Los Altos Hills City Council
January 30, 2025

Resolution ___ Page 23
ii. Three times the density allowed by the general plan, zoning ordinance, or state law, whichever is greater.
iii. The density that is consistent with the density specified in the housing element.

In reviewing the foregoing, the Project does not meet Items (C)(1)(i)-(iii) because its density exceeds the minimum prescribed by statute. Under (i), the density applicable to Los Altos Hills under Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B) is 20 dwelling units per acre as the Town is a “suburban jurisdiction” defined by Section 65583.2.6
Under (ii), the density currently allowed under the Town’s General Plan and Zoning (which contains only the R-A district designation) is one unit per acre. Finally, under (iii), as the Project parcel is not listed in the Housing Element site inventory for 2023-2031, the 1 du/ac standard under the Town’s General Plan and zoning continues to apply. The Project proposes 55 units, which equates to a density of 143.6 du/ac. This density far exceeds the statutory thresholds as listed above since it would well exceed fifty percent of 20 du/ac alone. The Applicant has not elected to be subject to the provisions of Government Code section 65589.5 as it existed on February 1, 2023 when the initial preliminary application was filed or on April 11, 2023 when the preliminary application was revised. Consequently, the proposed Project does not qualify as a “Builder’s Remedy Project” under Government Code section 65589.5(d)(6) in effect as of January 1, 2025.

III. Government Code Section 65589.5(j) Findings
Section 65589.5(j) provides:

When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete [defined by statute to be the filing of a preliminary application], but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist:
(A) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
(B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. (emphasis and clarifications added.) 6 Gov. Code section 65583.2 (e)(1). See also LAH 2023-2031 Housing Element, page 172, under Housing Resources.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 1

Resolution ___ Page 24
For the purposes of clarity, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed Project is not compliant with applicable objective standards as set forth in Section 65589.5(j).

Specifically, based on the record below including the Town’s Consistency Determination Letter dated August 31, 2023, the Project is inconsistent with a number of objective General Plan and zoning development standards and policies, including but not limited to minimum lot size, setbacks, height, and residential density. As such, it is not a housing development project covered by subsection (j).

However, even if the Project were to be analyzed under the two findings set forth in subdivision (j) above, as set forth in detail under Finding #1 above which are incorporated here for the purposes of this section, the Project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety based on its failure to comply with Fire Code Section 503.1.1 to provide adequate distance between the proposed fire access road and the residential building. Based on reasons articulated in Finding #1, there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact other than reducing the Project density by reducing the size of the residential building proposed or to deny the Project. Finding #1 illustrates in detail the Applicant’s inability to propose alternative mitigation methods that directly address the excessive distance or provide equally protective and efficient measures to mitigate the adverse impact.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 1

Resolution ___ Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. _________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS

ALTOS HILLS MAKING FINDINGS OF DENIAL PURSUANT TO
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65589.5(d) AND

DENYING A SENIOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 57 SENIOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS (CDP23-0002)
LOCATED AT 10758 MORA DRIVE, LOS ALTOS HILLS
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2023, the Town of Los Altos Hills (“Town”) received a preliminary application pursuant to Government Code section 65941.1 and a formal application from Forrest Linebarger (“Applicant”) for a senior residential development project titled “Silver Oaks Senior Community” consisting of 44 units with 11 units reserved for low-income households (Application No. CDP23-0002) at 10758 Mora Drive (“Project”); and WHEREAS, on February 1, 2023, the Town also received a preliminary application and a formal application for a nearly identical senior residential development project also titled “Silver Oaks” consisting of 44 units with 11 units reserved for low-income households (Application No.

CDP23-0001) at 10728 Mora Drive which is separated by one parcel from the Project site; and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2023, the Applicant also revised the preliminary application and formal application for the 10728 Mora Drive property to add 10 additional market- rate units, for a total of 55 units where 44 units would be market-rate, and 11 units would be reserved for lowincome households; and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2023, the Applicant submitted a revised preliminary application and formal application for the Project to add 10 additional market-rate units, for a total of 55 units where 44 units would be market rate, and 11 units would be reserved for low-income households; subsequently on July 3, 2023, the Applicant’s resubmitted plans show that one additional market rate and one additional affordable units were added, bringing the unit count to a total of 57 units where 45 units would be market-rate, and 12 units would be reserved for low-income households; and
WHEREAS, the Project is filed under Government Code section 65589.5(d), commonly referred to as the “Builder’s Remedy”, which in summary provides that a local government may not deny a qualifying affordable housing project for very low, low- or moderate-income households unless the local government makes certain written statutory findings; and WHEREAS, in particular, under Section 65589.5(d)(2), a local government may deny said affordable housing development project if it finds, based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record, that the proposed housing development project would have a “specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety” as defined by statute, and that “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households”; and WHEREAS, likewise, under Section 65589.5(d)(3), a local government may deny said affordable housing development project if it finds, based on based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record, that the denial of project is required “in order to comply with specific state ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 2
or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households”; and WHEREAS, similarly, under Section 65589.5(d)(6) (as added by Assembly Bill 1893 on September 19, 2024 and effective as of January 1, 2025), a local government may deny said affordable housing development project if it finds, based on based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record, that on the date a preliminary application was submitted, the local government did not have an adopted revised housing element that was in substantial compliance with state housing element law and the housing development project is not a “builder’s remedy project” defined by Section 65589.5(h)(11); and
WHEREAS, in recent years, the state of California has experienced several serious wildfire and structural fire catastrophes, including but not limited to the Camp Fire in Northern California's Butte County in 2018 and the most recent destructive Pacific Palisades and Eaton fires in Southern California. Los Altos Hills has historically been an area with high exposure to wildfire hazards and faces challenges of community evacuations during times of natural catastrophes; and WHEREAS, the Project site is a 0.397 acre parcel of a narrow shape with steep topography. The lot is 62.5 feet wide and 280 feet deep with an average slope of 23.97 percent. It is surrounded by single-family residential homes in a heavily vegetated hillside area of Los Altos Hills. The parcels next to the Project on either side at 10730 and 10776 Mora Drive are both larger parcels improved with a single-family dwelling and related structures currently occupied by residents. All of the neighboring parcels contain dense trees and shrubs where the homes are situated among such vegetation and screened from the roadway. The City Council staff report and related attachments provide additional description regarding the Project site location and its topographical, geographical and locational challenges, including but not limited to situating next to dense vegetation and grassy open space and having limited developable area on the parcel due to its steep average slope and narrow parcel width; and WHEREAS, based on the submitted plans and project description, the Project proposes to construct a “senior living community” providing housing for people of retirement age and proposes to map the units as condominiums. Additionally, the Project proposes to include residential assisted living, a nursing station, and entertainment facilities (including exercise, laundry, TV, dining, music room, and related facilities) as accessory uses. The Project’s units are proposed to be located on various levels of a building that is six stories above grade at the front of the building closest to Mora Drive and 9 stories in the rear, with proposed parking space of 32 spaces (approximately 0.58 spaces per unit). The proposed building would contain basement and podium 1 areas of 1,593 and 2,567 square feet, podium 2 area of 2,567 square feet and podium 3/garage area of 11,169 square feet and roof area of 4,240 square feet. The living area square footage on each floor are between 5,215 square feet and 11,184 square feet. The total floor area is 72,848, split between the purposed podium construction with a total floor of 23,235 square feet distributed between lower four stories and the wood framed construction with a total floor of 49,613 square feet distributed between the upper six stories. The proposed building is a mix of vehicular storage, residential units, utility spaces and recreation spaces, with 49,624 square feet of living area. The Project proposes to situate the residential “apartment” building and related facility all the way throughout the Project parcel and with certain patio and hardscape located at the rear side, leaving between 35’7 ¾” and 41’0” feet of setback from the rear property line; and ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 3
WHEREAS, the Town received, reviewed and processed the Project application in accordance with Government Code sections 65941.1, 65943, and 65589.5, by timely reviewing and providing comments on the completeness of the application within a 30-day period from each submittal, timely routing and transmitting comments from third-party review agencies including the Santa Clara County Fire Department, and timely providing comments on the Project’s consistency with applicable objective standards and regulations in accordance with Section 65589.5 and within 30 days from the Project application being determined complete; and WHEREAS, the Project as proposed is inconsistent with a number of objective development standards and regulations under the Town’s General Plan and Zoning Code, including but not limited to: minimum lot size, residential density, building height, and setbacks; in particular, the Project is inconsistent with the R-A zoning designation under Zoning and the General Plan where the residential density is 1 dwelling unit per acre and the minimum lot size is 1 acre. In contrast, the Project is proposing 57 units on one lot, which is higher than any development project that has ever been proposed in Los Altos Hills, and in conjunction with the adjacent project on 10728 Mora Drive, the projects would result in 112 units on two lots less than one acre combined; and
WHEREAS, as a part of the Town’s standard development application review procedures, the Project plans were routed by the Town’s Community Development Department to the Santa Clara County Fire Department (“SCCFD”) for Fire Code plan-check review. SCCFD provides plan check review for the Town regarding California Fire Code compliance, including local amendments adopted by the Town during the triennial building standards code update process; and WHEREAS, the purpose of SCCFD fire plan check review at planning entitlement stage is to identify significant issues to the project applications which may require significant design or structural changes, so that the applicant has an opportunity to address potential significant issues at an early stage; and
WHEREAS, in reviewing the Project against the current 2022 California Fire Code applicable to the Project, SCCFD identified, among other issues, that the Project is inconsistent with Section 503.1.1 of the Fire Code by failure to provide the required distance between the proposed building and fire apparatus access road at the Project site. Specifically, while Section 503.1.1 requires the fire apparatus access road to be within 150 feet from the building exterior, the Project proposes to increase such distance to 300 feet from the building which is twice the required distance; and
WHEREAS, SCCFD timely provided comments to the Applicant communicating the Section 503.1.1 inconsistency on April 5 and 25, 2023; August 14, 2023; September 27, 2023; and January 31, 2024. When the inconsistency remains unaddressed, SCCFD advised the Applicant to either revise design or submit an Alternate Means and Methods Request (“AMMR”) to demonstrate how the excessive distance would be mitigated; and WHEREAS, it should be noted that SCCFD identified the same Section 503.1.1 inconsistency for the project proposed at 10728 Mora Drive and requested the same re-design or AMMR submittal; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted an AMMR first for the 10728 Mora Drive parcel on March 20, 2024; that AMMR proposed to provide an additional standpipe at rear exit stair, include ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 4
certain Type 1A construction with 3-hour fire resistance rating at the garage level, provide sprinkler water curtain protection for certain building openings, and widen certain building exit points. SCCFD did not approve these mitigation alternatives to grant an exception or waive the Section 503.1.1 distance requirement because they do not demonstrate how the excessive distance would be mitigated. SCCFD requested additional explanations from the Applicant, which based on the record below has not been provided as of the adoption of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Applicant then submitted an AMMR for the Project on October 8, 2024, proposing measures similar to those submitted in the 10728 Mora Drive parcel in March 2024.

Specifically, the October 8, 2024 AMMR proposed to provide a sprinkler system; upgrade the fire resistance level for a portion of the proposed building exterior wall; remove some of the glass windows or increase their fire ratings for sides of the building; add standpipe outlet for water hoses at certain building exterior walls, and to separate entry and exit pathways for residents and firefighters by reserving the north and south sides respectively for each; and WHEREAS, SCCFD denied the AMMR for the Project on November 20, 2024, because the proposed measures do not mitigate the excessive distance deficiency under Section 503.1.1 and do not provide equivalent safety and effectiveness protections. As set forth in the record below and in Exhibit A to this Resolution, mitigating measures alleged by the Applicant as feasible alternatives are either already required by the Fire Code elsewhere or being proposed as a “partial” response to upgrade some parts of the building but not others. None of the measures specifically addresses the excessive distance being proposed by the Project due to the location of the fire apparatus access road; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the SCCFD November 20, 2024 AMMR Denial, the Applicant has not proposed additional alternatives for the Project or for 10728 Mora Drive; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 65589.5 (e) requires the Town to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in reviewing a housing development project including any “Builder’s Remedy” projects, and does not relieve the Town from its obligations to make required findings under CEQA before approving or undertaking a project; and WHEREAS, the Town previously determined that, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15060, the proposed Project development qualifies as a “project” for purposes of CEQA and may have a significant effect on the environment; consequently, either a mitigated negative declaration or an environmental impact report would be required if the Town were to further process the Project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project, provide the Applicant with due process and an opportunity to be heard, and considered all written documentation and public comments, pursuant to Government Code section 65589.5(d); and WHEREAS, there are no specific public hearing notice requirements under Government Code section 65589.5 or subdivision (d) for making findings of denial with regards to the Project.

However, notice of the City Council January 30, 2025 public hearing was published on January 19, 2025 via posting at the Project site; posting at Town Hall; and posting at the Public Hearing ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 5
Notice Board located on Christopher’s Lane and Summerhill Avenue, Los Altos Hills. The public hearing notice was delivered by mail on January 19, 2025 to the Applicant and to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the Project site based on the most current information from the County Assessor’s Office property tax roll. The Applicant was also notified of the potential hearing during a meeting with the Town on January 17, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is not considering a conditional use permit, conditional development permit, site development permit, or other planning entitlements, but rather is making requisite state law findings of denial on behalf of the Town for the denial of the Project as a “Builder’s Remedy” application.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Town of Los Altos Hills hereby makes the findings set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and hereby DENIES the proposed development at 10758 Mora Drive (No. CDP23-0002) pursuant to Government Code section 65589.5(d).

The above and foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the Town of Los Altos Hills at a special meeting held on the ___ day of January, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

BY: _______________________________
Kavita Tankha, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Arika Birdsong-Miller, City Clerk
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 6

EXHIBIT A

FINDINGS OF DENIAL
REGARDING A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 57 SENIOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATED AT 10758 MORA DRIVE, LOS ALTOS HILLS
Based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes, without limitation: the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations §15000, et seq. (collectively, “CEQA”); the California Fire Code; the California Building Standards Code; the California Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 65589.5); the California Housing Element Law (Government Code section 65580 et seq.); the California Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code section 65920 et seq.); the Los Altos Hills General Plan; the Los Altos Hills 2023-2031 Housing Element; the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code; the Project application materials that includes: all site plans; all Town plan check, and zoning consistency comment letters and applicant responses thereto; all Santa Clara County Fire Department plan check reviews comment letters and comment letters and decisions regarding the Project and the applicant’s Alternative Means and Methods (AMMR) requests; all reports, minutes, public testimony submitted as a part of the City Council’s duly noticed January 30, 2025 public hearing; and any and all other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code §21080(e) and §21082.2), the City Council of the Town of Los Altos Hills hereby finds as follows:

I. General Findings

1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution.

2. The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the Community Development Department for the Town of Los Altos Hills, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, CA 94022, and in the custody of the Community Development Director.

3. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves. The City Council hereby finds that no environmental review or action is required for the making of these findings to deny the Project and the proposed senior residential development.

4. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on January 30, 2025 to make findings for this Project pursuant to Gov. Code section 65589.5. There are no specific public hearing notice requirements under that statute for making findings of denial. As the City Council is not considering a conditional use permit, conditional development permit, site development permit, or other planning entitlements, but rather is making requisite state law findings of denial on behalf of the Town, there are no applicable public hearing requirements under state law or local ordinance which would apply. However, the notice of the City Council January 30, 2025 public hearing was published on January 19, 2025 via posting at the Project site; posting at Town Hall, at the Public Hearing Notice Board located on Christopher’s Lane and Summerhill Avenue, Los Altos Hills; and posting on the Town’s website. The public hearing notice was delivered by mail on January 19, 2025 to the Applicant and to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the Project site based on the most current information from the County Assessor’s Office property tax roll. The ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 7
Applicant was also notified of the potential hearing during a meeting with the Town on January 17, 2025.

The City Council hereby finds that such noticing fulfils the requirements that otherwise applies to a site development permit or other planning discretionary entitlements (including but not limited to variances and appeals) under Los Altos Hills Municipal Code Title 10, Chapters 1 and 2, and also is consistent with the requirements under Government Code sections 65905 and 65091 that otherwise apply to applications on conditional use permits, variances, or equivalent development permit or the proposed revocation or modification thereof, or the appeal therefrom. On those bases, the City Council finds that the public hearing was duly and appropriately noticed, and that the public hearing afforded Applicant with due process as well as provided adequate and meaningful opportunity for the Applicant, all interested parties, and members of the public to respond to and participate in the hearing process.

II. Government Code Section 65589.5(d) Findings
On February 1, 2023, Forrest Linebarger (“Applicant”) filed a preliminary application pursuant to Government Code section 65941.1 and a formal development application to the Town for the Project (No. CDP23-0002) for the construction of 44 senior residential units with 11 units reserved for low-income households, which constitutes 25 percent affordability. On the same date, the Town also received a preliminary application and formal development application for a substantially similar senior residential development project located at 10728 Mora Drive, which is separated by one parcel from the Project site. Both projects were submitted pursuant to Government Code section 65589.5(d), commonly referred to as the “Builder’s Remedy”.

On April 11, 2023, the Project application was revised from 44 units to 55 units with 11 units reserved for low-income households, which represents a 20 percent affordability. The change proposed by the revised application exceeded 20 percent of the residential units proposed under the initial preliminary application submittal and reduced the percentage of affordable units initially provided. On July 3, 2023, the Applicant’s submitted plans increased the total units to 57 units with 12 units reserved for low income. The Applicant also revised the 10728 Mora Drive project residential units by 20 percent to be 55 units, while reducing its affordability to 20 percent with 11 low-income units. Both projects remain substantially similar in their proposed use, density, site plans/layout and development characteristics/proposals.

Government Code Section 65589.5(d)1
provides, in relevant part:
1 The City Council notes that Section 65589.5, including its “Builder’s Remedy” provisions under subdivision (d), was amended by Assembly Bill 1893 (2024) (AB 1893). One provision under AB 1893 allows a housing development project applicant who has submitted a preliminary application before January 1, 2025 to choose to be subject to the provisions of Section 65589.5 in effect on the date of that submittal, or to the statute applicable as of January 1, 2025 if the project meets the definition of a “builder’s remedy project” defined by AB 1893. As the Project Applicant has not otherwise made any resubmittals to the Town as of December 21, 2023 (when Town last issued a comment letter) and has not otherwise made any election as to the applicability of Section 65589.5 described above, this set of findings reviews the Project against Section 65589.5 both as it was in effect in 2024 (which covers the time that the Applicant submitted a preliminary application on February 1, 2023 and its subsequent revision on July 3, 2023), and as it is in effect on January 1, 2025. As further explained in this document, the record contains a preponderance of the evidence to support denial findings under both version of Section 65589.5.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 8
“For a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households. . . a local agency shall not disapprove the housing development project. . . or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing development project. . . infeasible, including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record” as to one of six statutory findings. (emphasis added).

As set forth below, the City Council hereby makes the following findings pursuant to Section 65589.5(d), subdivisions (2), (3), and (6), for the denial of the proposed Project.

Finding #1: Section 65589.5(d)(2)- Specific, Adverse Impact The finding set forth under Section 65589.5(d)(2) provides:

The housing development project or emergency shelter as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. The following shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety:

A. Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation.

B. The eligibility to claim a welfare exemption under subdivision (g) of Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

A. The Project as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety.

Background- Site Characteristics
The Project site is a 0.397 acre parcel of a narrow shape and steep topography. The lot is 62.5 feet wide and 280 feet deep with an average slope of 23.97 percent. It is surrounded by single-family residential homes in a heavily vegetated hillside area of Los Altos Hills. The parcels next to the Project on either side at 10730 and 10776 Mora Drive are both larger parcels improved with a single family dwelling and related structures currently occupied by residents. All of the adjacent and neighboring parcels contain dense trees and shrubs where the homes are situated among such vegetation and screened from the roadway.

The Project site is only accessible from Mora Drive, a public roadway fronting the parcel. Mora Drive has an approximate paved width of 25 feet in a 50-foot public right of way and does not contain sidewalks. Mora Drive also serves as the only public access road for at least seven other properties on the same side of the Project site, namely: 10710 Mora Drive, 10679 Mora Drive, 10696 Mora Drive, 10702 Mora Drive, 10724 Mora Drive, 10716 Mora Drive, and 10700 Mora Drive, all of which utilize a private driveway to connect to Mora Drive. There are at least five other lots on the opposite side facing the Project site that utilize the same segment of Mora Drive ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 9
as the only access road. Additionally, the Project site is in close proximity to the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve and the Mora Trail. Both open space areas contain vast areas of dry grass, shrubs and trees. The roadway serving the site twists and turns through steep elevation changes as it connects to the Project site. The record below contains observations that due to Mora Drive’s configuration, fire responses apparatus was seen cross into oncoming traffic to navigate the roadway with its smallest engine which would not be of a size sufficient to address a structure fire due to its purposed configuration.

The Town’s Municipal Code offers an illustration as to the sloped nature and limited development characteristic of this parcel. Under the Municipal Code, a Lot Unit Factor (LUF) is calculated for each parcel in Los Altos Hills by dividing the net lot area of the subject property by the minimum average lot size that would be required for a parcel of average slope equal to that of the subject property. This value is used in determining the allowable development and floor areas. Because of their geographical characteristics, substandard lots with a lower LUF would result in a smaller buildable area comparing to standard lots with a LUF of over 0.5 . A LUF of 0.5 or less indicates that the property is a substandard lot with steeper than average slope and limited development area.

The further the LUF is reduced from 0.5 means that the parcel slopes steeper and the development area is smaller. As an illustration here using the LUF calculations, the Project site would only have a LUF of approximately 0.28 due to its narrow width and steep average slope of approximately – 23 - 24 percent. The resulting development area is 2,714 square feet and floor area of 1,474 square feet.

