20020108_m

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

Date:

December 5, 2001

Set Time:

9:00 a.m.

Hearing Date:

December 18, 2001

To:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

From:

Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services, Telephone 599-1388

Subject:

Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve General Plan Map Amendment, Major Subdivision, and a Grading Permit, pursuant to the County Zoning Ordinance Section 6550, County Subdivision Ordinance Section 7010 and the State Subdivision Map Act, and County Ordinance Code Section 8602.1, respectively, to subdivide two parcels totaling 3.44 acres into eight parcels located at 535 Summit Drive in the unincorporated Emerald Lake Hills area of the County.

County File No.:

PLN 2001-00038 (Summit Jewel Partners/J. R. Rodine)

RECOMMENDATION

That based on staff analysis, the Planning Commission's actions on this application and the testimony taken at the public meeting, the Board of Supervisors:

Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to approve the proposed project.

Certify the Negative Declaration as complete and adequate in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Adopt the resolution to change the subject parcels' General Plan Map designation from "Low Density Residential" to "Medium-Low Density Residential."

Approve the proposed project by adopting the Recommended Findings and Conditions of Approval listed in Attachment A.

PROPOSAL

The applicant proposes to subdivide two legal parcels totaling 3.44 acres located at 535 Summit Drive in the unincorporated area of Emerald Lake Hills, near Redwood City. This application for a major subdivision proposes to create eight parcels. The proposed parcels range in size from 14,608 sq. ft. to 20,000 sq. ft. Access to six parcels will be from the proposed private cul-de-sac road that connects with Summit Drive whereas two other parcels (Parcel 1 and Parcel 8) can take access from either the proposed road or from Summit Drive. The City of Redwood City Water District and Emerald Lake Heights Sewer Maintenance District will provide water and sewer service to the site, respectively. A grading permit involving 150 cubic yards of cut and 150 cubic yards of fill has been submitted as part of the project in order to develop the proposed private access road. This project includes a General Plan Map Amendment to change the existing designation from Low Density Residential (0.3-2.3 dwelling units per acre) to Medium-Low Density Residential (2.4-6.0 dwelling units per acre) to match the zoning density allowed on the site.

BACKGROUND

Report Prepared By: Miroo Desai Brewer, Project Planner, Telephone 650/363-1853

Appellant: Theodore Fieguth

Applicant: J.R. Rodine

Owner: Summit Jewel Partners, LLC

Location: 535 Summit Drive, Emerald Lake Hills, Redwood City

APNs: 057-202-070; 057-212-190

Size: 3.44 acres

Existing Zoning: RH/DR (Residential Hillside/Design Review; 12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size, increasing relative to average slope)

General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (0.3-2.3 dwelling units per net acre)

Existing Land Use: Single-Family Residence, Two Caretaker's Quarters, Detached Garage and Storage Shed

Flood Zone: Zone C (Area of Minimal Flooding)

Environmental Evaluation: Negative Declaration issued with a public review period from August 27, 2001 to September 17, 2001

Setting: The subject property is a gently to steeply sloping, irregularly-shaped parcel, located on the northern side of Summit Drive, with a narrow portion extending down to Hillside Drive. The property is located on the nose of a small spur ridge. The ground surface slopes down to the north and northwest. The main body of the parcels has surface gradients between 10:1 and 4:1 (horizontal:vertical) while the narrow northern strip of the property slopes as steeply as 1_:1. The existing structures on the project site to be removed include a 3,220 sq. ft. house, two detached caretaker's units, a detached garage, a storage shed and a swimming pool. The grounds around the main residence have been landscaped with planters and bushes. The eastern portion of the lot has been developed into an orchard. Other portions of the property are in their natural state with native trees and grass groundcover. The property is bounded by developed single-family residential properties to the east, west, northeast and northwest, and by Summit Drive to the south.

Chronology:

Date

Action

October 4, 2000

Pre-application public workshop to review issues and take comments for the proposed project.

January 23, 2001

Application submitted for the proposed project.

August 23, 2001

Notice of Circulation of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the proposed project.

August 27, 2001

Initial Study and Negative Declaration published and the 20-day public review period commenced.

September 17, 2001

Initial Study and Negative Declaration public review period ends.

October 24, 2001

Planning Commission Public Hearing - Planning Commission approved the project.

November 13, 2001

Appeal filed at the Planning Division.

December 18, 2001

Board of Supervisors Public Hearing.

DISCUSSION

Planning Commission Action

On October 24, 2001 the Planning Commission considered the project and unanimously recommended its approval subject to approval of the General Plan amendment by the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission considered two project alternatives: one involved an 8-parcel subdivision with a public road and the other involved an 8-parcel subdivision with a private road. The Planning Commission on consideration of staff analysis and the testimony presented, approved the 8-parcel subdivision with a private road and made all the relevant findings including the findings for Exceptions to the Subdivision Ordinance.

