Item #6 4DR - Santa Clara County, California...2017/07/13 · Item #6 Staff Contact: Manira...

Counfy of Santa ClaraDepartment of Planning and DevelopmentPlanning office

county Governmenl Center, East Wing, 7th Floor70 West Hedding StreetSan Jose, california 951lG.l7o5@oal 299-'5770 FAX (4Oa) 248-9194www.sccplanning.org

STAFF REPORTZoning Administration

July 13, 2017

Item #6

Staff Contact: Manira Sandhir, Principal Planner(40 8 ) 299 - 57 87, manira. sandhir@Fln. scc qov. or g

File: 10687-1 4B.-l4G-1 4DRBuilding Site Approvalo Grading Approval and Design Review for apropose d 51263 sq. ft. two-story single-family residence.

Summary: Buitding Site Approval, Grading Approval, and Design Review to construct a new

5,263 square foot two-story single-family residence with partial basement and associated

improvements. Estimated grading quantities arc 4,589 cubic yards of cut and3,20l cubic yards

of filI.

Owner:Applicant:Address:APN:

Ruel and Evangeline PanganModem HouseAuguste Ct., Milpitas, CA 95035

029-3 5-005 and 029 -3 5 -007

Gen. Plan Designation: HillsidesZoníng: HS-d2Lot Size: 38.77 acres

Present Land Use: VacantSupervisorial District: 3

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

A. Approve the Initial Study and Negative Declaration.

B. Grant single building site approval, design review, and grading approval subject to

conditions, provided in Attachment B.

ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED

Attachment A - Initial Study and Negative DeclarationAttachment B - Proposed Conditions of ApprovalAttachment C - Location & Vicinity MapAttachment D - Proposed PlansAttachment E - Alternative Sites Feasibility Analysis

eoard of Supervisors: Mike wasserman, Cindy Chavez, Dave Cortese, Ken Yeager, S. Joseph SimitianCounty Executive: Jeffrey v Smith ffi

s.w

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project is for building site approval, grading approval, and design review for the

construction of a new 5,263 square foot two-story single-family residence on a 38.77 acre in the

Milpitas hillsides in unincorporated Santa Clara County. Associated site improvements include a

driveway, onsite wastewater system, water tanks, and a proposed solar PV system on grade. The

two water tanks are to be located southeast of the new residence below grade. Ground-mountedsolar panel affays are east of the building.

Grading for the project site improvements will include approximately 4,589 cubic yards (cy) ofcut and 3,201 cy of frll (total7,790 cy, net 1,388 cy). No trees are located on the site. Access to

the site is proposed via Auguste Court, in the City of Milpitas, at the northern property line, and

a long driveway along the easterly property line that ascends the knoll cn which the home is to

be located.

The subject property is situated among the lower foothills of the Mount Hamilton Range,

adjacent to the city limits and Urban Service Area boundary of the City of Milpitas on the northand west property lines. To the east is Ed Levin County Park, and to the south there is a surface

rnining operation (quarry) undergoing reclamation. The nearest residential uses are

approximateiy i,ûûû iinear feet to the northeasi of the proposeri'ouiiding site.

The property is located in the Santa ClaraValley Habitat Plan area. The property includesvegetative land covers of annual grassland, herbaceous and shrub/scrub.

The average slope of the property based on County GIS data is less than 25o/o. Portions of the

easterly half of the lot are 10-20% slope, and roughly the easterly two-thirds of the lot are located

in a County Landslide Hazard Study Zone.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Environmental Review and Determination (CEQA)The environmental impacts of the proposed project werc analyzed in an Initial Studyprepared by Staff, resulting in a proposed Negative Declaration (See Attachment A). Theaesthetic impacts of the proposed project and its visibility from the valley floor have been

addressed through the design review prooess and conditions of approval (See AttachmentB), such that, if approved, the design and conditions would limit the visibility, reflectivity,and glare from the residence.

B. ProjecUProposal1. General Plan - Ilillside Designation: The project is a single family residence within

Hillside land use designation, which permits low density residential use as furtherdefined and regulated through the Zoning Ordinance.a. The General Plan Growth and Development Chapter for Rural Unincorporated

Areas contains specific policies under Strategy #3,to Ensure EnvironmentallySafe and Aesthetic Hillside Development. To address policies intended to

File 10687-148- l4G- 14DRPangan Residence

Zonrng Administration HearingJuly 13,2017,Itern#6Page2

2

minimize or avoid unnecessary grading and for development of lots whichpropose hilltop or ridgeline development, the applicant's submitted an AlternativeSite Feasibility Analysis. This analysis evaluated several alternative sites using a

similar building pad and new driveway access for each. The conclusion of theanalysis resulted in a determination that the hilltop or knoll location may besupported with appropriate conditions, as the most geologically appropriatelocation, and further indicated that grading associated with other alternativelocations on site would be not be substantially reduced compared with theproposed project.

Zoning Ordinance:a. HS Zone. The single-family residential use is permitted use by right in the base

HS zoning district. The project also complies with the standard 30 footresidential setbacks.

b. -d2 Design Review Zone. The project has been designed to conform to theregulations of the -d2 Design Review Combining zoningdistrict for MilpitasHillsides (Section 3.20.050 of the County ZoningOrdinance). Specifically, theplans show a proposed residence in conformance with the following:i. Maximum house síze:ln42,the maximum permitted house size on lots

greater than 10 acres is 8,000 square feet. The proposed residence is 5,263

square feet.ii. Heíght: Maximum height allowed is27 feet over two stories in the -d2

district. The proposed residence is two stories, with the lower floor beingpartially below grade. The building utilizes anearly flat roof, which is 23

feet 1 inches high at its maximum height above finish grade.

iii. Color; The light reflectivity value (LRV) of the exterior surfaces of thestructure are limited to an LRV45 or lower. The proposed residenceincludes large expanses of windows on the upper floor, which can cause

glare and reflection depending on the angle of the sun, potentiallyresulting in visual impacts as viewed from the valley floor. The project has

been conditioned to require an anti-reflective coating or materials for allglass surfaces to achieve consistency with the 42 regulations..

iv. Crestline Areø Development Regulations: The project does not conflictwith the crestline-related provisions for the Milpitas hillside areas. Theproject was referred to the City of Milpitas and analyzed in consultationwith city staff. The location of the residence on a prominent knoll lies justbelow the Crestline zoîe as defined within the City's reglations. Based onthis analysis reviewing topographic data and field observations of originalstory pole installations, it appears that the house would not protrude above

the perceived crestline, and its low profile design would reduce potentialconflicts with the intent of the regulations.. The City also recommendednon-obtrusive materials and colors to minimíze any impacts. CountyStaff s recommended preliminary conditions include limiting lightreflectivity for building materials and new landscaping to further shieldthe residence adequately from the vantage points within the City ofMilpitas.

Zoning Administration HearingJuly 13, 2017,IIem#6

File I 0687-l4B-14G-l4DRPangan Residence

c.

File I 0687-14B-14c-14DRPangan Residence

Additionally, the house design features has large roof overhangs, whichhelp regulate sun exposure and produce shadows that reduce glare andvisibility.

Design Review, Chapter 5.50, Scope of Review. The project was evaluatedrelative to the following Design Review considerations:

A. Mitigation of any adverse visual impacts from proposed structures,grading, vegetation removal and landscaping;

Conditions of approval require building materiøls and landscaping whichwill reduce visibílity from the valley floor. No exístíng vegetatíon is to beremoved. Exísting rock outcroppíngs at the building síte wíll be preservedor relocated and utílized ín landscapíng design.

B. Compatibility with the natural environment;

The project is a single-fomíly residence and øssociated ímprovements. Theaccess driveway will be vísible from the east, but largely unseenfrom tltewest and valley floor. The dríveway design, cuts and fills will becompleted to blend in with the hillsides and be compatible wíth the naturalenvíronment.

C. Conformance with the "Design Review Guidelines," adopted by the Boardof Supervisors;

The project conforms with the adopted Desîgn Review Guídelínes. Thedesign is distínctly modern, with a long north south axis, very low slopingroof, and an upper floor that projects beyond the lower floor íncantileveredfashíon. The overall height of the buílding is simílar to amore tradítíonøl one-story home. Thefacades are generally uniþrm butthe west elevatíon is broken up by an entry gardenfeature and steps. Theoverall proportíons of the resídence result in a linearfaçade that is notbullE or obtrusive.

D. Compatibility with the neighborhood and adjacent development;

The project is not located within a defined urban or rural neighborhood.There are no immediately adjacent residential uses. The nearest homesqre approx,imately 1,000 linear feet to the northeast.

E. Compliance with applicable zoning district regulations; and

The project complies with the HS-d2 zoning dístrict standards asdemonstrated above.

Zoning Administration HearingJuly 13, 2017,Item#6

Conformance with the general plan, any applicable specific plan, or anyother applicable guidelines adopted by the Board of Supervisors orPlanning Commission.

There are no other applicable specífic plans or guidelines

Single Building Site Approval: The project conforms to the requirements of theCounty Ordinance Code for single building site approval, Section Cl2-300 et seq., as

conditioned by the referral agencies that reviewed the project. See Attachment B,Proposed Conditions of Approval.

Grading Approval: The project is subject to the following Grading Findings perCounty Ordinance Sec. Cl2-433

F

J

4.

File I 0687-l4B-l4G-14DRPangan Residence

An explanation of how the proposed development meets the required findings isshown in italics following each of findings below.

(a) The amount, design, location, and the nature of any proposed grading is necessary tocstablish or maintain a use presently permitted by law on the property.

A total of 7,790 cy of grading is associated with the proposed project. Estimatedquantíties of 4,589 cy of cut and 3,201 cy are proposedþr onsite improvements sucltas establíshing the access driveway, firetruck turnaround, and building site. Thebuílding excavation area is not includedþr purposes of Gradíng Approval. Thedmoltn¡ the desígn, the location and the nature of the proposed grading are deemednecessary to establish a single-famíly resídence; based on the required anølysís and

findings of the alternative sites evaluation.

(b) The grading will not endanger public and I or private property, endanger public healthand safety, will not result in excessive deposition of debris or soil sediments on anypublic right-of-way, or impair any spring or existing watercourse.

No grading wíll be deposited in any publíc right-of-way. There ís no creek locatedonsite and no grading is proposed neqr øny creek that may impair any exísting springor watercourse. The qccess driveway avoíds an area of lowlands and potentialwetlands just south of the city limits of Milpitas.

(c) Grading will minimize impacts to the natural landscape, scenic, biological andaquatic resources, and minimize erosion impacts.

The proposed grading has been designed to contour to the natural topography to themaximum extent possible with the residence and other improvements located at thetop of a lcnoll. The majority of the proposed grading is þr the driveway and buildingsite andfire turnaround. The Alternatives Analysís (Attachment E) indicates that


other possible building sites would result in commensurate gradíng, with the same orsimilar buílding design. Each alternatíve site would position the residence on the sideof a hillside portion of the lot, with íncreased grøding þr improvements such as a firetruck turnaround. TIte assocíated grading will not impose any impacts to the naturallandscape, biological or aquatíc resources.

(d) For grading associated with a new building or development site, the subject site shallbe one that minimizes grading in comparison with other available development sites,taking into consideration other development constraints and regulations applicable tothe project.

The proposed grading has been desígned to reduce the grading amounts. Alternatebuildíng sites proposed and analyzed would not have substantíally decreased thegrading due to retaining wqlls qnd turnaround requirements.

(e) Grading and associated improvements will conform with the natural terrain andexisting topography of the site as much as possible, and should not create a

signifi cant visual scar.

The proposed grading has been desígned to conþrm with natural terrain and exístingtopography to the maximum extent possible and to minímize grading and visualimpacts. Thefirst half of the drívewøyfollows the contours of the hillside thøt slopesdownward easterly towards Ed Levin Park. The remainder of the driveway achíevesqccess to the lcnoll in ø manner to mínimíze cuts and vísual impacts to the hillside.The proposed grading will not create any significant visual scar on the landscape asseenfrom the valley floor. Landscaping strategically place along the upper qccess

driveway and the house will shield any visible grading from the valley floor and blendthe house wíth the naturøl dppedrance of the híllsides.

(Ð Grading conforms with any applicable general plan or specific plan policies; and

The proposed grading ís ín conformance with specificfindings and policies identífiedin the County General Plan. The proposed grading is designed'to follow the naturalterrain, to minimíze grading, and to reduce visual ímpacts caused by hillsidedevelopment ønd in keeping with Generql Plan polícy R-GD 22- 36, as discussed ínAttachment E. The proposed grading intends to preserve the natural resources andcharacter of the rural environment.

