Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/25/2016& Town of Los Altos Hills City Council Special Meeting Minutes Thursday, August 25, 2016 Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, California CALL TO ORDER (5:00 P.M.) — CLOSED SESSION Mayor Harpootlian called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9) Linebarger v. Town of Los Altos Hills; Case No. 115 -CV -282970 Present: Mayor Harpootlian, Vice Mayor Waldeck, Councilmember Corrigan, Councilmember Radford, Councilmember Spreen Absent: None Staff: City Manager Carl Cahill, City Attorney Steve Mattas REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION There was no reportable action from the Closed Session. CALL TO ORDER (6:00 P.M.) - PUBLIC SESSION' Mayor Harpoothan called the meeting to order at 6:09 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Harpootlian, Vice Mayor Waldeck, Councilmember Corrigan, Councilmember Radford, Councilmember Spreen Absent: None Staff City Manager Carl Cahill, City Attorney Steve Mattas, Planning Director Suzanne Avila, City Engineer/Public Works Director Richard Chiu, Senior Engineer Tina Tseng, Consultant Planner Steve Padovan, City Clerk Deborah Padovan B. Pledge of Allegiance 1. AGENDA REVIEW • There were no changes to the agenda. 1 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 2. 3. • 4. • PUBLIC COMMENT (PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO ITEMS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF THE SPECIAL MEETING) There was no public comment. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Councilmember Corrigan moved to approve the CONSENT CALENDAR, specifically, the motion was seconded by Councilmember Radford. Motion Carried 5 to 0: AYES: Ma o� HaMootlian, Vice Mayor Waldeck, Councilmember Corrigan, Councilmember Radford, Councilmember Spreen NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None A. Rejection of Claim — Claim of Donnelly (Staff. D. Padovan) PUBLIC HEARINGS A. LANDS OF LINEBARGER; 10728 Mora Drive (Formerly 10730 Mora Drive, Lot l): Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of a Site Development Permit and Conditional Development Permit for a new 2,696 square foot, two-story single-family dwelling with 2,677 square feet of basement area on two levels and variance requests for side yard building setbacks of ten (10) and 15 feet, uncovered parking and vehicle back-up areas within five (5) feet of the property line, hardscape and basement lightwells in the side yard setbacks, and grading within ten (10) feet of the property line on a .347 acre lot; (Maximum height of structure is 27'); Original File #415-14-ZP-SD-GD-CDP-VAR; Appeal File #199- 16-MISC; CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(a)- construction of a new single-family residence in a residential zone district. (S. Avila Ex Parte Communications: Councilmember Spreen said he met with Mr. Linebarger earlier in the week and the neighbors months ago; Councilmember Corrigan stated she met with Mr. Linebarger four years ago for the first time, but has not met with him since other than a brief telephone call a few weeks ago; she met with neighbors along the way, including during last year's Mayor office hours and in the past, met in one of the neighbor's homes to discuss the issue; 2 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 Councilmember Radford reported that over the course of four years he met with neighbors, but did not recall names; Vice Mayor Waldeck stated he met with Mr. Linebarger a few years ago before the annexation occurred and on a few occasions have talked with neighbors; Mayor Harpootlian said in October 2012, he met with Mr. Linebarger and last Monday (August 22) he met with him during Mayor office hours. Mayor Harpootlian opened the Public Hearing. He then outlined the agenda and the format for the meeting. Staff will provide a presentation; following the presentation, the applicant may have 15 minutes to introduce the first property and then the Council will accept public input. Mr. Linebarger shall be provided time to address the public input, then the matter will return to Council for discussion. Lot 3 will be addressed in a similar manner. Consultant Planner Steve Padovan presented the staff report. Sart Hechtman, Land Use Counsel for Mr. Linebarger, addressed the procedural issue and stated that as is a special meeting for this particular item, and the applicant is not normally limited and he should have been notified in advance. The applicant was not made aware of the time limit in advance. Mr. Linebarger prepared a detailed presentation that would take 45 minutes and requested more time on the first presentation. • City Attorney Steve Mattas said that the Council has discretion to set the time. A presentation was made before the Planning Commission and the Council has information from that hearing, so the Council is not obligated to provide additional time beyond the 15 minutes, but if they chose to, they can allow more time for the presentation. A brief discussion ensued and the Council agreed to allocate 50 minutes for both presentations. Mr. Heckman provided a summary of Mr. Linebarger's application. He requested clear direction from the Council and that Mr. Linebarger's preference was not to be returned to the Planning Commission, but to continue future dialogue directly with the City Council. Forrest Linebarger presented his application to the City Council. Esther John, Los Altos Hills, urged the City Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the conditional development permit and variances requested by Mr. Linebarger. Dave Kehlet, Los Altos Hills, asked the Council to reject the urbanization of Los Altos Hills. • 3 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 • Karen Kehlet, Los Altos Hills, requested that Mr. Linebarger's applications be denied. Hal Feeney, Los Altos Hills, urged the Council not accept the setback argument, that just because it has been done that way does not mean that it should be done. Mary