This decision has been appealed. Please see Section E of the staff report for discussion of key issues of the appeal.

KEY ISSUES OF PROPOSED PROJECT

Conformance with the General Plan

The project and the alternative, as proposed and conditioned, conform with the applicable General Plan Policies, as discussed below:

Urban Land Use Policies

The County General Plan designates the subject property as "Low Density Residential" in the "Urban Lands" area. The "Low Density Residential" designation calls for a density of 0.3-2.3 dwelling units per net acre. The project proposes a General Plan Map Amendment to change the density designation to Medium-Low Density Residential (2.4-6.0 dwelling unit per net acre). The proposed density is 2.67 dwelling unit per net acre for the project proposal. The proposed density is at the lower end of the medium-low density range. The General Plan density designation is a broad-brush mechanism, which is implemented through the more site-specific application of a slope density formula in the Residential Hillside (RH) zoning regulations. The proposal is in compliance with all the applicable RH zoning regulations.

Table 8.1P in the General Plan establishes land use designations, densities and locational criteria in urban areas. The locational criteria for low density residential areas are: (1) existing low density areas; (2) hillside areas with steep slopes; (3) adjacent to sensitive habitats; (4) hazardous areas; and (5) not within areas of high perceived noise. The locational criteria for medium-low density residential areas are the same as that for low density residential areas except the first one, which is existing medium-low density areas.

In order to determine the existing density in the vicinity of the project parcels, staff conducted an analysis of parcel sizes within 500 feet of the project site. This analysis indicates that the existing density in the surrounding area is 3.14 dwelling units per net acre (please see Attachment I). This is higher than the proposed density of 2.67 dwelling units per net acre. Furthermore, the average parcel size within 500 feet of the project site is 12,589 sq. ft., which is smaller than the smallest proposed parcel size: 14,608 sq. ft. Therefore, staff believes that the applicant's request for a General Plan Map Amendment would not result in a density that would be incompatible or out of character with the surrounding neighborhood.

Furthermore, approval of the amendment will facilitate a more efficient use of the site by providing additional housing in keeping with regional employment trends and developed uses within the immediate plan area. This is in keeping with the Land Use Objectives for Urban Communities, General Plan Policy 8.2(d), which encourages provision of housing opportunities in unincorporated areas.

Vegetative, Water, Fish and Wildlife Resources Policies

The project, as conditioned, complies with Policy 1.23 (Regulate Development to Protect Vegetative, Water, Fish and Wildlife Resources) and Policy 1.24 (Protect Vegetative Resources). The biologist report submitted by the applicant and prepared by Thomas Reid and Associates recommended that pre-construction surveys be conducted for nesting raptors and for western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis). These were conducted in April 5, 2001, and no raptors were observed on site. Furthermore, the follow-up report states that most of the trees do not have suitable large branches or tree cavities that would be suitable for nest construction by hawks or owls and, therefore, it was highly unlikely that any raptors would utilize the site for nesting. The survey conducted for Western leatherwood revealed it is not present on the site.

The biologist report also documents an oak woodland area, approximately 0.2 acre, on the southwestern corner that is used by mule deer as a shelter, bedding and feeding area and an established mule deer corridor between the woodland area and the open space north of the project property. The report recommends preservation of the oak wood-land area as a shelter and feeding area for mule deer and other wildlife species and no construction of high fencing that would serve as a barrier to deer movement.

In order to ensure that the proposed development will not significantly impact the woodland area and the established deer corridor, the following conditions of approval are recommended: (1) recordation of a deed restriction on affected parcels that prohibits development in the woodland area, and (2) recordation of deed restrictions on affected parcels that regulates height and materials of fences (see Recommended Conditions of Approval 14 and 15 in Attachment A for full language of the conditions).

The proposed project would remove 52 significant trees. Construction of the proposed road (both public and private) will entail removal of 27 trees and demolition would entail removal of eight trees. An additional 17 trees identified by the arborist report to be in state of advanced decline or as potentially hazardous will also be removed. The sizes of the trees to be removed vary between 6 inches in diameter and 35 inches in diameter. The type of trees identified to be removed include fruit trees, redwoods, California bay laurel trees and coast live oaks.

Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the applicant to submit and implement a replanting plan that will replace all "live" trees removed at a 3:1 ratio (new:removed). In addition, staff recommends conditions of approval to include a $2,000 landscape surety deposit to ensure survival of replanted trees for at least two years and protection measures to ensure that the remaining trees on site are not endangered by construction and grading activities. See recommended Conditions of Approval 16, 17 and 18 in Attachment A for full text.

Conformance with the Emerald Lake Hills (ELH) Community Plan

The ELH Community Plan suggests that roads in the area be developed with a 22-foot road width. The project proposal is for a 22-foot road within a 30-foot public right-of-way.