(g) Grading substantially conforms with the adopted "Guidelines for Grading andHillside Development" and other applicable guidelines adopted by the County

The proposed grading is in conþrmance with the adopted "Guidelines for Gradingand Híllside Development" and the proposed grading is designed to adhere toguidelines for siting, road design, buildíngform and desígn, and løndform gradíng.Further, Guideline #9 encourages retainíng walls be desígned to be less than 10 feetín height ønd that they follow the existing hillside contours to minimíze visual impacts

File 10687-148-14G-l4DRPangan Residence

Zorutg Administration HearingJuly 13, 2017,Item#6

as seen from the valley floors. All retaining walls will be constructed at a height less

thøn 10 feet. Guidelíne #10 encourages new buildings to be constructed fon or nearJ

steeper slopes hqve a linear design relative to the contour of the land. The proposedresidence has a predominately north to south layout which matches the contour of the

slope. Guídeline #12 encourages large fill development to have natural features.The proposal has gently curvingfill gradations with no sharp and unnaturaltreatments.

BACKGROUND

An application for building site approval with grading and design review was submitted on

December 15,20!4, which was deemed incomplete on January 25,2015. A resubmittal was

submitted on June 12,2015 and was deemed subsequently deemed complete August 18, 2015.

Subsequently, after a delay in processing the Initial Study for compliance with the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act, staff determined that the project potentially conflicted with hillsidedevelopment policies of the General Plan and that the initial review did not sufficiently analyze

conformance with the County's and Milpitas' design review regulations regarding the crestline

protection zone. Over time, staff consulted and worked with the applicant to identify the

necessary means of addressing these procedural deficiencies, culminating in the alternative sites

analyses. Once these issues were more fully addressed, work on the Initial Study resumed.

The Initial Study analysis found there to be no significant environmental impacts from the

project, but recognizedthat the visibility of the house from some locations could be

appropriately addressed through design review conditions with landscaping and low-reflectivitymaterial choices. The Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project was

oirculated on June 5,2017 [Note: the title of the NOI was inadvertently a Mitigated NegativeDeclaration]. No public comments have been received. The project as noticed for a publichearing at the July 13, 2017 Zoning Administration hearings. Preliminary conditions of approval

were supplied to the applicant by email June 28, 2017.

STAFF REPORT REVIE\il

Prepared by: Manira Sandhir, Principal Planner, and Mark Connolly, Senior Planner

Reviewed by: Bill Shoe, Principal PlannerlZoning Administrator

File 10687-148-i4G-14DRPangan Residence


Courrtl' of sântâ -JlaraDepartment of Pl-annlng and DevelopmentPtanning AftLeeCounty Govetnment eoît,et, E¿st tttLngt ?Èh FlÔor70 f{êrt Heddlng StreetSêri Joae, CaLíf.oxnLa 95110-1705(408' 299-5110 rÃx {408) 288-9L98

www. eccp.lannLr.g.org

Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration

per the California Environmental Qualþ Act (CEQA), this notice has been prepared to inform you that

the will not have a effect on the environment.D¡te

615/2017a29-35-00sß687 -l4B-14G-14DR- 1 5EA

N¡mo

ResidentialPanganBuilding Site, Grading and DesignReview Approval

Owner

ModemHouse1265 Ínóiana Street

San Francisco, CA 94L07

Ruel & Evangeline Pangan

constructionpreliminary

driveway,yards).

habitatof Milpitas'

rgv1elryand designsite grading,for1SThe approvtl,projectproposedsiteAssociatedMil improvementsatresidence Coirt, pitas.footaof Augustesingle-familysquafe-4,000

cubic4,589includewillthefor approximatelya. and projectinclude Gradingsystem.septictheas sitewouldtrees beNo removed"fill 1 cubiccubic1 ofcutof 3¿nd (net ,388yards,20yards

PlanHabitat Area, althoughtheln ClaraSantalocated County1Sif.on Thenohas locatedtrees property-siteonbe servedwouldTheonlocated bysite.the propertyorno statusaralhere speclesspecial

the&omwillservlce providerbeatsr Cityw requestedsystem.septic

Loc¡tion

The property is located in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan area The property includes vege{ative land

covers of annual grassland" herbaceous and slnr¡b/scrub.

A knoll rises in the interior portion ofthe lot, having aî averrge slope of approximately 28%-T\e

proposed home site would 6u on the knoll. Ttre eastem half of the property, where parts of the driveway

pass througl¡ is located in landslide hazardznne.

includingundergoing

ofeast theHamiltontheof Mount justR*gglower foolhills8-acre38Thetheofeastéúrthe of MilpiøsCitybormdary

andLevinEd Park,recreational Countyuses,and1s to prívateadjacent publicpropertyresidential¡uraleitherusesResidential aterer;lamalion,andClub aGolf quarrySummiþointe

site.thesurroundswhichthe subjectorlow City of Milpitasdwelopmelrtdensity

A(r. k

Purpo¡e of Nodce

The purpose of this notice is to inform you that the County Planning Staffhas rocommended that aNegntive Decl¡rntlon bo approved for this projeot. County of Santa Clara Planning Staff has reviewod theInitial Study for the projeot, and basod upon substantial evidence in the reoord, finds that tho proposedproject could not h¡ve a rlgnlflcrnt effect on the envlronment,

The proposed project is scheduled to be approved by the County Zonlng Admlnl¡tr¡tor on July 13'2017, The conditions of approval will follow ths review period, as well as a 1S-day appeal period.

It should be noted th¿t the approval of a Negrtlve llecl¡r¡tlon does not constitute approval of the projectundcr considoration. Tho desision to approve or deny the project will be made separately.

PubllcLovlow-Berlod¡ lJegln¡¡Od6/t7 Jnd¡:6n6n0fi

publis Conunents rogarding the conectnes*, completeness, or adcquacy of this nritigatecl ncgativo declaration areinvited and must be receivcd on or before tho end of the reviow period listed above, Suoh commsnts should bebased on spccific enviroru¡rcntal conccrns. Written cor¡m€nts should be addrossed to tho Coun$ of S¡nt¡ Clar¡Plannlng Oftlco, County Gov*nment Center, 70 \ry. Hoddlng Street, Srn Joro, CA 95110, Tel: (408) 299-5770,Oral commento may be matle at the hearing. A file oontaining additiorral informatiCIü on thÍs projoct rnay beroviewed at the Planning Office under the filo numbor appearing at the top of this form., For additional infonnationregarding this projeot and the Mitigated Negative Deolaration, please contact Mnrk J. Connolly at (408) 299-5?86.

the Mltlcrted Necrüve Ilecl¡rrüon rnd lnltl¡l Study m¡y bo vlewod nt the followln¡ loc¡tlon¡:

(1) Santa elæa County Planning Offiee, 70 West Hedding Street, East Wing, ?tltFloor, San Joso, CA 951l0(2) Ptanning Offi ce Weboite www.sccplarurins,olg (Environmontal Documonts)(3) City of Milpitas Public Library

Other Arenclc¡ eent ¡ cony of thl¡ documentNone

Preparcd byrMark J. Connolly, Ssnior Planner

Design Review ApprovalVicintiy Map

,Fârl

Èiùt

l

o

a

{t

t,,

'lluli

rllrp

GE

{ã

IH

IH

rl@

ITil

EUILDINq EITE A PFNOVAT029'gt'00t

PANGAN RESIDENCEAU0Utf Ë 01itlllFlrAt,0A

ill

II

I ll*

I IilsoIT:D!

I

ll'II¡

7

'rl!

t

\I

II

I\

It

¡I

r^ - I

h

tlot@

å

IB.t

i

I

I:¡

SUILDINE SITË APPR OVALoe9-9õ'00ã

PANGAN RESIDENCEAUOUs?E OfMlllFlTAs' O^

Ë$nz

-/ ,lîÍTJ

Il[ fiül

INITIAL STUDYEnvironmental Checklist and Evaluation for Santa Clara County

File Number: 1 0687- 1 48- 1 4G- 1 4DR- 1 5EA Date: June2,2017

Project Type:Building Site Approval, Grading, and DesignReview

APN(s): 029-35-005

Project Location /Address

Auguste Court, Milpitas GP Designation: Hillsides

Ownerts Name Ruel & Evangeline Pangan Zoningz HS-dz

ApplÍcant's Name: Modern House Urban Service Area: None

Project Description

The proposed project is for building site approval, preliminary grading, and design review for construction of a4,000 square-foot single-family residence at Auguste Court, Milpitas. Associated site improvements include a

driveway, and septic system. Grading for the project will include approximately 4,589 cubic yards of cut and

3,201 cubic yards of fill (net 1,388 cubic yards). No trees would be removed, as the site has no trees located on it.

The property is located in the Santa Clara County Habitat Plan Area, although there are no special status species

or habitat located on the site. The property would be served by on-site septic system. Water service will be

requested from the City of Milpitas' provider.

Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses

The subject property is situated among the lower foothills of the Mount Hamilton Range, just east of the suburban

residential neighborhoods inside the eastern boundary of the City of Milpitas. The 38.8-acre property is adjacent

to public and private recreational uses, including Ed Levin County Park, and Summitpointe Golf Club and a

quaffy undergoing reclamation. Residential uses are either rural residential low density development or the Cityof Milpitas which surrounds the subject site.

The property is located in the Santa ClaraValley Habitat Plan area. The property includes vegetative land covers

of annual grassland, herbaceous and shrub/scrub.

A knoll rises in the interior portion of the lot, having an average slope of approximately 28%. The proposed home

site would be on the knoll. The eastern half of the property, where parts of the driveway pass through, is located

in landslid e hazard zone.

Other agencies sent a copy of this document:

City of Milpitas

I

The environmental faetors checked below would be potentially affected by this projectn involving at leastone impact as on the followíng pages.the

I. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIÄLLY AFFECTEI)

[l Aesthetics I Agriculture / Forest [ ¡ir QualityResources

I niotogical Resources I Cultural Resources ! Geotogy / Soils

n Greenhouse Gas Emissions I Hazards & Hazardous ! Hydrology/ Water QualityMaterials

I Land Use

I rutnc Services

! Utitities / Service Systems

! Noise

fl Resources / Recreation

! Mandatory f indings ofSignificance

! Population / Housing

! Transportation / Traffîc

I None

II. ENVIRONMENTAL F'ACTORS WITH NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

Some proposed applications that are not exempt from CEQA review may have little or no potential foradverse environmental impact related to most of the topics in the Environmental Checklist; and/orpotential impacts may involve only a few limited subject areas. These types of projects are generallyminor in scope, located in a non-sensitive environment, and are easily identifiable and without publiccontroversy. For the environmental issue areas where there is no potential for significant environmentalimpact (and not checked above), the following finding can be made using the project descrþtion,environmental setting, or other information as supporting evidence.

n Check here if this finding is not applicable.

FIITIDING: For the following topics, there is no potential for significant environmental impact tooccur either from construction, operation or maintenance of the proposed project, andno further discussion in the Environmental Checklist is necessary.

EVIDENCE Agricultural and Forest Resources: The subject property is zoned HS-dz. TheHillside (HS) base zoning district permits low density residential use, but encourages

clustering of development to preserve contiguous open space. The project site isclassified as Grazing Landby the California Department of Conservation's FørmlandMonitoring Program 2010); the existing annual grassland vegetation is suited to thegrazingof livestock. A small portion of the Northeast corner of the lot is PrimeFarmland Soil, but the proposed single-family house is not located in this location.Therefore, the construction of the single-family residence and associated siteimprovements would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, UniqueFarmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural uses and wouldnot affect existing agricultural operations on adjacent properties. The property does

not have existing agricultural uses and is not under a Williamson Act contract and

would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (ProjectDescription; Reference # l, 3, 4, 8, 9, 32, 36, 39)

2

EVIDENCE: Air Oualitv: The project would involve grading and construction activities. Fugitive

dust would be created during the construction of the proposed structures and site

improvements. However, dust emissions would be controlled through standard Best

Management Practices (BMPs) dust control measures that would be a condition ofapproval for the project. Emissions generated from a single family residence would be

well below the BAAQMD operational-related emissions thresholds. The proposed

uses are for private use and operation would not generate increased daily vehicle trips

or involve the emissions of criteria pollutants. (Project Description; Reference # 3,5)

EVIDENCE: Cultural Resources: At the request of the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma

State University, the applicant provided a cultural resources evaluation prepared byArchaeological Resource Management in March 2015. The investigation consisted ofarchival research, and a surface reconnaissance at the project site. The investigation

revealed no recorded archeological sites within the project area. Likewise, the surface

reconnaissance revealed no traces of significant cultural materials, prehistoric or

historic. Therefore, the project will not have a significant impact on cultural resources.