Jo Feeney, Los Altos Hills, addressed the issue of setbacks. Ed Cristal, Los Altos Hills, urged the Council to deny the appeal. Enrique Klein, Los Altos Hills, urged the Council to sustain the denials of the Planning Commission. Aart De Geus, Los Altos Hills, observed that lot sizes and regulations are fair; variances are a results of history; he asked that the Council ratify the Planning Commission's recommendation and deny the conditional development permit and variance requests. Judy Klein, Los Altos Hills, asked the Council to not set a precedent and to support the decisions made by the Planning Commission. Gregory Fretz, Los Altos Hills, said that at the June Planning • Commission meeting Mr. Linebarger was given specific direction, but he insists on this current plan. Brian Mahbod, Los Altos Hills, requested the Council uphold the Planning Commission's denial. Mr. Heckman provided a rebuttal to the public comment. Mayor Harpootlian closed the Public Hearing and returned the discussion to the Council. City Attorney Mattas responded to some of the comments, by Mr. Linebarger. Consultant Planner Padovan stated that Mr. Linebarger's application was originally submitted in December 2014. Staff always responds within 30 days of the application being submitted. Staff did respond with an incomplete letter within that 30 day period. Additionally, incomplete letters were sent in March, June and November 2015. Mr. Linebarger returned with a redesign and made the application complete in December 2015. The Planning Commission study session was held in February 2016. The Planning Commission hearing was in June 2016. Mayor Harpootlian explained that both he and Councilmember Corrigan, before they were appointed to the City Council, met with Mr. Linebarger in 2012 and • discussed lot line adjustments. Mr. Linebarger was not receptive at that time. 4 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 Councilmember Radford asked about the whether the applicant created this current situation with the lots from his own making and that the Council is not obligated to grant any variances. City Attorney Mattas said the argument is that at one point, Mr. Linebarger owned all three lots, that by selling the middle lot, it created the two smaller lots and the lots could not be brought together. The argument made by one of the speakers is citing to the language of the municipal code which says that the City would not grant a variance when the circumstances are of the making of the applicant. State law does not contain the language "made by the property owner," so the Council should look at the standard variance findings, conditions of the lots which create the necessity for a variance of some form. It doesn't constrain the Council in the type of variance granted, but the fact that he sold the middle lot is not independently a basis upon which to deny a variance. Councilmember Corrigan said that the two topics should be separate and would like to deal with the appeal independently of the alternative designs. As the Planning Commission is the designated body to review plans, she would want them to review the new proposals and go through the regular due process for properties. She was not in favor in approving or negotiating alternative plans and stated that they should go back to the Planning Commission in order to give the public an opportunity to make comments on proposed alternatives. Regarding the • appeal, she would continue to uphold the Planning Commission's direction to deny the current plans that were submitted. Vice Mayor Waldeck said the Council's job is to assess what is presented in terms of design and decide if appropriate for community. It is nice to know that other homes in the area do not confirm to Los Altos Hills, but comparisons to other properties is not germane. The Council makes decisions based on Town rules, not County rules. He said the problem is with the lot shape and the Town has any number of parameters that a house can be defined, but is constrained by the lot. The Council's job is to decide how the property fits within the Town's guidelines. He encouraged the applicant to engage with the Planning Commission to receive their ideas. Councilmember Radford expressed hope that all parties can get to a point where something can be built on these lots. He said the applicant needs to work with the Planning Commission. The revised alternative designs may have some merit, but requested the Planning Commission review as that is the process in Los Altos Hills. He spoke in support of upholding the Planning Commission's denial. City Attorney Mattas said that if the Council wants to send the matter back to the Planning Commission, then the Council could do so with a motion based on Mr. Linebarger submitting his updated plans. The Council would not have to take • action on the appeal tonight as it would be stayed. He asked that the applicant confirm on the record that no action on the appeal needs to be taken tonight if they return the matter to the Planning Commission. 5 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 Councilmember Radford said he supports returning it to the Planning Commission without taking action on the appeal and encouraged Mr. Linebarger to seriously work with the Planning Commission for a more supportable design. Councilmember Spreen said that there is no argument that this parcel can support some sort of livable house. Because this parcel is uniquely narrow, there will have to be some sort of variance setback application and the Commission and the Council will have to determine how to deal with that. In responding to the request from the applicant for clear direction, Councilmember Spreen stated that "it isn't our role to do that, that is why we have a Planning Commission." He said that the house as presented is just too big. He did appreciate seeing new options that addressed some of the issues and said as the house gets smaller, the problems get less. Mayor Harpootlian said that he turned in his Planning