Community Plan Policy 3.14 (Location of Street Parking) seeks to keep parking off the travel way, on private property, or within parking bays within the road right-of-way. The project proposal provides parking bays for five parking spaces. In addition, all future residential development on all of the proposed parcels will be required to provide a minimum of two visitor on-site parking spaces, to ensure that this policy is met.

Conformance with Zoning Regulations

Minimum Building Site

Proposed Parcels 1 to 8 both in the proposed project and in the alternative proposal have been reviewed by the County Planning Division under the density certification process (County File Nos. DEN 2001-00003 and DEN 2001-00013). The respective average slope and minimum required size of each of the proposed parcels have been verified as shown in the table below.

PROPOSED PROJECT

Parcel ID

Slope %

Minimum
Requirement
(sq. ft.)

Proposed
Parcel Size
(sq. ft.)

12,000

15,433

12,000

15,372

12,000

15,907

13,000

15,345

17,000

17,691

16,000

16,112

19,000

20,000

14,000

14,608

Section 6803 of the RH zoning regulations requires that if the proposed land division creates the maximum number of new parcels permitted by average slope measurement, a separate document shall be recorded that specifies that newly created parcels cannot be further divided into smaller parcels. Since the proposed subdivision, if approved, will create the maximum number of new parcels possible, staff recommends a condition of approval that requires the applicant to record a deed restriction for each parcel that restricts further subdivision.

Lot Frontage and Lot Width

All proposed parcels in the project proposal and the alternative comply with the zoning district's standards for a minimum lot frontage of 50 feet and the lot width of 50 feet.

All existing structures on the site will be demolished and foundation remains removed prior to the recordation of the final map. All future development on the proposed parcels would be required to comply with development and design standards applicable to the RH/DR Zoning District, including review by the County Design Review Committee.

Conformance with Grading Permit Requirements and Findings

A grading permit is required to construct the proposed access road and re-grade upon removal of foundation remains from structures previously demolished.

The applicant has submitted all the necessary documents including preliminary grading plans and soils report required for the proposed work for the project proposal and the alternative. The grading plan and other materials were referred to relevant departments and agencies, and the recommended conditions that were received have been included in the conditions of approval listed in Attachment A of this report.

The County's Grading Ordinance requires that the following findings must be made for approval and issuance of the grading permit:

That the granting of the grading permit, as conditioned, will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

The recommended conditions of approval will regulate grading activities so that the grading work is correctly performed and monitored by the applicant's civil engineer. In addition, the recommended conditions of approval also ensure that soil erosion, during and after grading activity, will be controlled, and no additional grading than that shown on the approved plans will occur.

That the project conforms to the criteria of the Grading Ordinance Section 8602.1.

The required grading plans have been submitted, reviewed and approved by the applicable agencies as required by the Grading Regulations. Recommended conditions of approval ensure that the approved plans and measures are implemented.

That the project, as conditioned, is in conformance with the General Plan.

Staff has reviewed the General Plan and believes the project conforms with the applicable policies of the General Plan as previously discussed.

Compliance with Subdivision Regulations and Required Findings

This project has been processed in accordance with the County Subdivision Regulations and the State Subdivision Map Act, and has been reviewed by various agencies for compliance with provisions of the County Subdivision Regulations. The proposal requires an exception to the Subdivision Regulations regarding road width. This exception is discussed in detail in Section A.5(b) of this report.

Required Findings for Subdivision

In order to approve this application for a subdivision, the Board of Supervisors must make the following seven findings:

(1)

In accordance with Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, this tentative map, together with the provisions for its design or improvement, is consistent with the San Mateo County General Plan.

The project proposal request a General Plan amendment regarding density as described in Section B.1 of this report. In all other respects, the proposal is consistent with the General Plan.

(2)

The site is physically suitable for the type of development and for the proposed density of development.

The site is physically suited for single-family residential development for the following reasons: (1) the proposed parcels in both alternatives conform to the minimum parcel size requirements of the RH Zone given their average slopes (see Section A.4); (2) the existing structures will be demolished prior to the recordation of the final map; (3) access will be provided to the proposed parcels via construction of a cul-de-sac road that connects to Summit Drive; and (4) the site will be served by underground public utilities and will be connected to available sewer and water services.

(3)

The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, substantial environmental damage, or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitats.

A grading permit application has been processed in conjunction with this application for a major subdivision for the proposed private road. The project was found to be in compliance with the County's Grading Ordinance (see Section B.5 of this report). An Initial Study and a Negative Declaration were prepared for this project. This review identified potential impacts associated with increased development of the project site. Mitigation measures proposed in the Negative Declaration to diminish the significance of these impacts have been incorporated as recommended conditions of approval. Review of the project by affected agencies, including Environmental Health, yielded no objections.