As a condition of the project to ensure there are no cultural resources impact, the

applicant is required by County Ordinance No. 86-18 to immediately notify the

County Coroner in the event that human skeletal remains are encountered. Upon

determination by the County Coroner that the remains are Native American, the

coroner would then contact the Califomia Native American Heritage Commission,

pursuant to subdivision (c) of section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code and the

County Coordinator of Indian affairs. No fuither disturbance of the site would be

allowed except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs inaccordance with the provisions of state law and this chapter. If artifacts are found on

the site a qualified archaeologist would be contacted along with the County Planning

Office. No further disturbance of the artifacts may be made except as authorizedbythe County Planning Office. (Project Description; Reference # 2,3,4, 16, 19, 40, 4l)

EVIDENCE: Geolosv and Soils: A portion of the proposed driveway is located ina State Seismic

Hazard Zone and County Landslide Hazard Zone. However, the proposed building site

is not within the zone. Best management practices used during construction wouldprevent substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The proposed project site is not

located on expansive soils. Therefore, the project would have no impact of geology

and soils given compliance with the county geologic conditions, including review ofplans and observation of foundation construction.. (Project Descriptioq Reference# 3,

6, 14,24c,32, 46)

EVIDENCE: Greenhouse Gas: The project would involve grading and construction activities,

including the use of construction equipment, but emissions of greenhouse gases

(GHG) would be minimal and temporary. The future single-family residence wouldconsume electricity for lighting, appliances, electronics and other activities. The

location would presumably require vehicular transportation during construction and to

access the residence once occupied. However, the amount of GHG emissions would be

minimal, and therefore would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to

the effect of GHG emissions on the environment. In addition, emissions generated

from a single-family residence would be well below the BAAQMD operational-related

emissions thresholds. The proposed use as a single family dwelling would not conflict

J

with any applicable plan, policy or regulation for reducing the emissions ofgreenhouse gases. (Project Description; Reference # 3, 4, 6,9, 10,20)

EVIDENCE: Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The subject property is located in the í(ildløndUrban Intedace area. The proposed single-family residence would conform to the FireMarshal's Office requirements, including sprinklers and water storage requirements,for adequate fire protection. The project would not involve transport of hazardousmaterials or emit hazardous emissions. The project site is not located on a hazardousmaterials site and is more than two miles from the nearest public use airport, which isSan Jose Intemational Airport located over six miles away. The proposed accessdriveway would conform to all requirements of the Fire Marshal's Office foremergency vehicle access. (Project Description; Reference # I,2,3, 4, 5,7,9, 13, 19,24b,30,33, 40, 4r,49)

EVIDENCE: Hvdrologv: The proposed project is not located next to any creeks or streams. Theproposed septic system would not be located within 100 feet of a water well, 50 feet ofa drainage swale, or on soils where a high water table extends close to the landsurface. The proposed development area includes storm water retention and swales forstorm-water runoff. The proposed project would not alter drainage and would beconditioned to ensure that no stormwater would be displaced from the property. BMPswould be required as a condition to minimize erosion during construction. (ProjectDescrþtion; Reference # 3,6,32,34,35a, 35b, 40,41)

EVIDENCE: Population and Housins: The proposed project is a single-family residence. Nocommercial, industrial or institutional uses are proposed. Development of a single-family residence would not induce consequential population growth or displaceexisting housing or people. (Project Description; Reference # 1,3,4,30,40)

EVIDENCE: Public Services: The proposed project is a single family residential unit and wouldnot significantly increase the need for additional fire or police protection to the area.Other public services, such as provided by schools or parks, would not be impacted.(Project Description; Reference # 1,3, 4, 5, 6)

EVIDENCE: Resources/Recreation: The proposed project site is not located in an area wheremineral resources of value to the region or state have been identified. The site is alsonot located on locally important mineral resource recovery sites. The proposed projectis for a single-family residence and would not involve either the use or construction ofrecreational facilities. The property is located close to recreation sites, including EdLevin County Park and Summitpointe Golf Club, however these would not beimpacted. (Project Description; Reference # t, 3, 5, 6, 28, 32)

EVIDENCE: Transportation/TraffÏc: The proposed project is a private, single-family residence.No commercial, industrial, or institutional use is proposed. The project will notgenerate substantial new traffic, impair existing transportation facilities, or result ininadequate emergency access or parking capacity. Construction activities for theproposed structures would involve a small number of vehicle trþs related to deliveryof material and workers commuting to the site. Because the number of trips would betemporary and small in number, and road use in the vicinity is relatively light, theproposed project would not have impacts on traffic and circulation. The private roadleading up to the property is narrow. A traffic management plan will be required as a

4

condition of approval for construction vehicle activity. Onsite parking for the

proposed single-family residence is in conformance with the County parking

requirements. (Project Description; Reference # 3, 5, 6, 7, 19, 30, 40)

EVIDENCE: Utilities/Service Svstems: The proposed single-family residence would not require orresult in the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment or storm water

drainage facilities. Water would be provided by onsite well. There would be an on-site

sceptic system, and stormwater would be detained on site. Construction activities

would involve minimal amounts of debris that would need be removed and disposed

of, and existing landfill capacity would be sufficient to accommodate it. (Project

Description; Reference # | , 3, 5, 6, 24b)

III . ENVIRO¡IMENTAL DETERMINATION

DETERMINATION: (To be completed bv the Lead Asencv)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

[t t frnd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVEDECLARATION will be prepared.

n I nn¿ 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 project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

E t nn¿ 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 DECLARATION pursuant to

applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVEÚËC1.¡ne1ION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further

is required.

! t nn¿ that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT REPORT is required.

Signature Date

ForPrinted name

5

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS

DISCUSSION

In March 1999,the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance NS-1200.292, which was intendedto protect the scenic integrity of Milpitas hillsides. The ordinance was developed following a

collaborative study with the City of Milpitas, and aligns with Milpitas goals and policies forhillside development. The subject property, zoned HS-dz, is subject to the ordinance provisions,currently Section 3.20.050 of the County Zoning Ordinance.

The project site is presently undeveloped. Areas adjacent to Old Calaveras Road are gentlesloping, and have significant amounts of vegetation, including numerous trees, shrubs and annualgrassland vegetation types. A knoll rises in the interior portion of the lot. Vegetation on the knollconsists primarily of non-native annual grasses and weedy forbs. The proposed home site issituated on the knoll, with a development area proposed on 28.1% average slope. The proposedhouse size is 4,000 square feet, which conforms to applicable house size limitations in subsection3.20.0s0(A).

The location of the knoll relative to the house substantially shields the house from views frommost valley floor vantage points. Upon reviewing topographic data and observing sitecharacteristics in the field, it appears that the house would not be in conflict with the applicable -d2 Crestline Area Development Restrictiozs, subsection 3.20.050(D). In addition, the City ofMilpitas confirmed that the project would not be in conflict with their view shed protectionrequirements, and recofiìmended design features to minimize any impacts, which are included as

conditions of approval.

The house would be visible from some adjacent lands and trails. However, the house designfeatures alarge roof overhang, which in response to sun angles, should produce shadows thatreduce visibility. This project will additionally undergo a design review process by the ZoningAdministrator at a public hearing. Per subsection 3.20.050(D) of the County Zoning Ordinance,the light reflectivity value (LRV) shall not exceed 45, which will ensure the house will have arelatively muted color and should not contrast dramatically with the natural background tones.Should the zoning administrator deem additional visual impact mitigation necessary, other

6

A. AESTHETICS¡MPACT

SOURCES

WOULD THE PROJECT YES NO

Potent¡allvSionificant

lmoact

Less ThanSiqnificant

withMitiqation

l¡cqrpo!'ated


lmpactNo lmoact

a)

b)

c)

Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenicvista?

Substantially damage scenic resources alonga designated scenic highway?

Substantially degrade the existing visualcharacter or quality of the site and itssunoundings?

Create a new source of substantial light orglare which would adversely affect day ornighttime views in the area?

X

2,3,4,6,17f

3,6,717f

2,3

3,4

X

d)

conditions of approval could be added in addition to LRV, including, but not limited to,

screening and landscaping.

MITIGATION: None uired.

DISCUSSION: See Section II: Environmental Factors with No Significant Impacts.

MITIGATION: None required.

7

ln determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer

to the Califomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia Dept. ofConservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland

B. AGRICULTURE / FOREST RESOURCES

IMPACTNOYESWOULD THE PROJECT:

Less ThanSiqn¡ficant

wirhMit¡oation

lncorporated

Less ThanS¡onificant

lmoactNo lmoact

SOURCEPotentiallvSionificant

lmoact

a) Convert 10 or more acres of farmlandclassified as prime in the report Soi/s ofSanta Clara County lClass I //) to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculturaluse?

c) Conflict with an existing Williamson ActContract or the County's Williamson ActOrdinance (Section C13 of County OrdinanceCode)?

d) Conflict with existing zone for, or causerezoning ol forest land (as defined in PublicResources Code section 12220(ù),timberland (as defined by Public ResourcesCode section 4526), or timberland zonedTimberland Production (as defined byGovemment Code section 51f Oa(g))?

e) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion offorest land to non-forest use?

9,21a

3,4,26

3,23,24,26

nn

n

32! n

n

1,28

9,

f) lnvolve other changes in the existingenvironment which, due to their location ornature, could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use or conversion of forestland to non-forest use?

C. AIR QUALITY

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution controldistrict may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

IMPACT

SOURCE

WOULD THE PROJECT: YES NO

PotentiallvSionificant

lmoact


withMitioation

lncorDorated

Less ThanSionificant

lmpactNo lmoact

a) Conflictwith orobstruct implementation of theapplicable air quality plan?

b) Violate any air quality standard or contributesubstantially to an existing or projected airquality violation?

c) Result in a cumulatively considerable netincrease of any criteria pollutant for which theproject region is non-attainment under anapplicable federal or state ambient air qualitystandard (including releasing emissions whichexceed quantitative thresholds for ozoneprecursors)?

d) Exposê sensitive receptors to substantialpollutant concentrations?

n n5,29,30

5,29,30

X s,2e,30

! 5,29,30



8

D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

IMPACT

SOURCES


PotentiallvSiqnificant

lmÞact


withMitiqation

lncorDorated

Less ThanSiqníficant

lmoactNo lmoact

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, eitherdirectly or through habitat modifications, onany species identified as a candidate,sensitive, or special status species ¡n local orregional plans, policies, or regulations, or bythe Califomia Department of Fish and Gameor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on anyriparian habitat or other sensitive naturalcommunity identified in local or regional plans,policies, regulations or by the CalifomiaDepartment of Fish and Game or US Fish andWildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federallyprotected wetlands as defined by section 404of the Clean Water Act (including, but notlimited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) ortributary to an already impaired water body, asdefined by Section 303(d) of the Clean WaterAct through direct removal, filling, hydrologicalinterruption, or other means?

d) Have a substantial adverse effect on oakwoodland habitat as defined by OakWoodlands Conservation Law (conversion/loss of oak woodlands) - Public ResourceCode $ 21083.4?

e) lnterfere substantially with the movement ofany native resident or migratory fish or wildlifespecies or with established native resident ormigratory wildlife conidors, or impede the useof native wildlife nursery sites?

0 Conflict with the provisions of an adoptedHabitat Conservation Plan, NaturalCommunity Conservation Plan, or otherapproved local, regional or state habitatconservation plan?

n 1 ,7 , 17b, 170,

3,7,8a, 17b,17e,22d,22e,33

n 3,7,17n,33

n ! 1,3,31,32

n 1,7,17b,17o

n n 3,4,171

DISCUSSION: The project site is within the Santa ClaraValley Habitat Plan permit area. At the

request of the Planning Office, the applicant submitted a Habitat Plan screening form. Theproject is not a covered project under the Habitat Plan.

The property vegetation is primarily non-native annual grassland. On the eastem portion of the

property, next to the Ed Levin County Park, there may be habitat for a candidate threatened

species the Tricolored Blackbird, which is also federally protected under the Migratory BirdTreaty Act. Tricolored Blackbirds are found in Oregon, V/ashington, Nevada, coastal BajaCalifornia, and mainly in Califomia. The species migrate to Califomia during the breeding

season and winter. These birds forage in grasslands, fields and farmlands. They prefer to nest indense marsh vegetation, but are also found nesting in cattails, bulrushes, Himalaya berry and

9

agricultural silage. The breeding season ranges from March to August, but breeding season canbegin earlier with the initiation of spring. The existing site does not contain nesting habitat, but apond with the potential nesting habitat for the Tricolored Blackbirds is located in the adjacentpark property. Since the nesting habitat is not located within the property, the project will have a

less than significant impact on biological resources.


