,", '" Palo lAlto Lee Ani II a £:a -,. ........ )\rri j l~lga .' 80S 'Los Trancos Rei Con text lVlap Arrill~lga ~ . . Fc)Othi I (s Park"> This Illap is a product of the Cty of Paio Alto GIS Legend ~~ Historic Site ~ Near Creek (SCVWD) / .............. Curb Edge "..--Water Feature .,----Railroad The City of Palo Alto elee2, 2010'()3·23 10:14:29 (\\oC-maps\gla$lgis\admln\Pe .. ona~Plannlng.mdb) ) ) 805 Los Trancos Rd Context Map This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS --0' 1030' This document Is a graphic ,epre88ntation only 01 beat available aourcea The City of Palo Alto assume. no re8ponalbility for any errors Cl989 to 2010 City of Palo Alto +20.75' +32.83' 0S01JTlo1 a..EIIAT1ON 1""·.f4 0N011lTH ~ATlON 2V"~.T~ tl~ll:'Y-'\ f''''\;.; CONSTRUCT! ~ INCORPORA~ ---I:EVC.D.I :.=--.. ~ LANGENSKIOLD FAMILY TRUST 805 LOS TRANCOS ROAD. PALO ALTO. CA ~ /"-r---....,, NO. SHEETS