Commission hat years ago and is not going to put it back on. However, constrained lots of less than 1/2 acre were the nemesis of the Planning Commission and it was difficult to find a reasonable compromise. One of the things the Commission looked at is to fit them within the constraints of the neighborhood and Mr. Linebarger has presented information stating that is what he is trying to do: Both the planning staff and the Commission have stated that there is more work to be done. He said that the • Council may entertain a motion that this be returned to the Planning Commission. City Attorney Mattas requested that Mr. Linebarger or his representative indicate on the record that they concur that they did specifically ask the Council to continue discussions with them, but the Council does have a right to refer this back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Heckman stated that he requested that they receive feedback from the City Council and the opportunity to refine the design. He further said that they have no objection to return to the Planning Commission to discuss more design refinements. City Attorney Mattas said the Council was discussing upholding the Planning Commission's determination which would essentially uphold the denial. Mr. Linebarger could come back in with a revised application, but the motion the Council is entertaining is to stay the current proceeding so that the matter is referred back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will again consider it with the new plans that have been submitted with public comment and then the Planning Commission will then render a decision, which could be appealed to the City Council. Mr. Heckman concurred with the process outlined by Mr. Mattas. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Councilmember Corrigan moved to: with the concurrence of the applicant, refer the hatter of Lot 1 (LANDS OF • LINEBARGER; 10728 Mora Drive (Formerly 10730 Mora Drive, Lot 1): Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of a Site Development Permit and Conditional Development Permit for a new 2,696 square foot, two-story single-family dwelling 6 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 with 2,677 square feet of basement area on two levels and variance requests for side yard building setbacks of ten (10) and 15 feet, uncovered parking and vehicle back- up areas within five (5) feet of the property line, hardscape and basement lightwells in the side yard setbacks, and grading within ten (10) feet of the property line on a .347 acre lot; (Maximum height of structure is 271 Original File #415-14-ZP-SD- GD-CDP-VAR; Appeal File #199-16-MISC; CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(a) - construction of a new single-family residence in a residential zone district) pplication back to the Planning Commission for further public hearing and consideration; Mr. Linebar eg r will present his alternative plans to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission will consider the alternative plans, the Council's input and the current and further neighborhood input as it considers the proposed alternative project. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Radford. Motion Carried 5 to 0: AYES: Mayor Harpootlian, Vice Mayor Waldeck, Councilmember Corrigan, Councilmember Radford, Councilmember Spreen NOES: None ABSENT: None • ABSTAIN: None Mayor Harpootlian said that a reduction in size makes a lot of the problems go away. The boxiness of the house needs to be lessened; the applicant may wish to reduce the number of variances requested and some of the setbacks could be reduced. He acknowledged that compromises are necessary. Councilmember Corrigan stated that the Deerfield Drive turnaround variance that was granted was on -grade and not a cut and fill and she would have a hard time supporting a cut and fill so close to property lines; she is also eager to see setbacks that are closer to, or not exceeding, the county setbacks; she is willing to look at variances for eaves versus structural walls. The Council meeting was recessed at 8:05 p.m. The meeting reconvened to open session at 8:12 p.m. B. LANDS OF LINEBARGER; 10758 Mora Drive (Formerly 10730 Mora Drive Lot 3): Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of a Site Development Permit and Conditional Development Permit for a new 2,520 square foot, two-story single-family dwelling with 2,583 square feet of basement area on two levels and variance requests for side yard building setbacks of ten (10) and 15 feet, uncovered parking and vehicle back-up areas within two (2) feet of the property line hardscape and basement lightwells in the side yard setbacks, and grading City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 within ten (10) feet of the property line on a .398 acre lot; (Maximum height of structure is 27'); Original File #413-14-ZP-SD-GD-CDP-VAR; Appeal File #198- 16-MISC; CEQA review: Categorical Exemption - per Section 15303(a)- construction of a new single-family residence in a residential zone district (Staff: S. Avila City Attorney Mattas asked the City Council to consider, given the direction that the Council provided on Lot 1, the approach to Lot 3 would be similar. If the Council were to consider that, both lots would be considered at the Planning Commission. Mayor Harpootlian asked the Council if they were willing to entertain this request by the City Attorney, then he would ask the applicant. There was Council consensus agreement to return both lots to the Planning Commission. Mr. Heckman, replied that as Lot 1 is substantially similar to Lot 3, the applicant would not object to refer the matter to the Planning Commission. He further said that as long as it is understood, that just like Lot 1, the applicant is not waiving any right to appeal back to this subsequent body. Aart De Geus, Los Altos Hills, stated that this issue feels like Groundhog Day and while he respects the Council's decision, he requested that the process that is well determined with