DISCUSSION: See Section II: Environmental Factors with No Significant Impacts


E. CULTURAL RESOURCES

IMPACT

SOURCE


PotentiallvSion¡ficant

lmoact

Less ThanSiqnif¡cant

withMitioation

lncorporated

Less ThanSionifìcant

lmoactNo lmoact

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of a historical resource pursuantto $ 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, or theCounty's Historic Preservation Ordinance(Section 17 of County Ordinance Code) - i.e.relocation, alterations or demolition of historicresources?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of an archaeological resource asdefined in $ 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a uniquepaleontological resource or site or uniquegeologic feature?

d) Disturb any human remains, including thoseinterred outside of formal cemeteries?

3, 16, 19,40,41

tr 3,19,40, 41,

2,3,4,,40,41

n 2,40,41

10

F. GEOLOGYAND SOILS

IMPACT

SOURCE

WOULD THE PROJEGT: YES NO


lmpact


withMitioation

lncoroorated

Less ThanSion¡ficant

lmoactNo lmoact

a) Expose people or structures to potentialsubstantial adverse effects, including the risk ofloss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, asdelineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Mapissued by the State Geologist for the areaor based on other substantial evidence ofa known fault? Refer to Division of Minesand Geology Special Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

iii) Seismic-related groundfailure, includingliquefaction?

iv) Landslides?

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss oftopsoil?

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that isunstable, or that would become unstable as aresult of the project, and potentially result inon- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in thereport, So/s of Santa Clara County, creatingsubstantial risks to life or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting theuse of septic tanks or altemative wastewaterdisposal systems where sewers are not availablefor the disposal of waste water?

0 Cause substarttial compaction or over-covering ofsoil either on-site or off-site?

S) Cause substantial change in topography orunstable soil conditions from excavation,grading, or fill?

n 6,17c,43

!n!!

nX

Xtr

xnuX

6,17c6,17c,17n,18b

6,171,118b6,14,23,24

2,3,17c,23,24

n n x 14,23,24,

X 3,6,23,24,

3,6

2,3,6,17j



11

G. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

IMPACT



lmoact


withM¡tiqation

lncorDorated


lmoactNo lmoact

SOURCE

a) Generate greenhouse gas em¡ssions, eitherdirectly or indirectly, that may have asignificant impact on the env¡ronment?

b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy orregulation of an agency adopted for thepurpose of reducing the emissions ofgreenhouse gases?

I



H. HAZARDS&HAZARDOUSMATERIALS

IMPACT

SOURCE



lmoact


withMit¡oation

lncorporated


lmpactNo lmoact

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through the routine transport,use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through reasonably foreseeableupset and accident conditions involving therelease of hazardous materials into theenvironment?

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handlehazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances, orwaste within 1/4 mile of anexisting or proposed school?

d) Be located on a site which is included on a listof hazardous materials sites compiledpursuant to Govemment Code Section65962.5 and, as a result, would it create asignificant hazard to the public or theenvironment?

! ! Ll x 1,3,4,5

2,3,5

nn X 46

n 47

T2

e) For a project located within an airport land useplan refenal area or, where such a plan hasnot been adopted, within two miles of a publicairport or public use airport, or in the vicinity ofa private airstrip, would the project result in asafety hazard for people residing or working inthe project area?

f) lmpair implementation of or physically interferewith an adopted emergency response plan oremergency evacuation plan?

S) Expose people or structures to a significantrisk of loss, injury or death involving wildlandfires including where wildlands are adjacent tourbanized areas or where residences areintermixed with wildlands?

3,22a

5, 48

4,179n

DISCUSSION: See Section II: Environmental Factors with No Significant Irnpacts


HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

IMPACT

SOURCE



lmoact


withMit¡oation

lncorporated

Less ThanS¡qnifìcant

lmoactNo lmpact

a) Violate any water quality standards or wastedischarge requirements?

b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies orinterfere substantially with groundwaterrecharge such that there would be a net deficitin aquifer volume or a lowering of the localgroundwater table level (e.9., the productionrate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop toa level which would not support existing landuses or planned uses for which permits havebeen granted?

c) Substantially alter the existing drainagepattem of the site or area, including throughthe alteration of the course of a stream orriver, in a manner which would result insubstantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

d) Substantially alter the existing drainagepattem of the site or area, including throughthe alteration of the course of a stream orriver, or substantially increase the rate oramount of surface runoff in a manner whichwould result in flooding on- or off-site?

e) Create or contribute increased impervioussurfaces and associated runoff water whichwould exceed the capacity of existing orplanned stormwater drainage systems orprovide substantial additional sources ofpolluted runofP

0 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

n u34, 36

3,4

3,17n,

X 3 ,17p

! 1, 3, 5, 36,21a

n 1,3,5

13

S) Place housing within a 10O-year flood hazardarea as mapped on a federal Flood HazardBoundary or Flood lnsurance Rate Map orotherflood hazard delineation map?

h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard areastructures which would impede or redirectflood flows?

i) Expose people or structures to a significantrisk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of alevee or dam?

3,18b, 18d

2,3,4,17p

X

tr

n

3, 17p, 18b,18d



DISCUSSION:The subject property is currently undeveloped. Surrounding land uses include rural residential,grazinglands, and a quarry undergoing reclamation. Public and private recreational uses,including Ed Levin County Park, Summitpointe Golf Club and Spring Valley Golf Club, are alsonearby. The proposed 4,000 square-foot single family residence and associated siteimprovements would be for private use and would not divide an established community. Nocommercial, industrial or institutional uses are proposed.

The subject property's general plan designation is Hillsides (Very-Low Density), and the zoningis Hillside with the -d2 combining district for Milpitas Hillsides, with a purpose to preserve thepredominantly natural hillsides within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Milpitas. Theproject could have a significant land use impact if the proposed project protruded up to orbeyond the natural ridgeline to the east of the subject property. County Planning Staff receivedcorrespondence from the City of Milpitas Planning Staff stating that the project had no ridgelineimpacts.As a hillside project proposed on top of a knoll and near a ridgeline the following County ofSanta Clara General Plan policies are also applicable to the project.

J. LAND USEIMPACT

SOURCE



lmoact


withMitioalion

lncorDorated


lmDactNo lmoact

a)

b)

Physically divide an established community?Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or regulation of an agency withjurisdiction over the project (including, but notlimited to the general plan, specific plan, orzoning ordinance) adopted forthe purpose ofavoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

trx2,48a,9, 18a

PolicyR-GD 31

t4

Ridgelines and ridge areas have special significance for both public policy and private interests.

Ridgeline and hillside development that creates a major negative visual impact from the valleyfloor should be avoided or mitigated, particularly for those areas most immediately visible fromthe valley floor. Ridgeline development policy should also take into account the need to allowreasonable use and development of private land.

Policy R-GD 33

For existing legal lots, the County encourages the consideration of alternatives to ridgeline orhilltop locations. Where grading policies and permit findings are involved, building sites mayonly be approved where consistent with the grading policies of the General Plan and the permit

requirements and findings of the Grading Ordinance.

Policy R-GD 34For existing legal lots, if a ridgeline or hilltop location is a potentially suitable location fordevelopment, consistent with grading or other land development policies and regulations, due to

the particular geologic circumstances, access needs, or other suitability characteristics of the lot,the following conditions or mitigations to visual impacts of development shall be considered and

applied through applicable land use and development approvals, as necessary and appropriate:

(a) Landscaping and vegetation retention, as appropriate,(b) Color and material choices that blend with the natural surroundings, and(c) Any other similar requirements or mitigations that reasonably relate to the degree of visualimpact. fNote:

'Where Design Review zoning applies or is required by condition of subdivisionor other approval, such requirements will be addressed through the applicable Design Reviewprocedurel.

The applicants submitted an alternative feasibility analysis to demonstrate conformance with the

grading findings. Overall, Staff s review of the proposed project has resulted in consistency withthese general plan policies and the zoning ordinance.

(Project Description; Reference # 2,3, 4, 8,31, 33,35a, 39)


K. NOISEIMPAGTS

SOURCE



lmoact


W¡thMit¡qation

lncorÞorated

Less ThanSionif¡cant

lmoactNo lmoact

a) Result in exposure of persons to or generationof noise levels in excess of standardsestablished in the local general plan or noiseordinance, or applicable standards of otheragencies?

Result in exposure of persons to or generationof excessive groundbome vibration orgroundbome noise levels?

8a,13,22a,45

b) n n

X

13,45

15

c) Result in a substantial permanent increase inambient noise levels in the project viciniÇabove levels existing without the project?

d) Result in a substantial temporary or periodicincrease in ambient noise levels in the projectvicinity above levels existing without theproject?

e) For a project located within an airport land useplan refenal area or, where such a plan hasnot been adopted, within two miles of a publicairport or public use airport, or private airstripwould the project expose people residing orworking in the project area to excessive noiselevels?

1,2,5,45

1,2,5,45

n

n X 1,s,22a



DISCUSSION: See Section II: Environmental Factors with No Significant knpacts


L. POPULATION AND HOUSING

IMPACT

SOURCE


PotentiallvSionificânt

lmpact


withMitioation

lncorporáed


lmpactNo lmoact

a) lnduce substantial growth in an area, eitherdirectly (for example, by proposing new homesand businesses) or indirectly (for example,through extension of roads or otherinfrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existinghousing or people, necessitating theconstruction of replacement housingelsewhere?

1,3,4

tr n x 1,2,3,4

M. PUBLIC SERVICES

IMPACT



lmoact


withMitioation

lncorporated


lmoactNo lmpact

a) Result in substantial adverse physical impactsassociated with the provision of new or

t6

physically altered govemmental facilities, needfor new or physically altered govemmentalfacilities, the construction of which could causesignificant environmental impacts, in order tomaintain acceptable service ratios, responsetimes or other performance objectives for anyof the public services:

i) Fire Protection?

ii) Police Protection?

¡ii) Schoolfacilities?iv) Parks?

v) Other public facilities?


MITIGATION: None required



xXxXX

nnnntr

!n!nn

3,53,53,53,5, 17h

3,5

N. RESOURCES AND RECREATION

IMPACT

SOURGE



lmpact

Less ThanSiqnifìcant

withMitioation

lncoroorated


lmoactNo lmpact

a) Result in the loss of availability of a knownmineral resource that would be of future valueto the region and the residents of the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site asdelineated on a local general plan, specificplan, or other land use plan?

c) lncrease the use of existing neighborhood andregional parks or other recreational facilitiessuch that substantial physical deterioration ofthe facility would occur or be accelerated?

d) lnclude recreational facilities or require theconstruction or expansion of recreationalfacilities which might have an adverse physicaleffect on the environment?

n 1 ,2, 3, 6, 44

1,2,3,6,8a

1,2,4,5,17h

u 1,3, 4,5

O. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC

IMPACT SOURCE



lmoact

Less ThanSiqnifìcant

withMit¡qation

lncorporated


lmoactNo lmoact

a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance orpolicy establishing measures of effectiveness

1,4,5,6,7,49

tr X

t7

for the performance of the circulation system,taking into account all modes of transportationincluding mass transit and non-motorizedtravel and relevant components of thecirculation system, including but not limited toi ntersections, streets, hig hways and freeways,pedestrian and bicycle paths, and masstransit?

b) Conflict with an applicable congestionmanagement program, including but notlimited to level of service standards and traveldemand measures, or other standardsestablished by the County congestionmanagement agency for designated roads orhighways?

c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems,including either an increase in traffic levels ora change in location that results in substantialsafety risks?

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a designfeature (e.9., sharp curves or dangerousintersections) or incompatible uses (e.9., farmequipment)?

e) Result in inadequate emergency access?

f) Conflictwith adopted policies, plans, orprograms regarding public transit, bicycle, orpedestrian facilities, or othen¡vise decrease theperformance or safety of such facilities?

¡ 6, 49, 50

5,6,7

3, 5, 6,7

1,3,5, 48,

8a,2'la

n

xX

tr

nn

DISCUSSION: See Section II: Environmental Factors with No Signifrcant Impacts.


P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

IMPACT

souRcE



lmoact


withMitiqation

lncorDorated


lmpactNo lmoact

a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements ofthe applicable Regional Water Quality ControlBoard?

b) Require or result in the construction of newwater or wastewater treatment facilities orexpansion of existing facilities, the constructionof which could cause significant environmentaleffects?

c) Require or result in the construction of newstorm water drainage facilities or expansion ofexisting facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental effects?

d) Require new or expanded entitlements inorder to have sufficient water suppliesavailable to serve the project?