Project Fire Code Compliance Review by the County Fire Department As a part of the Town’s standard development application review procedures, the Project plans were routed by the Town Community Development Department to the Santa Clara County Fire Department (“SCCFD”) for Fire Code plan-check review. SCCFD provides plan check review for the Town regarding California Fire Code compliance, including local amendments adopted by the Town during the triennial building standards code update process. It should be noted that SCCFD’s review for the purpose is a planning-entitlement plan check review and does not relieve the Project from undergoing further Fire Code and related requirements review based on the code in effect at the building permit application stage.2

The purpose of fire plan check review at planning entitlement stage is to identify significant issues to the project applications which may require significant design or structural changes, so that the 2 Notwithstanding this clarification, these findings note that the Project, like other development projects processed by the Town, would be required to comply with the California Building Standards Code most recently in effect at the time it submits a building permit for review. The Applicant has argued in previous correspondences to the Town and SCCFD that the state Permit Streamlining Act and a preliminary application under Government Code section 65941.1 would allow the Project to “vest” building and fire code standards as of the February 2023 initial Project submittal date. This claim is incorrect; based on Government Code section 65589.5(f)(9), the Housing Accountability Act and related preliminary application provisions do not affect the obligation of a housing developer to comply with minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission. The Fire Code, like other building standards codes, are a part of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations adopted by the Commission, and independently apply to housing developments including Project outside the “planning entitlements” phase which is the current stage that the Project is in. This reasoning is also supported by the fact that the Legislature has adopted Government Code section 65913.3, a separate statute governing “post-entitlement” permits that are separate from planning entitlement approvals. Consequently, although not directly an issue relating to the review of this Project at the planning entitlement stage, the City Council finds that the Project would have been required to comply with the California Building Standards Code most recently in effect at the time had it submitted a building permit for review and that review based on the 2022 California Fire Code is appropriate and required.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 10
applicant has an opportunity to address potential significant issues at an early stage. At this planning review stage, the Project was reviewed against the 2022 California Fire Code, which is a part of the most recent triennial state building code update; it was published July 1, 2022 and became effective on January 1, 2023. For the purposes of planning entitlement plan check review, such code was in existence at the time the Project filed a preliminary application and at the time of its subsequent revision and is the currently applicable law.

Pursuant to its review of the Project plans, and among other issues, SCCFD identified a Project inconsistency with the California Fire Code to provide an approved fire apparatus access road for meeting the Code’s distance requirement. Specifically, Fire Code section 503.1.1, with limited local amendments under Los Altos Hills Municipal Code Title 8, Chapter 1.8, requires the following:
503.1.1 Buildings and Facilities.

Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements for this section and shall extend to within 150 feet (45,720 mm) of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility.

Exceptions:

1. In other than R-3 or U occupancies, when the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system, installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, the dimension may be increased to a maximum of 300 feet when approved by the fire code official.

2. When there are not more than two Group R-3 or accessory Group U occupancies, the dimension may be increased to a maximum of 200 feet.

3. When apparatus roads cannot be installed because of topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades or other similar conditions, an approved alternative means of fire protection shall be provided. (emphasis added.)
It should be noted that the local amendments introduced by Los Altos Hills3 only affect the
“Exceptions” portion of Section 503.1.1 identified above and only makes changes regarding situations involving Group R-3 or U occupancies (i.e. buildings with two or less dwelling units and utilities/accessory buildings). The 150-foot distance requirement remains a provision of the state Fire Code and is unchanged.

County Fire Department Determination of Project Non-Compliance Pursuant to SCCFD review, the Project does not comply with Section 503.1.1 of the Fire Code.

SCCFD determinations and bases are set forth in further detail as follows, with information 3 It is further noted that local amendments introduced by the Town were based on reasonably necessary changes due to local climatic, topographic, and geologic conditions, and were made pursuant to Health and Safety Code sections 18941.5 and 17958 accompanied by requisite findings made by City Council under state law.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 11
retrieved from staff report attachments accompanying this resolution and a part of the record before the City Council. The City Council adopts these determinations and bases for the purposes of making its findings. All references to Section 503.1.1 below are to the Fire Code. • SCCFD April 5, 2023 Plan Review Comments (No. 23-1045): This letter reviews the Project’s initial 44-unit proposal. It directs the Applicant to demonstrate how the Project will meet the 150 feet distance requirement under Section 503.1.1. • SCCFD April 25, 2023 Plan Review Comments (No. 23-1490): This letter reviews the Project’s initial 44-unit proposal. It directs the Applicant to demonstrate how the Project will meet the 150 feet distance requirement under Section 503.1.1. • SCCFD August 14, 2023 Plan Review Comments (No. 23-2595): This letter reviews the Project’s revised 57-unit proposal. It specifies that Project does not meet the 150 feet distance requirement in Section 503.1.1 and that the Applicant requests an approval of up to 300 feet travel. The letter notes that fire personnel would have to travel 35 to 42 foot elevation change to the furthest portions of the proposed residential building, and that the access to the back of the building cannot accommodate both firefighters accessing and residents evacuating at the same time. The comment letter requests revisions to width of the path of travel and mitigation measures to address the requested 300 feet travel distance. • SCCFD September 27, 2023 Plan Review Comments (No. 23-3524): This letter reviews the Project’s revised 57-unit proposal. It continues to affirm the comments provided in the August 14, 2023 letter, and notes that firefighters would need to navigate a 35 to 42 foot elevation change to access the furthest portions of the proposed residential building, which is not conducive to efficiently deploying firefighting resources. The letter continues to request design revisions or mitigation measures to address this code inconsistency as identified above.
• SCCFD January 31, 2024 Plan Review Comments (No. 23-4781): This letter reviews the Project’s revised 57-unit proposal. It specifies that the Project continues to be inconsistent with Section 503.1.1’s 150 feet distance requirement and does not approve the requested 300 feet exception. It specifies that firefighters cannot access the furthest portions of the building due to “total travel distance, 34 to 37 foot elevation change, exposure to building interior from unrated openings, narrow path of travel, and close proximity to adjacent parcels.” The comment letter directs the Applicant to revise building design or to propose mitigating measures through an “Alternate Means and Methods Request” to mitigate excessive distance.

The City Council notes that SCCFD in the foregoing review also determined that the neighboring senior residential development project at 10728 Mora Drive, which is located one parcel away from this Project and with nearly identical development proposals and unit count, is inconsistent with Section 503.1.1 for the same reasons.

Applicant Request for Alternative Measures and Denial by County Fire Department On March 20, 2024, the Applicant submitted an Alternate Means and Methods Request (“AMMR”) for the neighboring residential project at 10728 Mora Drive. On October 8, 2024, the Applicant submitted an AMMR for the Project. The AMMR proposes certain mitigation measures to “increase safety along access paths” and to “mitigate excessive distance” with regards to Fire Code Section 503.1.1.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 12
As discussed in further detail in the next subsection, the AMMR proposes to provide a sprinkler system; upgrade the fire resistance level for a portion of the proposed building exterior wall; remove some of the glass windows or increase their fire ratings for sides of the building; add standpipe outlet for water hoses at certain building exterior walls, and to separate entry and exit pathways for residents and firefighters by reserving the north and south sides respectively for each.

Ultimately, as specified below, all of these measures were denied as feasible mitigation measures by SCCFD because they do not mitigate the excessive distance deficiency under Section 503.1.1 and do not provide equivalent safety and effectiveness protections. The following summarizes the AMMR review.
• SCCFD November 20, 2024 Letter (Plan Check No. 24-4312): this letter formally denies the AMMR for the Project because the proposed mitigations measures do not sufficiently address the safety issue including firefighter access and evacuation safety created by the noncompliance with Section 503.1.1 for the reasons summarized as follows:
o Providing automatic sprinklers: this proposed measure is already required by the Fire Code and cannot be used to replace or supplement an existing deficiency.
o Upgrade fire resistance walls: the proposed upgrade only addresses a portion of the building and not others. It also fails to address the deficiency that there is insufficient length for a fire hose to reach the building and still exposes firefighters to fire during the path of travel. o Increase fire window rating and removing glass: Similarly, this proposed AMMR measure is already a requirement under the Fire Code and cannot be used to address an existing deficiency. This proposal also does not address all windows and leaves some residential unit windows not being fire rated. o Providing separate pathways for residents exiting and firefighters entering:

Like the proposal above, this proposed measure still leaves certain parts of the path of travel to be shared by firefighters and residents. In particular, such shared space would be shared by occupants in wheelchairs while firefighters also utilize the same space. It therefore does not safely separate ingress and egress. Further, with regards to a portion of the path of travel, firefighters would need to travel a longer distance if they wanted to gain access up the stairs to the north side of the building, and the travel distance would actually increase over 300 feet. This measure therefore does not address the issue that the fire apparatus (truck) is too far away from the building because of the distance between the access road and the building exterior walls.

The Project does not comply with Section 503.1.1 of the California Fire Code and does not provide adequate fire apparatus/personnel access, thereby resulting in a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety under Gov. Code Section 65589.5.

Section 65589.5 requires the determination of a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety to be based on objective, identified written public health and safety standards in existence when the preliminary application was submitted. That section also defines objective standards as criteria that “involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal.”4

4 Gov. Code section 65589.5(f)(9).

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 13
In this case, the 150-foot distance requirement under Section 503.1.1 is an objective and quantifiable numeric standard; applying it to the Project does not involve personal or subjective judgment by Town or SCCFD officials. This standard is also uniformly verifiable by an external benchmark known by both the Applicant and the Town before submitting any application for a development project. The City Council further notes that, as explained above, the 150-foot standard is an objective standard contained in the state Fire Code and not a Town-imposed standard through any local amendments; in any event, the Project would be required to meet Fire Code requirements regardless of whether it is under the planning entitlements review or building permit submittal stage. The application of Section 503.1.1 and the 150-foot standard to the Project and the specific adverse impact analysis are, therefore, well supported by Section 65589.5.

Based on the record below, it is clear that the Project proposes a fire access road that fails to meet Section 503.1.1 because it does not provide a fire apparatus access road that extends to within 150 feet of all portions of the proposed residential building and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building, as measured by that proposed fire access road. In other words, as noted on the diagram in the accompanying staff report and the Project plans, the proposed fire apparatus access road situated at the front of the parcel and proposed building does not extend to allow firefighters and hoses to reach all sides of the building including the rear within the required 150 feet distance. Instead, the Applicant has proposed to increase the travel distance to 300 feet which is double the distance required. This increase is proposed on a narrow, steeply sloped lot in a densely vegetated hillside area of the Town on a roadway where portions of the road can only support one way traffic due to its twist and turn configuration and as explained below render it difficult and dangerous for firefighters to navigate the challenging terrain.

As defined by Section 202 of the Fire Code5
, a “fire apparatus access road” is “a road that provides fire apparatus [i.e. fire trucks] access from a fire station to a facility, building or portion therefor.” The requirement of this path of travel and the distance that it must be located from the proposed building provides firefighters and fire trucks the ability to quickly access a building or facility once they arrive on scene during a fire emergency. As specified in the SCCFD November 20, 2024 AMMR denial letter, the primary purpose of Section 503.1.1 is to limit the maximum length of hose needed to reach any point along the exterior of a building or facility from a fire department truck. The Project’s failure to satisfy this 150-foot distance requirement significantly impedes the ability of firefighters to have sufficient water hose length to efficiently deploy firefighting resources, thereby creating a significant safety risk and dangers of substantial injury and death for both the firefighters and the residents and staff of the building.

Given the Project’s unique location and exposure to wildfire hazards, the significance of this public safety/health and life-threatening risk cannot be overstated. As set forth above, the Project site is located in a densely vegetated area at the edge of the Los Altos Hills town boundary. It is also surrounded by single-family, occupied residences and is in close proximity to the Mora Trail and Rancho San Antonio County Part/Open Space Preserve and the Mora Trail, which areas contain a significant amount of open space and dry grass vegetation. Images of the Project site in the record demonstrate that all of its surrounding areas are covered by dense trees, shrubs, grass, and/or other vegetation that are naturally grown or installed as a part of landscape screening mechanisms on various private parcels so that the residential units are not or less visible from the roadway. All of these factors significantly increase the risk of fire spreading during a structure fire or wildfire event 5 Chapter 2, Part 29, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 14
or firestorm catastrophe, the difficulties in the Project and surrounding residents to evacuate, and the challenges for firefighters to deploy resources and manpower to control and extinguish fires for the Project building and surrounding neighborhood.

Additionally, the Project site itself contains unique topographical and geological limitations that worsen these safety and life-threatening risks. At the outset, the Project site is a 0.397 acre parcel of a narrow shape and steep topography. The lot is 62.5 feet wide and 280.33 feet deep with an average slope of 23.97 percent. This significant slope and narrow width already limits the parcel’s development capacity and available building envelope. Further, the Project site has only one main accessible public roadway from Mora Drive fronting the parcel and without any roadways in the back of the parcel. This roadway at the front of the site is further shared by several other lots on both sides of Mora Drive, with some relying on only one other private driveway to connect to Mora Drive. The Project site is also sloped towards the back of the parcel, which means that access to the back of the site and proposed building requires navigating steeper elevations in an area without access roads. All of these unique site-specific problems further exacerbates the risk of fire spreading and the inability of firefighters to deploy effectively in time.

Indeed, the SCCFD November 20, 2024 AMMR Denial Letter took all of these site factors into consideration and pointed out that the Project site has site-specific challenges due to its topography and threat of wildfire. Here, the Project proposes to construct a senior residential building that is significantly higher and denser than any other dwellings typically proposed in Los Altos Hills and in a such densely vegetated areas where fire hazard exposure is high, and where the targeted tenants would be elderly residents who are already of limited mobility. Notwithstanding these risk factors, the Project site configurations show that there are various slopes and elevation gains adjacent to the sides and rear of the building, which are significantly close to the dense vegetation and dry grass open space. The SCCFD AMMR Denial Letter accurately pointed out that there is already minimal access widths between the proposed fence and the residential building, with only a single access road on one side of the building to the right of way on Mora Drive.

As reflected in these comments, the Project’s location in a remote and steep hillside area as well as its geographical/topographical/access limitations make it essential for emergency responders to be able to extinguish or control wildland and structure fires, and for its residents and staff to be able to efficiently evacuate without crossing paths with firefighters or obstruct their travel routes.

The Project has failed to address these essential public safety needs and respond to the risk exposure. It fails to adhere to the 150-foot distance requirement under Section 503.1.1 but rather proposes to situate the fire access road even further away at double the distance of 300 feet. This code noncompliance does not allow firefighters and fire trucks to have sufficient hose length and minimal travel distance to quickly respond to fire threats. Consequently, the Project creates a significant, quantifiable, direct and unavoidable impact not only for the number of senior residents who would occupy the development at full capacity, but also for the immediate and surrounding residents exposed to the same wildfire threats.

Further, it should be highlighted that the foregoing site risk factors also cannot be discounted in the event that emergency responders need to access the building and respond to urgency medical or life-threatening events. Such personnel would need the same amount of quick access and ability to transport equipment/patients from the residential building. The likelihood of such medical or life-threatening emergencies, given the nature of the senior residential development and the dense occupancy, is much higher than any other development in the Town. In cases of emergencies, responders would be required to travers longer distances from the emergency response vehicle or ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 15
fire engine and similarly would be required to transport patients or victims via the same significantly longer path of travel. These emergency responders would also be required to navigate steep elevations when trying to reach the rear of the building due to the site’s natural geographical constraints. A fire access road that does not meet Section 503.1.1 would deny responders the ease of access and the ability to efficiently and effectively respond to such emergencies. The severity and significance of this threat to public safety is reflected in SCCFD’s repeated rejections of the Applicant’s proposal to allow for excessive distance and be exempted from the 150-foot requirement.

The City Council hereby finds that the foregoing failure to comply with Section 503.1.1 creates a significant, adverse impact as defined by Government Code section 65589.5 based on the objective, identified 150-foot distance, as that section and the 2022 California Fire Code existed on February 2023 when the Project preliminary application was submitted and on April and July 2023 when it was revised.

B. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households.

Section 503.1.1, as modified by Los Altos Hills local amendments under Health and Safety Code sections 18941.5 and 17958, allow certain exceptions to be granted from the 150-foot distance requirement under limited circumstances. In this case, the Applicant seeks such an exception from the 150-foot distance requirement, under Exception No. 1 of Section 503.1.1. Exception No. 1 states that the fire code official may grant a distance increase of up to 300 feet when the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with other provisions of the Fire Code. SCCFD, in its January 31, 2024 Plan Review Comment Letter, directed the Applicant to either revise building design or to propose mitigating measures through an “Alternate Means and Methods Request” (“AMMR”) to mitigate the excessive distance.

In his October 8, 2024 AMMR, the Applicant proposed the following mitigating measures:
1) Provide an NFPA 13 sprinkler system.
2) Upgrade the fire resistance rating of the Type I-A exterior wall. 3) Remove glass or increase fire ratings of windows within 10 feet of the path of travel on the sides of buildings.
4) Add standpipe outlets at the north and south exterior walls. 5) Separate occupant egress and firefighter ingress pathways- reserve the north side of the building for occupant egress, and the south side of the building for fire department personnel ingress.

SCCFD rejected all of these proposals in the November 20, 2024 Denial Letter, specifically:
1) Provide an NFPA 13 sprinkler system. This measure is already required by the California Fire Code and therefore fails to mitigate the excessive distance deficiency. As noted in SCCFD’s findings, a less stringent sprinkler system would not be permitted under any circumstances and thus a measure already required by code cannot serve as an alternative to resolve a separate noncompliance.
2) Upgrade the fire resistance rating of the Type I-A exterior wall. SCCFD determined that “this measure fails to address the Type III-A construction portion of the building that a ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 16
firefighter would need to pass while traversing the sides of the building, which is not proposed for an upgrade in fire rating.” As noted in SCCFD’s letter, although the Applicant claims that such wall upgrade would protect firefighters from potential fire exposure at a critical entry point, the proposed mitigating measure fails to address the “Type III-A” construction which is adjacent to and above the path of travel. Additionally, the proposed measure does not address fire apparatus access needs, which is the original distance requirement under Section 503.1.1. Thus, as stated by SCCFD, the proposed measure “fails to provide equivalent effectiveness and safety” under Section 503.1.1. 3) Remove glass or increase fire ratings of windows within 10 feet of the path of travel on the sides of buildings. As an AMMR measure, the Applicant proposed removing all windows within 10 feet of the firefighter path of travel from the Type I-A construction portion of the building and upgrading the remaining windows in the Type I-A portion to ¾-hour rated glass. However, SCCFD notes that the proposal to upgrade the fire resistance rating of the exterior walls, discussed in #2 above, already requires 1.5-hour rated glass per California Building Code (CBC) Table 716.1 (3). Additionally, SCCFD observed that there are residential unit windows at the south elevation path of travel (within 10 feet of the path of travel) that are not proposed to be fire rated. In particular, SCCFD’s comment notes that “A single window in the Type Ill-A portion of the southwest side is proposed to be upgraded from ¾ to 1-hour rated glass. It appears an additional residential unit window within 10 feet of the firefighter path of travel (directly above stairs) is not proposed to be fire rated. All remaining windows in the Type III-A portion of the building are not rated.” Consequently, the Project “proposes unrated windows directly above and adjacent to firefighter path of travel.” Ultimately, the proposed modification to the windows does not address the need for fire apparatus access under Section 503.1.1. For these reasons, SCCFD concluded that the proposed alternative fails to provide equivalent effectiveness and safety to mitigate excessive distance pursuant to Section 503.1.1. 4) Standpipe outlets added at north and south exterior walls. SCCFD determined that these proposed outlets do not provide the same level of safety and effectiveness protections and does not satisfy Section 503.1.1, because they “increase operational hose deployment time compared to hose pre-connects from an apparatus. Standpipe outlets are also less reliable than pre-connects fed directly from an apparatus for several reasons, including required system maintenance and the potential for closed valves and other system failures upstream of the hose valves.” Accordingly, SCCFD concluded that this measure likewise fails to provide equivalent effectiveness and safety of the requirements of Section 503.1.1. 5) Separation of occupant egress and firefighter ingress pathways. Applicant claims that this designation will reduce the conflict between occupant egress and firefighter ingress during an event. However, SCCFD concluded that this measure also fails to address site-specific risk factors and does not mitigate the need for fire apparatus access. Specifically, SCCFD notes as follows: “In the proposed plans, occupants utilizing the wheelchair ramp will share space with firefighter ingress for a limited portion of the front right (south) side of the building. Because of this shared ingress/egress space, the measure fails to separate ingress and egress pathways. Furthermore, if firefighters need to gain access to stairway #2 on the north side of the building, this mitigation measure would increase the travel distance to over 300 feet by requiring firefighters to traverse the south, east, and finally north sides of the building.” Accordingly, SCCFD notes that this measure actually increases the distance from the fire apparatus access road to portions of the building. It therefore concluded that the proposed measure does not address the need for equivalent effectiveness and safety of the requirements of Section 503.1.1.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 17
The City Council first notes that the foregoing AMMR exception and review process is consistent with Section 65589.5 and SCCFD’s denial of Applicant’s AMMR is also consistent with the application of objective standards under that statute. As set forth in the subsection above, the Project is inconsistent with an objective standard under state law. There is nothing in the record demonstrating that the Applicant is precluded from complying with the 150-foot distance requirement, nor does the Applicant argue that he is unable to comply. In fact, the compliance issue with Section 503.1.1 was raised by SCCFD during the first plan check comment letter after the initial Project submittal, but the Applicant has not taken any actions to revise the Project so that it complies with Section 503.1.1. Instead, the Applicant elects to pursue Exception No. 1 under state law, which is within the discretion of the fire code official, and ultimately of the Town, to grant or deny such exception.

The Council recognizes that the Applicant has argued in his October 8, 2024 AMMR and the record below that Exception No. 1 violates the Housing Accountability Act because it states that the 150-foot distance “may” be increased to up to 300 feet when approved by the fire code official; however, the Applicant is incorrect. The language under Exception No. 1 does not conflict with the 150-foot distance required by Section 503.1.1, as that requirement is an objective standard and applies equally to every project. Where the Project fails to meet such objective standard, and the Applicant elects to pursue an exception to the objective standard instead of revising the Project to conform with said standard, the approving authority’s discretion to approve or deny the exception is consistent with Section 65589.5 provisions.

Turning to the AMMR and denial at issue, the record below clearly demonstrates that the Applicant has failed to present a “feasible method” to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact resulting from the Project’s failure to comply with Section 503.1.1. The Applicant has not proposed to reduce the distance of the fire access road to the proposed residential building at all.

Nor has the Applicant presented any alternative that would specifically address the excessive distance between the fire access road and the building, in particular with respect to the back of the building where slope and elevation gain significantly. Neither has the Applicant provided equivalent safety and effectiveness measures that would mitigate the significant risk of fire exposure for the Project’s occupants including seniors with limited mobility, and the significant challenges that firefighters and emergency responders will face in navigating long distances, narrow paths, and steep elevations, while responding to wildfire and other life-threatening emergencies on site.