(4)

The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

There are no access easements across this property. Access to six parcels will be from the proposed cul-de-sac road that connects with Summit Drive whereas two other parcels (Parcel 1 and Parcel 8) can potentially take access from the proposed road or from Summit Drive. The proposed road is required to be designed to the applicable Department of Public Works standards.

(5)

The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities.

Future development on all of the proposed parcels could be designed to make use of adaptive heating and cooling, as the proposed parcels in both alternatives are aligned on a north-south access.

(6)

The discharge waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the State Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the State Water Code.

The Department of Public Works has reviewed the proposed subdivision and the project, as conditioned, would not violate the State Water Code.

(7)

The benefits of additional housing are greater than any negative effects the subdivision would have on fiscal and environmental resources.

Approval of this project will allow the creation of eight additional building sites in the County. No negative effects on fiscal resources have been identified. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, an Initial Study and a Negative Declaration were prepared for this project that examined both alternatives. This review identified potential impacts associated with increased development of the project site. Mitigation measures proposed in the Negative Declaration to diminish the significance of these impacts have been incorporated as recommended conditions of approval.

Exceptions to the Subdivision Ordinance

Section 7094 of the County Subdivision Ordinance allows the Board of Supervisors to approve exceptions to any of the design, improvement or exaction requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance provided certain findings can be made.

The applicant is requesting an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance regarding road width for the alternative proposal.

Section 7022(3.a) of the Subdivision Ordinance states that "in general, public roads will be required for major subdivisions, while private roads will be allowed for minor subdivisions." The applicant has requested construction of a private road instead of a public road to provide access to the proposed parcels as an alternative proposal. The proposed private road is 22 feet wide within a 30-foot right-of-way and meets the County standards for private roads. However, the proposed private road does not meet the County requirement for public roads for major subdivisions that must be 38 feet wide within a 50-foot public right-of-way.

In order to approve this exception, the following two findings must be made:

(1)

That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property, or that the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the owner/subdivider; and that the exception is appropriate for the proper design and/or function of the subdivision.

(2)

That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to other property or uses in the area in which the property is situated.

The Planning Commission made the above the findings and approved the Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance. The Emerald Lake Hills Community Plan, which takes precedence over the County Subdivision Regulations, stipulates a 22-foot width standard for roads in this area. Although it is possible to reconcile the two different road standards, the decision-maker must find that the wider road meets the Community Plan goal to provide "a basic and safe level of access compatible with the natural features and rural atmosphere in Emerald Lake Hills." The Planning Commission determined that a private road was the appropriate design for the project and made the above findings to the Subdivision Ordinance and approved the 8-parcel subdivision with a private road.

In-Lieu Park Fees

Section 7055.3 of the Subdivision Regulations requires that, as a condition of approval of a tentative parcel map, the subdivider will be required to dedicate land or pay a fee in lieu of dedication for the purpose of acquiring, developing, or rehabilitating County parks and recreation facilities and/or assisting other providers of parks and recreation facilities in acquiring, developing or rehabilitating facilities that will serve the proposed subdivision. The section further defines the formula for calculating this fee. The fee for this subdivision is $50,972.10. A worksheet showing the computation methodology is included in Attachment K.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, a revised Initial Study, recommending that a Negative Declaration be adopted, was prepared for this project and circulated from August 27, 2001 through September 17, 2001. Staff received comments from the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) (see Attachment L). It was pointed out that Government Code Section 56133, enacted in 1994, sets forth that a city or special district may provide new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries only after it first requests and receives written approval from LAFCo in the affected county. In this case, the provision of water service would be from the City of Redwood City. This section requires that cities or districts apply by resolution to LAFCo on the property owner's behalf. Therefore, the City of Redwood City would need to submit a resolution of application, application form and fees to LAFCo requesting LAFCo's approval to provide water to the project site. Staff has included this requirement as a recommended condition of approval.

REVIEW BY EMERALD LAKE HILLS ASSOCIATION

The project was reviewed by the Emerald Lake Hills (ELH) Association on the initial proposal that included the proposal of a private road with a width of 22 feet within a 30-foot right-of-way. Carole Henley of the ELH Association recommended the creation of a larger cul-de-sac with guest parking and wider width of access road to the cul-de-sac. The applicant revised the application to include a 38-foot wide road within a 50-foot right-of-way. Staff referred the revised proposal to the ELH Association and no additional comments were received. The Planning Commission considered the ELH Association's suggestion but adopted the 22-foot right-of-way standard recommended in the Emerald Lake Hills Community Plan.

KEY ISSUES OF THE APPEAL

The main issues of this appeal are indicated below in bold type followed by staff's response. A complete copy of the appeal application is included as Attachment O.