X 1, 3, 5,

n 1,3,5,21a,38

n 1,3,5n

tr 1,3,5,21,

18

e) Result in a determination by the wastewatertreatment provider which serves or may servethe project that it has inadequate capacity toserve the project's projected demand inaddition to the provide/s existingcommitments?

f) Not be able to be served by a landfillwithsufficient permitted capacity to accommodatethe project's solid waste disposal needs?

S) Be in non-compliance with federal, state, andlocal statutes and regulations related to solidwaste?

n tr 1,3,5

! 1,3,5

n 5,6



DISCUSSION

a) Less Than Signifìcant Impact. As discussed in the Biological Resources section, theproposed project is located in the Santa ClaruValley Habitat Plan (SCVHP) area, whichestablishes standardized measures that mitigate impacts upon species covered by the SCVHP to aless-than-significant level. The proposed project would not have the potential to substantially

T9

Q. MANDATORY FINDING OF SIGNIF¡CANCE

IMPACT

SOURCE



lmpact


withMitioation

lncorDorated


lmoactNo lmoact

a) Does the project have the potential to degradethe quality of the environment, substantiallyreduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to dropbelow self-sustaining levels, threaten toeliminate a plant or animal community, reducethe number or restrict the range of a rare orendangered plant or animal or eliminateimportant examples of the major periods ofCalifomia history or prehistory?

b) Does the project have impacts that areindividually limited, but cumulativelyconsiderable ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of anindividual project are considerable whenviewed in connection with the effects of pastprojects, the effects of other cunent projects,and the effects of probable future projects)?

c) Does the project have environmental effectswhich will cause substantial adverse effects onhuman beings, either directly or indirectly?

1to51

1to51

n X 1to51

reduce the habitat of any fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to dropbelow self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce thenumber of, or restrict the range of, a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate importantexamples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

b) Less Than Significant Impact. No past, current, or probable future projects were identifiedin the project vicinity that, when added to project-related impacts, would result in cumulativelyconsiderable impacts. While projects proposed in hillside areas may affect the scenic vista fromthe valley floor, each of these projects would be subject to design review and any cumulativeimpact would be less than significant. The proposed project's contribution would not beconsidered cumulatively significant as it has limited visibility from the valley floor and wouldalso undergo design review, a discretionary review process which will further reduce itsaesthetics impact. As discussed in the analyses provided in this Initial Study, project impacts

were found to be less than significant. The incremental effects of the proposed project are notcumulatively significant when viewed in context of the past, current, and/or probable futureprojects. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

c) No Impact. The proposed project is a single-family residence. As described in theenvironmental topic sections of this Initial Study, the proposed private structures and use wouldnot have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly.

20

1. Environmental lnformation Form2. Field lnspection3. Project Plans4. Working knowledge of site and conditions5. Experience With Other Projects of This Size and

Nature6. Gounty Expert Sources: Geologist, Fire Marshal,

Roads & Airports, Environmental Health, LandDevelopment Engineering, Parks & Recreation,Zoning Administration, Gomprehensive Planning,Architectural & Site Approval GommitteeSecretary

7. Agency Sources: Santa Clara Valley WaterDistrict, Santa C|ara Valley TransportationAuthority, Midpeninsula Openspace RegionalDistrict, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, GA Dept. ofFish & Game, Caltrans, U.S. Army Gorps ofEngineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board,Public Works Depts. of individual cities, PlanningDepts. of individual cities,

8a. Santa Glara Gounty (SCC) General Plan8b. The South County Joint Area Plan9. SGG Zoning Regulations (Ordinance)10. County Grading Ordinance11. SCC Guidelines for Architecture and Site

Approval12. SGC Development Guidelines for Design Review13. County Standards and Policies Manual(Vol. l- Land

Development)14. Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (expansive

soil regulations) [1 994 version]15. Land Use Database16. Santa Glara Gounty Heritage Resource (including

Trees) lnventory [computer database]17. GIS Database

a. SGC General Plan Land Use, and Zoningb. USFWS Gritical Habitat & Riparian Habitatc. Geologic Hazardsd. Archaeological Resourcese. Water Resourcesf. Viewshed and Scenic RoadsS. Fire Hazardh. Parks, Public Open Space, and Trailsi. Heritage Resources - Treesj. Topography, Contours, Average Slopek. Soilsl. HCP Data (habitat models, land use coverage

etc)m. Air photosn. USGS Topographico. Dept. of Fish & Game, Natural Diversity Datap. FEMA Flood Zonesq. Williamsosn Actr. Farmland monitoring programs. Traffic Analysis ZonesBase Map Overlays & Textual Reports (GlS)

18. Paper Mapsa. SCG Zoningb. Barclay's Santa Clara County Locaide Street

Atlasc. Color Air Photos (MPSI)

d. Santa Clara Valley Water District - Maps of FloodControl Facilities & Limits of 1% Floodinge. Soils Overlay Air Photosf. "Future Width Line" map set

19. CEG¡,A Guidelines [Gurrent Edition]

Area Soecific: San Martin. Stanford. and Other Areas

San Martin20a.San Martin Integrated Design Guidelines20b.San Martin Water Quality Study20c.Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) betweenSanta Clara County & Santa Clara Valley Water District

Stanford2la. Stanford University General Use Permit (GUP),Gommunity Plan (GP), Mitigation and MonitoringReporting Program (MMRP) and Environmental lmpactReport (ElR)21b. Stanford Protocol and Land Use Policy Agreement

Other Areas t22a.South Gounty Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan

and Palo Alto Airport comprehensive Land UsePlan [November 19, 2008]

22b.Los Gatos Hillsides Specific Area Plan22c.County Lexington Basin Ordinance Relating toSewage Disposal22d. User Manual Guidelines & Standards for Land UsesNear Streams: A Manual of Tools, Standards andProcedures to Protect Streams and StreamsideResources in Santa Clara County by the Santa ClaraValley Water Resources Protection Collaborative, August2005 - Revised July 2006.22e. Guidelines and Standards for Land Use NearStreams: Streamside Review Area - Summary preparedby Santa Clara County Planning Offlce, September 2007.22f. Monterey Highway Use Permit Area

Soils23.USDA, SGS, "Soils of Santa Glara Gounty24.USDA, SCS, "Soil Survey of Eastern Santa Clara

County"

Aqricultural Resources/Open Space25. Right to Farm Ordinance26. State Dept. of Conservation, "CA Agricultural Land

Evaluation and Site Assessment Model"27. Open Space Preservation, Report of the Preservation

2020 Task Force, April 1987 [Chapter lVl28. Wiliamson Act Ordinance and Guidelines (current

version)

Air Qualitv29. BAAQMD Clean Air Plan, and BMQMD CEQA Air

Quality Guidelines (201 0)30. BAAQMD Annual Summary of Contaminant Excesses

& BAAQMD, "Air Quality & Urban Development -Guidelines for Assessing lmpacts of Projects & Plans"

[current version]

Bioloqical Resources/Water Quality & Hvdroloqical Resources/

Utilities & Service Svstems"

2l

Initial Study Source List*

31. Site-Specific Biological Report32. Santa Glara Gounty Tree Preservation Ordinance

Section G16, Santa Clara County Guide toEvaluating Oak Woodlands lmpacts, Santa ClaraGounty Guidelines for Tree Protection andPreservation for Land Use Applications

33. Clean Water Act, Section 40434. Riparian lnventory of Santa Clara County, Greenbelt

Coalition, November I 98835. CA RegionalWater Quality Control Board, Water

Quality Control Plan, San Francisco Bay Region[1ees]

36. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Private Well WaterTesting Program [12-98]

37. SCC Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program,Urban Runoff Management Plan [1997]

38. County Environmental Health / Septic Tank SewageDisposalSystem - Bulletin "A'

39. County Environmental Health Department Tests andReports

Archaeoloqical Resources40. Northwest lnformation Center, Sonoma State

University41. Site Specific Archaeological Reconnaissance

Report

Geoloqical Resources

42. Site Specific Geologic Report43. State Departmçnt of Mines and Geology, SpecialReport #4244. State Department of Mines and Geology, SpecialReport #146

Noise45. Gounty Noise Ordinance

Hazards & Hazardous Materials46. Section 21151 .4 of Califomia Public Resources Code47. State Department of Toxic Substances, Hazardous

Waste and Substances Sites List48. County Office of Emergency Services Emergency

Response Plan [1994 version]

Transportation/Traffi c49. Transportation Research Board, "Highway

Capacity Manual", Special Report 209, 1995.50. SCC Congestion Management Agency, "Monitoring

and Conformance report" (Cunent Edition)51. Official Countv Road Book*ltems listed in bold are the most important sourcesand should be referred to during the first review of theproject, when they are available. The planner shouldrefer to the other sources for a particularenvironmental factor if the former indicate a potentialenvironmental impact.

ATTACHMENT B

Building Site Approval - Grading Approval - Design Review

Preliminary Conditions of Approval

FILE NUMBER: 10687-r4B-14G-14DR

OWNER: Rueland Evongeline Pangon

DATE: Jurrc 28,2017

Project Description: BUILDING SITE APPROVAL, GRADING APPROVAL and DESIGN

REVIEW for a new 4,000 square-foot single-family residence on a

38.77 acre property. Estimated grading quantities ate 4,589 cubic yards

of cut and3,20l cubic yards of fill (for a total of 7,790 cy, net grading

1,388 cy).

APPLICATION IS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STATED BELO\ü IN ACCORDANCEWITH PLANS AS SUBMITTED.

Items marked with one asterisk (*) must be completed prior to building permit issuance.

Items marked with two asterisks (**) must be completed prior to occupancy or final inspection

permit issuance.

Items marked with three asterisks 1*r'x) must be completed prior to issuance of grading permit.

Items marked with four asterisks (*:ß{<*'.) must be completed prior to completion of grading and

release ofbonds.

PLANNING OFFICE - Contact Mark Connolly at (a08) 299-5786 [email protected] for more information regarding the following conditions.

1.. Development shall take place in accordance with approved plans submitted to the Planning

Office by Modern House Architecture & Design on December 15, 2014 withrevisedelevations submitted Jtxrc 12, 201 5.

2. Existing zoningis HS-d2 and General Plan Designation is Hillsides. Maintain the followingminimum dwelling setbacks:

Sides: 30 ft. Rear: 30 ft.Front: 30 ft.

Page 1 of 12

The maximum height of dwelling is27 leet (measured from final grade) and not more thantwo (2) stories.

3. Any new accessory or other structures within 300 feet of the proposed house, and additionsto the new house, shall require design review under Section 5.50.040 of the County ZoningOrdinance, prior to any building permits or construction.

4.* Submit a completed Landscape Water-Efficiency Checklist prior to the issuance of abuilding permit.

5.* LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to issuance of the building permit, submit three (3) copies of alandscape plan (including irrigation systems), prepared and stamped by a licensedlandscape architect. The landscape plan shall emphasize native plant species, and shall bedesigned to provide some visual screening and break up the apparent mass of the house as

viewed from adjacent properties and the valley floor, specifically to the south and the west.

a. The requirements of Division 833 of the County Ordinance Code (Water Conservationin Landscaping) shall apply. In particular:

i. Landscape water efficiency must be demonstrated by utilizing any one of the threeoptions provided in Section B33-5: Demonstration of Landscape Water Efficiency.

ii. Landscape design must comply with all applicable standards and criteria of SectionB33-6: Water-Efficient Design Elements.

iii. Landscape and irrigation plans must comply with all applicable standards and criteriaof Section 833-8: Landscape and Irrigation Design Plans.

The landscape ordinance and supporting information can be found on the Planning Officeweb site: <www.sccplanning.org> > Permits and Development > Landscape Ordinance

b. The landscape plan may include of a variety of landscape material types (i.e.large/small trees, shrubs, forbs, vines/ivy, and ground cover) of varying species forelective landscaping. Canopy trees shall, for the purposes of this condition, meanevergreen trees of a species whose height and spread at maturity is adequate to screen

the residence from the valley floor.

c. The plan shall include at least thirty (30) native or naínalized canopy trees (oaks orother), with the following specific requirements

iv. At least twenty-four (24) of these trees must be installed south of the access drivewayfrom StationlT+ on Grading Plans Sheet C.4. until Station 22+ on Grading Plans Sheetc.5.

v. At least six (6) of these trees must be installed in front of the south facing façadebetween the swale and Contour 730 as identified on Grading Plans Sheet C.5., toprovide visual impact mitigation.

vi. Trees shall be at minimum 24-inchbox trees.vii. Trees shall be represented on the landscaping plan with symbols that approximate the

full size of their canopies at maturity.