It is particularly important to emphasize that, in reviewing the AMMR proposals, the City Council observes that the mitigating measures proposed by the Applicant are either already required by the Fire Code elsewhere or being proposed as a “partial” response to upgrade some parts of the building but not others. None of the measures specifically addresses the excessive distance being proposed by the Project due to the location of the fire access road. Instead, the alternatives proposed by the Applicant are passive approaches that attempt to reduce only some of the fire risk exposures once firefighters and emergency personnel have had to navigate the excessive fire access road distance in order to reach the residential building. The risks and dangers posed by the excessive distance remain for firefighters and residents alike. For these reasons, the evidence in the record amply demonstrates that the Applicant has not proposed any feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact created by the Project’s excessive fire access road distance described above.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 18
Likewise, the record also demonstrates that there is no feasible mitigation without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households. As set forth above, the Applicant has been involved in several rounds of plan check review and AMMR review with SCCFD but has only proposed modifications to portions of building features as indirect attempts to address the excessive distance issue. SCCFD has determined these indirect measures are inadequate and do not satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific Project public safety impact. The Applicant did not propose any alternatives involving revising the actual building footprint or building design to provide more space on the parcel to accommodate the proposed fire access road.

Based on the record below, a redesign of the proposed building most likely would result in a loss of residential units. Given the Project site already has a narrow width of 62.5 feet and constrained by a 280.33-foot depth and average slope of 23.97 percent, the available buildable area is naturally diminished. The Project site plans shows the proposed building utilizing as much of the horizontal site area as possible, leaving only 5 feet of side setback from the property boundaries (in contrast, the Town’s standard side setback requirement is 30 feet). Under these circumstances, redesigning to reduce building width necessarily results in reduction of the number of residential units.

The Project proposes 57 residential units, with 12 units reserved for low-income households. The Project’s proposed “BMR (Below Market Rate) Program” submitted in April 2023 states that “All BMR rental units on site shall be reserved for low-income households representing income levels less than eight (80) percent and more than fifty (50) percent of [Average Median Income] (AMI) in Santa Clara County.”
The record contains an affordability analysis (which is included as an attachment to the accompanying staff report) performed by the Town Building Code Official regarding estimated Project construction cost based on the most recent October 1, 2024 plan set prepared plan set prepared by Stevens Ferrone & Bailey, Berry and Associates on behalf of the Applicant. The cost analysis is based on the International Code Council (ICC) Building Valuation Data, which is a well-established, identified benchmark utilized by jurisdiction in California and nationwide for purposes including but not limited to determining development and building permit fees.

Additionally, the affordability analysis also examines the Project’s estimated rate of return by comparing the change in estimated construction costs, land costs, and projected income from Project units.

The analysis estimates that the Project would need to remove approximately 8,284 square feet of building area to accommodate the additional fire access road distance. Of this square footage, it is estimated based on the distribution of individual dwelling unit square footages that 5,401 square feet would be residential. In order for the Project to maintain affordability under Section 65589.5(d), it appears the most feasible approach is for the Project to remove a combination of market-rate and below-market rate (BMR) units for low-income. Based on a combination of estimated construction costs, land costs, and unit income projection, the Project is not estimated to achieve and rate of return, and would continue to carry its costs, for approximately 8 years.

Using the 10758 Mora Drive parcel as an example, the Project currently as proposed has an estimated land cost of $5 million, estimated construction costs of $13.6 million, and a 1-year income projection of $1.9 million equating to an approximately 8 years rate of return (i.e. the Project would not recover its costs until Year 8). Assuming that a combination of BMR units and market-rate units are removed to accommodate for fire access while maintaining the affordability levels under Section 65589.5, the Project rate of returns either remains at 8 years or increases to 9 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 19
years. It should be noted that the affordability analysis also conservatively assumes that there are no additional code compliance or other financing issues that further increases Project costs and reduces its financial feasibility. Consequently, reducing the building square footage most likely results in the reduction of dwelling units, which impedes the Project’s ability to recover its initial capital expenses and would have to carry costs for a significant period of time. This in turn reduces the ability of the Project’s market-rate units to generate sufficient income to support BMR units and the Project as a whole, and thus results in increase in rent for BMR units or the loss thereof, rendering the Project unaffordable to lower and moderate income.

Pursuant to this analysis, re-designing the building results in the Project becoming unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households based on a combination of the reduction of unit count and the increase in the Project’s ability to carry costs and supporting below-market-rate units based on market rate unit income generation. Notably, this conclusion is further supported by and consistent with the Applicant’s proposal to increase the number of market rate units and reducing the number of affordable units through the Project revision in April and July 2023, and his unwillingness to propose such a design change, despite the Section 503.1.1 compliance issue was first questioned by SCCFD on April 5, 2023, approximately two months after the Project submittal, and then raised again soon thereafter on August 14, 2023, providing ample opportunities for the Applicant to propose such re-design options to accommodate sufficient fire access road distance. The City Council further observes that the Applicant has not proposed any other alternatives or redesign options since the SCCFD’s November 20, 2024 AMMR Denial Letter.

In light of the foregoing and based on the record before it, the City Council finds that the Project as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households, pursuant to Government Code section 65589.5(d)(2). The City Council specifically notes that per the description set forth in Footnote 1 of this Findings document, the City Council finds that this Finding #1 would apply and is supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, regardless of whether the Project is analyzed under Government Code section 65589.5 as it existed in 2024 or as it is in effect on January 1, 2025.

Finding #2: Section 65589.5(d)(3)- Necessary to Comply with State Law The finding set forth under Section 65589.5(d)(2) provides:

The denial of the housing development project or imposition of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible.

As set forth in detail in Finding #1 above, the proposed Project does not comply with state law— namely, Section 503.1.1 of the California Fire Code— because of its failure to provide the required 150 feet distance between a fire access road and the proposed residential building. The Project was reviewed against the 2022 California Fire Code, which is a part of the most recent triennial state building code update; it was published July 1, 2022 and became effective on January 1, 2023. For the purposes of planning entitlement plan check review and as noted in Footnote 1, such code was ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 20
in existence at the time the Project filed a preliminary application and at the time of its subsequent revision and is the currently applicable law.

The City Council specifically notes that while Section 503.1.1 was adopted by the Town with certain local amendments, the 150-foot standard was not modified and remains a state Fire Code requirement applicable to all development projects. Additionally, the local amendments introduced by Los Altos Hills were made pursuant to Health and Safety Code sections 18941.5 and 17958 accompanied by requisite findings made by City Council under state law. These local amendments only affect the “Exceptions” portion of Section 503.1.1 identified above and only makes changes regarding situations involving Group R-3 or U occupancies (i.e. buildings with two or less dwelling units and utilities/accessory buildings). The 150-foot distance requirement remains a provision of the state Fire Code and is unchanged. For the reasons explained in Finding #1 above, which are incorporated herein for the purposes of this Finding #2, the Project is required to comply with Section 503.1.1 but fails to do so. Its noncompliance created a specific, adverse impact, amounting to a significant public safety threat to both Project residents and staff, and firefighters and emergency responders. The Applicant has been unable to propose a feasible mitigation method that directly addresses this excessive distance, and facts in the record demonstrate that the only other available alternative—which is the redesign and reduction of building width—would result in the reduction of units and significantly increase Project costs and render it financially infeasible, thereby rendering the development unaffordable to moderate and lower income households.

In relation to the foregoing, the City Council also notes that there is no record of the Project demonstrating it meet the requirements under the California Building Code to have the Building Code Official approve any proposals to provide alternative material, design or method of construction from the requirements of the Building Code. Section 104.11 of the Building Code provides for the Building Official to approve AMMRs where proposed alternatives complies with the intent of the Building Code standards and that the alternatives offered is not less than the equivalent of the quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability, and safety. The record below is void of any attempts by the Applicant to demonstrate to the Town that the proposed alternatives for excessive assistance are approvable equivalent methods under the Building Code based on the effectiveness, fire resistance, safety, and the other criteria listed above.

Accordingly, and based on the record before it, the City Council finds that the denial of the Project is required in order to comply with the California Fire Code, specifically Section 503.1.1, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households, pursuant to Government Code section 65589.5(d)(3). The City Council specifically notes that per the description set forth in Footnote 1 of this Findings document, the City Council finds that this Finding #2 would apply and is supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, regardless of whether the Project is analyzed under Government Code section 65589.5 as it existed in 2024 or as it is in effect on January 1, 2025.

Finding #3: Section 65589.5(d)(6)- Failure to Qualify as a Builder’s Remedy Project Based on Current Statute.

The finding set forth under Section 65589.5(d)(6) provides:

On the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction did not have an adopted revised housing ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 21
element that was in substantial compliance with this article and the housing development project is not a builder’s remedy project.

Under the recently effective Government Code section 65585.03, a housing element is considered to be in substantial compliance when the city adopts that housing element, and the element is either certified by the state Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) or by a court of competent jurisdiction. As relevant here, HCD certified the Town’s Housing Element on May 30, 2023, while the Project preliminary application was filed on March 3, 2023. As such, this Finding No. 3 would apply if the Project does not qualify as a “Builder’s Remedy” project defined by statute and does not otherwise elect to be subject to the provisions of Section 65589.5 as it existed on March 3, 2023.

Under Government Code section 65589.5(h)(11), as amended as of September 19, 2024 and as effective as of January 1, 2025, a housing development would qualify as a “Builders’ Remedy” project if it meets the following criteria, among other things:

A. The project is a housing development project that provides housing for very low, low, or moderate-income households.

B. On or after the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction did not have a housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article.

C. The project has a density such that the number of units, as calculated before the application of a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915, complies with all of the following conditions:
1) The density does not exceed the greatest of the following densities:
i. Fifty percent greater than the minimum density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for that jurisdiction as specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2.
ii. Three times the density allowed by the general plan, zoning ordinance, or state law, whichever is greater.
iii. The density that is consistent with the density specified in the housing element.

In reviewing the foregoing, the Project does not meet Items (C)(1)(i)-(iii) because its density exceeds the minimum prescribed by statute. Under (i), the density applicable to Los Altos Hills under Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B) is 20 dwelling units per acre as the Town is a “suburban jurisdiction” defined by Section 65583.2.6
Under (ii), the density currently allowed under the Town’s General Plan and Zoning (which contains only the R-A district designation) is one unit per acre. Finally, under (iii), as the Project parcel is not listed in the Housing Element site inventory for 2023-2031, the 1 du/ac standard under the Town’s General Plan and zoning continues to apply. The Project proposes 57 units, which equates to a density of 143.6 du/ac. This density far exceeds the statutory thresholds as listed above since it would well exceed fifty percent of 20 du/ac alone. The Applicant has not elected to be subject to the provisions of Government Code section 65589.5 as it existed on February 1, 2023 6 Gov. Code section 65583.2 (e)(1). See also LAH 2023-2031 Housing Element, page 172, under Housing Resources.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 22
when the initial preliminary application was filed or on April 11 and July 3, 2023 when the preliminary application and project plans were revised respectively. Consequently, the proposed Project does not qualify as a “Builder’s Remedy Project” under Government Code section 65589.5(d)(6) in effect as of January 1, 2025.

III. Government Code Section 65589.5(j) Findings
Section 65589.5(j) provides:

When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete [defined by statute to be the filing of a preliminary application], but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist:
(A) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
(B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. (emphasis and clarifications added.) The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Project is not compliant with applicable objective standards as set forth in Section 65589.5(j). Specifically, based on the record below including the Town’s Consistency Determination Letter dated August 31, 2023, the Project is inconsistent with a number of objective General Plan and zoning development standards and policies, including but not limited to minimum lot size, setbacks, height, and residential density. As such, it is not a housing development project covered by subsection (j).

However, even if the Project were to be analyzed under the two findings set forth in subdivision (j) above, as set forth in detail under Finding #1 above which are incorporated here for the purposes of this section, the Project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety based on its failure to comply with Fire Code Section 503.1.1 to provide adequate distance between the proposed fire access road and the residential building. Based on reasons articulated in Finding #1, there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact other than reducing the Project density by reducing the size of the residential building proposed or to deny the Project. Finding #1 illustrates in detail the Applicant’s inability to propose alternative mitigation methods that directly address the excessive distance or provide equally protective and efficient measures to mitigate the adverse impact.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

Resolution ___ Page 23

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

HOUSING CRISIS ACT of 2019 – SB 330

PRELIMINARY APPLICATION FORM

PURPOSE
This form serves as the preliminary application for
housing development projects seeking vesting rights
pursuant to SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019.

GENERAL INFORMATION
An applicant for a housing development project that
includes (1) residential units (2) a mix of commercial
and residential uses with two-thirds of the project’s
square footage used for residential purposes; or (3)
transitional or supportive housing, shall be deemed to
have submitted a preliminary application upon
provision of all of the information listed in this
Preliminary Application form and payment of the
permit processing fee to the agency from which
approval for the project is being sought.

After submitting this Preliminary Application to the
local agency, an applicant has 180 days to submit a
full application or the Preliminary Application will
expire.

Submittal Date Stamp*1,2:
*1Submittal of all the information listed and
payment of the permit processing fee freezes
fees and development standards as of this date,
unless exceptions per Government Code §
65889.5(o) are triggered.
*2Note: Record keeping pertaining to which
standards and fees apply at date of submittal is
imperative, as penalties may apply for
imposing incorrect standards
Notes:

1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Coastal Act standards apply.

2. After submittal of all of the information required, if the development proponent revises the project to change the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, excluding any increase resulting from Density Bonus Law, the development proponent must resubmit the required information so that it reflects the revisions.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

SITE INFORMATION

1. PROJECT LOCATION - The specific location, including parcel numbers, a legal description, and site address, if applicable.

Street Address ___________________________________Unit/Space Number Legal Description (Lot, Block, Tract) Attached? YES NO
Assessor Parcel Number(s) _____________________________________________________

2. EXISTING USES - The existing uses on the project site and identification of major physical alterations to the property on which the project is to be located.

3. SITE PLAN - A site plan showing the building(s) location on the property and approximate square footage of each building that is to be occupied.

Attached? YES NO

4. ELEVATIONS - Elevations showing design, color, material, and the massing and height of each building that is to be occupied.

Attached? YES NO

5. PROPOSED USES - The proposed land uses by number of units and square feet of residential and nonresidential development using the categories in the applicable zoning ordinance.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

a. RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT COUNT:

Please indicate the number of dwelling units proposed, including a breakdown of levels by affordability, set by each income category.

Number of Units
Market Rate
Managers Unit(s) – Market Rate
Extremely Low Income
Very Low Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Total No. of Units
Total No. of Affordable Units
Total No. of Density Bonus Units
Other notes on units:

6. FLOOR AREA - Provide the proposed floor area and square footage of residential and nonresidential development, by building (attach relevant information by building and totals here):

Residential Nonresidential Total
Floor Area (Zoning)
Square Footage of
Construction

7. PARKING - The proposed number of parking spaces:

8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES, WAIVERS, CONCESSIONS and PARKING REDUCTIONS - Will the project proponent seek Density Bonus incentives, waivers, concessions, or parking reductions pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915? YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES,” please describe:

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

9. SUBDIVISION – Will the project proponent seek any approvals under the Subdivision Map Act, including, but not limited to, a parcel map, a vesting or tentative map, or a condominium map? YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES,” please describe:

10.POLLUTANTS – Are there any proposed point sources of air or water pollutants? YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES,” please describe:

11.EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS – Provide the number of existing residential units on the project site that will be demolished and whether each existing unit is occupied or unoccupied. Provide attachment, if needed.

Occupied
Residential
Units
Unoccupied
Residential
Units
Total
Residential
Units
Existing
To Be Demolished

12. ADDITIONAL SITE CONDITIONS –
a. Whether a portion of the property is located within any of the following:
i. A very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, pursuant to Section 51178? YES ☐ NO ☐
ii. Wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2 (June 21, 1993)?
YES ☐ NO ☐
iii. A hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Section 65962.5, or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code?
YES ☐ NO ☐
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

iv. A special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined by any official maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency?
YES ☐ NO ☐
v. A delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law (Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and by any local building department under Chapter

12.2 (commencing with Section 8875) of Division 1 of Title 2? YES ☐ NO ☐
vi. A stream or other resource that may be subject to a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code?
YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES” to any, please describe:
b. Does the project site contain historic and/or cultural resources? YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES,” please describe:
c. Does the project site contain any species of special concern? YES ☐ NO
If “YES,” please describe:

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

d. Does the project site contain any recorded public easement, such as easements for storm drains, water lines, and other public rights of way? YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES,” please describe:
e. Does the project site contain a stream or other resource that may be subject to a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code? Provide an aerial site photograph showing existing site conditions of environmental site features that would be subject to regulations by a public agency, including creeks and wetlands.

YES ☐ NO ☐
If “YES,” please describe and depict in attached site map:

13.COASTAL ZONE - For housing development projects proposed to be located within the coastal zone, whether any portion of the property contains any of the following:
a. Wetlands, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 13577 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.

YES ☐ NO ☐
b. Environmentally sensitive habitat areas, as defined in Section 30240 of the Public Resources Code.

YES ☐ NO ☐
c. A tsunami run-up zone. YES ☐ NO ☐
d. Use of the site for public access to or along the coast. YES ☐ NO ☐

14.PROJECT TEAM INFORMATION - The applicant’s contact information and, if the applicant does not own the property, consent from the property owner to submit the application.

Applicant’s Name
Company/Firm
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Are you in escrow to purchase the property? YES ☐ NO ☐
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Property Owner of Record ☐ Same as applicant ☐ Different from applicant Name (if different from applicant)
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Optional: Agent/Representative Name
Company/Firm
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Optional: Other (Specify Architect, Engineer, CEQA Consultant, etc.) Name
Company/Firm
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Primary Contact for Project: ☐ Owner ☐ Applicant ☐ Agent/Representative ☐ Other ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

PROPERTY OWNER AFFIDAVIT
Before the application can be accepted, the owner of each property involved must provide a signature to verify the Preliminary Application is being filed with their knowledge. Staff will confirm ownership based on the records of the City Engineer or County Assessor. In the case of partnerships, corporations, LLCs or trusts, the agent for service of process or an officer of the ownership entity so authorized may sign as stipulated below.
• Ownership Disclosure. If the property is owned by a partnership, corporation, LLC or trust, a disclosure identifying the agent for service or process or an officer of the ownership entity must be submitted. The disclosure must list the names and addresses of the principal owners (25 percent interest or greater). The signatory must appear in this list of names. A letter of authorization, as described below, may be submitted provided the signatory of the letter is included in the Ownership Disclosure. Include a copy of the current partnership agreement, corporate articles, or trust document as applicable.
• Letter of Authorization (LOA). A LOA from a property owner granting someone else permission to sign the Preliminary Application form may be provided if the property is owned by a partnership, corporation, LLC or trust, or in rare circumstances when an individual property owner is unable to sign the Preliminary Application form. To be considered for acceptance, the LOA must indicate the name of the person being authorized to file, their relationship to the owner or project, the site address, a general description of the type of application being filed and must also include the language in items 1-3 below. In the case of partnerships, corporations, LLCs or trusts, the LOA must be signed by the authorized signatory as shown on the Ownership Disclosure or in the case of private ownership by the property owner. Proof of Ownership for the signatory of the LOA must be submitted with said letter. • Grant Deed. Provide Copy of the Grant Deed if the ownership of the property does not match local records. The Deed must correspond exactly with the ownership listed on the application. • Multiple Owners. If the property is owned by more than one individual (e.g., John and Jane Doe, or Mary Smith and Mark Jones) signatures are required of all owners.

1. I hereby certify that I am the owner of record of the herein previously described property located in _______________________________ which is involved in this Preliminary Application, or have been empowered to sign as the owner on behalf of a partnership, corporation, LLC, or trust as evidenced by the documents attached hereto.

2. I hereby consent to the filing of this Preliminary Application on my property for processing by the Department of ____________________________ for the sole purpose of vesting the proposed housing project subject to the Planning and Zoning ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect on the date that this Preliminary Application is deemed complete.

3. Further, I understand that this Preliminary Application will be terminated and vesting will be forfeited if the housing development project is revised such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction increases or decreases by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision, and/or an application requesting approval of an entitlement is not filed with ____________________ within 180 days of the date that the Preliminary Application is deemed complete.

4. By my signature below, I certify that the foregoing statements are true and correct.

Signature Signature
Printed Name Printed Name
Date Date
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 1 of 8 HOUSING CRISIS ACT of 2019 – SB 330

PRELIMINARY APPLICATION FORM

PURPOSE
This form serves as the preliminary application for
housing development projects seeking vesting rights
pursuant to SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019.

GENERAL INFORMATION
An applicant for a housing development project that
includes (1) residential units (2) a mix of commercial
and residential uses with two-thirds of the project’s
square footage used for residential purposes; or (3)
transitional or supportive housing, shall be deemed to
have submitted a preliminary application upon
provision of all of the information listed in this
Preliminary Application form and payment of the
permit processing fee to the agency from which
approval for the project is being sought.

After submitting this Preliminary Application to the
local agency, an applicant has 180 days to submit a
full application or the Preliminary Application will
expire.

Submittal Date Stamp*
1,2:
*
1Submittal of all the information listed and
payment of the permit processing fee freezes
fees and development standards as of this date,
unless exceptions per Government Code §
65889.5(o) are triggered.
*
2Note: Record keeping pertaining to which
standards and fees apply at date of submittal is
imperative, as penalties may apply for
imposing incorrect standards
Notes:

1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Coastal Act standards apply.

2. After submittal of all of the information required, if the development proponent revises the project to change the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, excluding any increase resulting from Density Bonus Law, the development proponent must resubmit the required information so that it reflects the revisions.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 2 of 8

SITE INFORMATION

1. PROJECT LOCATION - The specific location, including parcel numbers, a legal description, and site address, if applicable.

Street Address ___________________________________Unit/Space Number Legal Description (Lot, Block, Tract) Attached? YES NO
Assessor Parcel Number(s) _____________________________________________________

2. EXISTING USES - The existing uses on the project site and identification of major physical alterations to the property on which the project is to be located.

3. SITE PLAN - A site plan showing the building(s) location on the property and approximate square footage of each building that is to be occupied.

Attached? YES NO

4. ELEVATIONS - Elevations showing design, color, material, and the massing and height of each building that is to be occupied.

Attached? YES NO

5. PROPOSED USES - The proposed land uses by number of units and square feet of residential and nonresidential development using the categories in the applicable zoning ordinance.

See attached plan submittal sheet C1
See attached plan submittal sheets A2.1 and A2.2
This is a Builder's Remedy application under Gov. Code 65589.5(d) consisting of 55 units of residential with 20% (11 units) reserved for low-income households. There is 1 building proposed of 68,687 square feet of residential and uses accessory to residential, such as parking, recreation, etc. For a further breakdown see sheet CO of the attached plan submittal. The project will be mapped as condominiums.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 3 of 8 a. RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT COUNT:

Please indicate the number of dwelling units proposed, including a breakdown of levels by affordability, set by each income category.