"The Planning Commission never required that Summit Jewel Partners demonstrate any benefit for the local community that would result from the approval of their request. On the contrary, objections voiced by the residents were ignored and never appeared in the staff reports. Our objections are very simply stated: `Summit Jewel Partners should abide by the same rules that have applied to all local area property owners for all of these many years.' We believe that absentee owners, who have no interest in our community other than profit, should follow the same rules - originally made to preserve our community - with which we who live here have abided."

San Mateo County requires applicants to demonstrate compliance by their projects with the applicable County regulations. The proposed project is in compliance with all the applicable regulations except for General Plan density designation of the project site. The applicant is requesting that the existing General Plan designation of Low Density Residential be amended to Medium-Low Density Residential in order to correlate with the property's zoning and to facilitate a more efficient use of the site by providing additional housing in keeping with regional employment trends and developed uses within the immediate plan area. This is in keeping with the Land Use Objectives for Urban Communities, General Plan Policy 8.2(d) that encourages provision of substantial amount of housing opportunities in unincorporated areas. Furthermore, as discussed in Section B of this staff report, the proposed density is at the lower end of the Medium Low Density Residential bracket and lower than existing density within 500 feet of the project property. Staff believes that approval of the General Plan Map Amendment will not result in a density that is out of scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood.

Staff received one letter of objection from a resident at 418 Crest Drive (see Attachment P for a copy of the letter). In her letter, Debra Lepold stated that she was opposed to the change in General Plan designation. The staff report prepared for the Planning Commission did not include this note. Staff regrets this oversight. However, Ms. Lepold was sent a copy of the staff report prepared for this project along with the agenda that announced the date and time of the Planning Commission public hearing at which a decision would be made on the project. At the Planning Commission public hearing, the Commission received public testimony from only the applicant, Mr. J. R. Rodine. Except for the proponents of the project, no party, including the appellant and Ms. Lepold, appeared or presented opposition to the project.

REVIEWING AGENCIES

Department of Public Works

Environmental Health Division

Building Inspection Section

California Department of Forestry

County Counsel

City of Redwood City, Community Development Services (Engineering and Construction)

Emerald Lake Hills Association

ATTACHMENTS

Recommended Findings and Conditions of Approval

Tentative Subdivision Map

Proposed Resolution and Map to Amend General Plan

Letter of Decision from the Planning Commission Public Hearing held on October 24, 2001.

Initial Study and Negative Declaration

Tree Removal Plan

Delineation of Oak Woodland

Grading Plan

Neighborhood Parcel Size Analysis

Memo from County Counsel Regarding ELH Community Plan Road Standard

In-Lieu Park Fees Worksheet

Comments from LAFCo on Initial Study

Traffic Study

Biologist Report

Copy of the Appeal Letter

Copy of Debra Lepold's Letter

Letters sent to the Board of Supervisors by residents (November 6, 2001)

MDB:kcd - MDBL2806_WKU.DOC


Attachment A

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Permit or Project File Number: PLN 2001-00038				Hearing Date: December 18, 2001

Prepared By: Miroo Desai Brewer			For Adoption By: Board of Supervisors


RECOMMENDED FINDINGS

For the General Plan Amendment, Recommend That:

1.	The Board of Supervisors adopt the resolution to change the subject parcels' General Plan Map designation from "Low Density Residential" to "Medium-Low Density Residential."

For the Major Subdivision, Find That:

2.	In accordance with Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, this tentative map, together with the provisions for its design or improvement, is consistent with the San Mateo County General Plan, subject to approval of the General Plan amendment by the Board of Supervisors.

3.	The site is physically suitable for the type of development and for the proposed density of development.

4.	The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, substantial environmental damage, or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitats.

5.	The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

6.	The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities.

7.	The discharge waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the State Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 1300) of the State Water Code.

8.	The benefits of additional housing are greater than any negative effects the subdivision would have on fiscal and environmental resources.

For Exceptions to the Major Subdivision Ordinance, Find That:

9.	There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property, or that the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the owner/subdivider; and that the exception is appropriate for the proper design and/or function of the subdivision.

10.	The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to other property or uses in the area in which the property is situated.

For the Grading Permit, Find That:

11.	The granting of the grading permit, as conditioned, will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

12.	The project conforms to the criteria of the Grading Ordinance Section 8602.1.

13.	The project, as conditioned, is in conformance with the General Plan.

For the Negative Declaration, Find That:

14.	The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of San Mateo County.

15.	The Negative Declaration is complete, correct and adequate, and prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and applicable State and County guidelines.

16.	On the basis of the Initial Study, comments received hereto, and testimony presented and considered at the public hearing, there is no substantial evidence that the project, if subject to the mitigation measures contained in the Negative Declaration, will have a significant effect on the environment.