File 10687-l4B-l4G-l4DRPangan Residence

Zonrng Administration MeetingJuly 13,2017,Item#_Page2

d. Soil must be capable of supporting the proposed installation and must have adequate

water storage capacity. Soil characteristics, including structure, texture, percolation,

pH, mineral content, and microbiology, shall be evaluated early in the design process.

Soil amendments, such as compost or fertilizer, shall be added as appropriate.

e. Arrangement of trees and other plant materials shall provide for defensible space forfire protection around proposed buildings. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office(408 299-5760) for more information.

6.** The landscape architect shall oversee the installation of plant materials and irrigationhardware, and assess the quality of installation. After the planting is complete, the property

owner shall provide to the Planning Office a written summary report from the landscape

architect, which shall :

Detail the plant materials installed (species, number, location, size, quality) per the

approved plan. Indicate any discrepancies between plan and installation (if applicable),

and state reasons for such discrepancies.

b. Detail any necessary soil augmentation, fertilizer, staking or other plant-specificmaintenance required for the installation.

c. Report any installation problems or concerns of long-term viability

d. Detail any longer-term maintenance needs, including periodic professional tree

fertitizing and pruning to better assure successful growth.

7.:****<Landscaping materials must be installed per approved plan prior to final inspection.

8. Original invoices and receipts from landscape contractor(s) and tree nursery must be kepton hand for one year following installation. Should verification of proper installation be

necessary, such invoices shall be made available to the zoningadministrator for inspection.

9. For 3 consecutive years following occupancy, the owner shall provide evidence to the

Planning Office thatg0o/o of the trees installed per Condition 5 above, are shown to be

healtþ. If not, the owner shall replant the trees and extend the post approval monitoringperiod to another two years. This landscaping shall be maintained for as long as the house

remains.

10.*Any monies or fees due to the Department of Planning and Development shall be paidprior to issuance of any permits for this project.

I l.*Submit color samples for the house façade, trim and roof materials indicating the LightReflectivity Value is less than or equal to 45, pursuant to Section 3.20.040.8.

a.

File 10687-l4B-l4G-14DRPangan Residence

Zonrng Administration MeetingJuly 13,2017,ltem#-Page 3

12.*** & *(*** V/indows to the south and west facing the valley floor shall be coated with ananti-reflective coating to reduce reflectivity and glare as viewed from the valley floor. Priorto issuance of a building permit, provide samples and specifications for an anti-reflectivecoating.

13.* Pursuant to ç5.20.I25, record a Notice of Permit and Conditions with the County Officeof Clerk-Recorder, to ensure that successor property owners are made aware that certainconditions of approval shall have enduring obligation. Evidence of such recordation shallbe provided prior to building permit issuance.

LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING - Contact Christine Hii at (408) 299-5116,christine. sccgov.org for additional information.

LDE Plan Check:14.* Obtain a Grading Permit from the Land Development Engineering (LDE) Section of the

Planning Office prior to beginning any construction activities. The process for obtaining a

Grading Permit includes submitting the following:

. Six sets of grading plans on24"x36"

. One set ofplans on 1 1"xl7" or pdf

. Engineer's Estimate

. One set of drainage calculations per the County Drainage Manual

. One set of Retaining wall details and structural calculations, if applicable

. One copy of the Title Report

. One copy of Soils Report

. One copy of a Letter from the Geotechnical Engineer approving the final plans

. Pay the Plan Check and Inspection Fee

LDE will provide the final amount of the Engineer's Estimate. A performance bond for theengineer's estimate is required; this can be in the form of cash deposit, assignment of asavings account or CD, a surety from an insurance company, or a letter of credit.

Expect six to twelve weeks to complete the review process. Once all the fees and securityhave been submitted, and the plan has been approved and signed, a Grading Permit will beissued and said construction may begin. This permit does not imply that a building permithas been issued. Please contact LDE at (299-5734) for additional information andtimelines.

15.* Final plans shall include a single sheet which contains the County standard notes andcertificates as shown on County Standard Cover Sheet. The minimum letter size for plansubmission and approval shall be no smaller than 1/10 inch.

Improvement Plans:16. * P."l*ritta.y plans prepared by V/estfall Engineers and received on Decemb er 19,2014

by the Santa Claru County Planning Office have been reviewed. Submit finalimprovement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer for review and approval by

File 10687-148-l4G-14DRPangan Residence

Zonrng Admini stration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,Item#_Page 4

LDE. Include plan, profile, typical sections, contour grading for all street, road, driveway,

structures and other improvements as appropriate for construction. All the followingstandards shall be consistent with the September 1997 Standard Details Manual, County ofSanta Clara, Roads and Airports Department and/or the March 1981 Standards and

Policies Manual, Volume 1 (Land Development) as appropriate. Plans will be processed

and checked for conforlnance with the following County Ordinances , the 2007 Santa CIara

County Drainage Manual, Santa ClaraGrading Ordinance, Santa Clara County Flood

Plain Ordinance as appropriate. Copies of these manuals and ordinances are available at

the following web sites:

Roads & Airports Standard Details Manual. Go to http://www.sccgov.org,. Click on Agencies & Depts on the top right side of the page.

. Click on the letter R on the top of the page.

. Click on Roads & Airports Department on the middle of the page.

. Click on Published Standards, Specifications, Documents and Forms on the

Quicklinks on the right side of the page.. Click on the appropriate Detail Section at the bottom of the page. For example, for

detail A"/4, chose Section A of the Standard Details, September 1997.

Land Development Engineering Standards and Policies Manual. Go to http://www.sccbuilding.orgl,. Click on Land Development Engineering on the left side of the page.

. At the bottom of the page, click on Private Road Standard Details for private road

details.. Click on Plan Review & Processing link in the middle of the page for other useful

links.

Santa ClaraCounty Drainage Manual, Flood Plain Ordinance, and/or GradingOrdinance

. Go to http://www.sccbuilding.orgl,

. Click on Land Development Engineering on the left side of the page.

. At the bottom of the page, click on the pdf titled "Drainage Manual"

. At the bottom of the page, click on the pdf titled "Flood Plain Ordinaîce" At the

bottom of the pa3e, click on the link titled "Grading Ordinaîce"

Said Final Improvement Plans Shall include the following:

Roads to be/ not to be County Maíntained;a. Driveway Approaches per County Standard SD4. The driveway approach shall

conform to County standard slopes of less than 5Yo grade 20 feet from the edge ofpavement, or to the right of way, whichever is greater.

b. Single Lot Driveways per County Standard SD5. A1l geometries shall be consistent

with the conditions imposed by the Fire Marshal's Office below.c. Drainage Ditch and Swale Linings per County Standard SD8.

d. Energy Dissipaters per County Standard SD10.

File 10687-l48-l4G-l4DRPangan Residence

Zorung Administration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,Item#-Page 5

e. Standard Temporary Turnarounds per County Standard SD13.f. Standard Turnarounds and Tumouts per County Standard SDl6.

Grøding:g. Cross Sections of the driveway and house pad.

h. Location for the disposition of excess grading material.i. Engineered Slopes that conform to County Standard Detail SD6 and Section Cl2-543

of the County Grading Ordinance with regard to slope height and use of drainageterraces.

j. All other improvements required by these Conditions of Approval.k. The requirement to take all exported materials from the site to a County approved

disposal site must be clearly indicated on the plan.l. It appears that at Station 19+50 some grading work may propose within 5-feet of

property lines. Please clearly show that all proposed grading is setback 5 feet fromproperty line, or revise the proposed grading to meet the setback requirement perSection C12-558.

Erosion Control;m. Provide an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan that outlines seasonally appropriate

erosion and sediment controls during the construction period in accordance withSections Cl2-568 through Cl2-571of the Grading Ordinance and MunicipalRegional Permit (north county) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemPhase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System General Permit (southcounty). Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Sheets may include, but are not limitedto, the following information as needed:

1. Erosion and Sediment Control: soil binders, geotextiles, mats, creek andhillside stabilization, hydroseeding, silt fence, sediment basin, check dams,fiber rolls, gravel bags, drainage inlet protection, construction entrance/ exit,sheet sweeping requirements, perimeter controls, etc.

2. Good Site Management: containment, spill prevention, material storage/protection, sanitary waste management, etc.

3. Non Stormwater Management, dewatering operations, paving operations,concrete washouts, vehicle and equipment storage and refueling, etc.

n. Include the County's Standard Best Management Practice Plan Sheets BMP-I andBMP-2 with the Plan Set.

o. Landscape Plans that demonstrate long-term erosion control, aesthetic / screeningcomponents, and any other requirements listed in these conditions.

Drainage:p. Provide for the unintemrpted flow of water in swales and natural courses on the

property or any access road. No fill or crossing of any swales or watercourses isallowed unless shown on the approved plans.

q. Property owner is responsible for the adequacy of any drainage facilities and for thecontinued maintenance thereof in a manner that will preclude anyhazard to life,health or damage to adjoining property.


Zoning Administration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,Item#_Page 6

r. Demonstrate the subject property has adequate existing and proposed storm drainage

facilities in accordance with criteria as designated in the County Drainage Manual.

At the minimum, drainage plans and hydraulic calculations shall demonstrate all ofthe following:

1. The site and proposed graded areas can be adequately drained,

2. The development of the site will not cause problems to nearby properties,

3. The site is not subject to significant damage from the one-percent flood, and

4. The on-site drainage will be controlled in such a manner as to not increase the

downstream peak flow or cause ahazard or public nuisance. If this cannot be

demonstrated, provide a detention system pursuant to the Design Guidelines

in Section 6.3.3 of the 2007 Santa Clara County Drainage Maual.

Easements:s. Indicate on the improvement plans all applicable easements affecting the parcel(s)

with benefactors and recording information. Supply one copy of a prelimi4ary titlereport, dated within 60 days of the day of submittal, with the submission of the

grading/improvement plans for review by Land Development Engineering.

t. Provide a copy of the Covenant of Easement for proposed driveway construction in

the adjacent parcel 029-35-007.

Storm Water Treatment - SF Bay watershed;u. This project is located within the San Francisco Bay watershed. It is recommended to

include source control measures, as applicable and required to include at least one ofthe following site design measures;

1. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse,

2. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas,

3. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas.

4. Direct runoff from driveways, and/or uncovered parhng lots to vegetated

areas.

5. Construct sidewalks, walkways, andlor patios with permeable surfaces.

6. Construct driveways andlor uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces.

Please refer to the Santa ClaraValley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program

(SCVURPPP) "C.3 Stromwater Handbook" at www.scvurppp-w2k.com/program_components.shtml for additional information about compliance withthese regulations. (These regulations are from to the 2009 San Francisco Bay MunicipalRegional NPDES Storm Water Permit (MRP) as amended in20l1, Section C.3).

Utilities:v. All new on-site utilities, mains and services shall be placed underground and

extended to serve the proposed residence. All extensions shall be included in the

improvement plans submitted to LDE for review. OfÊsite work should be

coordinated with any other undergrounding to serve other properties in the immediate

area.

File 10687- l4B-l4G-14DRPangan Residence

Zoning Administration MeetingJuly 13, 201'7,Item#-PageT

Soils and Geoloey:17. * Submit one copy of the geotechnical report for the improvements, prepared by a

registered civil engineer, as required by the Santa Clara County Ordinance Code, toLand Development Engineering.

18. * Submit a plan review letter by the Project Geotechnical Engineer certifying that thegeotechnical issues identified in the above geotechnical report have been mitigated onthe improvement plan. This letter shall be submitted to and reviewed by LandDevelopment Engineering.

Notice of Intent19. * This project may/ will disturb one acre (43, 560 square feet) or greater of land area.

Provide a calculation showing the final area disturbed with this project.If the above calculation indicates more than one acre of disturbed land area,theOwner shall file a "Notice of Intent" (NOD to comply with the Statewide GeneralNPDES Permit for storm water discharges associated with construction activity withthe State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). This condition is mandated bythe State of California. A filing form, a filing fee, a location map, and a Storm WaterPollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) are required for this filing. A copy of theApplication shall be submitted to the SWRCB, with a duplicate copy submitted to theCounty, prior to building permit issuance, and by state law must be done prior tocommencing construction.