a Planning Commission that makes an assessment and recommendation and the council ratifies or rejects it. He asked that the Planning Commission and staff provide sufficient guidance to the applicant. Dave Kehlet, Los Altos Hills, said the county building setbacks are 15 feet and as a negotiating point the Council may consider to take a stronger position. Enrique Klein, Los Altos Hills, commented that he was disappointed by the Council's decision that the applicant's appeal was not denied. Councilmember Radford said when the applicant returns to the Planning Commission, there may be some benefit to the neighborhood working with what might be acceptable rather than simply continuing to argue that he has no right to build. The Council has not been given legal advice that he has no right to build on the lots. It might be more beneficial to work with the Planning Commission and the applicant to come up with something that might be more acceptable to the neighborhood. Mayor Harpootlian closed the Public Hearing. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Councilmember Corriean moved: with the concurrence of the applicant, refer the matter of Lot 3 (LANDS OF LINEBARGER; • 10758 Mora Drive (Formerly 10730 Mora Drive, Lot 3): Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of a Site Development Permit and Conditional Development Permit for a new 2,520 square foot, two-story single-family dwelling with 2,583 8 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 square feet of basement area on two levels and variance requests for side yard building setbacks of ten (10) and 15 feet, uncovered parking and vehicle back-up areas within two (2) feet of the property line, hardscape and basement 4htwells in the side yard setbacks, andrg ading within ten (10) feet of the property line on a .398 acre lot; (Maximum height of structure is 27'), Original File #413-14-ZP-SD-GD- CDP-VAR; Appeal File #198-16-MISC; CEQA review: Categorical Exemption per Section 15303(aa) - construction of a new single-family residence in a residential zone district) application back to the Planning Commission for further public hearing and consideration; Mr. Linebar e�present his alternative plans to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission will consider the alternative plans, the Council's input and the current and further neighborhood input as it considers the proposed alternative project. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Waldeck. Motion Carried 5 to 0: AYES: Mayorrpootlian, Vice Mayor Waldeck, Councilmember Corrigan, Councilmember Radford, Councilmember Spreen NOES: None ABSENT: None • ABSTAIN: None 5. • NEW BUSINESS A. Memorandum on Sewer Service Charge for Secondary Dwellings (Staff. R. Chiu) — Continued from the August 18, 2016 City Council meeting Public Works Director Richard Chiu presented the report. Council discussion ensued. Roddy Sloss, Los Altos Hills, said he was never informed about a secondary unit fee. Jitze Couperus, Los Altos Hills, said that he was not advocating for any position, but said there were potential unintended consequences as we need secondary dwellings for housing requirements. Allan Epstein, Los Altos Hills, said that Proposition 218 supersedes the municipal code and says you have to apportion fees relative to the burden that the property places on the system. The Town's municipal code and fee structure do not make clear what someone is going to pay and it is inconsistent. City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 Kjell Karlsson, Los Altos Hills, suggested that we keep the staff time in mind. The easiest is to have one unit per parcel so you don't have to "mess with square footage or parcels." Further Council discussion ensued. There was Council consensus to allow the subcommittee on sewer to review the matter again, allow the Finance and Investment Committee review and return to the Council at a later date. The Council then discussed the request by resident Roddy Sloss requesting a refund for additional sewer charges. Further Council discussion. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED: Councilmember Corrigan moved to provide a refund to Roddy Sloss on the condition that he provide written documentation verifying that he was advised by Town staff inaccurately. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Waldeck. Public Works Director Chiu said that to staffs knowledge, we have not seen any documentation written by town staff that indicated the resident did not need to pay a secondary dwelling unit. The Council asked Mr. Sloss to provide the written documentation to the City Manager within the next 24 hours and if acceptable, place on the Consent Calendar for approval in September. Mr. Sloss said that the documents he will produce are his notes that were taken before the meeting and after the meeting to show the resolution. There was no written documentation from Town staff as Mr. Sloss said it was a verbal communication. Councilmember Corrigan withdrew her motion and Vice Mayor Waldeck removed his second. The Subcommittee will take a closer look at the issue of sewer fees for secondary units and return with a recommendation. If needed, hiring a consultant could be considered. 6.' ADJOURN Mayor Harpootlian thanked the Council for the efforts they put in tonight and said he would especially like to thank the City Clerk, whose efforts made such a success of the volunteer appreciation dinner and requested that his thanks be extended to the rest of the staff who contributed towards the successful dinner. He further thanked Director Chiu • and expressed that it has been a pleasure serving with him. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. 10 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016 s • 11 Respectfully submitted, Deborah Padovan City Clerk The minutes of the August 25, 2016 special City Council meeting were approved as presented at the October 20, 2016 regular City Council meeting. 11 City Council Special Meeting Minutes August 25, 2016