Number of Units
Market Rate
Managers Unit(s) – Market Rate
Extremely Low Income
Very Low Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Total No. of Units
Total No. of Affordable Units
Total No. of Density Bonus Units
Other notes on units:

6. FLOOR AREA - Provide the proposed floor area and square footage of residential and nonresidential development, by building (attach relevant information by building and totals here):

Residential Nonresidential Total
Floor Area (Zoning)
Square Footage of
Construction

7. PARKING - The proposed number of parking spaces:

8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES, WAIVERS, CONCESSIONS and PARKING REDUCTIONS - Will the project proponent seek Density Bonus incentives, waivers, concessions, or parking reductions pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915? YES NO
If “YES,” please describe:
44 11
55 11
0 0
0 0
0 See attached plan submittal sheet CO for further breakdown. 66,291 0
71,034 0 71,034
32 X
66,291
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 4 of 8

9. SUBDIVISION – Will the project proponent seek any approvals under the Subdivision Map Act, including, but not limited to, a parcel map, a vesting or tentative map, or a condominium map? YES NO
If “YES,” please describe:

10.POLLUTANTS – Are there any proposed point sources of air or water pollutants? YES NO
If “YES,” please describe:

11.EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS – Provide the number of existing residential units on the project site that will be demolished and whether each existing unit is occupied or unoccupied. Provide attachment, if needed.

Occupied
Residential
Units
Unoccupied
Residential
Units
Total
Residential
Units
Existing
To Be Demolished

12. ADDITIONAL SITE CONDITIONS –
a. Whether a portion of the property is located within any of the following:
i. A very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, pursuant to Section 51178? YES NO
ii. Wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2 (June 21, 1993)?
YES NO
iii. A hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Section 65962.5, or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code?
YES NO
The units will be mapped as condominiums.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 5 of 8 iv. A special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined by any official maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency?
YES NO
v. A delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law (Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and by any local building department under Chapter

12.2 (commencing with Section 8875) of Division 1 of Title 2? YES NO
vi. A stream or other resource that may be subject to a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code?
YES NO
If “YES” to any, please describe:
b. Does the project site contain historic and/or cultural resources? YES NO
If “YES,” please describe:
c. Does the project site contain any species of special concern? YES NO
If “YES,” please describe:

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 6 of 8 d. Does the project site contain any recorded public easement, such as easements for storm drains, water lines, and other public rights of way? YES NO
If “YES,” please describe:
e. Does the project site contain a stream or other resource that may be subject to a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code? Provide an aerial site photograph showing existing site conditions of environmental site features that would be subject to regulations by a public agency, including creeks and wetlands.

YES NO
If “YES,” please describe and depict in attached site map:

13.COASTAL ZONE - For housing development projects proposed to be located within the coastal zone, whether any portion of the property contains any of the following:
a. Wetlands, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 13577 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.

YES NO
b. Environmentally sensitive habitat areas, as defined in Section 30240 of the Public Resources Code.

YES NO
c. A tsunami run-up zone. YES NO
d. Use of the site for public access to or along the coast. YES NO

14.PROJECT TEAM INFORMATION - The applicant’s contact information and, if the applicant does not own the property, consent from the property owner to submit the application.

Applicant’s Name
Company/Firm
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Are you in escrow to purchase the property? YES NO
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 7 of 8 Property Owner of Record Same as applicant Different from applicant Name (if different from applicant)
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Optional: Agent/Representative Name
Company/Firm
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Optional: Other (Specify Architect, Engineer, CEQA Consultant, etc.) Name
Company/Firm
Address _________________________________________Unit/Space Number City ___________________________ State _______ Zip Code Telephone ___________________________ Email
Primary Contact for Project: Owner Applicant Agent/Representative Other ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) Preliminary Application Form (Revised April 9, 2020) Page 8 of 8

PROPERTY OWNER AFFIDAVIT
Before the application can be accepted, the owner of each property involved must provide a signature to verify the Preliminary Application is being filed with their knowledge. Staff will confirm ownership based on the records of the City Engineer or County Assessor. In the case of partnerships, corporations, LLCs or trusts, the agent for service of process or an officer of the ownership entity so authorized may sign as stipulated below.

Ownership Disclosure. If the property is owned by a partnership, corporation, LLC or trust, a disclosure identifying the agent for service or process or an officer of the ownership entity must be submitted. The disclosure must list the names and addresses of the principal owners (25 percent interest or greater). The signatory must appear in this list of names. A letter of authorization, as described below, may be submitted provided the signatory of the letter is included in the Ownership Disclosure. Include a copy of the current partnership agreement, corporate articles, or trust document as applicable.

Letter of Authorization (LOA). A LOA from a property owner granting someone else permission to sign the Preliminary Application form may be provided if the property is owned by a partnership, corporation, LLC or trust, or in rare circumstances when an individual property owner is unable to sign the Preliminary Application form. To be considered for acceptance, the LOA must indicate the name of the person being authorized to file, their relationship to the owner or project, the site address, a general description of the type of application being filed and must also include the language in items 1-3 below. In the case of partnerships, corporations, LLCs or trusts, the LOA must be signed by the authorized signatory as shown on the Ownership Disclosure or in the case of private ownership by the property owner. Proof of Ownership for the signatory of the LOA must be submitted with said letter.

Grant Deed. Provide Copy of the Grant Deed if the ownership of the property does not match local records. The Deed must correspond exactly with the ownership listed on the application.

Multiple Owners. If the property is owned by more than one individual (e.g., John and Jane Doe, or Mary Smith and Mark Jones) signatures are required of all owners.

1. I hereby certify that I am the owner of record of the herein previously described property located in _______________________________ which is involved in this Preliminary Application, or have been empowered to sign as the owner on behalf of a partnership, corporation, LLC, or trust as evidenced by the documents attached hereto.

2. I hereby consent to the filing of this Preliminary Application on my property for processing by the Department of ____________________________ for the sole purpose of vesting the proposed housing project subject to the Planning and Zoning ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect on the date that this Preliminary Application is deemed complete.

3. Further, I understand that this Preliminary Application will be terminated and vesting will be forfeited if the housing development project is revised such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction increases or decreases by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision, and/or an application requesting approval of an entitlement is not filed with ____________________ within 180 days of the date that the Preliminary Application is deemed complete.

4. By my signature below, I certify that the foregoing statements are true and correct.

Signature Signature
Printed Name Printed Name
Date Date
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

1 For this housing development project to be feasible under the “Builder’s Remedy” provision of the HAA and to provide 20% low-income units, the project requires approval of the following Below Market Rate Administration Program. Currently, the Town has no program for administering below market rate housing units.

Below Market Rate Housing Program
Mora Drive Builder’s Remedy Residential Development

1. Definitions:
a. “Administrator” means the entity in charge of administering the BMR program for this residential development project, which shall be chosen by the owner or the owner’s agent in perpetuity of the term of the BMR housing. b. "Affordable housing" means housing which costs a very low-, low-, or moderateincome household no more than approximately thirty (30) percent of its gross monthly income. Costs included in the calculation of income for ownership housing are monthly mortgage principal and interest payments, homeowners' insurance, property taxes and homeowners association fees, where applicable.

Costs included in the calculation of income allocated to rental housing are monthly rent and utilities.
c. "Below-market-rate (BMR) unit" means an ownership or rental unit under the BMR program which is affordable to households with low or moderate incomes as defined herein.
d. "Gross household income" means the earned and unearned household income of all adult members of the household.
e. "Low-income household" means a household whose gross income as published periodically by the state Department of Housing and Community Development is between fifty (50) percent to eighty (80) of the median household income, adjusted for household size, for Santa Clara County.

2. BMR household eligibility requirements.
a. The Administrator or its designee shall select potential occupants of BMR units from a list of those persons qualified on the basis of household income, relationship between household size and the size of available units, and further criteria and procedures to be established by the Administrator. b. Each purchaser of a BMR unit shall certify, prior to close of escrow, in a form acceptable to the Administrator or its designee, that said unit is being purchased and shall be maintained as the purchaser's primary place of residence. c. The household income of each renter of a BMR unit shall be verified annually by the Administrator or its designee to confirm the household's continued income ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

2 eligibility for the unit as set forth herein and other procedures that the Administrator may promulgate.

3. Compliance

4. This program shall comply with all state and federal eligibility requirements under California law, but shall be exempt for changes to municipal ordinances. This program shall be run for 55 years from the date of first occupancy. a. Rental units. All BMR rental units on site shall be reserved for low-income households representing income levels less that eighty (80) percent and more than fifty (50) percent of AMI in Santa Clara County, although an household that’s income drops below the 50% lower threshold may be retained by the Administrator or requirements of state law. e. Concurrent development of BMR on-site units. All BMR on-site units in a residential development and phases of a development shall be constructed concurrently with or prior to the construction of market-rate units.
f. Location and design of BMR on-site units. All BMR units shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the project and consistent with federal and state fair housing laws, except that affordable units for seniors shall comply with applicable requirements for senior housing. The actual location of a BMR rental unit within a complex shall be assigned to a particular dwelling unit.

The exterior design of the BMR units shall be consistent with the market-rate units in the project and be comparable in terms of interior design, materials, and quality of finishes.

However, the BMR units may differ from market-rate units in square footage, number of bedrooms, number of bathrooms, number of amenities provided. BMR units shall have the same access to project amenities and recreational facilities as market-rate units. g. Qualifying households. All BMR rental units shall be rented only to qualified lowincome households less than fifty (50) percent AMI, and all BMR ownership units shall be sold only to qualified very low-income households less than fifty (50) percent AMI. Rents, sales prices, and eligible household sizes of BMR units shall comply with the requirements pursuant to the BMR guidelines.
h. Term. BMR units shall be maintained as affordable housing for 55 years from first occupancy.
k. Administration. The BMR program shall be administered by the Administrator or its designee who may issue written procedures to implement the BMR program and guidelines, the administrator shall be the property owner during the time each BMR unit is operated for rental, If any of the units are sold the property owner shall designate a Administrator for the remainder of the project, who shall be paid by a fund set up in the CC&R’s of the market rate units.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

3 A project's BMR ownership units shall be sold at prices affordable to low-income households representing income levels more that eighty (80) percent and more than fifty (50) percent of AMI in Santa Clara County. The eligible household income range may be adjusted annually to reflect adjustments in the median household income published periodically by the state department of housing and community development for Santa Clara County. The sales price for each BMR unit shall result in a total monthly payment that shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of the selected household income level for that unit adjusted by unit size and presumed household size, and includes mortgage, taxes, utilities, HOA dues, insurance and private mortgage insurance.

Should any units be sold before the expiration of the 55 year terms, they shall be sold to lowincome households representing income levels less that eighty (80) percent and more than fifty (50) percent of AMI in Santa Clara County. The property manager shall set aside a reserve to cover future special assessments and increases in HOA dues for those households, and the total housing cost shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of the household's selected income level for the unit over the life of the mortgage. The property manager or designee may establish standards for calculating the amount of the reserve.

Resale controls on ownership units.

All BMR units shall be subject to deed restrictions, covenants, resale restrictions, and other applicable conditions and documentation to ensure compliance with the BMR program, and which includes an option that entitles the property owner or its designee the first right to purchase a BMR ownership unit at the lower of the following purchase prices:
a. Market value;
b. The purchase price paid by the seller, plus one-third of the increase (during the period of seller's ownership) in a CPI, All Urban Consumers, San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics; or c. An amount equal to the price affordable to household earning the income level specific to the BMR unit.

An exception to the restriction that the BMR unit be sold to property owner approved BMR household may be granted if:

1. Within a one hundred eighty (180) day period; and

2. The property owner decides not to exercise its option to purchase the BMR unit. The seller will be entitled to the lowest purchase price listed above. The balance of the proceeds shall be paid to the Property owner and the property will be returned to rental to very low income households. The deed restrictions shall prohibit sales or transfers of the property except with the written consent of the property owner and at a price listed above.

Owners of BMR ownership units shall provide the Administrator a notification of intent to sell prior to listing the unit. If an owner intends to refinance, change title, or transfer ownership ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

4 of the BMR ownership unit, the owner shall notify and receive approval from the Administrator or designee prior to initiating a refinance, title change, or transfer of ownership.

The BMR ownership deed restrictions and conditions shall contain such other provisions as are considered necessary by the Administrator to implement the BMR program. A reference to the deed restrictions and conditions shall be included in all deeds or conveyances of BMR units.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 3

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
March 3, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 44-unit Development Project at 10758 Mora Drive
File #CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced project located at 10758 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing on February 1, 2023. Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, staff has determined the application is INCOMPLETE and has identified the following outstanding items which must be addressed prior to further processing of the application. A copy of the Pre-Application Checklist is attached for your reference; it is strongly encouraged that you make an appointment with the project planner for a meeting to assist you with providing information that are necessary to render the application complete.

INCOMPLETE COMMENTS

1. Correct the jurisdiction and zip code on the Application for Project Review (should be Los Altos Hills and 94024).

2. Correct the project description on the Application for Project Review; the application currently states it is a project submitted pursuant to the provisions of Senate Bill 9 (SB 9). Please be advised that the proposed project is not qualified for ministerial approval pursuant to SB 9 and is not consistent with SB 9 provisions and the Town’s SB 9 Ordinance under Title 1, Chapter 1, Article 15.

3. Provide a fully completed and properly executed Application for Project Review, including a Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, that does not contain any “signed under protest” statements. Please note the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement is required for all development applications submitted to the Town and is required to continue processing the application.

4. The proposed project requires the following permits and review. Please submit the following application fees in the amounts stated below. Amounts identified as “deposits” are initial payment deposits that would need to be replenished by the applicant if funds are exhausted, and ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
March 3, 2023

unspent amounts in the deposit would be refunded to the applicant upon completion of the Project review and decision process. Payment can be made online with credit cards following the enclosed Online Payment Instructions or in person via credit cards or checks payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills.
a. $7,125 Site Development Permit
b. $2,180 Conditional Development Permit
c. $2,000 Geotechnical Review Deposit
d. $1,500 Technical Environment Study Review
e. $5,000 C3 Compliance Review Deposit
f. $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study Deposit

5. Provide a site specific geotechnical evaluation for the proposed project pursuant to Item #23 of the application checklist. This may be in the form of a supplemental letter, addendum or revised geotechnical report.

6. Correct the parking space total in Section 5 of the Preliminary Application (should be 32).

7. Clearly show the locations of the 32 proposed parking spaces on the plans.

8. Identify the location of the nine affordable units on the plans and provide the proposed level of affordability and specific income level, and time frame the units will be available for rent at the designated affordable rate.

9. Provide a Guidelines of Service Design Load Worksheet pursuant to Item #16 of the application checklist, as sewer connections will be required for the proposed project.

10. Provide a design for holding wells for sewage with details, dimensions, backup systems, and calculations for capacity with safety factors for the proposed development.

11. Include the estimated grading quantities, in cubic yards (cut/fill), net (import/export) on the Grading & Drainage Plan.

12. Provide the finished elevation for the proposed patio and lawn area on the plans.

13. Provide the top of wall (TW) and bottom of wall (BW) elevations for all retaining walls at every 20’ and where it changes direction.

14. Include the width (dimension) of the “Flow Through Plan Bio-Retention Area Detail 1” on sheet C4.

15. As the proposed project requires a Conditional Development Permit, please provide findings to support a Conditional Development Permit request pursuant to the application checklist.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
March 3, 2023

16. Please provide evidence showing that the project Architect and Engineer possess a Los Altos Hills business license pursuant to Item #8 on the application checklist.

17. Please provide a preliminary title report that is less than six (6) months old pursuant to Item #6 on the application checklist.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

18. Complete and return the attached Environmental Checklist Form.

19. The new development proposed will require a sewer system capacity study which will be prepared by the Town’s consultant. As noted above, the Town will require an initial deposit of $10,000 for the sanitary sewer capacity study.

20. The proposed project is considered a “Regulated Project” per the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) and requires incorporating site design measures and install Low Impact Development (LID) treatment measures. Provide a Storm Water Control Plan and C.3 Data Form for review.

21. The Town’s consultant will review this project for C.3 compliance. As noted above, provide a $5,000 deposit for the first review (on a time and materials basis). Additional budget will also be needed for review of resubmittals.

22. Submit a Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for review.

23. Submit a Grading and Construction Operation Plan for review.

24. Provide a will-serve letter from California Water Service Company, PG&E, Comcast, or AT&T for utility services of the proposed building.

Once the application has been deemed complete, Town departments and the Santa Clara County Fire Department will conduct substantive review of the plans and application materials. The Town has started the process of routing the application to said reviewers to begin the review process. Comments will be provided once review has been completed and/or received by the Town, in accordance with applicable timelines. In addition, environmental review will commence in accordance with applicable law. The appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees will be based on actual cost.

After addressing the comments listed in this letter, please revise the plans and submit three (3) sets of plans as well as a written response addressing each of the comments outlined in this letter.

Thank you for your attention and cooperation in addressing these comments. I can be contacted by email at [email protected] if you have any questions.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
March 3, 2023

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Enclosed:
- Invoice and Online Payment Instructions
- Pre-Application Checklist
- Environmental Checklist Form
5308703.3
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
May 11, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 55-unit Development Project 10728 Mora Drive
File #CDP23-0001
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10728 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing on April 11 and 12, 2023. Note that the project was revised from 44 units to 55 units with the resubmittal, which constitutes a 20 percent change in project unit count and accompanied by a new preliminary application. Thus, this resubmittal is being reviewed as a new application replacing the 44-unit project.

Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, staff reviewed the Preliminary Application against the list of items set forth under Government Code section 65941.1 and confirmed it provides the corresponding information required. However, the formal application is INCOMPLETE and staff has identified the following outstanding items which must be addressed prior to further processing of the application.

INCOMPLETE COMMENTS

1. Please provide a fully and properly executed Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement (part of the Application for Project Review), that does not contain any “signed under protest” statements. Please note the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement is required for all development applications submitted to the Town and is required to continue processing the application.

Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement provided; comment addressed.

2. Correct the jurisdiction and zip code on the Application for Project Review (should be Los Altos Hills and 94024).

Correction made; comment addressed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

3. The proposed project requires the following permits and review. Please submit the following application fees in the amounts stated below. Amounts identified as “deposits” are initial payment deposits that would need to be replenished by the applicant if funds are exhausted, and unspent amounts in the deposit would be refunded to the application upon completion of the Project review and decision process. Payment can be made online with credit cards following the enclosed Online Payment Instructions or in person via credit cards or checks payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills. a. $7,125 Site Development Permit – Not paid
b. $2,180 Conditional Development Permit – Paid (under protest) c. $1,500 Technical Environmental Study Review Deposit – Not paid d. $2,000 Geotechnical Review Deposit - Paid (under protest) e. $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study Deposit –Not Paid f. $5,000 C.3 Compliance Review Deposit – Not Paid
As noted on the application form, fees and deposits payable to the Town are required to process all project applications. Further, pursuant to the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, applicant assumes full responsibility for all costs incurred in processing the project. Deposits are applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project.

The foregoing fees and deposits are a part of the application requirements and must be paid before the project can move forward. Please see further information as follows:
a. The Site Development Permit fee is the standard fee for a project that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission. This fee amount is based on the FY 21-22 Fee Schedule in effect at the time of the project preliminary submittal. Note this fee also remains in effect as a part of the most recently adopted FY 22-23 Fee Schedule.

Thus, it is applicable to the project.
b. A Conditional Development Permit (CDP) is required when the Lot Unit Factor (LUF) for a property is less than 0.50. The LUF for the subject property is less than

0.50 and a CDP is required. Thus, the CDP fee is applicable. This fee amount is based on the FY 21-22 Fee Schedule in effect at the time of the project preliminary submittal. Note this fee also remains in effect as a part of the most recently adopted FY 22-23 Fee Schedule.
c. The project is not exempt from CEQA determination and environmental review is required for the project. The requested deposit is for work specifically related to that task. This fee amount is based on the FY 21-22 Fee Schedule in effect at the time of the project preliminary submittal. Note this fee remains in effect as a part of the most recently adopted FY 22-23 Fee Schedule.
d. Fee paid on April 11, 2023.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

e. Sewer capacity determination is a required component to processing this project.

Based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work. Deposit funds are only applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent on project review. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project. f. Pursuant to the Town’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS612008 criteria, C3/stormwater review is required in order for the project to continue to be processed. Based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work. Deposit funds are only applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent on project review. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project.

4. Provide a project specific geotechnical evaluation for the proposed project pursuant to Item No. 23 of the application checklist. This may be in the form of a supplemental letter, addendum or revised geotechnical report.

Report provided and reviewed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant; comment addressed.

5. Correct the parking space total in Section 5 of the Preliminary Application (should be 32).

Correction made; comment addressed.

6. Clearly show the locations of the 32 proposed parking spaces on the plans.

Parking spaces identified on site plan; comment addressed.

7. Identify the location of the nine affordable units on the plans and provide the proposed level of affordability and specific income level, and time frame the units will be available for rent at the applicable affordable rate.

The revised 55-unit project would provide 11 affordable units which has been indicated on the plans. Location of affordable units is shown on the plans; comment addressed.

8. Provide a Guidelines of Service Design Load Worksheet pursuant to Item #16 of the application checklist, as sewer connections will be required for the proposed project.

Worksheet provided; comment addressed.

9. Provide a design for holding wells for sewage with details, dimensions, backup systems, and calculations for capacity with safety factors for the proposed development.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

Comment not addressed. Required by Town Ordinance 10-2.702 Siting requirement under Title 10 Chapter 2 for Site Development. Design of the holding well could impact the siting of the building.

10. Include the estimated grading quantities, in cubic yards (cut/fill), net (import/export) on the Grading & Drainage Plan.

Cut and fill quantities have been provided; comment addressed.

11. Provide the finished elevation for the proposed patio and lawn area on the plans.

Finished elevation provided with clarification that there is no lawn; comment addressed.

12. Provide the top of wall (TW) and bottom of wall (BW) elevations for all retaining walls at every 20’ and where it changes direction.

Top and bottom of wall elevations provided; comment addressed.

13. Include the width (dimension) of the “Flow Through Plan Bio-Retention Area Detail 1” on sheet C4.

Information must be provided in order to perform analysis required by the Town’s NPDES Permit; comment outstanding. Stormwater treatment/C3 compliance cannot be deferred to building permit plan check; the application provides no C3/stormwater or hydrology information. The applicant must provide enough information for staff to determine that the project can comply with the NPDES permit requirements. Required by Town Ordinance Section 10-2.702 Siting requirement under Title 10 Chapter 2 for Site Development. Design of the Bio-Retention area could impact the siting of the building.

14. As the proposed project requires a Conditional Development Permit, please provide findings to support a Conditional Development Permit request pursuant to the application checklist.

Findings were provided; comment addressed.