Information is available in the 7th floor lobby, and from the SÌVRCB web site:http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml

Dedications and Easements20.* Indicate on the plan where the nearest publicly maintained road is located. Submit

evidence of legal access to the site from the nearest publicly maintained roadcompiled and/or verified by a Licensed Land Surveyor or Registered Civil Engineerwho is authorized to practice land surveying. Should access not exist, submit signed,notanzed, and recorded agreements to grant rights-of-ingress and egress.

Maps:21.* A licensed land surveyor, or registered civil engineer authorized to practice land

surveying shall set or verify permanent survey monuments (lot stakes), and identifythe parcel boundary on the plan. If property was previously surveyed, the monumentsmust be exposed, verified and shown on grading and building plans. If newmonuments will be set, the stakes shall be set pursuant to the State Land Surveyor'sAct prior to issuance of a construction or grading permit as necessary. The LandSurveyor / Engineer in responsible charge of the boundary survey shall fileappropriate records pursuant to $8762 or 8771of the Land Surveyors Act with theCounty Surveyor.

File I 0687- 148- 14G- 14DRPangan Residcncç

Zonrng Administration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,Item#_Page 8

Agreements22.* Enter into a land development improvement agreement with the County. Submit an

Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost prepared by a registered civilengineer with the all stages of work clearly identified for all improvements and

grading as proposed in this application. Post financial assurances based upon the

estimate, sign the development agreement and pay necessary inspection and plan

check fees, and provide County with a Certificate of Worker's Compensation

Insurance. (Cl2-206)

Other Conditions23.** Construct all of the aforementioned improvements. Construction staking is required

' and shall be the responsibility of the developer.

DEPARTMENT of ENVIROMENTAL HEALTH- Contact Darrin Lee (408)-299-57 48, or by

e-mail at: [email protected] for information regarding the following:

24. *** Sewage disposal conditions have been determined at 173 plus 173 lineal feet ofsubsurface drainline. The two drainline systems must be connected through a

positive diversion valve. A 1500 gallon septic tank and effluent filter will be

required. This septic system is adequate to serve a three bedroom single familyresidence.

25. *** The location of all soils analysis test pits, and percolation test holes must be

shown on the revised site plan. The soil test log, and the percolation test results

including the adjusted, stabilized percolation rate must be shown on the revised site

plan.

26. *** Identify the source of potable water, If the potable water source is a private well,show the location and ensure there is a minimum 100 feet setback between the welland the proposed septic system.

27. All construction activities shall be in conformance with the Santa Clara CountyNoiseOrdinance Section 811-1 54 andprohibited between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00

a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, or at any time on Sundays for the duration ofconstruction.

28. *'*<{<* Provide proof of garbage service at the time of final occupancy sign-off.Garbage service in the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County is mandatory.

FIRE MARSHALS OFFICE - Contact Mac Bala at (408) 299-5763, or by e-mail at

mac.bala@pln. sccgov.org, for more information regarding the following conditions.

FIRE PROTECTION WATERIMPORTANT: Fire protection water system (aboveground water storage and wharfhydrant) shall be installed, functioning and inspected prior to approval of the foundation.

System shall be maintained in good working order and accessible throughout construction.

File I 0687-l4B-14G-l4DRPangan Residence

Zonrng Administration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,ltem#-Page 9

A stop work order may be placed on the project if the required hydrant systems are notinstalled, accessible, and/or functioning.

29. ON-SITE WATER STORAGE: Where on-site storage tanks are required, details forfire protection water supply shall be included with the building permit set ofdrawings. Submittal shall include, but not be limited to, location of water supply,(e.g. onsite well, shared well; tank location and capacity, pipe size, wharf hydrantorifice size and location, domestic and fire protection water tanks and pipingconfiguration).a. All installations shall include a primary aboveground storage tank with a capacity

of not less than 3,000 gallons dedicated to domestic and fire sprinkler systemdemand. Storage capacify may be increased due to sprinkler design demand oradditional domestic (including landscaping) required by the Environmental HealthDepartment.

b. Provide a minimum 10,000 gallon secondary aboveground storage tank dedicatedto the wharf hydrant.

c. Aboveground storage tanks shall be provided with automatic refill. Manualrefilling of tanks is not acceptable.

d. Installation of aboveground storage tanks less than 20 ft. to a structure requirestanks to be of noncombustible construction.

e. Installation of the tank system shall comply with Fire Marshal Standard CFMO-w5.

f. Underground storage tanks and swimming pools shall not be accepted in place ofaboveground storage tanks.

30. WHARF HYDRANT: One on-site wharf hydrant with 2-ll2 inch orifice is requiredto be installed when fire protection water is supplied by on-site aboveground storagetank(s). Installation of hydrants shall be in accordance with Fire Marshal StandardDetail CFMO-W4.a. Minimum distance to structure shall not be less than 55 ft. from the closest

portion of the structure and shall not exceed 150 ft. from the furthest portion ofthe structure ( measured along path of travel).

b. Hydrant shall be installed within 8 ft. of driving surface in a location acceptable tothe Fire Marshal's Office.

c. Installation of a hydrant adjacent to a driveway (12 ft. wide) requires a turnoutcomplying with SD-16 to allow additional emergency vehicles to pass.

d. Hydrant shall have a positive flow by means of gravity feed or where that is notpossible, from a reliable, listed automatic pump approved by the Fire Marshal.Elevation of hydrants and tanks in relation to each other shall be a majorconsideration. NOTE: tank and hydrant elevations shall be noted on the site plansubmitted for building permit.

31. Fire protection water shall be made available to the fire department.

32. FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM: An approved residential fire sprinkler systemcomplying with CFMO-SP6 shâll be installed throughout the structure


Zorung Administration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,Item#_Page l0

NOTE: The fire sprinkler system shall be installed and finaled by this office prior to

occupancy. A separate permit shall be obtained from this office by a state licensed C-

16 contractor prior to installation. Please allow for a minimum of 30 days for plan

review of fire sprinkler plans by this office.

FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS

33. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: These are minimum Fire Marshal standards. Should

these standards conflict with any other local, state or federal requirement, the most

restrictive shall apply.

a. Construction of access roads and driveways shall use good engineering practice.

b. All required access roads, driveways, turnarounds, and turnouts shall be installed,

and serviceable prior to approval of the foundation, and shall be maintained

throughout construction. A stop work order may be placed on the project ifrequired driving surfaces are not installed, accessible, and/or maintained at all

times.

34. DRIVEWAYS (roads serving only one lot) shall comply with the following when the

distance between the centerline of the access road and any portion of the structure

exceeds 150 ft. (measured along the path of travel).

a. Width: Clear width of drivable surface of 12 ft.b. Vertical Clearance: Minimum vertical clearance of 13 ft. 6 in. shall be maintained

between the access road and the building site (trim or remove, tree limbs, electrical

wires, structures, and similar improvements).c. Curve Radius: úrside turn radius for curves shall be a minimum of 42 ft.

d. Grade: Maximum grade shall not exceed l5%.e. Surface: All driving surfaces shall be all-weather and capable of sustaining 65,000

pound gross vehicle weightf. Turnouts: Passing turnouts in compliance with SD-16 shall be provided at every 500

ft. and wherever hydrants are placed adjacent to a driveways (Exception station 12+-

00 to 18+00 in the coÍrmon driveway a turnout will be provided at the beginning ofthe private driveway station 0+00).

g. Turnarounds: Turnaround shall be provided for driveways in excess of 150 ft. as

measured along the path of travel from the centerline of the access road to the

structure. Acceptable turnarounds shall be 40 ft. by 48 ft. pad, hammerhead, or bulb

of 32 ft. radius complying with County Standard SD-l6. All turnarounds shall have a

slope of not more than 5o/o in any direction.h. Gates: Gates shall not obstruct the required width or vertical clearance of the

driveway and may require a Fire Department Lock Box/Gate Switch to allow for firedepartment access. Installation shall comply with CFMO-A3.

MISCELLANEOUS:35. Property is located within the Milpitas Response Area and the State Response Area

(served by Cal Fire).

File 10687-14B-14G-14DRPangan Residence

Zoning Administration MeetingJuly 13, 2017,Item#-Page 1l

36. This property is located in the Wildland/Urban Interface Fire Area. All of thefollowing conditions shall apply:

a. A Class "4" roof assembly is required. Detail shall be included in plans submittedfor building permit.

b. Provide a ll2 inch spark arrester for the chimney.c. Remove significant combustible vegetation within 30 feet of the structure to

minimize risk of wildfire casualty. Maintain appropriate separation of vegetativefuels in areas between 30 and 100 feet from the structure.

37. MAINTENANCE: Fire protection water systems and equipment shall be accessibleand maintained in operable condition at all times, and shall be replaced or repairedwhere defective. Fire protection water shall be made available to the fire department.Fire department access roads, driveways, turnouts, and turnarounds shall bemaintained free and clear and accessible at all times for fire department use. Gatesshall be maintained in good working order, and shall remain in compliance with FireMarshal Standard CFMO-43 at all times.

GEOLOGY - Contact Jim Baker at (a08) 299-5774 or jim.baker@,pln.sccgo for additionalinformation.

38.*&**Submit a Plan Review Letter that indicates the plans conform with the intent of theapproved recommendations. ln addition, prior to Final Úrspection, submit a ConstructionObservations Letter that confirms the construction was completed in conformance with theplans. JBB

File 10687-148- 14G- 14DRPangan Residence

Zorung Administration MeetingJuly l3,2077,Ifem#_Page 12

029-01-007

029 07

9-35-015

029-03-023

USA:Milpitas

029-30-011

029-34-004

02

,/029-36-0

R.o

029-36-003

029-37-0{

029-34-002

City ofMILPITAS

37-0

029-33-00

al ElevationNational

andreau

029

02 18tu _z'029-35-017

029-35-019\-/

CityMILPITAS

029 1

01902

02

33

029- 30

\_l029-30-0

029-35-0ll

02

1

4

36

029I

6

029-30-01

029-35-0

\

t3029-35-005

7

9-0 029-06-0029-0 I

029-06:023 I11

029-06-009I

0 59-01

I

029.30:008

029-33-004

The National Map: National

029-3'P¿it{fçt, Geograph ic N amesNational Landl8

County of Santa ClaraDepartme'nt of Planning and Development

OfficeCounty Center, East Wing70 West Heclding Sbeet 7th FloorSan Jose California 95110-1705

1,000 2,000

Natio

'11Dataset; U.S

' jï'l't, ü

; HERE

õ 11&ñ

niãdF >i* E

'riã{çJ''

g

ã€

å{

i$

ldÍråirII

!¡l$

T

!

oaÕ

õ

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION029-35-005

PANGAN RESIDENCEAUGUSTA CIMILPITAS- CA

Ið

E

Ißå

II

ü

CI

,3

. ,r,li,

z

¡

-jilì4i

t

//4

//

az--!

!7o!olnmE'.|,

5ovÞvm

2?Ê86

lL¡4ân"274

ñqf,z¡*

iãü*gi\\,Eil

16r ;l|ãtzfr16r nlÐ?lc7t>*tzatlIJ18Ë16lf'tcat@lol¡tat

'1,[frr,g

ä gilsx

I s""fr

d

e

åão

.;3

¡¡¡:r:

¡ã¡i.t:il::.

i:!i:3:::

MODERNHOUSEAR.CHITECTURE

& DçSGN

6ffi&ffi_^-KÈ3îe>,

It:t c@ | |wCud Cline Architect

zou-ot-zourI'oo -,<F o g¡ L'Ø,=-ui2aodt! oè() o t:

^Z<>Eo<o(,I z:<zo-

Al.t

N'l '

VICINITY MAP

PROPOSED FLOORAREAtof SEËr¿oñtre DElRrct l@lruÍ)

5¡8.Þ SO. [.¡,G¡.5SO. n36.9 S. Ff

N)rurcilRESDErcËl(N) DECXSÍERUCE(ñ) DRW Y

GRADING QUANTITIES (CUBIC YDS)*UMAY ¿a¡ 16l€þErcE 3ð 0USETENT ?S O

åu[qre 8m ¡ruRNouþ ææ r&

ElAr w wrffi

ea

niã9.>ñag+eñ

Icatt

tIr

ïrI0

IÍI

9

3

vI

tÊ¡

tc

IIIItg

oao

õ


PANGAN RESIDENCEtst¡

ilil AUGUSTA CTMILPITAS. CA

ItI

Æ-\----{:rt

/J\----11',

-€

. -/A'r

__rÀI

--€

- --\9

??I

1Ia

1t

qq̂l(olr

Yr

I

i-

I

I

I

€--,,-

q-

Â

o--

^

Â

âL-.-

I

Ãt-r-- -

\i/-- -

o--

ååo

lf,@

fr'HJ[HH

-/€r

Ð.6¡

@

t, ,'

+P

-ô-

II¡

näã

¡¡î:q*F ¿å'TIiläH ö

iFiËåå ä Ë

13 e çåm

Æ,."RÀr\Q!! ultjt;

.\+:z'

o¡o

7.