17.	The mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration, agreed to by the applicant, placed as conditions on the project, and identified as part of this public hearing, have been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan in conformance with California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Planning Division

1.	The applicant shall include the portion labeled "remainder parcel" as part of Parcel 5 and revise tentative map to show 8 parcels. Concurrent with the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 5 that prohibits all development (with exception of installation and maintenance of public utilities) on the area excluded from slope density calculations and exclude use of this area for purposes of calculation of lot coverage, floor area ratio and setbacks for Parcel 5. The applicant shall provide a draft copy of the deed restriction for review and approval by County Counsel prior to its recordation.
2.	This subdivision approval is valid for two years, during which time a final map shall be filed. The Planning Division may issue an extension to this time period, pursuant to Section 7013.5 of the County Subdivision Regulations, upon written request and payment of any applicable extension fees if required.

3.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the County Board of Supervisors shall approve the final map at a public hearing.

4.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain a demolition permit for each of the existing structures from the Building Inspection Section and complete all the requirements of the demolition permits.

5.	The applicant shall pay to the San Mateo County Planning and Building Division an amount of $50,972.10 for in-lieu park fees, as required by County Subdivision Regulations Section 7055.3 prior to recordation of the final map.

6.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall record a deed restriction for each new parcel that states that the parcel cannot be further subdivided.

7.	All future development on each of the eight parcels shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee and the Planning Division for conformance with the applicable zoning regulations.

8.	Prior to installation of any future entry gate on the access road, the applicant shall submit a plan to the Planning Division for review and approval. The plan shall include manufacturer's specifications for design, height and color.

9.	Prior to installation of street lights, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan showing all freestanding fixtures to the Planning Division for review and approval. The plan shall include manufacturer's specifications for design, height and candlepower. The height, number, placement and design of all light fixtures shall be such that no light glare is visible from any public road.

10.	Prior to the issuance of permit to grade, the applicant shall comply with all applicable recommendations indicated in the geotechnical study submitted to the County and prepared by Geo-Forensics, Inc.

11.	The applicant shall submit an erosion and sediment control plan stipulating all such measures to be implemented in the event of a storm during construction throughout the winter season (effective October 15 through April 15). The Planning Division shall confirm that the approved plan is in place and ready to be implemented (in case of an impending or actual storm) prior to the start of any grading, construction or demolition activities at the site. The plan shall be activated during the period of grading activity in the event that any rainstorms occur, and its effectiveness shall be reported on by the applicant's civil engineer. Any revisions to the plan shall be prepared and signed by the project engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works.

	The applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors minimize the transport and discharge of pollutants from the construction site into storm drain systems and water bodies by adhering to the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Program "General Construction and Site Supervision" guidelines by:

	a.	Using filtration materials on storm drain covers to remove sediment from dewatering effluent.

	b.	Stabilizing all denuded areas and maintaining erosion control measures continuously between October 15 and April 15.

	c.	Removing spoils promptly, and avoiding stockpiling of fill materials, when rain is forecast. If rain threatens, stockpiled soils and other materials shall be covered with a tarp or other waterproof material.

	d.	Storing, handling, and disposing of construction materials and wastes so as to avoid their entry to the storm drain system or water body.

	e.	Avoiding cleaning, fueling or maintaining vehicles on-site, except in an area designated to contain and treat runoff.

	f.	Limiting and timing applications of pesticides and fertilizer to avoid polluting runoff.

12.	The applicant shall, pursuant to Section 5023 of the San Mateo County Code, submit a construction site stormwater management plan for the project to the Planning Division, for the review and approval by the Planning Administrator prior to the issuance of any project-related building or grading permit. The plan shall illustrate and describe appropriate methods, chosen by the applicant from the California Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbook, to control stormwater runoff from the project site during construction and from land use activities on the site once the project is completed. The applicant may also include all applicable practices located in the San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP) brochures for Earth Moving Activities, Roadwork and Paving, Heavy Equipment Operation and Fresh Concrete and Mortar Application.

13.	The applicant's erosion and sediment control plan shall include best management practices for ensuring that proposed grading and removal of existing structures and foundations do not result in any runoff of sediment and other materials into the waterway. The chosen measures shall be implemented on site and verified by a Planning staff member prior to the issuance of a permit to grade and/or prior to the issuance of any demolition permit.

14.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall delineate the legal boundaries of the oak woodland on the final map based on the biologist report and in conjunction with the civil engineer's survey data, for the purposes of establishing a "non-developable area" for review and approval by the Planning Administrator. The applicant shall record, on parcels containing the oak woodland area, created by this subdivision, a deed restriction identifying the "non-developable area." The deed restriction shall state: "No development (structures, patios, decks, landscaping, irrigation lines, etc.) shall occur in this zone. No vegetation shall be disturbed without prior approval from the San Mateo County Planning Division." Prior to the issuance of permit to grade, the applicant shall place a temporary fence around the boundary of the "non-developable area" denoting its presence.