15. Please provide evidence showing that the project Architect and Engineer possess a Los Altos Hills business license pursuant to Item #8 on the application checklist.

Business license document provided; comment addressed.

16. Please provide a preliminary title report that is less than six (6) months old pursuant to Item #6 on the application checklist.

A Preliminary Title Report has been provided; comment addressed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

17. Complete and return the attached Environmental Checklist.

Comment outstanding; As noted previously, the project is not exempt from CEQA and environmental review is required.

18. The new development proposed will require a sewer system capacity study which will be prepared by the Town’s consultant. As noted above, the Town will require an initial deposit of $10,000 for the sanitary sewer capacity study.

Comment outstanding; A Sewer study is needed in advance of or in conjunction with the environmental review. The Town needs to understand the sewer capacity impact of the project. Based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work.

19. The proposed project is considered a “Regulated Project” per the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) and requires incorporating site design measures and install Low Impact Development (LID) treatment measures. Provide a Storm Water Control Plan and C.3 Data Form for review.

Comment outstanding; Information is needed to determine that the project can comply with NPDES Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) Permit No. CAS612008 requirements. This element could impact the siting of the building.

20. The Town’s consultant will review this project for C.3 compliance. As noted above, provide a $5,000 deposit for the first review (on a time and materials basis). Additional budget will also be needed for review of resubmittals.

Comment outstanding; Deposit was not paid. Review by the Town’s Stormwater Consultant/engineering consultant cannot commence until a deposit is received by the Town.

21. Submit a Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for review.

This requirement can be deferred until Planning entitlements approval has been secured.

It is required to be submitted and approved prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check.

22. Submit a Grading and Construction Operation Plan for review.

This requirement can be deferred until Planning entitlements approval has been secured.

It is required to be submitted and approved prior to acceptance of plans for building plan ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

check. The Grading and Construction Operation Plan assists staff in determining grading and construction impacts to neighboring properties.

23. Provide a will-serve letter from California Water Service Company, PG&E, Comcast, or AT&T for utility services of the proposed building.

Comment not satisfactorily addressed; Please confirm that the will-serve letters are applicable to the 55-unit project proposed with this application.

24. Please see the comments from the Santa Clara County Fire Department (Attachment 2).

Note that the Fire Department reviewed the prior 44-unit proposal and is still reviewing the revised plans for the 55-unit project. Comments for the 55-unit project will be provided when received.

25. Please see the letter from the Town Geotechnical Consultant, Cotton, Shires & Associates (Attachment 3).

Once the application has been deemed complete, environmental review will commence in accordance with applicable law. Traffic analysis may be required as part of the process. The appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees will be based on actual cost.

After addressing the comments listed in this letter, please revise the plans and submit three (3) sets of plans as well as a written response addressing each of the comments outlined in this letter.

Thank you for your attention and cooperation in addressing these comments. I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Enclosed:

1. Environmental Checklist

2. Santa Clara County Fire Department comments dated April 25, 2023

3. Letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates dated May 11, 2023 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 Phone (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941- 3160
May 11, 2023

VIA EMAIL ONLY
Ryan J. Patterson
Zacks Freedman & Patterson, APC
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94111
[email protected]
RE: Development Projects at 10728 and 10758 Mora Drive
Dear Mr. Patterson:

This correspondence is in response to your letter dated April 11, 2023 to the Town of Los Altos Hills (“Town”), regarding Forrest Linebarger’s proposed residential developments at 10728 and 10758 Mora Drive (Nos. CDP23-0001 and 0002) (collectively, “Project”). Your correspondence makes certain claims regarding Project application completeness and applicability of various fees and requirements include the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), on the basis that Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5), commonly referred to as “Builder’s Remedy”, applies to the Project.

Please be advised that at this time, the Project applications remain incomplete based on the Town’s Pre-Application Checklist compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65940 et seq. (the “Permit Streamlining Act” or “PSA”). Enclosed with this letter are two Project Comment Letters dated May 11, 2023, noting missing items that must be addressed before the applications can be determined complete. Please also note that the Town is in receipt of Mr. Linebarger’s preliminary applications and has timely reviewed them against the submittal requirements under Government Code section 65941.1. The Town is not required to issue any affirmative determination regarding the completeness of the preliminary applications.1 As explained below, the Town’s incompleteness determinations are consistent with the PSA and with Government Code section 65589.5 (the “Housing Accountability Act” or “HAA”). Once the Project applications are deemed complete, the Town will review them for consistency with applicable standards and regulations and timely notify the applicant in accordance with the HAA.
1 Gov. Code section 65941.1; HCD Housing Accountability Act Technical Assistance Advisory, September 2020.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
May 11, 2023

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 Phone (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 The Town’s March 3 and May 11, 2023 comment letters identified items that are a part of its application checklist requirements which needed to be submitted before the application can be deemed complete, items from the Project plans that require further clarification, and additional issues that need to be addressed before the Project application may move forward. In particular, we respond to the specific items referenced in your letter as follows. • Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement must be properly and fully executed. This agreement is a part of the Town’s standard planning application and its execution is required to submit a project application. Mr. Linebarger must fully and properly sign the agreement and will be required to reimburse and indemnify the Town with respect to the Project applications as set forth in that agreement. • The Project must pay all applicable permit fees and deposits. The Town’s permit processing fees and deposits are set forth in its Planning and Engineering fee schedules published on the Town website. The planning project application form identifies fees and deposits as a requirement processing a development project. Fees and deposits are based on estimated reasonable costs of processing an application. The Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, which is a part of the application requirements, mandates the applicant to assume full responsibilities for such costs.

Here, the Project Comment Letters appropriately identified fees and review deposits are included as a part of the Cost Reimbursement Agreement and Fee Schedule in effect at the time of preliminary application submittal. Contrary to your assertions, these fees and deposits are objective numerical figures and based on reasonable costs of providing the underlying application processing services. These fees are authorized by law, and are applied equally to all residential development applications based on the applicable entitlements required and thus also apply to the Project.

Relatedly, it is worth noting that these processing fees and deposits are for the purposes of processing applications for governmental regulatory actions or approvals, and thus not subject to the protest procedures set forth under Government Code section 66020. Mr.

Linebarger has not paid all applicable processing fees and deposits, and will be required to do so as outlined in the Project Comment Letters before the Project applications can move forward.
• Conditional Development Permit (CDP) is a required checklist component for the Project. The Town’s application checklist require an applicant to submit findings to support a Conditional Development Permit, where one is required, as a part of the application submittal. Under Municipal Code section 10-1.1007(3), a CDP is required for lots with a lot unit factor of 0.50 or less. This standard is an objective, numeric determination involving no subjective judgment and consistent with HAA provisions. As the Project parcels each have lot unit factors less than 0.50, a CDP is required and Mr.

Linebarger must provide complete findings in support of the CDP as required by the application checklist.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
May 11, 2023

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 Phone (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 • The Project is not exempt from CEQA. Regardless of whether a project asserts the “Builder’s Remedy” provisions apply, Government Code section 65589.5(e) specifies that the Town must continue to comply with CEQA and make required environmental findings pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081. Relatedly, section 65589.5(d) provides local agencies the ability to make written findings and impose conditions of approval based on several grounds specified in the statute. This Project therefore does not qualify for ministerial approval, nor is it exempt from CEQA review. Mr. Linebarger must comply with applicable CEQA requirements outlined in the Project Comment Letters in order for the Project to move forward.
• Water, C3/Storm Water, Sewer Capacity Analyses are required for the Project. As is the case for every residential development project in Los Altos Hills, the Town requires sewer and water service analyses to determine the project would be adequately served by utilities. Similarly, even if a housing development project seeks to rely on review authority set forth under Government Code section 65589.(d), that statute anticipates the local agency to determine whether the project has adequate water or service. Finally, the Town’s NPDES Permit requires C3 compliance for the Project. Consequently, the Project Comment Letters properly requested will-serve letters and sewer service load worksheets, and Mr. Linebarger will be required to pay sewer capacity study and C3/Stormwater review deposits in connection with the Project as a part of the Town’s standard requirements.

The Town’s Planning Department staff is available and would be happy to discuss with Mr.

Linebarger approaches to address incomplete items in his Project applications so that the application may be determined to be complete and further review may commence. If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Department.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila
Consultant Principal Planner
Town of Los Altos Hills
cc: Peter Pirnejad, City Manager
Steve Mattas, City Attorney
Attachment: Project Comment Letters dated May 11, 2023
5305706.1
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
August 2, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 55-unit Development Project 10728 Mora Drive
File #CDP23-0001
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10728 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing on July 3, 2023. Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, staff determined that application is INCOMPLETE and has identified the following outstanding items which must be addressed prior to further processing of the application.

INCOMPLETE COMMENTS

1. The proposed project requires the following deposits in the collective amount of $15,000.

Payment can be made online with credit cards following the enclosed Online Payment Instructions or in person via credit cards or checks payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills.

The deposits are a part of the application requirements and must be paid before the project can move forward.

As noted on the application form and the Preliminary Application Checklist, fees and deposits payable to the Town are required at the time of submittal to process all project applications. This is an item specified on the cover page of the application. Further, pursuant to the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement which is also a part of the application, the applicant assumes full responsibility for all costs incurred in processing the project. Deposits are applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project. In addition, as noted previously in prior comment letters, these deposits are provided for as a part of the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule adopted pursuant to a public hearing consistent with state law and effective April 2022. Specifically, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 2, 2023

a. $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study Deposit
A sewer capacity/impact analysis is a required component to processing this project.

The Town’s sanitary sewer system standards, compliance and operations, and past sewer studies are based on single-family home developments of one or two units generally. The proposed project application falls outside this standard work scope with the analysis required for sewer capacity. For instance, processing the project application requires analysis of the sewer conveyance system from the project site and Mora Drive, where the sewer main is eight inches in diameter and connects to a sixinch sewer line downstream, to the City of Los Altos where wastewater is processed.

As such, the complete scope of analysis required for processing this project application is considered efforts outside the standard scope and a deposit pursuant to the Engineering Department Fee Schedule is required.
b. $5,000 C.3 Compliance Review Deposit
Pursuant to the Town’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS612008 criteria and Town Municipal Code Sections 10-2.1401 - 1403, developers are required to comply with stormwater treatment measure requirements consistent with the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board applicable to the Town of Los Altos Hills. This includes compliance with requirements under Section C.3 of the Town’s NPDES permit where the proposed development is considered a “regulated project”. As the proposed project is considered a “regulated project” as defined in the NPDES Permit, it is subject to and must meet requirements under Section C.3 for New Development and Redevelopment. The Town’s standard stormwater treatment/C.3 compliance review are based on single-family home developments of one or two units generally. The proposed project application falls outside this standard work scope with the analysis required for stormwater treatment measure compliance. As explained previously, based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work. Deposit funds are only applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent on project review.

2. The June 8, 2023 Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Stevens Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company has been reviewed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant. Please see Attachment 1 for comments to be addressed by the project consultant.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

3. The previous comment to provide a design for holding wells for sewage with details, dimensions, backup systems, and calculations for capacity with safety factors for the proposed development has been addressed. Substantive sewer review will be required.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 2, 2023

4. The previous comment to include the width (dimension) of the “Flow Through Plan BioRetention Area Detail 1” on sheet C4.has been addressed. Substantive C.3/Stormwater review will be required.

5. A Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be required to be submitted for review prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check, as is required for all development projects.

Review of this plan is not done in conjunction with the building permit plan check, it precedes that process.

6. A Grading and Construction Operation Plan will be required to be submitted prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check, as is required for all development projects.

Review of this plan is not done in conjunction with the building permit plan check, it precedes that process.

7. Provide a will-serve letter from PG&E for utility services of the proposed 55-unit building (letters have been provided from Cal Water and Comcast).

8. The revised plans are under review by Santa Clara County Fire Department. Comments for the 55-unit project will be provided when received.

Once the application has been deemed complete, environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) will commence in accordance with applicable law. Traffic analysis may be required as part of the environmental review. The appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees will be based on actual cost.

After addressing the comments listed in this letter, please submit a revised set of plans as well as a written response addressing each of the comments outlined in this letter.

Thank you for your attention and cooperation in addressing these comments. I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Enclosed:

1. Letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates dated July 20, 2023 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
August 31, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 55-unit development project - consistency review
10728 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0001
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Following the Town’s Comment Letter dated August 2, 2023, staff has further reviewed your application submittals for the 55-unit development project located at 10728 Mora Drive, pursuant to Government Code 65589.5 and the Town’s standard application review process. The following comments are being provided regarding the proposed project’s consistency with standards, policies, and requirements under the Los Altos Hills General Plan, Zoning Law, and other applicable standards and requirements in effect at the time that the project’s preliminary application was deemed submitted.

Please be advised that the Town has received your resubmittal dated August 29, 2023 in response to our August 2 Comment Letter. The Town will review the resubmitted materials to determine whether the outstanding completeness items set forth in that Comment Letter have been addressed and the project application may be determined complete. This letter does not make any completeness determinations or deem the project application complete; it only provides concurrent consistency review of the project. The outstanding items set forth in our August 2 Letter must still be addressed in order for the application to be determined complete. We will provide a separate comment letter regarding your August 29, 2023 submittal when review is completed. Any additional consistency review items based on the August 29 resubmittal will also be addressed at that time.

Zoning Standards and Policies Consistency Review
Pursuant to staff’s review, the proposed project is inconsistent with the zoning designation for the project parcel as the designation is Residential-Agricultural (R-A) with single family residence as the permitted use, whereas the project proposes to develop a multi-family senior facility structure with 55 units (See Article 7 of Chapter 1, Title 10 of the Municipal Code).Likewise, the underlying ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

parcel is not consistent with the lot size requirement and a Conditional Development Permit would be required for any proposed development.

In addition, the project is inconsistent with the following standards under Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code:

1. Maximum floor area (Section 10-1.503)

2. Maximum development area (Section 10-1.502)

3. Building setbacks (Section 10-1.505)

4. Building height (Section 10-1.504)
Additional review for the project is required or in progress with respect to the following standards and requirements:

1. Outdoor lighting

2. Exterior colors

3. Tree removal (Chapter 2, Article 3)

4. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance compliance (Section 10-2.809)

5. Stormwater treatment/C.3 compliance

6. Sewer connection and capacity
Attachment 1 to this letter outlines in further detail the consistency review and status of each of the foregoing items. Please review for details and make revisions to project as necessary to comply with applicable standards.

General Plan Standards and Policies Consistency Review
The proposed project is not consistent with several General Plan policies and standards. For example, Land Use Element Policy 1.1 states: “Within incorporated Los Altos Hills and its sphere of influence dwelling types shall be limited to single-family detached residences, which may include a single secondary unit.” The project is proposing a multi-family senior facility consisting of 55 units in the R-A zone and thus not consistent with this policy and the standard for singlefamily residences. Likewise, the Housing Element Policy 1.1 states: “Allow multi-family housing in designated areas to meet the town’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for affordable housing.” The project is not consistent with this policy as the project site is not within any of the areas intended to be rezoned for multi-family housing.

Attachment 2 to this letter outlines in further detail the consistency review for applicable General Plan policies and standards. Please review for details and make revisions to project as necessary to comply with applicable standards.

Additional Requirements
Review for this project has not been completed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant and Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD). Comments from these reviewers must be addressed ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

before it can be determined whether the project is in compliance with the Uniform Fire Code and geotechnical standards.

Once the application has been determined to be complete, environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) will commence in accordance with applicable law. Traffic analysis may be required as part of the environmental review. As noted in the August 2, 2023 Comment Letter, the appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees to be paid by the applicant will be based on actual cost.

I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments

1. Zoning and Site Development Standards Consistency Review Table

2. Applicable General Plan Policies Consistency Review
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

ATTACHMENT 1
Zoning and Site Development Consistency Review
Title 10, Chapters 1 and 2 of Los Altos Hills Municipal Code Inconsistent/Under Review Items
Zoning/Site
Development Standard
Requirement Project
Proposed/Status
Compliant Yes or No
Zoning Designation ResidentialAgricultural/Single
Family
Multi-family senior
residential facility
No
Lot Size
(Section 10-1.501)
1 acre minimum 16,308 sq. ft./.374 Ac
Nonconforming lot
No
Nonconforming Lot, CDP
required (Section 10-

1.1007(3)
Setbacks
(Section 10-1.505)
40 feet front
30 feet sides & rear
30 feet front
5 feet sides

16.8 feet rear
No
Building Height
(Section 10-1.504)
27 feet sectional
35 feet low to high
84 feet 4 inches No
MDA
(Section 10-1.502)
5,000 sq. ft.
1 14,379 sf + 67,475 sf No
MFA
(Section 10-1.503)
7,500 sq. ft.267,475 sf No
Parking
(Section 10-1.601)
2 covered spaces plus 2
uncovered spaces per
primary dwelling; 1
space ADU
32 total
(.58 spaces/unit)
No- the project is not
consistent with the singlefamily R-A zoning
designation for the
underlying parcel as
described above, and even
if assuming 2 spaces per
unit count the proposed
parking spaces does not
meet this standard
Accessible Parking Pursuant to California
Building Code- 2 spaces
per development project
2 Yes
Tree Removal Oaks with trunk diameter
12-inches or greater (a
heritage tree) require
approval
10 trees to be
removed; must be
consistent with Town
heritage tree removal
requirements.

Under Review
1 These values are not guaranteed for lots with LUF less than .50 2 These values are not guaranteed for lots with LUF less than .50 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

Additional Design and
Other Standards
Requirement Project Proposed/Status Compliant Yes or No Geotechnical Clearance Review by Town
Geotechnical Consultant
In progress; comments
provided 8/2/23
Under Review
Grading See Grading Policy 16 feet cut Under Review
Exterior Color 50 LRV walls
40 LRV roof
Color light reflectivity
values to be analyzed
Under Review
Environmental Review Initial Study and
applicable CEQA
document to be prepared
Environmental Checklist
provided
CEQA analysis pending
Exterior Lighting See Lighting Policy Under review; requires compliance with
lighting requirements
Under Review
Landscaping Compliance w/WELO 1,929 sq. ft. Under Review Stormwater3 Compliance w/NPDES
permit/C.3
Stormwater plan
provided; review by
Town consultant
necessary
Review required - see also
August 2, 2023 Comment
Letter
Sanitary Sewer4 Sufficient sewer
capacity and connection
1 connection for lot;
capacity TBD
Review required- see also
August 2, 2023 Comment
Letter
Fire Safety Standards
and California Fire Code
requirements
Comply with Fire Code/
SCCFD requirements
Review in progress;
initial comments
provided; additional
comments to be
provided
Not in compliance; based
on initial comments
provided by Fire
Department, project does
not meet California Fire
Code requirements in
several areas at this time.

Review ongoing;
see also August 2, 2023
Comment Letter and
SCCFD August 14, 2023
comment letter
3 Plans to be reviewed by Town’s Stormwater Consultant. 4 Sewer capacity study required per August 2, 2023 Comment Letter.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

ATTACHMENT 2
Consistency Analysis- Applicable General Plan Policies

LAND USE
• Policy 2.1- Within incorporated Los Altos Hills and its sphere of influence dwelling types shall be limited to single-family detached residences, which may include a single secondary unit.

Project is not consistent with this policy.
• Policy 4.3- Power transmission lines, power distribution lines, and telephone lines serving new development shall be placed underground.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.

CIRCULATION
• Policy 5.1- Driveways shall be of a minimum width, as required by the Fire Department in order to accommodate emergency vehicles.

To be determined (TBD); additional information required by Santa Clara County Fire Department.
• Policy 5.2- New driveways should generally not exceed a maximum grade of fifteen percent in order to allow for safe travel, including access for emergency vehicles.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 5.4- Driveways shall provide safe and adequate ingress and egress to private parcels.

Driveways shall have adequate sight distance to allow for safe entry onto the roadway.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 5.6- Driveways should be designed with adequate drainage.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

• Policy 5.8- Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 8.3- Development of new homes, religious facilities, schools and other land uses shall include adequate provision for on-site parking to reduce the number of vehicles parked on Town roadways.

Project appears to be inconsistent with this standard; 32 parking spaces is not enough to support 57 units.
• Policy 10.3- All addresses shall be clearly visible at the street. Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 11.3- The drainage system shall not burden the natural waterways with road pollutants and silt.

TBD; stormwater review has not been completed.
• Policy 11.4- Drainage shall not create safety hazards for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists, or damage to adjacent properties.

TBD; drainage and stormwater plan review has not been completed. • Policy 11.7- Utilities shall be placed underground for new development.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.

CONSERVATION
• Policy 2.3- Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks and other significant trees, on public and private property.

TBD; tree diameters to be provided for oak trees proposed for removal. • Policy 5.5- Reduce non-point source pollution in urban runoff.

TBD; Stormwater plan and C.3 compliance review has not been completed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

HOUSING
• Policy 1.1- Allow multi-family housing in designated areas to meet the town’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for affordable housing.

The project is not consistent with this policy; the project site is not within any of the areas intended to be rezoned for multi-family housing.
• Policy 1.2- Ensure that new residential development and reconstruction, and rehabilitation of existing residences preserve existing views, hills, ridgelines, water courses, riparian vegetation, open spaces, native trees, and Town character as much as possible while remaining consistent with all aspects of state housing law.

TBD: please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance. • Policy 1.8- Ensure that residential development sites have appropriate and adequate services and facilities, including water, wastewater, and neighborhood infrastructure.

TBD; the applicant provided will serve letters from Cal Water and AT&T. A will serve letter from PG&E letter is needed and a sewer study is required to determine whether there is sufficient capacity for the proposed project.

SAFETY
• Policy 1.3- The geologic and soils conditions of proposed development sites shall be analyzed to ensure land stability and foundation bearing capabilities.

TBD; a geotechnical report was provided and reviewed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant; comments provided on August 2, 2023 to be addressed by project applicant • Policy 4.1- Development shall not be permitted unless an acceptable level of fire protection and adequate water supplies can be provided.

TBD; comments from the Santa Clara County Fire Department to be addressed.

NOISE
• Policy 1.1- Noise levels shall be compatible with the Town’s semi-rural atmosphere and consistent with Town standards.

TBD; noise analysis will be completed as part of the environmental review process; any noise mitigation measures will be required to be implemented.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

• Policy 1.4- Noise generated by construction equipment shall be attenuated to the maximum extent possible. Hours of construction activity shall be regulated to minimize the impact of noise on surrounding residential properties.

TBD; Project will be required to comply with the Town’s construction hours requirements. • Policy 2.3- Mitigation measures such as site planning, building orientation, window placement, increased setbacks, landscaped berms, and sound-proofing shall be required in new development when necessary to reduce the impacts of noise.