PANGAN RESIDENCEAUGUSlA CÏI\4ILPITAS, CA

tfrlElHl

rl, l* I

(ilt

qrai rò 6)YI Y Ytttttt

I

I€t-)\./

ii¡

iI

II

q!I

G-

Ãþl- -

o--

q-o--

ÃL:¡- -

G--q-

Â

\̂9/- -

¡ËO

å¿@

I¿t

n¿HmllElET-m

i

,..tI

áa

à

I

¡P

q

!E

+-

a:!

R

ffidP

à¿

xi

PRñrÉDoN r¿6¡6 @ es^M

xm=frå€

¡ et;ífi: Ill$ËËBã ç

lådEli r 4l3eç?.ß

ofo


PANGAN RESIDENCEAUGUSTA CTMILPITAS. CA

á¡

rf,lãlËl

nl' l* I

--9

---q

- --(,

- --\v

-.--l'F\

---o

--€

--o

Ã

--o

Ã- -1'

^- -19/

I!I

rÀY!I

q^iYi

i1?G--

o--

tò-.-

q-o--

/.ãL-. -

o--q--

Â

(:¡- -

\̂f-

@rlaËlO

¡aO

*@

sÌEhl

;ËåËäE¡¡il T

9ç

ã

_l

5tf,I

1I

tãEl! e

ËËIFåãåI

I

III

.lI

I

I

I

L____

------JLr

î-I

I

,Sr!

i3rã

FtliFI)

;Eä[di =

;ËãFåä

çãßll "

iËåFåËË

-I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I¡

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

_-J

---FI

IIII¡\

¡III

---J

MODERNHOUSEÂRCHfTÊClURE& DESIGN

_-,zt:\.,6Ër..3e\'\W"tu .*ll.wfl.

Cúñ Cline Architect

zou-ot-zouJl

r-oo -,<Fo¡11uuo,=-Úì,2^

o 0l -loc

'iz?ifro<

ioz

!a

rcifllÞlElslwtlæÐt

A3.t

?I

/A NORTH ELEVATION CT, YRD. (PROPOSED)\et/ 'ruuc. 18

?

,ôY

i

6'ìY

i ?¡Cl

Yi

?

/1\ NORTH ELEVATION (PROPOSED)\gri su,n.. f'

I I ?

? ? 1I

I

I

I ? aI

I

I ? ??

nn

¡0EtoEc

u

! @ E E g qE

ulEi

EOOOAAES¡OE¡O

ì:i;å;

-il

i!;:¡!11::

:å;¿

orar6dr.usr. wosú xd'itus.N3þd. PRrÑfÉooÑ 1Æ¡3 @ 05tÀM

xm=fråß

F>.Iñoø+0#

{tm

!

a

cå

etI¡

aå


PANGAN RESIDENCEAUGUSTA CTMILPITAS. CA

Ëg

E'

¡g å

trtrtrEEtrEEEE lî

ËãiåiËãã¡iiËiili

iËËãHi'iIgE t. ¡,1;

E FTFTÉËFFE grggggss

ËËìisgiEE E Ã Ï-HEEää

d $r!EÈt:s

a* ã ç

gírñiripãËÉ

Ë3H

9ã

--o

--€

---o

--€

--o

---o

--€

--o

--€

t+16 t{

ls lr

,)I

--o

ô

A--Ë,

Ã- --\t

-. --r'È\

---o

m1-m

ãõz

I¡

E

tr

tr

E

E

E

tr

tr

E

E

EI

H

E

B

BL

tr

tr

ñ¡d*dmHrydEqdPÀñG^MPÁGÊN-PurñrNG0!ùr3dtr.u3 . PRrrEooñ rÆró @ e57ak

ËigF>-!ñaa+0il

{c,m

B

It

iiatÈl

ó

et

eI¡

caÍt,I

,ffi,v.ry

oao

¡


PANGAN RESIDENCEAUGUSÏA C1IVILPITAS, CA

Ið

E

1

nlãlsl

Il' ls I

12lolltñ

hICLtÞ12lôlølotltõt2

lrlnt:loHt?loIEIOlølñlolãl¿

{ËõËiiË:EËãËiË

;c3tãri:ü.ìêñ

f;iåã9Íçqìad;tãFbãõ

åEqãs¡

EtrtrtrE E]trtr{8{8ilSqÞdËÍãöa>\â819tê4ã¡ì:ãi¡d3Íã:ürgär!

ËãHiË

EËËãåô;:Èr

ìÊc¡6

s'*

QZ!ãtÊ*ni386

iËËåËäËåËii

--o

--o

--€

--€

--€

--@

-*.@

---o

--o

tl

EF

{+l?È l.ildFt9 lilä lçlr l'trt

lcl

E]EäËããfiÉiËii

ËffåËE¡Eiåi

"ää¡ ËãsÉ¡oÈ, t

TBt.;

lít;

F

tr

ËisiËË

ËäåËäË:g:9T¡r¡ìqlà¡qãããi

Êåããã

É

Ë!ïE¡Ë¡i:I

ãiË:EËËr;i

ËÊã"ËEãËEË

Ik;t;

l*

lã

g

iËãããËãiËsxäl

isE:stii¡ïi!

ËËËåËËå¡Ëåi

ÁI-\

YHIStlo1 lat.t?ç lut

lmlc¡l{lolzl¡lolnlmt>lxITì>lølrt¡lotol<IXl{loIItm

l=

:l

7o(ha(nmo--{õzIø-lm7ot-o(t,m+

Ø{m7(¡,I-

6

I

i

i¡

I¡

È

4a

a

¿

c

8E â¡ÉtÈ étr

:Ë¡åË¡¿ ãËË

3E ËEg

E tl{l:¡È

Èt

---o

-.---1Þr

--o

--{Ð

--o

Ã

---o

Â- --\t

---o

Â* --\t

tråÈ

It

:ll

tt

,,*u8-t'

(

s

/,/,

{3/,

,l

{//

I

a

t1

--¿

)

\I ,\

\a\

(

3g

=9Ë ç3>s ä-diÌ:.H YÈ -õaã

r -'*\g

llO)o_v5d

F\

a¡

tE

ATTACHMENT D

Alternative Sites Analysis (Submitted By Applicant Juanary 20,2017)

Comparison - Potential Alternative Building Sites

Option 1 - Proposed buildine site:

The owner purchased the 38.7 acre property in order to have a building site away from otherresidences or improvements. The proposed building site was selected by the owners to create

residence which is surrounded by their property to give them buffer from their neighbors. Thesite grading is limited to the building site and driveway only. The house location is at top of theknoll. The driveway is a continuation of an existing paved road winding through the property tothe building site with total length of 2300 feet. The location for the proposed residence was

selected by the owner as the only suitable site within the property for low profile single storyresidence. Combination of the house design and site grading will reduce visibility from thevalley as well as from the County Park and trail. Upon extensive effort a suitable area for leachfield with acceptable percolation rate was found located southeast from the building site.

Complete geologic and geotechnical investigation was completed with recommendations forconstruction of both driveway and proposed residence. The site grading consists of an excavationfor the residence with basement, fire turnaround and parking, and driveway to the building site.

The grading quantities are as follows:

Option 2 - Alternative site:

This site is located on the slope near the northerly boundary only 400 feet from entry to theproperty, less than 200 feet from the golf course, and less than 40 feet above the lowest grade onthe site. This location does not impact view shed for the neighbor or from the valley. It will be

visible from the County Park and trail only. From the park it will appear as a two story residence.

Driveway to this site is short, only 420 feet and would require only minor grading. Significantfill would be required for construction of the turnaround. Maximum depth of the fill would be 25

feet. The backyard of the residence would have to be cut into the slope to accommodate buildingas designed. This cut would be up to 20 feet in maximum depth. Locating the proposed home onthe sloping site with even slope of 25o/o does not take advantage of its design features. This sitedoes not take advantage of the low profile design limiting light for portion of the residence

during winter months. There is no suitable area for leach field below the proposed site whichincludes area of fill for the turnaround or area with vegetation usually found in the wetlands. Thesuitable area for the leach field is located far away and would require pumping. The site grading

consists ofan excavation forthebackyard area; fill forthe fire turnaround andparking, and

driveway to the building site. The grading quantities are as follows:

Backyard surrounding residenceDriveway including parking and turnaround

lI76 C.Y. of cut3413 C.Y. of cut 3201C.Y. of fill

1480 C.Y. of fill

SantaÐlara County Zoning Administration HearingJuly 13,2017

Backyard behind residence 2400 C.Y. of cutDriveway including parking and tumaround 100 C.Y. of cut

ATTACHMENT D



This site is located on the slope above site 2 about 110 feet above the lowest grade on the site.

This location does not impact view shed for the neighbor or from the valley. It will be visiblefrom the County Park and trail only. From the park it will appear as a two story residence.

Driveway to this site will be about 800 feet long and will require grading due to steep slopes near

the building site; signifrcant fill would be required for construction of the turnaround. Maximumdepth of the fill would be 20 feet. The backyard of the residence would have to be cut into the

slope to accommodate building as designed. This cut would be up to 20 feet in maximum depth.

Locating the proposed home on the sloping site with slope from 15 to 25o/o does not take

advantage of its design features. This site does not take advantage of the low profile design

limiting light for portion of the residence during winter months. The area below the site may not

be suitable for leach field. It includes area of fill for the turnaround, rocky slope not suitable for a

leach field and low area with vegetation usually found in wetlands. The suitable area for the

leach field is located far away and may be accessed by long (almost 1000 feet long) gravity

sewer main. The site grading consists of an excavation for the backyard area and both cut and fillfor the driveway, fire turnaround and parking. The grading quantities are as follows:


This site is located on the slope almost at center of the property. This location does not impactview shed for the neighbor or from the valley. It will be visible from the County Park and trailonly. From the park it will appear as a two story residence. Driveway to this site is about 930 feet

long and would require only minor grading. Construction of the turnaround will require fill withmaximum depth of 12 feet. The backyard of the residence would have to be cut into the slope to

accommodate building as designed. This cut would be up to 17 feú in maximum depth. Locating

the proposed home on the sloping site with even slope of 20Yo does not take advantage of itsdesign features. This site does not take advantage of the low profile design limiting light forportion of the residence during winter months. There may not be a suitable area for leach fieldbelow the proposed site which includes area of fill for the turnaround and area of shallow swale.

The suitable area for the leach field is located far away and would require pumping. The site

grading consists of an excavation for the backyard area, and a fill for the fire turnaround,parking, and driveway to the building site. The grading quantities are as follows:

Backyard behind residence 2000 C.Y. of cutDriveway including parking and turnaround 1200 C.Y' of cut

Backyard behind residence 1260 C.Y. of cut

Driveway including parking and turnaround 350 C.Y. of cut

2100 C.Y. of fill

1200 C.Y. of fill

Santa Clara County Zoning Administration HearingJuly 13,2017

ATTACHMENT D


Option 5 -Alternative site:

This site is located on the slope at lower portion of the property 1100 feet from entry to theproperty. This location does not impact view shed for the neighbor or from the valley. It will bevisible from the County Park and trail only. From the park it will appear as a two story residence.1100 foot long driveway to this site would require only minor grading however; significant fillwould be required for construction of the turnaround. Maximum depth of the fill would be 25feet. The backyard of the residence would have to be cut into the slope to accommodate buildingas designed. This cut would be up to 20 feet in maximum depth. Locating the proposed home onthe sloping site with even slope of 24Yo does not take advantage.of its design features. This sitedoes not take advantage of the low profile design limiting light for portion of the residenceduring winter months. From the park it will appear as a two story residence. There is no suitablearea for leach field below the proposed site which includes area of fill for the turnaround or area

with vegetation usually found in wetlands. The suitable area for the leach field is located faraway and would require pumping. The site grading consists of an excavation for the backyardarea, and a fill for the fire turnaround and parking, and driveway to the building site. The gradingquantities are as follows:

Backyard behind residenceDriveway including parking and turnaround

2050 C.Y. of cut100 C.Y. of cut 1850 C.Y. of fiIl

Santa Clara County Zoning Administration HearingJuly 13,2017

Item #6 4DR - Santa Clara County, California...2017/07/13 · Item #6 Staff Contact: Manira...

Documents

Transcript of Item #6 4DR - Santa Clara County, California...2017/07/13 · Item #6 Staff Contact: Manira...