15.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall record a deed restriction for Proposed Parcels 6 and 7 identifying the mule deer corridor delineated in the biologist report. The deed restriction shall state: "Fencing on the rearmost 10 feet of the side property lines and along rear property lines shall not exceed 5 feet. Fencing in those locations shall be post and rail fencing that has rails that are at least a foot apart."

16.	Tree protection measures recommended in the arborist report prepared by S. P. McClenahan Company, Inc., shall be placed on site and verified by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a permit to grade and prior to issuance of the demolition permit.

17.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a replanting plan for the project site. The said plan shall replace all trees removed as part of this subdivision at a 3:1 ratio (new:removed), minimum 10-gallon size. The replanting plan must be approved by the Planning Division, and implemented by the applicant, prior to the recordation of the final map.

18.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a landscape surety and maintenance deposit, in the form of a Certificate of Deposit, in the amount of $2,000, to the Planning Division prior to the recordation of final map. The surety deposit shall be released upon the confirmation by the Planning Division that all trees have survived and are healthy two years from the date of their planting. Any dead or dying trees shall be replaced in like kind as soon as possible and the length of the surety deposit adjusted accordingly as determined by the Planning Administrator.

19.	All future structures to be built on the project site shall be designed to incorporate permanent stormwater control measures in conformance with BAASMA Guidelines. This requirement shall be included as a note on the final map and shall be recorded on all deeds for parcels created by this subdivision. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any structure on the project site, all plans shall be reviewed by the Planning Division for conformance with this condition.

20.	The applicant shall submit a dust control plan to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a permit to grade and demolition permits associated with this project. The plan shall include the following control measures:

	a.	Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.

	b.	Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind.

	c.	Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard.

	d.	Apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking and staging areas at construction sites. Also, hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas.

	e.	Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking and staging areas at construction sites.

	g.	Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.).

	h.	Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads within the project parcel to 15 mph.

	i.	Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.

	j.	Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

	The approved plan shall be implemented for the duration of any grading, demolition and construction activities that generate dust and other airborne particles.

21.	Noise levels produced by the proposed grading/construction activity shall not exceed the 80 dBA level at any one moment. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Grading/construction operations shall be prohibited on Sunday and any national holiday.

22.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Division an application for street naming of the proposed private road. The application shall be processed and a decision shall be made at a public hearing by the Zoning Hearing Officer.

23.	All utility lines on site shall be installed underground to any proposed buildings and/or structure from the nearest existing utility pole.

24.	All excess grading material shall be hauled off site to an approved County facility.

25.	For the purposes of determining height of new residential buildings on the project site, the existing topography on Sheet 1 of the tentative map of this proposal shall be referred to during subsequent applications for design review.

26.	All future development shall include a minimum of two off-street parking spaces in addition to those spaces required by the County's Parking Regulations.

27.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a copy of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R) to the Planning Division and the County Counsel for review and approval.

28.	The applicant shall comply with the recommendation outlined in the traffic report prepared by RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering regarding the relocation of the joint use utility pole.

29.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall install a STOP sign with STOP legend on the street approach to Summit Drive.

Department of Public Works

30.	The provisions of the San Mateo County Grading Ordinance shall govern all grading on and adjacent to this site.

31.	All grading shall be according to the approved grading plan and the soils consultant's recommendations. Any revisions to the approved grading plan shall be prepared and signed by the engineer, and shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works and the Planning Division for concurrence prior to commencing any work pursuant to the proposed revision.

32.	The applicant's engineer shall provide on the "grading plans" a comprehensive drainage plan for this site. It should include surface and subsurface drains (both old and new) and if applicable, the location and design of outfall structures.

33.	No grading shall commence until a schedule of all grading operations has been submitted to and reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Division. The submitted schedule shall include a schedule for winterizing the site.

34.	Prior to the issuance of a permit to grade, the applicant shall submit, to the Department of Public Works for review and approval, a plan for any off-site hauling operations. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: size of trucks, haul route, disposal site, dust and debris control measures, and time and frequency of haul trips. As part of the review of the submitted plan, the County may place such restrictions on the hauling operation as it deems necessary.

35.	The engineer who prepared the approved grading plan shall be responsible for the inspection and certification of the grading as required by Section 8606.2 of the Grading Ordinance. The engineer's responsibilities shall include those relating to non-compliance detailed in Section 8606.5 of the Grading Ordinance.

36.	At the completion of work, the engineer who prepared the approved grading plans shall certify, in writing, that all grading and drainage facilities have been completed in conformance with the approved plans, as conditioned, and the Grading Ordinance.

37.	At the completion of work, the engineer who prepared the approved grading plan shall submit a signed "as-graded" plan conforming to the requirements of Section 8606.6 of the Grading Ordinance.