TBD; noise analysis will be done as part of the environmental review process; any noise mitigation measures will be required to be implemented and California Building Code requirements will be applicable.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
September 28, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 55-unit development project
10728 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0001
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10728 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing August 29, 2023. Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, the application has been determined to be COMPLETE. Please refer to the sections below regarding project comments and consistency review comments, which need to be addressed for the project to move forward.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requirements and Public Resources Code section 21080.1, the Town has determined that the proposed development is an activity subject to CEQA and may have a significant effect on the environment.1 The Town has determined that either a mitigated negative declaration or an environmental impact report would be required.2 An Initial Study will be conducted for the project in order to determine the specific environmental analysis required.3 Please be advised that the Town is required to consider and adopt the proposed mitigated negative declaration, or consider and certify the environmental impact report prepared for the project, prior to making a decision on the project and make findings regarding the project’s environmental impacts.4 The highest approving body making a decision on the proposed project will be making the environmental determination and findings under CEQA. 1 CEQA Guidelines section 15060.
2 Public Resources Code sections 21080.1-21080.3.
3 CEQA Guidelines section 15063.
4 Gov. Code section 65589.5(e); CEQA Guidelines sections 15074, 15090, 15091.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
September 28, 2023

An Initial Study will be conducted by the Town and prepared by a third-party consultant retained by the Town. The applicant is responsible for all costs and expenses in conducting the Initial Study as well as all technical studies required for environmental review, including but not limited to traffic analysis. The environmental review fee to be paid by the applicant will be based on actual cost to prepare the work based on an approved proposal from an outside consultant plus a 10% administrative fee to cover staff time in accordance with the Town’s adopted fee schedule. The Town will provide additional information once the cost estimate is received from the consultant.

PROJECT COMMENTS AND CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
Outstanding Engineering, Fire and Department Comments
Stormwater/.C3 Compliance
The Town’s Stormwater/.C3 Consultant has reviewed project compliance with Stormwater Requirements as set forth in the memo included as Attachment 1. • Pursuant to such review, the following changes shall be made to the project stormwater management plan:
a. Revise the bioretention area and flow-through planter details to indicate 18 inches of biotreatment soil mix (as specified in the SCVURPPP C3 Stormwater Handbook Appendix C) and 3 inches of composted mulch on the surface of the biotreatment soil, clearly label the overflow structure and set its overflow height at 6 inches above the biotreatment soil elevation.
b. Include details to show how runoff enters the treatment measures. Provide a detail for the bubbler or storm drain pipe emitter.
c. Correct the fields corresponding to total project impervious area created/replaced in the C.3 Data Form, Section 2, by including 994 square feet of off-site impervious area created/replaced.
d. Correct the hydraulic sizing criteria indicated in the C.3 Data Form, Section 7 to match the method used in the C.5 Sheet. The method used was the Flow-based - Uniform Intensity Method (2.c).
e. Indicate site design measures on the plan sheets.
f. Include details to show how the swimming pool drainage is connected to the sanitary sewer system and indicate this source control measure on the plan sheets. g. The landscape plan for the bioretention areas and flow-through planted should include plants that have characteristics similar to those listed in the SCVURPPP C.3 Stormwater Handbook, Appendix D, Plant List and Planting Guidance for LandscapedBased Stormwater Treatment Measures. • Additionally, a maintenance agreement or other maintenance assurance for maintaining the stormwater treatment measures and source controls, executed between the applicant and the Town, will be required.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
September 28, 2023

Geotechnical Review
• Review of the August 24, 2023 Geotechnical Response Letter from Stevens Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company and revised plans has been completed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant. Please see Attachment 2.

Fire Department Review
• Fire Department comments dated September 27, 2023 are included as Attachment 3.

Building Code Preliminary Review
• The Town’s Building Official has conducted a preliminary Building Code review to identify significant code compliance issues that may affect overall building design. The preliminary review identified code inconsistencies which need to be addressed by the project. Please refer to the Preliminary Review Letter included as Attachment 4.

Consistency Review Comments
Pursuant to the Town’s prior Consistency Review Comment Letter dated August 31, 2023 (see Attachment 5), the proposed project is inconsistent with standards, policies, and requirements under the Los Altos Hills General Plan, Zoning Law, and other applicable standards and requirements. Upon reviewing of the August 29, 2023 submittals, the proposed project continues to be inconsistent with the following:
(1) Zoning Designation for the parcel;
(2) Lot size requirement (a Conditional Development Permit is required); (3) Development standards under Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code; and (4) General Plan standards and policies.

The Town’s August 31, 2023 Consistency Review Comment Letter sets forth the inconsistency comments in further detailed, and is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 5. The comments in said letter remain and have not been addressed by the proposed project. Please review for details and make revisions to the proposed project as necessary to comply with applicable standards, policies and requirements.

Additionally, the project’s August 29 submittal shows outdoor lighting on the proposed plans. The proposed type of lighting fixture, maximum lumens and color temperature are being reviewed against the Town’s Outdoor Lighting Policy. Please indicate the specific locations for outdoor lighting and the number of each of the light fixture types proposed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
September 28, 2023

Additional Comments
Please also note that additional review for the project is required or in progress with respect to the following standards and requirements:
• Sewer connection and capacity (review pending)
• Tree removal (Chapter 2, Article 3)- please confirm trunk diameters of trees proposed demonstrating compliance with heritage oak tree removal requirements. • Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance compliance (Section 10-2.809) (may be reviewed with construction plans)
I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments:

1. EOA Stormwater Review dated August 2, 2023

2. Letter from Cotton, Shires & associates, dated September 4, 2023

3. Santa Clara County Fire Department Comments dated September 27, 2023

4. Building Department Comments dated September 19, 2023

5. Consistency Review Comment Letter dated August 31, 2023 5494213.1
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
December 21, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 55-unit development project
10728 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0001
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10728 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing November 30, 2023. The Town is providing an update and initial responses as to our review of your resubmittals and will continue to forward comments as they are provided by the reviewing departments. Please refer to the sections below regarding the revised plans and responses to comments.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
As set forth in our prior correspondences and most recently in our September 28, 2023 comment letter, this project is not a ministerial project and not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Town has instead determined, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.1 and related CEQA Guidelines, that the proposed development is an activity subject to CEQA and may have a significant effect on the environment.1 The Town has determined that the proposed development does not qualify for an infill exemption or any other statutory or categorical exemption. The Town is required to consider all phases of the proposed project including planning, operation, and implementation.2It is expected that the project will have environmental impacts, which may constitute significant impacts, in areas including but not limited to traffic, noise, air quality, utilities and energy, and emergency response services. Thus, either a Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report would be required.3 1 CEQA Guidelines section 15060.
2 CEQA Guidelines section 15063.
3 Public Resources Code sections 21080.1-21080.3.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
December 21, 2023

An Initial Study will be conducted for the project in order to determine the specific environmental analysis required.4 Once the outstanding preliminary review issues for Stormwater/C.3, Geotechnical, and Building Code items as noted below have been addressed, the Town will commence the preparation an Initial Study, which we anticipate can occur in January 2024. It is important to have the plans and technical studies for the project be in a complete form and their issues addressed before environmental review commences. Plan changes and/or revisions to key elements of the project such as stormwater treatment during the environmental review process would cause delays in completing the required environmental document, and result in additional cost. The Initial Study will be conducted by the Town and prepared by a third-party consultant retained by the Town.

Please be advised that the Town is required to consider and adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration or consider and certify the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project, prior to making a decision on the project and make findings regarding the project’s environmental impacts.5 The highest approving body making a decision on the proposed project will be making the environmental determination and findings under CEQA.

Please also be advised that the applicant is responsible for all costs and expenses in conducting the Initial Study as well as all technical studies required for environmental review, including but not limited to traffic analysis. The environmental review fee to be paid by the applicant will be based on actual cost to prepare the work based on an approved proposal from an outside consultant plus a 10% administrative fee to cover staff time in accordance with the Town’s adopted fee schedule.

The Town will provide you with additional information regarding payment once the cost estimate is received from the consultant.

PROJECT COMMENTS AND CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
Outstanding Engineering, Fire and Department Comments
Stormwater/.C3 Compliance
• Review of the response to comments is still in progress. Comments will be forwarded when received.

Geotechnical Review
• Review of the November 29, 2023 Geotechnical Response Letter from Stevens Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company and revised plans by the Town Geotechnical Consultant is still in progress. Comments will be forwarded when received. 4 CEQA Guidelines section 15063.
5 Gov. Code section 65589.5(e); CEQA Guidelines sections 15074, 15090, 15091.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

Lands of Linebarger
10728 Mora Drive
December 21, 2023

Fire Department Review
• Fire Department review is still in progress. Comments will be forwarded when received.

Building Code Preliminary Review
• The Town’s Consultant and Building Official are in the process of reviewing the revised plans and response to comments. Comments will be forwarded by December 29, 2023.

Consistency Review Comments
Pursuant to the Town’s prior Consistency Review Comment Letter dated August 31, 2023 (see Attachment 5), the proposed project is inconsistent with standards, policies, and requirements under the Los Altos Hills General Plan, Zoning Law, and other applicable standards and requirements. Upon reviewing of the August 29, 2023 submittals, the proposed project continues to be inconsistent with the following:
(1) Zoning Designation for the parcel;
(2) Lot size requirement (a Conditional Development Permit is required); (3) Development standards under Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code; and (4) General Plan standards and policies.

The Town’s August 31, 2023 Consistency Review Comment Letter sets forth the inconsistency comments in further detailed, and is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 1. The comments in said letter remain and have not been addressed by the proposed project. Please review for details and make revisions to the proposed project as necessary to comply with applicable standards, policies and requirements.

Sewer Study
The Sewer connection and capacity review is still in progress.

I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments:

1. Consistency Review Letter
5564789.2
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4a

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
March 3, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 44-unit Development Project at 10758 Mora Drive
File #CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced project located at 10758 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing on February 1, 2023. Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, staff has determined the application is INCOMPLETE and has identified the following outstanding items which must be addressed prior to further processing of the application. A copy of the Pre-Application Checklist is attached for your reference; it is strongly encouraged that you make an appointment with the project planner for a meeting to assist you with providing information that are necessary to render the application complete.

INCOMPLETE COMMENTS

1. Correct the jurisdiction and zip code on the Application for Project Review (should be Los Altos Hills and 94024).

2. Correct the project description on the Application for Project Review; the application currently states it is a project submitted pursuant to the provisions of Senate Bill 9 (SB 9). Please be advised that the proposed project is not qualified for ministerial approval pursuant to SB 9 and is not consistent with SB 9 provisions and the Town’s SB 9 Ordinance under Title 1, Chapter 1, Article 15.

3. Provide a fully completed and properly executed Application for Project Review, including a Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, that does not contain any “signed under protest” statements. Please note the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement is required for all development applications submitted to the Town and is required to continue processing the application.

4. The proposed project requires the following permits and review. Please submit the following application fees in the amounts stated below. Amounts identified as “deposits” are initial payment deposits that would need to be replenished by the applicant if funds are exhausted, and ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
March 3, 2023

unspent amounts in the deposit would be refunded to the applicant upon completion of the Project review and decision process. Payment can be made online with credit cards following the enclosed Online Payment Instructions or in person via credit cards or checks payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills.
a. $7,125 Site Development Permit
b. $2,180 Conditional Development Permit
c. $2,000 Geotechnical Review Deposit
d. $1,500 Technical Environment Study Review
e. $5,000 C3 Compliance Review Deposit
f. $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study Deposit

5. Provide a site specific geotechnical evaluation for the proposed project pursuant to Item #23 of the application checklist. This may be in the form of a supplemental letter, addendum or revised geotechnical report.

6. Correct the parking space total in Section 5 of the Preliminary Application (should be 32).

7. Clearly show the locations of the 32 proposed parking spaces on the plans.

8. Identify the location of the nine affordable units on the plans and provide the proposed level of affordability and specific income level, and time frame the units will be available for rent at the designated affordable rate.

9. Provide a Guidelines of Service Design Load Worksheet pursuant to Item #16 of the application checklist, as sewer connections will be required for the proposed project.

10. Provide a design for holding wells for sewage with details, dimensions, backup systems, and calculations for capacity with safety factors for the proposed development.

11. Include the estimated grading quantities, in cubic yards (cut/fill), net (import/export) on the Grading & Drainage Plan.

12. Provide the finished elevation for the proposed patio and lawn area on the plans.

13. Provide the top of wall (TW) and bottom of wall (BW) elevations for all retaining walls at every 20’ and where it changes direction.

14. Include the width (dimension) of the “Flow Through Plan Bio-Retention Area Detail 1” on sheet C4.

15. As the proposed project requires a Conditional Development Permit, please provide findings to support a Conditional Development Permit request pursuant to the application checklist.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
March 3, 2023

16. Please provide evidence showing that the project Architect and Engineer possess a Los Altos Hills business license pursuant to Item #8 on the application checklist.

17. Please provide a preliminary title report that is less than six (6) months old pursuant to Item #6 on the application checklist.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

18. Complete and return the attached Environmental Checklist Form.

19. The new development proposed will require a sewer system capacity study which will be prepared by the Town’s consultant. As noted above, the Town will require an initial deposit of $10,000 for the sanitary sewer capacity study.

20. The proposed project is considered a “Regulated Project” per the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) and requires incorporating site design measures and install Low Impact Development (LID) treatment measures. Provide a Storm Water Control Plan and C.3 Data Form for review.

21. The Town’s consultant will review this project for C.3 compliance. As noted above, provide a $5,000 deposit for the first review (on a time and materials basis). Additional budget will also be needed for review of resubmittals.

22. Submit a Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for review.

23. Submit a Grading and Construction Operation Plan for review.

24. Provide a will-serve letter from California Water Service Company, PG&E, Comcast, or AT&T for utility services of the proposed building.

Once the application has been deemed complete, Town departments and the Santa Clara County Fire Department will conduct substantive review of the plans and application materials. The Town has started the process of routing the application to said reviewers to begin the review process. Comments will be provided once review has been completed and/or received by the Town, in accordance with applicable timelines. In addition, environmental review will commence in accordance with applicable law. The appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees will be based on actual cost.

After addressing the comments listed in this letter, please revise the plans and submit three (3) sets of plans as well as a written response addressing each of the comments outlined in this letter.

Thank you for your attention and cooperation in addressing these comments. I can be contacted by email at [email protected] if you have any questions.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
March 3, 2023

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Enclosed:
- Invoice and Online Payment Instructions
- Pre-Application Checklist
- Environmental Checklist Form
5308703.3
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
May 11, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 55-unit development project
10758 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10758 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing on April 11 and 12, 2023. Note that the project was revised from 44 units to 55 units with the resubmittal, which constitutes a 20 percent change in project unit count and accompanied by a new preliminary application. Thus, this resubmittal is being reviewed as a new application replacing the 44-unit project.

Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, staff reviewed the Preliminary Application against the list of items set forth under Government Code section 65941.1 and confirmed it provides the corresponding information required. However, the formal application is INCOMPLETE and staff has identified the following outstanding items which must be addressed prior to further processing of the application.

INCOMPLETE COMMENTS

1. Correct the jurisdiction and zip code on the Application for Project Review (should be Los Altos Hills and 94024).

Correction made; comment addressed.

2. Correct the project description on the Application for Project Review; the application currently says it is a project submitted pursuant to the provisions of Senate Bill 9 (SB 9).

Please be advised that the proposed project does not qualify for ministerial approval pursuant to SB 9 or consistent with SB 9 provisions and the Town’s SB 9 Ordinance under Title 1, Chapter 1, Article 15.

Correction made; comment addressed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

3. Provide a fully and properly executed Application for Project Review, including a Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, that does not contain any “signed under protest” statements. Please note the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement is required for all development applications submitted to the Town and is required to continue processing the application.

Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement provided; comment addressed.

4. The proposed project requires the following permits and review. Please submit the following application fees in the amount of $12,805. Payment can be made online with credit cards following the enclosed Online Payment Instructions or in person via credit cards or check payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills.
a. $7,125 Site Development Permit – Not Paid
b. $2,180 Conditional Development Permit – Paid (under protest) c. $1,500 Technical Environment Study Review – Not Paid d. $2,000 Geotechnical Review Deposit – Paid (under protest) e. $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study Deposit – Not Paid f. $5,000 C3 Compliance Review Deposit – Not Paid
As noted on the application form, fees and deposits payable to the Town are required to process all project applications. Further, pursuant to the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, applicant assumes full responsibility for all costs incurred in processing the project. Deposits are applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project.

The foregoing fees and deposits are a part of the application requirements and must be paid before the project can move forward. Please see further information as follows:
a. The Site Development Permit fee is the standard fee for a project that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission. This fee amount is based on the FY 21-22 Fee Schedule in effect at the time of the project preliminary submittal. Note this fee also remains in effect as a part of the most recently adopted FY 22-23 Fee Schedule. Thus, it is applicable to the project.
b. A Conditional Development Permit (CDP) is required when the Lot Unit Factor (LUF) for a property is less than 0.50. The LUF for the subject property is less than 0.50 and a CDP is required. Thus, the CDP fee is applicable. This fee amount is based on the FY 21-22 Fee Schedule in effect at the time of the project preliminary submittal. Note this fee also remains in effect as a part of the most recently adopted FY 22-23 Fee Schedule. c. The project is not exempt from CEQA determination and environmental review is required for the project. The requested deposit is for work specifically related to that task. This fee amount is based on the FY 21-22 Fee Schedule in effect at the time of the project preliminary submittal. Note this fee remains in effect as a part of the most ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

recently adopted FY 22-23 Fee Schedule.
d. Deposit paid on April 11, 2023.
e. Sewer capacity determination is a required component to processing this project.

Based on the Town's Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered "Effort out of Standard Scope" and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work. Deposit funds are only applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent on project review. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project. f. Pursuant to the Town’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS612008 criteria, C3/stormwater review is required in order for the project to continue to be processed. Based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work.

Deposit funds are only applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent on project review. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project.

5. Provide a project specific geotechnical evaluation for the proposed project pursuant to Item No. 23 of the application checklist. This may be in the form of a supplemental letter, addendum or revised geotechnical report.

Report provided and the project is under review by the Town Geotechnical Consultant.

6. Correct the parking space total in Section 5. of the Preliminary Application (should be 32).

Correction made; comment addressed.

7. Clearly show the locations of the 32 proposed parking spaces on the plans.

Parking spaces identified on site plan; comment addressed.

8. Identify the location of the nine affordable units on the plans and provide the proposed level of affordability and specific income level, and time frame the units will be available for rent at the designated affordable rate.

The revised 55-unit project would provide 11 affordable units which has been indicated on the plans. Location of affordable units is shown on the plans; comment addressed.

9. Provide a Guidelines of Service Design Load Worksheet pursuant to Item #16 of the application checklist, as sewer connections will be required for the proposed project.

Worksheet provided; comment addressed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

10. Provide a design for holding wells for sewage with details, dimensions, backup systems, and calculations for capacity with safety factors for the proposed development.

Comment not addressed. Required by Town Ordinance 10-2.702 Siting requirement under Title 10 Chapter 2 for Site Development. Design of the holding well could impact the siting of the building.

11. Include the estimated grading quantities, in cubic yards (cut/fill), net (import/export) on the Grading & Drainage Plan.

Cut and fill quantities have been provided; comment addressed.

12. Provide the finished elevation for the proposed patio and lawn area on the plans.

Finished elevation provided with clarification that there is no lawn; comment addressed.

13. Provide the top of wall (TW) and bottom of wall (BW) elevations for all retaining walls at every 20’ and where it changes direction.

Top and bottom of wall elevations provided; comment addressed.

14. Include the width (dimension) of the “Flow Through Plan Bio-Retention Area Detail 1” on sheet C4.

Information must be provided in order to perform analysis required by the Town’s NPDES Permit; comment outstanding. Stormwater treatment/C3 compliance cannot be deferred to building permit plan check; the application provides no C3/stormwater or hydrology information. The applicant needs to provide enough information for staff to determine that the project can comply with the NPDES permit requirements. Required by Town Ordinance Section 10-2.702 Siting requirement under Title 10 Chapter 2 for Site Development. Design of the Bio-Retention area could impact the siting of the building.

15. As the proposed project requires a Conditional Development Permit, please provide findings to support a Conditional Development Permit request pursuant to the application checklist.

Findings were provided; comment addressed.

16. Please provide evidence showing that the project Architect and Engineer possess a Los Altos Hills business license pursuant to Item #8 on the application checklist.

Business license document provided; comment addressed.

17. Provide a preliminary title report that is less than six (6) months old pursuant to Item #6 on the application checklist.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

A Preliminary Title Report has been provided; comment addressed.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

18. Complete and return the attached Environmental Checklist.

Comment outstanding; As noted previously, the project is not exempt from CEQA and environmental review is required for the project.

19. The new development proposed will require a sewer system capacity study which will be prepared by the Town’s consultant. As noted above, the Town will require an initial deposit of $10,000 for the sanitary sewer capacity study.

Comment outstanding; A Sewer study is needed in advance of or in conjunction with the environmental review. The Town needs to understand the sewer capacity impact of the project. Based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work.

20. The proposed project is considered a “Regulated Project” per the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) and requires incorporating site design measures and install Low Impact Development (LID) treatment measures. Provide a Storm Water Control Plan and C.3 Data Form for review.

Comment outstanding; Information is needed to determine that the project can comply with NPDES Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) No. CAS612008 requirements. This element could affect the siting of the building.

21. The Town’s consultant will review this project for C.3 compliance. As noted above, provide a $5,000 deposit for the first review (on a time and materials basis). Additional budget will also be needed for review of resubmittals.

Comment outstanding; Review by the Town’s Stormwater Consultant/Engineering Consultant cannot commence until a deposit is received by the Town.

22. Submit a Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for review.

This requirement can be deferred until Planning approval has been secured. It is required to be submitted and approved prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check.

23. Submit a Grading and Construction Operation Plan for review.

This requirement can be deferred until Planning approval has been secured. It is required to be submitted and approved prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check. The ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
May 11, 2023

Grading and Construction Operation Plan assists staff in determining grading and construction impacts to neighboring properties

24. Provide a will-serve letter from California Water Service Company, PG&E, Comcast, or AT&T for utility services of the proposed apartment building.

Please confirm that the will-serve letters are applicable to the 55-unit project proposed with this application. Comment Outstanding.

25. Please see the comments from the Santa Clara County Fire Department (Attachment 2).

Note that the Fire Department reviewed the prior 44-unit proposal and is still reviewing the revised plans for a 55-unit project. Comments for the 55-unit project will be provided when received.

26. Please see the letter from the Town Geotechnical Consultant, Cotton, Shires & Associates (Attachment 3).

Once the application has been deemed complete, environmental review will commence in accordance with applicable law. Traffic analysis may be required as part of the environmental review. The appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees will be based on actual cost.

After addressing the comments listed in this letter, please revise the plans and submit three (3) sets of plans as well as a written response addressing each of the comments outlined in this letter.

Thank you for your attention and cooperation in addressing these comments. I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Enclosed

1. Environmental Checklist

2. Fire Department Comments for 44-unit project dated April 5, 2023

3. Letter from Cotton, Shires & associates, dated May 11, 2023 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 Phone (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941- 3160
May 11, 2023

VIA EMAIL ONLY
Ryan J. Patterson
Zacks Freedman & Patterson, APC
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94111
[email protected]
RE: Development Projects at 10728 and 10758 Mora Drive
Dear Mr. Patterson:

This correspondence is in response to your letter dated April 11, 2023 to the Town of Los Altos Hills (“Town”), regarding Forrest Linebarger’s proposed residential developments at 10728 and 10758 Mora Drive (Nos. CDP23-0001 and 0002) (collectively, “Project”). Your correspondence makes certain claims regarding Project application completeness and applicability of various fees and requirements include the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), on the basis that Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5), commonly referred to as “Builder’s Remedy”, applies to the Project.

Please be advised that at this time, the Project applications remain incomplete based on the Town’s Pre-Application Checklist compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65940 et seq. (the “Permit Streamlining Act” or “PSA”). Enclosed with this letter are two Project Comment Letters dated May 11, 2023, noting missing items that must be addressed before the applications can be determined complete. Please also note that the Town is in receipt of Mr. Linebarger’s preliminary applications and has timely reviewed them against the submittal requirements under Government Code section 65941.1. The Town is not required to issue any affirmative determination regarding the completeness of the preliminary applications.1 As explained below, the Town’s incompleteness determinations are consistent with the PSA and with Government Code section 65589.5 (the “Housing Accountability Act” or “HAA”). Once the Project applications are deemed complete, the Town will review them for consistency with applicable standards and regulations and timely notify the applicant in accordance with the HAA.
1 Gov. Code section 65941.1; HCD Housing Accountability Act Technical Assistance Advisory, September 2020.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
May 11, 2023

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 Phone (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 The Town’s March 3 and May 11, 2023 comment letters identified items that are a part of its application checklist requirements which needed to be submitted before the application can be deemed complete, items from the Project plans that require further clarification, and additional issues that need to be addressed before the Project application may move forward. In particular, we respond to the specific items referenced in your letter as follows. • Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement must be properly and fully executed. This agreement is a part of the Town’s standard planning application and its execution is required to submit a project application. Mr. Linebarger must fully and properly sign the agreement and will be required to reimburse and indemnify the Town with respect to the Project applications as set forth in that agreement. • The Project must pay all applicable permit fees and deposits. The Town’s permit processing fees and deposits are set forth in its Planning and Engineering fee schedules published on the Town website. The planning project application form identifies fees and deposits as a requirement processing a development project. Fees and deposits are based on estimated reasonable costs of processing an application. The Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement, which is a part of the application requirements, mandates the applicant to assume full responsibilities for such costs.

Here, the Project Comment Letters appropriately identified fees and review deposits are included as a part of the Cost Reimbursement Agreement and Fee Schedule in effect at the time of preliminary application submittal. Contrary to your assertions, these fees and deposits are objective numerical figures and based on reasonable costs of providing the underlying application processing services. These fees are authorized by law, and are applied equally to all residential development applications based on the applicable entitlements required and thus also apply to the Project.

Relatedly, it is worth noting that these processing fees and deposits are for the purposes of processing applications for governmental regulatory actions or approvals, and thus not subject to the protest procedures set forth under Government Code section 66020. Mr.

Linebarger has not paid all applicable processing fees and deposits, and will be required to do so as outlined in the Project Comment Letters before the Project applications can move forward.
• Conditional Development Permit (CDP) is a required checklist component for the Project. The Town’s application checklist require an applicant to submit findings to support a Conditional Development Permit, where one is required, as a part of the application submittal. Under Municipal Code section 10-1.1007(3), a CDP is required for lots with a lot unit factor of 0.50 or less. This standard is an objective, numeric determination involving no subjective judgment and consistent with HAA provisions. As the Project parcels each have lot unit factors less than 0.50, a CDP is required and Mr.

Linebarger must provide complete findings in support of the CDP as required by the application checklist.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
May 11, 2023

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 Phone (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 • The Project is not exempt from CEQA. Regardless of whether a project asserts the “Builder’s Remedy” provisions apply, Government Code section 65589.5(e) specifies that the Town must continue to comply with CEQA and make required environmental findings pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081. Relatedly, section 65589.5(d) provides local agencies the ability to make written findings and impose conditions of approval based on several grounds specified in the statute. This Project therefore does not qualify for ministerial approval, nor is it exempt from CEQA review. Mr. Linebarger must comply with applicable CEQA requirements outlined in the Project Comment Letters in order for the Project to move forward.
• Water, C3/Storm Water, Sewer Capacity Analyses are required for the Project. As is the case for every residential development project in Los Altos Hills, the Town requires sewer and water service analyses to determine the project would be adequately served by utilities. Similarly, even if a housing development project seeks to rely on review authority set forth under Government Code section 65589.(d), that statute anticipates the local agency to determine whether the project has adequate water or service. Finally, the Town’s NPDES Permit requires C3 compliance for the Project. Consequently, the Project Comment Letters properly requested will-serve letters and sewer service load worksheets, and Mr. Linebarger will be required to pay sewer capacity study and C3/Stormwater review deposits in connection with the Project as a part of the Town’s standard requirements.

The Town’s Planning Department staff is available and would be happy to discuss with Mr.

Linebarger approaches to address incomplete items in his Project applications so that the application may be determined to be complete and further review may commence. If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Department.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila
Consultant Principal Planner
Town of Los Altos Hills
cc: Peter Pirnejad, City Manager
Steve Mattas, City Attorney
Attachment: Project Comment Letters dated May 11, 2023
5305706.1
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
August 2, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 57-unit development project
10758 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10758 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing July 3, 2023. The Town notes that the proposed project has been revised from 55 units to contain 57 units. Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, staff determined that the application is INCOMPLETE and has identified the following outstanding items which must be addressed prior to further processing of the application.

INCOMPLETE COMMENTS

1. Please submit the following deposits in the collective amount of $15,000. Payment can be made online with credit cards following the enclosed Online Payment Instructions or in person via credit cards or check payable to the Town of Los Altos Hills. The deposits are a part of the application requirements and must be paid before the project can move forward.

As noted on the application form and the Preliminary Application Checklist, fees and deposits payable to the Town are required at the time of submittal to process all project applications. This is an item specified on the cover page of the application. Further, pursuant to the Cost Reimbursement and Hold Harmless Agreement which is also a part of the application, the applicant assumes full responsibility for all costs incurred in processing the project. Deposits are applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent. Any unused portion of the deposit will be returned to the project applicant upon completion of the project. As noted previously in prior comment letters, these deposits are provided for as a part of the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule adopted pursuant to a public hearing consistent with state law and effective April 2022. Specifically, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 2, 2023

a. $10,000 Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study Deposit
A sewer capacity/impact analysis is a required component to processing this project. The Town’s sanitary sewer system standards, compliance and operations, and past sewer studies are based on single-family home developments of one or two units generally. The proposed project application falls outside this standard work scope with the analysis required for sewer capacity. For instance, processing the project application requires analysis of the sewer conveyance system from the project site and Mora Drive, where the sewer main is eight inches in diameter and connects to a six-inch sewer line downstream, to the City of Los Altos. As such, the analysis required for processing this project application is considered efforts outside the standard scope and a deposit pursuant to the Engineering Department Fee Schedule is required.
b. $5,000 C.3 Compliance Review Deposit
Pursuant to the Town’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS612008 criteria and Town Municipal Code Sections 10-2.1401 - 1403, developers are required to comply with stormwater treatment measure requirements consistent with the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board applicable to the Town of Los Altos Hills. This includes compliance with requirements under Section C.3 of the Town’s NPDES permit where a proposed development is considered a “regulated project”. As the proposed project is considered a “regulated project” as defined in the NPDES Permit, it is subject to and must meet requirements under Section C.3 for New Development and Redevelopment. The Town’s standard stormwater treatment/C.3 compliance review are based on single-family home developments of one or two units generally. The proposed project application falls outside this standard work scope with the analysis required for stormwater treatment measure compliance. As explained previously, based on the Town’s Engineering Department Fee Schedule effective April 2022, projects exceeding the standard review scope are considered “Effort out of Standard Scope” and will be required to provide a deposit based on the scope of work. Deposit funds are only applied towards actual costs incurred by the Town based on staff/consultant hourly rate and time spent on project review.

2. The June 8, 2023 Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Stevens Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company has been reviewed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant. Please see Attachment 1 for comments to be addressed by the project consultant.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

3. The comment to provide a design for holding wells for sewage with details, dimensions, backup systems, and calculations for capacity with safety factors for the proposed development has been addressed. Substantive sewer review will be required for the proposed project.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 2, 2023

4. The previous comment to include the width (dimension) of the “Flow Through Plan BioRetention Area Detail 1” on sheet C4 has been addressed. Substantive C.3/Stormwater review will be required for the proposed project.

5. A Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be required to be submitted for review prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check, as is required for all development projects.

Review of this plan is not done in conjunction with the building permit plan check, it precedes that process.

6. A Grading and Construction Operation Plan will be required to be submitted prior to acceptance of plans for building plan check, as is required for all development projects.

Review of this plan is not done in conjunction with the building permit plan check, it precedes that process.

7. Provide a will-serve letter from PG&E for utility services of the proposed 57-unit building (letters have been provided from Cal Water and Comcast).

8. The revised plans are under review by Santa Clara County Fire Department. Comments for the 57-unit project will be provided when received.

Once the application has been deemed complete, environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) will commence in accordance with applicable law. Traffic analysis may be required as part of the environmental review. The appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees will be based on actual cost.

After addressing the comments listed in this letter, please submit a revised set of plans as well as a written response addressing each of the comments outlined in this letter.

Thank you for your attention and cooperation in addressing these comments. I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments

1. Letter from Cotton, Shires & associates, dated July 20, 2023 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
August 31, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 57-unit development project - consistency review
10758 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Following the Town’s Comment Letter dated August 2, 2023, staff has further reviewed your application submittals for the 55-unit development project located at 10728 Mora Drive, pursuant to Government Code 65589.5 and the Town’s standard application review process. The following comments are being provided regarding the proposed project’s consistency with standards, policies, and requirements under the Los Altos Hills General Plan, Zoning Law, and other applicable standards and requirements in effect at the time that the project’s preliminary application was deemed submitted.

Please be advised that the Town has received your resubmittal dated August 29, 2023 in response to our August 2 Comment Letter. The Town will review the resubmitted materials to determine whether the outstanding completeness items set forth in that Comment Letter have been addressed and the project application may be determined complete. This letter does not make any completeness determinations or deem the project application complete; it only provides concurrent consistency review of the project. The outstanding items set forth in our August 2 Letter must still be addressed in order for the application to be determined complete. We will provide a separate comment letter regarding your August 29, 2023 submittal when review is completed. Any additional consistency review items based on the August 29 resubmittal will also be addressed at that time.

Zoning Standards and Policies Consistency Review
Pursuant to staff’s review, the proposed project is inconsistent with the zoning designation for the project parcel as the designation is Residential-Agricultural (R-A) with single family residence as the permitted use, whereas the project proposes to develop a multi-family senior facility structure with 55 units(See Article 7 of Chapter 1, Title 10 of the Municipal Code). Likewise, the underlying ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

parcel is not consistent with the lot size requirement and a Conditional Development Permit would be required for any proposed development.

In addition, the project is inconsistent with the following standards under Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code:

1. Maximum floor area (Section 10-1.503)

2. Maximum development area (Section 10-1.502)

3. Building setbacks (Section 10-1.505)

4. Building height (Section 10-1.504)
Additional review for the project is required or in progress with respect to the following standards and requirements:

1. Outdoor lighting

2. Exterior colors

3. Tree removal (Chapter 2, Article 3)

4. Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance compliance (Section 10-2.809)

5. Stormwater treatment/C.3 compliance

6. Sewer connection and capacity
Attachment 1 to this letter outlines in further detail the consistency review and status of each of the foregoing items. Please review for details and make revisions to project as necessary to comply with applicable standards.

General Plan Standards and Policies Consistency Review
The proposed project is not consistent with several General Plan policies and standards. For example, Land Use Element Policy 1.1 states: “Within incorporated Los Altos Hills and its sphere of influence dwelling types shall be limited to single-family detached residences, which may include a single secondary unit.” The project is proposing a multi-family senior facility consisting of 55 units in the R-A zone and thus not consistent with this policy and the standard for singlefamily residences. Likewise, the Housing Element Policy 1.1 states: “Allow multi-family housing in designated areas to meet the town’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for affordable housing.” The project is not consistent with this policy as the project site is not within any of the areas intended to be rezoned for multi-family housing.

Attachment 2 to this letter outlines in further detail the consistency review for applicable General Plan policies and standards. Please review for details and make revisions to project as necessary to comply with applicable standards.

Additional Requirements
Review for this project has not been completed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant and Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD). Comments from these reviewers must be addressed ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

before it can be determined whether the project is in compliance with the Uniform Fire Code and geotechnical standards.

Once the application has been determined to be complete, environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) will commence in accordance with applicable law. Traffic analysis may be required as part of the environmental review. As noted in the August 2, 2023 Comment Letter, the appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared by an outside consultant and the fees to be paid by the applicant will be based on actual cost.

I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments

1. Zoning and Site Development Standards Consistency Review Table

2. Applicable General Plan Policies Consistency Review
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

ATTACHMENT 1
Zoning and Site Development Consistency Review
Title 10, Chapters 1 and 2 of Los Altos Hills Municipal Code Inconsistent/Under Review Items
Zoning/Site
Development
Standard
Requirement Project
Proposed/Status
Compliant Yes or No
Zoning Designation ResidentialAgricultural/Single FamilyMulti-family senior residential facility
No
Lot Size
(Section 10-1.501)
1 acre minimum 17,325 sq. ft./.397 Ac
Nonconforming lot
No
Nonconforming Lot,
CDP required (Section
10-1.1007(3)
Setbacks
(Section 10-1.505)
40 feet front
30 feet sides & rear
30 feet front
5 feet sides

16.8 feet rear
No
Building Height
(Section 10-1.504)
27 feet sectional
35 feet low to high
84 feet 4 inches No
MDA
(Section 10-1.502)
5,000 sq. ft.
1 14,396 sf + 71,034 sf No
MFA
(Section 10-1.503)
7,500 sq. ft.271,034 sf No
Parking
(Section 10-1.601)
2 covered spaces plus 2
uncovered spaces per
primary dwelling; 1 space
ADU
32 total
(.56 spaces/unit)
No- the project is not
consistent with the
single-family R-A
zoning designation for
the underlying parcel as
described above, and
even if assuming 2
spaces per unit count
the proposed parking
spaces does not meet
this standard
Accessible Parking Pursuant to California
Building Code - 2 spaces
per development project
2 Yes
Tree Removal Oaks with trunk diameter
12-inches or greater (a
heritage tree) require
approval
10 trees to be removed;
must be consistent with
Town heritage oak tree
removal requirements.

Under Review
1 These values are not guaranteed for lots with LUF less than .50 2 These values are not guaranteed for lots with LUF less than .50 ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

Additional Design
and Other Standards
Requirement Project
Proposed/Status
Compliant Yes or No
Geotechnical
Clearance
Review by Town
Geotechnical Consultant
In progress; comments
provided 8/2/23
Under Review
Grading See Grading Policy 16 feet cut Under Review
Exterior Color 50 LRV walls
40 LRV roof
Color light reflectivity
values to be analyzed
Can be provided prior
at building plan check
Environmental
Review
Initial Study and applicable
CEQA document to be
prepared
Environmental
Checklist provided
CEQA analysis
pending
Exterior Lighting See Lighting Policy Under review; requires compliance with
lighting requirements
Under Review
Landscaping Compliance w/WELO 2,929 sq. ft. Under Review Stormwater3 Compliance w/NPDES
permit/C.3
Stormwater plan
provided; review by
Town consultant
necessary
Review required- see
also August 2, 2023
Comment Letter
Sanitary Sewer4 Sufficient sewer capacity
and connection
1 connection for lot;
capacity TBD
Review required - see
also August 2, 2023
Comment Letter
Fire Safety Standards
and California Fire
Code requirements
Comply with Fire Code/
SCCFD requirements
Review in progress;
initial comments
provided; additional
comments to be
provided
Not in compliance;
based on initial
comments provided by
Fire Department,
project does not meet
California Fire Code
requirements in
several areas at this
time.

Review ongoing;
see also August 2,
2023 Comment Letter
and SCCFD August
14, 2023 comment
letter
3 Plans to be reviewed by Town’s Stormwater Consultant. 4 Sewer capacity study required per August 2, 2023 Comment Letter.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

ATTACHMENT 2
Consistency Analysis- Applicable General Plan Policies

LAND USE
• Policy 2.1- Within incorporated Los Altos Hills and its sphere of influence dwelling types shall be limited to single-family detached residences, which may include a single secondary unit.

Project is not consistent with this policy.
• Policy 4.3- Power transmission lines, power distribution lines, and telephone lines serving new development shall be placed underground.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.

CIRCULATION
• Policy 5.1- Driveways shall be of a minimum width, as required by the Fire Department in order to accommodate emergency vehicles.

To be determined (TBD); additional information required by Santa Clara County Fire Department.
• Policy 5.2- New driveways should generally not exceed a maximum grade of fifteen percent in order to allow for safe travel, including access for emergency vehicles.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 5.4- Driveways shall provide safe and adequate ingress and egress to private parcels.

Driveways shall have adequate sight distance to allow for safe entry onto the roadway.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 5.6- Driveways should be designed with adequate drainage.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

• Policy 5.8- Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 8.3- Development of new homes, religious facilities, schools and other land uses shall include adequate provision for on-site parking to reduce the number of vehicles parked on Town roadways.

Project appears to be inconsistent with this standard; 32 parking spaces is not enough to support 57 units.
• Policy 10.3- All addresses shall be clearly visible at the street. Street addresses should be based on the street where the driveway access is located.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.
• Policy 11.3- The drainage system shall not burden the natural waterways with road pollutants and silt.

TBD; stormwater review has not been completed.
• Policy 11.4- Drainage shall not create safety hazards for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists, or damage to adjacent properties.

TBD; drainage and stormwater plan review has not been completed. • Policy 11.7- Utilities shall be placed underground for new development.

TBD: Project likely can comply with this requirement, please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance.

CONSERVATION
• Policy 2.3- Preserve and protect Heritage Trees, including native oaks and other significant trees, on public and private property.

TBD; tree diameters to be provided for oak trees proposed for removal. • Policy 5.5- Reduce non-point source pollution in urban runoff.

TBD; Stormwater plan and C.3 compliance review has not been completed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

HOUSING
• Policy 1.1- Allow multi-family housing in designated areas to meet the town’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation for affordable housing.

The project is not consistent with this policy; the project site is not within any of the areas intended to be rezoned for multi-family housing.
• Policy 1.2- Ensure that new residential development and reconstruction, and rehabilitation of existing residences preserve existing views, hills, ridgelines, water courses, riparian vegetation, open spaces, native trees, and Town character as much as possible while remaining consistent with all aspects of state housing law.

TBD: please provide additional information to demonstrate and verify compliance. • Policy 1.8- Ensure that residential development sites have appropriate and adequate services and facilities, including water, wastewater, and neighborhood infrastructure.

TBD; the applicant provided will serve letters from Cal Water and AT&T. A will serve letter from PG&E letter is needed and a sewer study is required to determine whether there is sufficient capacity for the proposed project.

SAFETY
• Policy 1.3- The geologic and soils conditions of proposed development sites shall be analyzed to ensure land stability and foundation bearing capabilities.

TBD; a geotechnical report was provided and reviewed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant; comments provided on August 2, 2023 to be addressed by project applicant • Policy 4.1- Development shall not be permitted unless an acceptable level of fire protection and adequate water supplies can be provided.

TBD; comments from the Santa Clara County Fire Department to be addressed.

NOISE
• Policy 1.1- Noise levels shall be compatible with the Town’s semi-rural atmosphere and consistent with Town standards.

TBD; noise analysis will be completed as part of the environmental review process; any noise mitigation measures will be required to be implemented.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
August 31, 2023

• Policy 1.4- Noise generated by construction equipment shall be attenuated to the maximum extent possible. Hours of construction activity shall be regulated to minimize the impact of noise on surrounding residential properties.

TBD; Project will be required to comply with the Town’s construction hours requirements. • Policy 2.3- Mitigation measures such as site planning, building orientation, window placement, increased setbacks, landscaped berms, and sound-proofing shall be required in new development when necessary to reduce the impacts of noise.

TBD; noise analysis will be done as part of the environmental review process; any noise mitigation measures will be required to be implemented and California Building Code requirements will be applicable.
5474538.1
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
September 28, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 57-unit development project
10758 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10758 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing August 29, 2023. Upon review of the submitted plans and materials, the application has been determined to be COMPLETE. Please refer to the sections below regarding project comments and consistency review comments, which need to be addressed for the project to move forward.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requirements and Public Resources Code section 21080.1, the Town has determined that the proposed development is an activity subject to CEQA and may have a significant effect on the environment.1 The Town has determined that either a mitigated negative declaration or an environmental impact report would be required.2 An Initial Study will be conducted for the project in order to determine the specific environmental analysis required.3 Please be advised that the Town is required to consider and adopt the proposed mitigated negative declaration, or consider and certify the environmental impact report prepared for the project, prior to making a decision on the project and make findings regarding the project’s environmental impacts.4 The highest approving body making a decision on the proposed project will be making the environmental determination and findings under CEQA. 1 CEQA Guidelines section 15060.
2 Public Resources Code sections 21080.1-21080.3.
3 CEQA Guidelines section 15063.
4 Gov. Code section 65589.5(e); CEQA Guidelines sections 15074, 15090, 15091.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
September 28, 2023

An Initial Study will be conducted by the Town and prepared by a third-party consultant retained by the Town. The applicant is responsible for all costs and expenses in conducting the Initial Study as well as all technical studies required for environmental review, including but not limited to traffic analysis. The environmental review fee to be paid by the applicant will be based on actual cost to prepare the work based on an approved proposal from an outside consultant plus a 10% administrative fee to cover staff time in accordance with the Town’s adopted fee schedule. The Town will provide additional information once the cost estimate is received from the consultant.