38.	No grading shall be allowed during the winter season (October 15 to April 15) to avoid potential soil erosion unless approved, in writing, by the Planning Administrator. The applicant shall submit a letter to the Planning Division, at least, two (2) weeks prior to commencement of grading stating the date when grading shall begin.

39.	Prior to the issuance of future building permits, the applicant will be required to provide payment of "roadway mitigation fees" based on the square footage (assessable space) of the proposed residence per Ordinance #3277. The applicant is advised that he is entitled to a "credit" to be put towards reduction of mitigation fee for demolition of existing structures.

40.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall have designed (by a registered civil engineer) and the applicant shall construct an on-site private street to serve the proposed lots of the subdivision. The street shall terminate in a turnaround meeting the requirements of the applicable fire jurisdiction and the San Mateo County Department of Public Works, including the placement of "No Parking" sign within the turnaround area.

41.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall have a registered civil engineer prepare a drainage analysis of the proposed subdivision and submit it to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage plan shall consist of a written narrative and a plan. The flow of the stormwater onto, over and off the property being subdivided shall be detailed on the plan and shall include adjacent lands as appropriate to clearly depict the pattern of flow. The analysis shall detail the measures necessary to certify adequate drainage. Recommended measures shall be designed and included in the street improvement plans and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.

42.	The applicant shall record documents, which address future maintenance responsibilities of any private drainage or roadway facilities that may be constructed. Prior to the recording of these documents, they shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review.

43.	The applicant shall prepare a plan indicating the proposed method of sewering the new lots. This plan should be included on the improvement plans and be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review. Upon completion of this review, the applicant or his engineer shall have the approved sewer plans signed by the appropriate Sewer District.

44.	The property owners shall dedicate "sanitary sewer easements" for any portion of the sewer main which lies outside of existing public sanitary sewer easements, if applicable.

45.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall purchase seven (7) additional sewer connections from the Emerald Lake Heights Sewer Maintenance District.

46.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit, to the Planing Department and the Department of Public Works, written certification from the appropriate Water District stating that their requirements to provide water service connections to the proposed parcels of this subdivision have been met.

47.	Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit written certification from the appropriate energy and communication utilities to the Department of Public Works and the Planning Division stating that they will provide energy and communication services to the proposed parcels of this subdivision.

48.	The applicant shall submit a driveway "plans and profiles" to the Department of Public Works, showing the driveway access to both parcels (garage slabs) complying with County standards for driveway slopes (not the exceed 20%) and to County standards for the driveways (at the property line/easement line) being the same elevation as the center of the access roadway. When appropriate, this plan and profile shall be prepared from elevations and alignment shown on the improvement plans. The driveway plans shall also include and show specific provisions and details for handling both the existing and the proposed drainage.

49.	"As-built" plans of all construction required by these conditions shall be prepared and signed by the subdivider's engineer upon completion of all work. The "as-built" plans shall be accompanied by a written certification from the engineer that all private facilities have been completed in conformance with the approved plans.

50.	No construction work within the County right-of-way shall begin until County Department of Public Works requirements for the issuance of an encroachment permit, including review of appropriate plans, have been met and an encroachment permit issued.

51.	The applicant shall submit a final map to the Department of Public Works for review and recording.

California Department of Forestry

52.	The San Mateo County Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow requirement for construction of all buildings using the procedure established in the San Mateo County Fire Ordinance. A fire flow of 500 gpm for two (2) hours with a 20-psi residual operating pressure must be available as specified by additional project conditions to the project site.

53.	The required fire flow shall be available with a County Standard Wet Barrel Fire Hydrant. The configuration of the hydrant shall be a 6-inch minimum opening with a minimum of one each 4 1/2-inch outlet and one each 2 1/2-inch outlet located not less than 30 feet nor more than 250 feet from the building, measured by way of approved driveable access to the project site.

54.	All new public water systems, extensions from a public water system or replacement of any main or line of an existing public water system shall have a minimum diameter of 6 inches. If the pipes are not linked in grid or if individual legs are over 600 feet in length, then the minimum diameter shall be 8 inches.

55.	When receiving water service for fire protection (hydrants, fire sprinkler systems) from a public or municipal water purveyor, written certification from the water company that hydrants will be installed or the existing water system is capable of meeting the project conditions is required to be presented to the San Mateo County Fire Department for verification to show that required upgrades to the system will be installed and that existing fire flows will meet the project requirements.

Local Agency Formation Commission

56.	Prior to the issuance of permit to grade or undertake any construction of public or private improvement, the applicant shall request the City of Redwood City Water District to apply to and obtain approval from LAFCo pursuant to Government Code Section 56133, on the applicant's behalf, to provide water service to the project site and shall comply with the City's requirements to guarantee water service, to the satisfaction of the Planning Administrator.

MDB:kcd - MDBL2806_WKU.DOC