PROJECT COMMENTS AND CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
Outstanding Engineering, Fire and Department Comments
Stormwater/.C3 Compliance
The Town’s Stormwater/.C3 Consultant has reviewed project compliance with Stormwater Requirements as set forth in the memo included as Attachment 1. • Pursuant to such review, the following changes shall be made to the project stormwater management plan:
a. Revise the bioretention area and flow-through planter details to indicate 18 inches of biotreatment soil mix (as specified in the SCVURPPP C3 Stormwater Handbook Appendix C) and 3 inches of composted mulch on the surface of the biotreatment soil, clearly label the overflow structure and set its overflow height at 6 inches above the biotreatment soil elevation.
b. Include details to show how runoff enters the treatment measures. Provide a detail for the bubbler or storm drain pipe emitter.
c. Correct the fields corresponding to total project impervious area created/replaced in the C.3 Data Form, Section 2, by including 994 square feet of off-site impervious area created/replaced.
d. Correct the hydraulic sizing criteria indicated in the C.3 Data Form, Section 7 to match the method used in the C.5 Sheet. The method used was the Flow-based - Uniform Intensity Method (2.c).
e. Indicate site design measures on the plan sheets.
f. Include details to show how the swimming pool drainage is connected to the sanitary sewer system and indicate this source control measure on the plan sheets. g. The landscape plan for the bioretention areas and flow-through planted should include plants that have characteristics similar to those listed in the SCVURPPP C.3 Stormwater Handbook, Appendix D, Plant List and Planting Guidance for LandscapedBased Stormwater Treatment Measures. • Additionally, a maintenance agreement or other maintenance assurance for maintaining the stormwater treatment measures and source controls, executed between the applicant and the Town, will be required.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
September 28, 2023

Geotechnical Review
• Review of the August 24, 2023 Geotechnical Response Letter from Stevens Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company and revised plans has been completed by the Town Geotechnical Consultant. Please see Attachment 2.

Fire Department Review
• Fire Department comments dated September 27, 2023 are included as Attachment 3.

Building Code Preliminary Review
• The Town’s Building Official has conducted a preliminary Building Code review to identify significant code compliance issues that may affect overall building design. The preliminary review identified code inconsistencies which need to be addressed by the project. Please refer to the Preliminary Review Letter included as Attachment 4.

Consistency Review Comments
Pursuant to the Town’s prior Consistency Review Comment Letter dated August 31, 2023 (see Attachment 5), the proposed project is inconsistent with standards, policies, and requirements under the Los Altos Hills General Plan, Zoning Law, and other applicable standards and requirements. Upon reviewing of the August 29, 2023 submittals, the proposed project continues to be inconsistent with the following:
(1) Zoning Designation for the parcel;
(2) Lot size requirement (a Conditional Development Permit is required); (3) Development standards under Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code; and (4) General Plan standards and policies.

The Town’s August 31, 2023 Consistency Review Comment Letter sets forth the inconsistency comments in further detailed, and is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 5. The comments in said letter remain and have not been addressed by the proposed project. Please review for details and make revisions to the proposed project as necessary to comply with applicable standards, policies and requirements.

Additionally, the project’s August 29 submittal shows outdoor lighting on the proposed plans. The proposed type of lighting fixture, maximum lumens and color temperature are being reviewed against the Town’s Outdoor Lighting Policy. Please indicate the specific locations for outdoor lighting and the number of each of the light fixture types proposed.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
September 28, 2023

Additional Comments
Please also note that additional review for the project is required or in progress with respect to the following standards and requirements:
• Sewer connection and capacity (review pending)
• Tree removal (Chapter 2, Article 3)- please confirm trunk diameters of trees proposed demonstrating compliance with heritage oak tree removal requirements. • Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance compliance (Section 10-2.809) (may be reviewed with construction plans)
I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments:

1. EOA Stormwater Review dated August 2, 2023

2. Letter from Cotton, Shires & associates, dated September 4, 2023

3. Santa Clara County Fire Department Comments dated September 27, 2023

4. Building Department Comments dated September 19, 2023

5. Consistency Review Comment Letter dated August 31, 2023 5494213.1
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills California 94022 (650) 941-7222 Fax: 650/941-3160 **VIA EMAIL ONLY**
December 21, 2023
Forrest Linebarger
785 Castro Street, Suite A
Mountain View, CA 94041
Via email at [email protected]
RE: 57-unit development project
10758 Mora Drive
File # CDP23-0002
Dear Mr. Linebarger:

Thank you for submitting plans for the above referenced revised project located at 10758 Mora Drive received by the Town for review and processing November 30, 2023. The Town is providing an update and initial responses as to our review of your resubmittals and will continue to forward comments as they are provided by the reviewing departments. Please refer to the sections below regarding the revised plans and responses to comments.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
As set forth in our prior correspondences and most recently in our September 28, 2023 comment letter, this project is not a ministerial project and not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Town has instead determined, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.1 and related CEQA Guidelines, that the proposed development is an activity subject to CEQA and may have a significant effect on the environment.1 The Town has determined that the proposed development does not qualify for an infill exemption or any other statutory or categorical exemption. The Town is required to consider all phases of the proposed project including planning, operation, and implementation.2It is expected that the project will have environmental impacts, which may constitute significant impacts, in areas including but not limited to traffic, noise, air quality, utilities and energy, and emergency response services. Thus, either a Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report would be required.3 1 CEQA Guidelines section 15060.
2 CEQA Guidelines section 15063.
3 Public Resources Code sections 21080.1-21080.3.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
December 21, 2023

An Initial Study will be conducted for the project in order to determine the specific environmental analysis required.4 Once the outstanding preliminary review issues for Stormwater/C.3, Geotechnical, and Building Code items as noted below have been addressed, the Town will commence the preparation an Initial Study, which we anticipate can occur in January 2024. It is important to have the plans and technical studies for the project be in a complete form and their issues addressed before environmental review commences. Plan changes and/or revisions to key elements of the project such as stormwater treatment during the environmental review process would cause delays in completing the required environmental document, and result in additional cost. The Initial Study will be conducted by the Town and prepared by a third-party consultant retained by the Town.

Please be advised that the Town is required to consider and adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration or consider and certify the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project, prior to making a decision on the project and make findings regarding the project’s environmental impacts.5 The highest approving body making a decision on the proposed project will be making the environmental determination and findings under CEQA.

Please also be advised that the applicant is responsible for all costs and expenses in conducting the Initial Study as well as all technical studies required for environmental review, including but not limited to traffic analysis. The environmental review fee to be paid by the applicant will be based on actual cost to prepare the work based on an approved proposal from an outside consultant plus a 10% administrative fee to cover staff time in accordance with the Town’s adopted fee schedule.

The Town will provide you with additional information regarding payment once the cost estimate is received from the consultant.

PROJECT COMMENTS AND CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
Outstanding Engineering, Fire and Department Comments
Stormwater/.C3 Compliance
• Review of the revised plans and response to comments is still in progress. Comments will be forwarded when received.

Geotechnical Review
• Review of the November 29, 2023 Geotechnical Response Letter from Stevens Ferrone & Bailey Engineering Company and revised plans by the Town Geotechnical Consultant. Is still in progress. Comments will be forwarded when received. 4 CEQA Guidelines section 15063.
5 Gov. Code section 65589.5(e); CEQA Guidelines sections 15074, 15090, 15091.

ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

Lands of Linebarger
10758 Mora Drive
December 21, 2023

Fire Department Review
• Santa Clara County Fire Department review is still in progress. Comments will be forwarded when received.

Building Code Preliminary Review
• The Town’s Consultant and Building Official are in the process of reviewing the revised plans and response to comments. Comments will be forwarded by December 29, 2023.

Consistency Review Comments
Pursuant to the Town’s prior Consistency Review Comment Letter dated August 31, 2023 (see Attachment 5), the proposed project is inconsistent with standards, policies, and requirements under the Los Altos Hills General Plan, Zoning Law, and other applicable standards and requirements. Upon reviewing of the August 29, 2023 submittals, the proposed project continues to be inconsistent with the following:
(1) Zoning Designation for the parcel;
(2) Lot size requirement (a Conditional Development Permit is required); (3) Development standards under Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code; and (4) General Plan standards and policies.

The Town’s August 31, 2023 Consistency Review Comment Letter sets forth the inconsistency comments in further detailed, and is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 1. The comments in said letter remain and have not been addressed by the proposed project. Please review for details and make revisions to the proposed project as necessary to comply with applicable standards, policies and requirements.

Sewer Study
The Sewer connection and capacity review is still in progress.

I can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Avila
Suzanne Avila, AICP
Consultant Principal Planner
Attachments:

1. Consistency Review Letter
5564752.2
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 4b

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1044 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
Plans and Scope of Review:

This project shall comply with the following:

The California Fire (CFC) & Building (CBC) Code, 2022 edition, as adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills Municipal Code (LAHMC) and California Code of Regulations (CCR).

The scope of this project includes the following:

Proposed new 64,483 SF five-story multifamily apartment building with 2 podium levels and a basement.

Plan Status:

Plans are NOT APPROVED. Revise and resubmit drawings and provide a response letter addressing comments on this plan review. Comments having BOLD font require correction prior to approval.

Plan Review Comments:

1. Plans will need to demonstrate whether or not the proposed building meets the requirements of a high rise building as described in CBC 403.1.

2. Required Aerial Access: Where required: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. 2. Width: Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925) in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet (9144 mm) in height. 3. Proximity to building: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building, as approved by the fire code official [CFC Chp. 5 and SCCFD SD&S A-1]. Aerial access is required. -Aerial access roadways shall meet the minimum road width of 26 feet adjacent to building -Aerial access roadways shall meet the required outside turning radii of 60 feet -One entire side of the building shall provide for aerial access and shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building; Revise plans to demonstrate compliance -Provide building/street section views showing how the aerial ladder access will be achieved; Provide more detail on any proposed trees, balconies, or power lines that may obstruct aerial access City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
64,4832
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 1
DATE
LAH 4/5/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1044 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

3. Fire Department Aerial Apparatus Turnaround Required:  Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 60 feet outside. Maximum grade in any direction shall be a maximum of 5%. Installations shall conform with 2022 CA Fire Code Appendix D as amended by SCCFD. CFC Sec. 503 Driving surface shall be capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing at least 75,000 pounds (34050 kg). -Turnaround C is no longer acceptable due to aerial access requirements. -Aerial apparatus turnaround required
-Show a turnaround that accommodates aerial apparatus with minimum outside turning radii of 60 feet

4. Buildings and Facilities Access: Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or with the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. [CFC, Section 503.1.1].
-Show on the plans how access will be achieved to all portions of the building -All portions of the building shall be within 150 feet of fire department access

5. Standpipe system will be required. For reference see CFC Sec. 905. The standpipe systems shall be installed in accordance with this section and NFPA 14 as amended in Chapter 47. -Note on sheet C0 that a standpipe will be installed as a deferred submittal.

6. Required Fire Flow:  The minimum required fire flow for this project is 3,750 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. Since an automatic fire sprinkler system will be installed, the fire flow will be reduced by 25%, establishing a required adjusted fire flow of 2,813 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. Note: The minimum required number and spacing of the hydrants shall be in accordance with CFC Table C105.1 as amended by SCCFD.
-Hydrant is not capable of meeting the minimum required fire flow of 2,812 gpm at 20psi -Work with Calwater and provide documentation that that outlines how the fire flow will be met OR revise plans in order to meet fire flow requirements City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
64,4832
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 2
DATE
LAH 4/5/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1044 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

7. Fire Department Connection: The fire department connection (FDC) for the structure in support of the sprinkler system shall be installed at the street on the street address side of the building. It shall be located within 100 feet of a public fire hydrant and within ten (10) feet of the main PIV (unless otherwise approved by the Chief due to practical difficulties). FDC's shall be equipped with a minimum of two (2), two-and-one-half (2- 1/2”) inch national standard threaded inlet couplings.

Orientation of the FDC shall be such that hose lines may be readily and conveniently attached to the inlets without interference. FDC's shall be painted safety yellow [SCCFD, SP-2 Standard]. -Show on the plans the proposed location of the FDC
-FDC needs to be within 100 feet of a hydrant

8. Two-way Communication System: Two-way communication systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 72 (2016 edition), the California Electrical Code (2013 edition), the California Fire Code (2016 edition), the California Building Code (2016 edition), and the city ordinances where two way system is being installed, policies, and standards. Other standards also contain design/installation criteria for specific life safety related equipment. These other standards are referred to in NFPA 72.
-Make a note on sheet C0 that two-way communication system will be installed as a deferred submittal

9. Emergency responder radio coverage in new buildings: All new buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication systems of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building.

This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communication systems.

CFC Sec. 510.1 as adopted.
-Make a note on sheet C0 that radio coverage will be installed as a deferred submittal

10. Fire Alarm Requirements: Refer to CFC Sec. 907 and the currently adopted edition of NFPA 72 for fire alarm requirements.
-Note on Sheet C0 that fire alarm will be installed as a deferred submittal.

11. Fire Sprinklers Required: Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.18. Noted on sheet C0.

City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
64,4832
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 3
DATE
LAH 4/5/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1044 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

12. Construction Site Fire Safety: All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33.

13. Address identification: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained CFC Sec. 505.1.

14. Water Supply Requirements: Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7.

This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction.  A permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the fire code or other such laws or regulations shall not be valid.  Any addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be approved in advance [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6].

City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
64,4832
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 4
DATE
LAH 4/5/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1486 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
Plans and Scope of Review:

This project shall comply with the following:

The California Fire (CFC) & Building (CBC) Code, 2022 edition, as adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills Municipal Code (LAHMC) and California Code of Regulations (CCR).

The scope of this project includes the following:

Proposed new 68,687 SF five-story multifamily apartment building with 2 podium levels and a basement.

Plan Status:

Plans are NOT APPROVED. Revise and resubmit drawings and provide a response letter addressing comments on this plan review. Comments having BOLD font require correction prior to approval.

Plan Review Comments:

1. Plans will need to demonstrate whether or not the proposed building meets the requirements of a high rise building as described in CBC 403.1.

2. Required Aerial Access: Where required: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. 2. Width: Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925) in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet (9144 mm) in height. 3. Proximity to building: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building, as approved by the fire code official [CFC Chp. 5 and SCCFD SD&S A-1]. Aerial access is required. -Aerial access roadways shall meet the minimum road width of 26 feet adjacent to building -Aerial access roadways shall meet the required outside turning radii of 60 feet -One entire side of the building shall provide for aerial access and shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building; Revise plans to demonstrate compliance -Provide building/street section views showing how the aerial ladder access will be achieved; Provide more detail on any proposed trees, balconies, or power lines that may obstruct aerial access City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
68,687
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 1
DATE
LAH 4/25/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1486 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

3. Fire Department Aerial Apparatus Turnaround Required:  Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 60 feet outside. Maximum grade in any direction shall be a maximum of 5%. Installations shall conform with 2022 CA Fire Code Appendix D as amended by SCCFD. CFC Sec. 503 Driving surface shall be capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing at least 75,000 pounds (34050 kg).
-Turnaround C is no longer acceptable due to aerial access requirements. -Aerial apparatus turnaround required
-Show a turnaround that accommodates aerial apparatus. Turnaround diagrams can be found on CFC Appendix D Figure D103.1.

4. Buildings and Facilities Access: Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or with the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. [CFC, Section 503.1.1]. -Show on the plans how access will be achieved to all portions of the building -All portions of the building shall be within 150 feet of fire department access

5. Standpipe system will be required. For reference see CFC Sec. 905. The standpipe systems shall be installed in accordance with this section and NFPA 14 as amended in Chapter 47. -Note on sheet C0 that a standpipe will be installed as a deferred submittal.

6. Required Fire Flow:  The minimum required fire flow for this project is 3,750 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. Since an automatic fire sprinkler system will be installed, the fire flow will be reduced by 25%, establishing a required adjusted fire flow of 2,813 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure. Note: The minimum required number and spacing of the hydrants shall be in accordance with CFC Table C105.1 as amended by SCCFD.
-Provided will serve letter does not explain if there will be improvements in order to meet required fire flow
-Hydrant is not capable of meeting the minimum required fire flow of 2,812 gpm at 20psi -Work with Calwater and provide documentation that that outlines how the fire flow will be met OR revise plans in order to meet fire flow requirements
City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
68,687
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 2
DATE
LAH 4/25/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1486 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

7. Fire Department Connection: The fire department connection (FDC) for the structure in support of the sprinkler system shall be installed at the street on the street address side of the building. It shall be located within 100 feet of a public fire hydrant and within ten (10) feet of the main PIV (unless otherwise approved by the Chief due to practical difficulties). FDC's shall be equipped with a minimum of two (2), two-and-one-half (2- 1/2”) inch national standard threaded inlet couplings.

Orientation of the FDC shall be such that hose lines may be readily and conveniently attached to the inlets without interference. FDC's shall be painted safety yellow [SCCFD, SP-2 Standard]. -Show on the plans the proposed location of the FDC
-FDC needs to be within 100 feet of a hydrant

8. Two-way Communication System: Two-way communication systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 72 (2016 edition), the California Electrical Code (2013 edition), the California Fire Code (2016 edition), the California Building Code (2016 edition), and the city ordinances where two way system is being installed, policies, and standards. Other standards also contain design/installation criteria for specific life safety related equipment. These other standards are referred to in NFPA 72.
-Make a note on sheet C0 that two-way communication system will be installed as a deferred submittal

9. Emergency responder radio coverage in new buildings: All new buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication systems of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building.

This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communication systems.

CFC Sec. 510.1 as adopted.
-Make a note on sheet C0 that radio coverage will be installed as a deferred submittal

10. Fire Alarm Requirements: Refer to CFC Sec. 907 and the currently adopted edition of NFPA 72 for fire alarm requirements.
-Note on Sheet C0 that fire alarm will be installed as a deferred submittal.

11. Fire Sprinklers Required: Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.18. Noted on sheet C0.

City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
68,687
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 3
DATE
LAH 4/25/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 1486 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

12. Construction Site Fire Safety: All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33.

13. Address identification: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained CFC Sec. 505.1.

14. Water Supply Requirements: Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7.

This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction.  A permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the fire code or other such laws or regulations shall not be valid.  Any addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be approved in advance [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6].

City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
68,687
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 4
DATE
LAH 4/25/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 3750 25% 2813

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 2718 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
This project has been reviewed with respect to the following:

The California Fire (CFC) & Building (CBC) Code, 2022 edition, as adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills Municipal Code (LAHMC) and California Code of Regulations (CCR). Note: Code review for building permit will be reviewed with respect to the fire/building codes in effect at time of permit application.

The scope of this project includes the following:

Proposed new 67,475 SF, five-story, Type IIIA/IA construction, R-2/R-2.1/A-3/S-2/B Occupancy apartment building with 2 podium levels and a basement.

Plan Status:

Plans are NOT APPROVED. Revise and resubmit drawings and provide a response letter addressing comments on this plan review. Comments having BOLD font require correction prior to approval.

Plan Review Comments:

1. High Rise Requirements: Every building of any type of construction or occupancy having floors used for human occupancy located more than 75 feet above the lowest floor level having building access, except buildings used as hospitals as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 1250 (CFC 202 Definition). - Sheet A2.2 reflects an elevation of 541.9 feet at the lowest building access (rear of building) and 631.6 feet at the highest floor having human occupancy (occupied roof). The resultant 89.7 feet exceeds 75 feet that establishes the building as a new high-rise structure, per CBC 403.1 and CBC 202 definition. - Revise design, as appropriate, to establish and demonstrate compliance with CBC/CFC provisions applicable to a new high-rise structure.

2. Fire Apparatus Access Roadway Required: Provide an access roadway with a paved all-weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 50 feet outside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Surface shall be capable of supporting 75K pounds.

Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet A-1. CFC Sec. 503.

Roadway: A vehicular access roadway greater than or equal to 20 feet in width serving more than two singlefamily dwellings. - The roads leading to the subject parcel have not been evaluated for fire department aerial apparatus access.
- Provide a road study sufficient to demonstrate that the existing Mora Drive provides not less than 20 feet drivable surface, compliant turning radii, and 13'-6" vertical clearance across the required width. - Provide a road slope profile, prepared by a licensed professional. - Provide licensed engineering certification that demonstrates the roads ability to support the minimum loading capacity of 75,000 lbs.

City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2.1

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
67,475
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
5 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 1
DATE
LAH 8/14/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 2865 25% 2148

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a

BLDG
PERMIT No.
23 2718 PLANREVIEW No.

PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS

3. Buildings and Facilities Access: Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or with the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. [CFC, Section 503.1.1]. - Approval of up to 300 feet travel is requested by way of applicants response letter. Fire personnel access to the furthest portions of the building includes 35 to 42 foot elevation change, which is not conducive to efficient deployment of firefighting resources. The request for 300 feet travel distance shall not be approved without appropriate mitigating measures. Review and revise design to propose mitigating measures to ensure effective firefighting operations, given the excessive travel distance and elevation change to the rear of the building.
- The access to the rear of the building is not sufficient to accommodate simultaneous occupant evacuation (from stair #2) and firefighter access to the rear of the structure. Review and revise path widths to provide adequate space for simultaneous use of the paths.

4. Required Aerial Access: Where required: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. 2. Width: Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925) in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet (9144 mm) in height. 3. Proximity to building: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building, as approved by the fire code official [CFC Chp. 5 and SCCFD SD&S A-1]. Aerial access shown on sheet A5.0. - The defined location for aerial apparatus access is arranged along one 52'-6" wide side of the building, and provides inadequate ladder access to the balance of the structure. The roof access is further obstructed by a rooftop dining facility with limited pathway access to the balance of the occupied roof. This configuration is insufficient for fire operations. Review project ability to provide additional aerial ladder access to the South building face.

5. Fire Department Aerial Apparatus Turnaround Required:  Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 60 feet outside. Maximum grade in any direction shall be a maximum of 5%. Installations shall conform with 2022 CA Fire Code Appendix D as amended by SCCFD. CFC Sec. 503 Driving surface shall be capable of supporting the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing at least 75,000 pounds (34050 kg).
- Turnaround from Appendix D103.1 shown on sheet A5.0.

City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE

SEC/FLOOR
R-2.1

OCCUPANCY
LOAD
67,475
AREA
Inhabiture
ApplicantName

SILVER OAKS

NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
5 OF
7+bsmt
IIIA/IA 2
DATE
LAH 8/14/2023
Flanagan, Caleb

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Construction
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI 2865 25% 2148

PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
10728 Mora Drive Los Altos Hills
ITEM 9A ATTACHMENT 5a